Intrasexuelle Konkurrenz unter Frauen und Luxusgüter

Luxusgüter und ihre evolutionäre Einordnung waren hier schon häufiger Thema:

Eine weitere interessante Studie beleuchtet das Verhältnis von Frauen zu Luxusgütern:

Past research shows that luxury products can function to boost self-esteem, express identity, and signal status. We propose that luxury products also have important signaling functions in relationships. Whereas men use conspicuous luxury products to attract mates, women use such products to deter female rivals. Drawing on both evolutionary and cultural perspectives, five experiments investigated how women’s luxury products function as a signaling system directed at other women who pose threats to their romantic relationships. Finding showed that activating a motive to guard one’s mate triggered women to seek and display lavish possessions. Additional studies revealed that women use pricey possessions to signal that their romantic partner is especially devoted to them. In turn, flaunting designer handbags and shoes was effective at deterring other women from poaching a relationship partner. This research identifies a novel function of conspicuous consumption, revealing that luxury products and brands play important roles in relationships.

Quelle: Conspicuous Consumption, Relationships, and Rivals: Women’s Luxury Products as Signals to Other Women

Die Theorie der Studie wird in dieser noch einmal wie folgt zusammengefasst:

We propose that women use luxury products to signal to other women that their romantic partner is especially devoted to them. We hypothesize that women’s flaunting of luxury possessions therefore functions as an intra-sexual signaling system: women use luxury products to send signals to other women in order to deter those other women from poaching their romantic partner. The current research investigates whether such a system exists and how it works.

Die Theorie wäre also, dass Luxusgüter gleichzeitig signalisieren, dass die Frau einen hohen Status hat und es insoweit gefährlich ist, sich mit ihr anzulegen bzw. dass ihr Partner sie schätzt, da er ihr ansonsten solche Luxusgüter nicht überlassen würde.

Dazu aus der Studie:

The women were asked to “Imagine you are in a relationship and you go to a social event with your partner.” They then responded to four different yes/no questions regarding whether the women themselves believed that other women would infer that their relationship partner was more devoted to them based on the outfit and jewelry that the woman chose to wear. Specifically, the women were asked: “Do you think some women might judge that your partner cares about you more [is more committed to you] when they see you wearing a designer [more expensive] outfit and jewelry?” Results showed that more than half of the women indicated that they believe that other women would infer that their relationship partner was more devoted to them based on their own 10 outfit and jewelry. Specifically, a majority of women believed that other women would infer that a more expensive outfit and jewelry indicates that their partner cares more about them (61.8%) and is more committed (53.9%). Similarly, a majority of women believed that other women would infer that a designer outfit and jewelry indicates that their partner cares more about them (52.6%) and is more committed (55.3%). The findings from the pilot study indicate that over half of the women surveyed believe that their own displays of luxury products can be used to signal to other women how much their partner is devoted to them

Es scheint also schon einmal der Glaube daran vorhanden zu sein, dass Luxusgüter ihre Partnerschaft als fester darstellen können. Unter steinzeitlichen Bedingungen wären solche Gaben sicherlich auch ein guter Indikator dafür, insbesondere da damals Luxusgüter gerade nicht in einem Supermarkt oder einem Geschäft gekauft werden konnten.

Die Thesen aus der Studie:

  • H1: A woman with luxurious possessions should be perceived by other women as having a more devoted partner.
  • H2: Activating a mate guarding motive should trigger women’s desire for conspicuous luxury goods.
  • H3: A motive to guard a mate should lead women to seek publically conspicuous luxury products but not less conspicuous products that are generally used in private.
  • H4: A mate guarding motive should lead women to seek conspicuous luxury products when the products can be seen by other women who pose a threat to the relationship.

