I actually learned quite a bit since I’ve last been here. Here’s my new hypothesis.
http://www.uclan.ac.uk/schools/psychology/staff/files/archerBBS09.pdf
http://news.softpedia.com/news/Sexual-Selection-Shaped-Our-Brains-54481.shtml
What I propose is that there is something called a sexual consent mechanism which is distinct from the personality. One can be social and another can be anti-social. I use the terms anti-social and maladaptive interchangealby.
What my hypothesis proposes is that men have a more social sexual consent structure than women do. Men will gravitate sexually towards more social behavior in women and women, more than men will to women, will gravitate sexually towards more anti-social behavior in men. It doesn’t take much of a difference between the sexual consent structures in order to have huge social consequences. Since men tend to sexually select more social behaviors in women on average, women will tend to be more social in their personalities on average than men. Since women tend to gravitate towards more anti-social behavior in men on average with their sexual consent mechanism, men will tend to be more anti-social in their personalities on average than women.
The reason anyone gravitates towards more maladaptive behavior is something else I think I figured out. What I think is occurring, is that we use a form of statistics to determine the lethality of a behavior, and if someone engages in behavior we deem to be highly lethal and they survive, we consider their survival fitness to be high. There’s one problem with this. Maladaptive behavior, anti-social behavior, registers as behavior with high lethality with respect to how we run these statistical heuristics, since we understand social behavior to be adaptive. I think the female sexual consent mechanism is more vulnerable to falling for this evidence of survival fitness more than the male sexual consent mechanism. It’s a relative malfunction, compared with the other gender. What this means is that as an aggregate, being a jerk should have the highest sexual selection value amongst males in this species. One of the ways to show survival fitness is to do something maladaptive and survive while doing it.
I’ve tended to find that the behaviors that work best for males are behaviors that people who are sensitive to acting out maladaptive aggression tend to avoid completely. Teasing people, being sarcastic, bragging, playing most games or sports, being a spectator of most games or sports, keeping an inordinate amount of wealth to ones self.
I think it has other social consequences as well. I think racism and sexism are forms of maladaptive aggression, they are anti-social and are one of the strategies that males will adopt much more than women to increase their chances of being sexually selected. Since consensual sexual selection is such a strong social re-enforcer, men will basically find all kinds of ways to be jerks in order to fit in relative to womens average sexual consent structure. In the same way that women use the statistics of lethality to determine survival fitness, men use the statistics of “counts”, which men get the most counts to determine as an aggregate how they should act if they want to increase their odds of being sexually selected.
The more I look into this subject the more this hypothesis seems to be true, everything from how we approach each other to who gets approached to differences in how the genders use humor. It is also telling that heterosexual women have consensual rape fantasies which aren’t as common at all with heterosexual men, and there is what would otherwise seem truly baffling phenomenon of women being known much more than men to go out of their way to “fall in love” with very anti-social brutal convicts in prison who are complete strangers.
I think the pointers all suggest that women positively re-enforce more maladaptive strategies with the consensual reward system of sexuality, and that because sex is such a huge motivational system and 80-90% of the population is heterosexual that this phenomenon should have a huge impact on every measure of maladaptive aggression throughout the entire species.
I think if people can become educated on how they act out subconsciously to how we distribute reward systems, both educating people on actual survival fitness behavior and men on their tendency to act out in order to participate in the reward system that the overall metric of maladaptive aggression on all scales will decrease in this species.
Additional evidence that the male sexual consent mechanism is more adaptive than the female one is evidence that women tend to select more within their own ethnic groups than males and males tend more than women to have sex with women other then their primary partners, which means from a reward system standpoint, men are distributing the reward system to women better than women are distributing it to men.
I think maladaptive sexual selection is the most determining factor for maladaptive behavior. The maladaptive sexual selection is a trick of the perception of survival fitness. It rewards maladaptive behavior over adaptive behavior, being tricked into believing that it’s adaptive. The motivational system for selecting maladaptive behavior is survival fitness, however, it’s a malfunction. It believes that when a person engages in high risk behavior or maladaptive behavior in general and they survive, that they must have very high survival fitness. I believe women are much more vulnerable to this than men are, which is why men who are very adaptive in terms of their personality profiles who do not approach women are generally not approached by women, even though it is the most adaptive personality profile for a male given the context. (If the sexual consent mechanism was functioning properly, these types of men should have their pick of the women, to use the popular term, they should be beating women off with a stick, in fact it is just the opposite in the real world). Men do tend more towards women who are more adaptive in their aggression make up, which is why women will tend in general, aside from their sexual consent structure to have more adaptive aggression structures than men do. I do believe there is adaptive aggression. An act of aggression is doing something to someone that they don’t want to have happen to them, being a serial killer is an act of aggression, putting a serial killer in prison is an act of aggression. The first one is anti-social aggression, the second one is social aggression.
There is a symmetry to how aggressive the gender is in relation to how adaptive or maladaptive their sexual consent structure is.
Men will at times pick the more maladaptive women with their sexual consent structures, but not as often as women do it with men, which is why the percentages on all scales of maladaptive aggression will be lower for women than men.
I’ve been trying to figure out the psych profile of pedophilia from what I’ve come to understand about acting out from observing the aggregate sexual selection process. Part of it is learned behavior in some individuals but I believe the source of it is acting out the sexual abuse of “innocence” or “adaptive behavior”, which is precisely what rewarding maladaptive behavior over adaptive behavior is. I actually have a term for when someone sexually selects more maladaptive behavior when there is a more adaptive person in the field, reverse rape. While men do this, they don’t do it at the same frequency that women do, If I’m right there should be more pedophiliac men than women.
In saying this, I believe that if the gravity of our sexual selections goes towards more adaptive behavior that it will compel more adaptive behavior and that existential suicides, homicides, abuse, bigotry, racism, sexism and social stratification will all decline significantly.
