Women's instincts in mate selection 126

Damn, that’s so romantic. ;)

I've heard that a man can attract the most beautiful woman that he can afford.

and the woman marries the wealthiest man she can atract

I have to disagree about how "good" their instincts are.

You guys keep up with football, right?

A person can have good instincts to play the game, under the rules. Good quarterbacking skills, or good hands to catch the ball, or quick speed and agility to dodge tacklers or even good defensive instincts to hold the line.

Alternatively some people have instincts to cheat because they are so lousy at the game that this is the only way they can win.

I hope you catch my meaning.

If their instincts were so good they would be able to find the guy with the good genes who also is good relationship material. Guys who also have an interest in being a long term mate. If women are choosing men who are just short term wham bam thank you ma'am rolls in the hay and then trying to cover their ass by getting somebody else to help them raise the bastard children, then their instincts are not very good at all because THEY CHOSE WRONG. The after-the-fact actions tell us that they're trying to make up for their mistake. If you have to lie or defraud anybody that means you fucked up somewhere.

they are not chosing they are responding to their instincts,there is no such thing free will, easily proven , by what process does one chose to be born?

Dude WTF? How can you say there is no such thing as free will when you know good and well you make choices every day.

When are you gonna stop making excuses for these women? They are not on autopilot any more than you are. They know what is good they know what is bad they know what is beneficial and what is detrimental. They also know what is right and wrong. They are not robots. Yes people are influenced by their urges but people also have the capacity to judge whether something should or should not be done and act accordingly. Your urges could tell you to do one thing but your common sense of morals and values and judgement could warn you against that. Therein lies the choice. Do you obey your urges or do you obey your principles?

I guarantee you this Rod....if paternity tests were made mandatory and alimony/child support nullified if the named father turned out to not be the biological, I bet the farm that women would make different choices. You would see these statistics change because deterrents and penalties are set in place. Some would still fuck up regardless but a lot of them would consider it wise to clean up their acts. Regardless of their instincts they would have pressure on them to choose differently because they know there is a large chance for their infidelity to be uncovered, and negative consequences imposed on them.

ali ,here is the flaw in your argument,have you visited third world countrys? they are starving to death ,yet they keep having kids. it is not a choice it is a responsse to instinctual bio evolotunary programing. if it was a choice people who can not afford kids would stop reproducing. it requires genious caliber brain to make an actual choice,statisticly genious are sterile therefore the gene pool is 99% flesh robots.

Well, some people have kids because they intend to, some people have kids because of contraceptive failure and didn't necessarally intend to have kids, but the condom broke or somebody forgot to pull out, etc.

There are people who choose not to have kids despite the general "programming" of our species to reproduce. And there are people who choose to reproduce despite overwhelming unfavorable circumstances. Decisions made on both sides of the street here. That is more evidence for people making their own choices than not being in control of what they do.

If somebody threatens to kick your ass if you don't move out of their way, what does your programming tell you to do? Stand there or move? Are you telling me you can't choose otherwise? Fear is the emotion that comes from the survival programming but not everyone would be afraid. What does that tell you? And not everyone would choose to move in response to that threat whether they were afraid or not. Some people don't believe in letting themselves being pushed around. Some people would stand up to the bully. Is that totally biologically motivated? Or is it a choice to fight instead of flight? If your argument was right people would always run from danger or unfavorable situations because of the survival instincts. Obviously people are known to choose contrary to their instincts. A more relevant example going with that reproduction in poverty theme you stated; the survival instinct says the more mouths you have to feed the less money or resources or food there will be to go around, thereby threatening the survival of the whole family. Therefore there is a choice; the survival of the existing members or the adding of new members. It is a choice that depends on what the individual values most in the situation. Is it more important to bust a nut and make a baby or is it more important to feed the children that are already here? When the two choices become moreso mutually exclusive people are forced to choose wisely or suffer the consequences.

If we are all acting according to programming then NOBODY would be able to change their behavior one way or another, we'd be locked into some preset script from birth. The testimony on this very blog of how people have chosen to adapt to their circumstances means that there is choice involved because you can just as easily find people who refuse to adapt.

fear is a direct result of amigdala hormone levels not a choice,fight or fligth is not a conscious decision,it would be to slow . the pseudo choices of people on this blog are genetic in origin with out the gene it would not happen.

after the action the mind finds excuses for the behaviour ,it is an evolved coping mechanism linked to survival instinct. how does one choose to be born autistic? no choice in the matter ,autism is a recessive neanderthol gene left over from cromagnom neanderthol hybridization.

Whoa there Rod. I never said fear was a choice. I said not everyone would be afraid in that scenario, meaning not everyone is influenced the same way by the same things. I also said the response to that fear is the individual's choice. You can fight or flight. There are people who choose one or the other despite being afraid. Again, what does that evidence tell you? Other things work in a similar manner as well. You will have your emotions you will have your urges but you will also have your understanding of the facts and pros and cons and based on those things you will choose, for better or worse.

You are trying to put human beings only in a genetic/biological context, of which our understanding is more limited than we think. Even biologists know better than that. You are more than just the sum of your genes. You are also the sum of your experiences and your behavior is influenced by your genetics and socialization but not set in stone.

Let's say I am out camping with my family, and a bear comes along roaring and all that. Well fear would urge me to run. But what if I'm tired of bears fucking up my camping trips, and I don't want to run the risk of this bear chasing us down and killing all of us (bears can run faster than we think). What if I choose to pick up a spear and fight the bear off instead? You don't think I'd be scared? Of course. But it's a conscious choice to fight after weighing the pros and cons. The bear could very well maul me to death anyway, making my choice an ill-fated one, but a choice nonetheless.

People have the ability to make decisions. There are numerous examples of people choosing to do contrary to their "programming" for whatever reason so your oversimplification of humans as "flesh robots" doesn't hold water when you consider the facts.

is your reaction to the bear not based on a previous programing? regardless of the origin of the programing.

does it not require a very inteligent person to be able to reprogram itself? what percentage of the population is that inteligent?

Fear may be a programmed emotion in response to the bear but the action I take may not be. Like I said if I choose to fight instead of doing the predictable thing (running) what does that say about your theory about me not having a choice in the matter?

"does it not require a very inteligent person to be able to reprogram itself? what percentage of the population is that inteligent?"

No, you need only the understanding that your "programming" isn't helping matters, or may even be making matters worse. You then make the better choice based on your cognizance of the situation and after weighing the pertinent factors. This is how humans adapt to changing circumstances.

Doesn't take genius to realize that a person has control over their choices and decisions. This is merely an observation, and it isn't even necessarally a keen one. I am sure many others also have understanding of this, the question is, who is willing to accept the truth and responsibility versus who is willing to put the blindfold on and make excuses for themselves? The "I didn't have a choice except to do that which should not have been done" excuse doesn't fly especially given the obvious other (often better) option(s).