Und die Ergebnisse:

  • Consistent with H1, findings showed that a woman was perceived as having a more devoted partner when she had designer compared to non-designer outfit and accessories (Ms = 5.40 vs. 4.82; t(67) = 2.01, p = .048, d = .24). Just as the majority of women have a lay belief that luxury goods can indicate how much their partner is devoted to them (see Pilot Study), Study 1 shows that other women infer that a man is more devoted to his partner when she has luxurious products.
  • Study 2 found that a mate guarding motive increased women’s desire for conspicuous consumption, as measured by wanting larger luxury brand logos. A mate guarding motive led women to draw luxury brand logos that were about twice the size compared to those in the other conditions (see Figure 1), and the effect of mate guarding persisted even when compared to control conditions that elicited similar levels of negative affect and arousal.
  • In summary, despite varying the method of how a mate guarding motive was elicited, Study 3 conceptually replicated the key finding from Study 2, showing that a mate guarding motive triggers women’s desire for conspicuous luxury products. In addition, Study 3 showed that mate guarding does not simply lead women to want any product, but is instead specific to products used for publically visible conspicuous consumption. Finally, Study 3 ruled out two possible alternative explanations for the effect of mate guarding, showing that this effect is not driven by threat to one’s self-esteem or by the mere presence of another woman.
  • In summary, Study 4 found that activating a mate guarding motive once again led women to seek luxury products. When women felt that their romantic relationship was threatened, they not only desired to spend more on designer handbags and shoes, but they also actually spent more money for a chance to win a real $200 luxury spending spree. Importantly, women sought conspicuous goods only when the products could be seen by another woman who posed a potential threat to her romantic relationship. Although this findings cannot rule out the possibility that women failed to seek luxury goods in the male audience condition due to feelings of shame or distress, the null finding in the male audience condition is consistent with past research showing that women do not seek conspicuous products when motivated to attract a mate (Griskevicius et al. 2007; Sundie et al. 2011). Furthermore, the fact that women did not increase their desire for luxury goods when another woman could not see the expensive products is consistent with the idea that women’s flaunting of designer goods is intended as a signal to other women rather than men.
  • In summary, Study 5 showed that a woman’s luxury products can effectively dissuade other women from poaching her romantic partner. Other women who would consider pursuing a taken man (women following a short-term mating strategy) were less willing to pursue him if his partner had a luxurious designer handbag and expensive jewelry. This effect was driven (mediated) by other women’s perceptions of the man as more devoted to his partner when she had luxury products. Importantly, the woman’s luxury products were not effective at guarding her mate when other women were explicitly told that the man had not contributed resources to her products. Consistent with the earlier finding that in ambiguous situations women spontaneously assume that the man paid for more than half (58%) of a woman’s luxury products, luxury products are effective at mate guarding for women because other women generally assume that a romantic partner has devoted at least some resources to his partner’s products.

Aus meiner Sicht eine durchaus stimmige Theorie. Sie zeigt mal wieder die Bedeutung von Costly Signals, die dann kulturell ausgestaltet werden. Was heute die Pradatasche oder das Luxuskleid sind mag früher ein besonderes Fellkleidungsstück oder eine besonders seltene aber schön geformte Muschel als Schmuckstück gewesen sein.

Natürlich nutzen auch Männer Luxusgegenstände nicht nur als Mittel um Frauen anzulocken, sondern auch in der intrasexuellen Konkurrenz. Vielleicht sogar auf eine sehr gleiche Weise: Ich würde vermuten, dass auch viele Männer davon ausgehen würden, dass sie die Frau eines sehr reichen Mannes schwerer erobern können und dies auch potentielle Konkurrenten abschreckt. Hier wird aber weniger darauf abgestellt werden, dass die Gegenstände Ausdruck einer besonderen Gunst der Frau sind, da bei diesen eine Versorgereigenschaft evolutionär nicht von der gleichen Bedeutung ist.

Es ist jedenfalls interessant, dass Eifersucht Frauen zu Luxusmarken führt und Luxusmarken ihnen auch in einer Partnerschaft Sicherheit geben können.

Das Strategic Pluralism Model

Eine interessante Betrachtung zum „Paarungsverhalten“ beim Menschen liefert das Strategic Pluralism Modell, dass stärker als die Sexual Strategies Theory (SST) darauf abstellt, dass verschiedene Situationen verschiedene Verhaltensweisen erforderlich machen:

During human evolutionary history, there were “trade-offs” between expending time and energy on child-rearing and mating, so both men and women evolved conditional mating strategies guided by cues signaling the circumstances. Many short-term matings might be successful for some men; others might try to find and keep a single mate, investing their effort in rearing her offspring. Recent evidence suggests that men with features signaling genetic benefits to offspring should be preferred by women as short-term mates, but there are trade-offs between a mate’s genetic fitness and his willingness to help in child-rearing. It is these circumstances and the cues that signal them that underlie the variation in short- and long-term mating strategies between and within the sexes.

