Some researchers believe that even the way the environment influences mate selection is a product of evolution. After all, evolution is adaptation, and that, some researchers contend, is what is happening when mate selection strategies change due to the circumstances presented to people looking for mates. Schmitt (2012) of Evolutionary Psychology says that evolutionary psychologists expect that the environment and culture will influence mate selection preferences. Gender parity may also influence the strategies used to select mates for women. Schmitt (2012) says that it is wrong to think that evolved mate selection strategies are fixed. In a way, Schmitt (2012) supports the argument that evolution is not the only influence on mate selection preferences, but instead of saying that other factors also influence them, he says that those factors are aspects of evolution.
Researchers that offer better evidence of what Schmitt (2012) is contending include Li, Valentine, and Patel (2011) writing in the journal, Personality and Individual Differences. They cite a study that involved participants from 33 countries, 6 continents and 5 islands that found the most important mate selection trait for women did not vary. It was consistently resource acquisition ability. For men, the most important trait was reproductive capacity (Li, Valentine, & Patel, 2011, p. 2). The fact that such a widely diverse group of people all selected the same mate selection traits seems to indicate that strategies are the result of evolution and not environmental influence.
Ironically, some of the arguments that favor the evolution-only contention are also remarkably sexist, which seem to lend to the theory that increased gender parity leads to the belief that evolution is not the only factor working when it comes to mate selection strategies. Schwarz and Hassebrauck (2012) of Human Nature explain that women want men who are wealthy, generous, smart, dominant, reliable, kind, humorous and nice. They attribute this to the Sexual Strategies Theory and to parental investment theory. These theories, according to Schwarz and Hassebrauck (2012), make women far more picky than men when it comes to a mate. Men, these researchers say, just want a good looking woman who can be a good domestic partner so she can stay home and have babies. Simple evolution they claim. Even when people age and no longer are concerned about raising children, Schwarz and Hassebrauck (2012) contend, these mate selection critieria stay in place because evolution dictated that is the way men and women look for one another (Schwarz & Hassebrauck, 2012, p. 461). It is fairly simple to see why many studies have been done to explore the notion that mate selection preferences have evolved and will not evolve any further despite the influences of gender parity. They were done to refute these types of sexist contentions that have served only to keep women in subjection to men.
Another group of researchers, Conroy-Beam, Buss, Pham, & Shackelford (2015) who published their findings in the Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin cite some of the same studies that Schwartz and Hassebrauck (2012) do. They also make some of the same contentions as Schwartz and Hassebrauck (2012). For instance, they say that the differences in mate selection strategies of males and females are obviously patterned on evolutionary necessities and that even across cultures, mate selection preferences appear to be universal. They do concede though that mate selection strategies are complicated and show great variation (Conroy-Beam, Buss, Pham, & Shackelford, 2015, p. 1082). They reason that mate selection is so complex is that it is one of the most important aspects of evolution. For Conroy-Beam, Buss, Pham, and Shackleford (2015) the revelation from their studies is that male and female humans are not that much alike even though biologically they are similar (Conroy-Beam, Buss, Pham, & Shackelford, 2015, p. 1091). This is not news to most people. It is also support for the theory that evolution may have initiated mate selection strategies to rely on features of the opposite sex that are best for reproductive purposes, but partly because of the differenes in not just the sexes but also between individuals, mate selection preferences have been influenced by environmental factors also.
Perhaps environmental influence can be seen as an aspect of evolution in that it is adaptation that triggers evolution. In that sense, perhaps mate selection strategies are evolutionary, but they have an environmental influene involved as well. One of those influences is gender parity. The best proof of this is seen in homosexual and lesbian mate selection. The procreation element is not a factor for homosexual/lesbian mates. That then skews the sexist argumen
Quality Work
Unlimited Revisions
Affordable Pricing
24/7 Support
Fast Delivery