Hacker News Reader

Comment by jl6 | Hacker News Reader

Your theory seems backwards. Cut-throat competition for mating opportunities should be a strategy for the least desirable, who have the greatest need to compete for the scarce resource. If you're top of the desirability scale, you are the scarce resource, and your job is to discern the best suitor amongst the many who put themselves forward.

View on HN

Part of the reason I dislike many evo-psych explanations as an archaeologist is that they end up reflecting a lot of the author's assumptions about the nature of human societies and not the diversity of forms we actually observe. You can support virtually any argument by just narrowing or widening this scope appropriately. One example here is that young women are free to actually decide which "suitors" to accept. In some gerontocracies, young women generally don't have that choice, socially at least.

This is just speculation on my part, but maybe being cut-throat is the strategy -- it's just applied to both potential suitors and potential competition. If you're at the top of the pyramid then the easiest way to discourage both unsuitable competition and unsuitable suitors is to be mean about it.

Now that I think about it a little more, it's probably more applicable to be mean to anyone in an outgroup.

And now that I think about it even more, I really have no idea of what I'm talking about. Most of the time that I've been mean to people, when I was younger, it was basically because I was an immature and confused jackass. And, as far as relationships go, who hasn't made a complete ass of theselves at one point or another?

What if you're second best? What if you don't know your position?

Game theory.

when 'best' is subjective, perceptions and biases come into play...

But when you are in a competition even if you are nr. 1 you still have to defend the position so you still need to cut some throats.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com