Quelle: The evolution of human mating: Trade-offs and strategic pluralism

Dazu aus dem Artikel:

In the last two decades, evolutionary theorists have begun to acknowledge that selection pressures should not have produced a single “best” mating tactic (or mixture of tactics) for males and females in most species. Instead, selection should have fashioned considerable phenotypic diversity in mating (Gross 1996). Guided by concepts from game theory (Maynard Smith 1982 [see also Maynard Smith “Game Theory and the Evolution of Behaviour” BBS7(1) 1984]) and the theory of evolutionarily stable strategies (Dawkins 1980; Parker 1984), evolutionary biologists are now documenting how having alternative mating tactics gives individuals of each sex differential reproductive fitness in various species. Although relatively little theory and research have focused on the mating behavior of human beings, hundreds of studies have confirmed that males and females in a wide range of species display alternative mating tactics that reflect conditional strategies (Gross 1996). Burley’s (1986) finding that male zebra finches’ relative allocation of parental effort and extrapair mating effort is contingent on their attractiveness is a good illustration of a conditional strategy. Conditional strategies have five main properties (see Gross 1996):

(a) They involve different behavioral tactics that are consciously or unconsciously “chosen” by an individual;

(b) the choices between tactics are “made” in response to specific features or cues in the environment, often an individual’s status or attractiveness relative to other individuals;

(c) all individuals are genetically monomorphic (i.e., they are are genetically designed to enact the same tactics);

(d) during their evolution, the average adaptive values of different tactics were not equal except at a “switchpoint” on a continuum of environmental input (e.g., individuals’ relative status) where the costs and benefits of each tactic balanced out; and

(e) during their evolution, the chosen tactic tended to yield higher fitness for the individual than other tactics given current environmental conditions.

Thus, the environmental conditions moderate the fitness gains of pursuing different tactics (e.g., exerting parental effort, pursuing short-term matings), thereby affecting the optimal allocation of effort to different tactics. If males differ in the conditions under which they engage in different tactics, they are enacting alternate conditional strategies. Although alternate strategies can be noncontinuously distributed in a population (e.g., if certain males never invest in offspring and always seek short-term mates), they are usually distributed continuously. This should occur if males differ in how long they tolerate their mate’s absence before pursuing other mates, or if males differ in the degree to which they expect extra-pair mates to have certain desirable attributes (Dominey 1984). Alternate strategies can reflect genetic polymorphisms (see Gross 1996). Although such polymorphisms exist in nature and may underlie certain variations in human mating strategies (see Gangestad & Simpson 1990; Wilson 1994), we focus on conditional strategies in this article.

Und aus der Zusammenfassung:

Mating tactics are highly variable in both men and women and have evolved to be contingent on environmental factors. Complete theories of mating strategies must account for these individual differences and contextual effects. We have proposed that these phenomena cannot be fully understood without considering the nature of the trade-offs that underlie mating decisions in humans. We suggest that good gene sexual selection, in concert with good-parenting sexual selection, may have generated the variation and contextual effects associated with the short- and long-term mating tactics witnessed in both sexes. Given the demands of biparental care during evolutionary history, both men and women were selected to use long-term mating tactics and invest in offspring. However, they were also selected to use ecologically contingent, conditional mating strategies, dedicating some effort to shortterm and extra-pair mating under specific conditions.

Women may have evolved to trade off evidence of a man’s genetic fitness for evidence of his ability and willingness to invest in offspring. The specific mating tactics and preferences women adopted, however, depended on the nature and quality of their local environment. If the local environment was difficult and demanded biparental care, women placed more weight on the investment potential of prospective mates and less weight on indicators of their genetic fitness. As a result, a larger proportion of women adopted long-term mating tactics almost exclusively. If, on the other hand, the pathogens were prevalent in the local environment (or the environment signaled the importance of the genetic fitness of offspring), women placed more weight on indicators of the genetic fitness of prospective mates. In such environments, a larger proportion of women were willing to engage in short-term, extra-pair matings, allowing them to gain genetic benefits from men who provided less parental investment at the risk of losing parental investment from their primary mates. The mating tactics and preferences of women accordingly reflected the nature and quality of the environments in which they lived.

Whereas women “tracked” their environment, men tracked and adjusted their mating tactics and preferences to the behavior of women (Thiessen 1994). If most women expected heavy paternal investment, most men (especially those who displayed less fitness) offered more and perhaps exclusive parental investment, dedicating a greater portion of their effort to long-term mating tactics and parental investment. As a result, variance in men’s mating success was reduced. If women’s “demand” for genetic benefits increased, some men (especially those advertising such benefits) dedicated more effort to short-term, extra-pair mating tactics, thereby increasing variance in mating success among men. Only a small proportion of men (i.e., those who displayed the most fitness) were able to carry out short-term tactics successfully at all times, regardless of the environmental factors to which women were responding.

Hier zeigt sich auch gut das Zusammenspiel von biologischen Modellen mit der Umwelt. Je nach dieser können sich andere Verhaltensweisen lohnen. Auch wenn dadurch ganz andere Kulturen entstehen, kann das Modell, welches diesem Verhalten zugrundelegt, biologisch sein.

Doppelstandards bei Sexobjekten

In einem Artikel mit dem Tiel „Why can we perve on men but not on women?“ findet sich eine interessante Betrachtung:

The Crusaders rugby team were also at the pool, warming down after their weekend game.

As they walked to the water in their togs, all eyes turned to stare at their chiselled shirtless bodies. People openly gaped at their rippling muscles, with some wolf whistling and grabbing their phones to snap a discreet pic.

I’m not going to lie, I too indulged in a wee perve (it was impressive!) but I tried to keep it discreet and get on with my workout.

It was only afterwards that I thought about how overt everyone’s appreciation of the men was. No-one considered that the Crusaders might feel embarrassed or uncomfortable by the attention.

If it was a team of cheerleaders jumping around in the pool instead of rugby players, would men have been drooling in the same manner? Probably, but I think they would have been a bit more subtle about it and other women would have been clucking their tongues about „perverts“.

When a female sportswoman is revered for her body people cry foul about not appreciating her sporting prowess, but a male’s sexy body seems to be an accepted part of the package.

A similar incident happened at a dinner with friends recently.

My girlfriend and I were talking about our other friend’s younger brother who is 17 and, shall we say, developing nicely.

We were discussing the merits of his muscles, when a man at the table interrupted our chat.

„If that was us talking about a girl in that way, you’d all be calling us disgusting,“ he said.

It was true.

If they men had been speaking that way about a young girl, praising her curves, I would have been really creeped out.

There seems to be a massive double standard between the sexes when it comes to sexual objectification.

Why is it acceptable that women can sexualise and openly harass young men, but it can’t go the other way around?

In the case of the Crusaders, they had the added attraction of being famous bodies (a woman next to me shrieked in delight when she noticed Dan’s body among the crowd), but it doesn’t just happen with celebs either.

Go to a bar at night and you’re likely to see a group of women at a hen’s party clawing at young males. They grab them, grope them, call obscenities at them – all as part of the fun and games.

If it was men at a stag party pawing at young females, someone would step in and tell them to back off.

Ich vermute mal die Gründe sind die Folgenden:

  • Männer sind üblicherweise stärker als Frauen und neigen eher zu sexuellen Übergriffen
  • eine kulturelle Ausgestaltung der höheren biologischen Kosten von Sex führt zu einem besseren Schutz von Frauen
  • Frauen beschützen kann attraktiv machen und edle erscheinen
  • von Männern wird eher erwartet sich gegen Angriffe von Frauen wehren zu können
  • es wird aufgrund des höheren Sexualtriebes des Mannes auch eher erwartet, dass sie diese sexuellen Avancen nicht so problematisch finden.
  • weibliche Sexualität wirkt weniger bedrohlich
  • weibliches Gaffen kommt auch weit weniger vor

 

Erfolgsquoten beim direkten Ansprechen auf Sex

In meinem Artikel zum Sextrieb bei Männern und Frauen hatte ich bereits dargestellt, dass Männer in allen Kategorien, die den Sexualtrieb betreffen, mehr Sex wollen als Frauen. Ein klassisches Experiment dazu ist, dass man tatsächlich einfach Leute losschickt, die Fragen, ob man Sex will.

Ein bekanntes Experiment dazu ist das Folgende:

Abstract

According to cultural stereotypes, men are more eager for sex than are women; women are more likely to set limits on such activity. In this paper, we review the work of theorists who have argued in favor of this proposition and review the interview and correlational data which support this contention. Finally, we report two experimental tests of ihis hypothesis. In these experiments, conducted in 1978 and 1982, male and female confederates of average attractiveness approached potential partners with one of three requests: „Would you go out tonight?“ „Will you come over to my apartment?“ or „Would you go to bed with me?“ The great majority of men were willing to have a sexual liaison with the women who approached them. Women were not. Not one woman agreed to a sexual liaison. Many possible reasons for this marked gender difference were discussed. These studies were run in 1978 and 1982. It has since become important to track how the threat of AIDS is affecting men and women’s willingness to date, come to an apartment, or to engage in casual sexual relations.

Quelle: Gender Differences in Receptivity to Sexual Offers

Die Zahlen für direkten Sex:

1978: 0% der Frauen und 75% der Männer

1982: 0% der Frauen und 69% der Männer

Das ist aber natürlich lange her. Allerdings hat sich daran anscheinend wenig geändert, auch heutige Versuche dieser Art führen nicht zu anderen Ergebnissen:

Frauen nach Sex fragen:

Männer nach Sex fragen:

Klar, es ist in den Videos eher auf Spass ausgerichtet, was man schon daran sieht, dass auch Paare angesprochen worden sind.  Aber dennoch zeigt sich ja ein recht eindeutiges Bild. Gerade bei Frauen in Gruppen wird man so keine Erfolge haben, aber auch Einzelfrauen sagten nein. Hingegen war die Männergruppe ein geringeres Problem (sie wollten sogar darum spielen, wer nun mit ihr mitgeht). Die Männer hatten denke ich eher Angst, dass sie verrückt ist oder es eine Falle ist (was es ja so gesehen auch war). Ich würde dabei den Mann als durchaus attraktiv einordnen, groß, gute Figur, nettes Gesicht. Es wäre interessant, wenn er sich mehr auf Singlefrauen und auch eine breitere Spanne konzentriert hätte.

Auch bemerkenswert: Die meisten Frauen schienen den Vorfall eher lustig zu finden, vielleicht auch gerade, weil sie in einer Gruppe waren und er dabei nicht aggressiv wirkte.

Was wollen schöne Frauen bei einem Partner?

Eine Studie beschäftigt sich damit, was schöne Frauen bei einem Partner wollen (via):

Abstract:

The current research tests the hypothesis that women have an evolved mate value calibration adaptation that functions to raise or lower their standards in a long-term mate according to their own mate value. A woman’s physical attractiveness is a cardinal component of women’s mate value. We correlated observer-assessed physical attractiveness (face, body, and overall) with expressed preferences for four clusters of mate characteristics (N = 214): (1) hypothesized good-gene indicators (e.g., masculinity, sexiness); (2) hypothesized good investment indicators (e.g., potential income); (3) good parenting indicators (e.g., desire for home and children), and (4) good partner indicators (e.g., being a loving partner). Results supported the hypothesis that high mate value women, as indexed by observer-judged physical attractiveness, expressed elevated standards for all four clusters of mate characteristics. Discussion focuses on potential design features of the hypothesized mate-value calibration adaptation, and suggests an important modification of the trade-off model of women’s mating. A minority of women— notably those low in mate value who are able to escape male mate guarding and the manifold costs of an exposed infidelity—will pursue a mixed mating strategy, obtaining investment from one man and good genes from an extra-pair copulation partner (as the trade-off model predicts). Since the vast majority of women secure genes and direct benefits from the same man, however, most women will attempt to secure the best combination of all desired qualities from the same man.

Quelle: Attractive Women Want it All: Good Genes, Economic Investment, Parenting Proclivities, and Emotional Commitment

Es ist insofern eine Überprüfung bestimmter Theorien innerhalb der evolutionären Theorie. Es geht darum, inwiefern Frauen, die aufgrund hohen Partnerwert eine große Auswahl haben, die Partnerwahlkriterien anwenden, die dort favorisiert werden.

Hier die Werte aus der Studie:

 was schöne Frauen wollen

was schöne Frauen wollen

 

Interessanterweise erhält Sexappeal einen recht hohen Wert, was insoweit Ansatzpunkte für „Game“ bietet. Überraschend ist aus meiner Sicht die geringe Wertung für Intelligenz, hier hätte ich mehr erwartet. Auch „Älter als sie“ erhält eine sehr hohe Wertung im Vergleich, die höchste aber hat Desire for Home and Children.  Allerdings geht es hier eben auch um die Heirat, also etwas ernstes, da werden die wenigsten Frauen einen Partner wollen, der von vorneherein erklärt keine Kinder zu wollen.

Die Partnerwahlkriterien wurden, wenn ich das richtig verstehe, allerdings teilweise durch Befragung der Frau ermittelt. Das ist sehr fehleranfällig, denn gerade so etwas wie Einkommen als Partnerwahlkriterium werden die Leute ungern zugeben und sich vielleicht auch gar nicht so bewusst  machen.

Selbermach Samstag XLV

Welche Themen interessieren euch, welche Studien fandet ihr besonders interessant in der Woche, welche Neuigkeiten gibt es, die interessant für eine Diskussion wären und was beschäftigt euch gerade?

Welche interessanten Artikel gibt es auf euren Blogs oder auf den Blogs anderer? Welches Thema sollte noch im Blog diskutiert werden?

Breaking Bad Staffel 5, 2. Teil

Morgen beginnt der zweite Teil der 5. und letzten Staffel von Breaking Bad, eine geniale Serie wie ich finde:

Hier der Trailer:

Und für alle, die noch einmal eine kurze Zusammenfassung benötigen:

 

Walter White startet als jemand der seine Familie versorgt wissen will und erkennt, dass er damit mehr erreichen kann: Er macht so gutes Meth, dass er einer der großen Spieler in dem Bereich wird. Er erlebt plötzlich Status und Macht, Leute, die ihm Respekt entgegenbringen und ihn fürchten, er baut sich eine Persona auf, die ihn dafür entschädigt, dass er damals aus der Firma ausgestiegen ist, die er mit seinen Studienkollegen gegründet hat und die diese zu Multimillionären gemacht hat und einfach nur Lehrer geworden ist. Er ist plötzlich jemand („Say my name!“ „Heisenberg“) Er will sich das erhalten und ein Imperium aufbauen.

Der Preis, den er dafür zahlen muss, ist dementsprechend hoch.

Was auch eine weitere Eigenschaft zeigt, die Charaktere immer häufiger haben und die zB auch in Game of Thrones, einer anderen genialen Serie, basierend auf noch genialeren Büchern, bei viele Charakteren auftaucht:

Obwohl die Charaktere schlechtes tun und böse sind sind wir als Zuschauer auf ihrer Seite, wollen nicht, dass sie geschnappt werden, fiebern mit ihnen mit. Es scheint so als wären uns ihre Taten teilweise egal, wenn wir zumindest anfänglich annehmen, dass sie gut sind (Walter White will seine Familie retten, bei den Sopranos ist es auch die Familie und gleichzeitig die Gruppe, bei Game of Thrones ist es auch die Familie bzw. einfach die Notwendigkeit ein Reich regierbar zu machen) oder zumindest in gewisser Weise die Notwendigkeit besteht so zu handeln. Wir brauchen nachvollziehbare Gründe, die nicht vollständig böse sind oder uns zumindest nachvollziehbar erscheinen. Es kommt hier wahrscheinlich noch hinzu, dass wir eine Entwicklung sehen, bei der uns die Einzelschritte zu einem gewissen Grad nachvollziehbar erscheinen. Wir erleben sie mit ihren Ängsten und Hoffnungen und in ihrem normalen Leben und dadurch erscheinen sie uns menschlich und bilden eine Identifikationsfläche.

Ich freue mich auf die restlichen Folgen, bisher war die Serie genial.