The social 'evolution' of evolutionary psychology

Evolutionary psychology has long been regarded as the answer to explaining why we are attracted to certain individuals. By looking at how our preferences have evolved, in regards to sexual selection of mates, the theories of evolutionary psychology outline very clearly who is the most desirable amongst us and who is least likely to pass on their genes. However, such theories disregard a few critical points. In our modern-day society, not everyone’s main goal is to pass on genes; for some, it’s to enjoy a successful career, for others, it’s to travel the world. Our present criteria do not necessarily coincide with our evolutionary ancestor’s. Additionally, evolutionary psychology ignores the all- important social factors which also affect the choosing of a mate, factors such as who do I enjoy spending time with, and who is least likely to reject my advances.

In a study done in the 90’s, by a proponent of evolutionary psychology, David Buss found that men were universally attracted to young, good-looking females, whose physical features indicated their fertility potential, while women, were drawn to powerful males with money. In their book ‘The Psychology of Physical Attraction’ Swami and Furnham explain the allure of this theory by saying, “The fundamental theories of evolutionary theory are clear, testable, and easily understood, which makes it intuitively appealing.”


But many theories proposed by evolutionary psychology as to why we did things in the past, are not applicable in our present day. In many western societies, women’s earning potential matches men’s, therefore deeming it unnecessary to opt for older males with money. Do you think Ashton Kutcher’s earning potential is on the mind of Demi as they snuggle up for a good night’s sleep? Equally, men do not necessarily go for youth when flirting to find a mate, because due to advances in medical technology, women are able to bear children at a much later age in life. And, as mentioned previously, our ancestors’ goals of propagating the species, aren’t necessarily our own. Therefore, the all-important signals of fertility, such as youth and hip to waist ratios, have been replaced by more relevant, social indicators, such as signals of approachability, as in, who will not reject me?!



At the end of the day, it's less about waist/hip ratio and more about who will make us feel special, unique, and understood. In my own research, where I asked over 250 people what sort of characteristics they are attracted to, the majority began listing personality characteristics before physical one. This point alone is very indicative as to what people value as important. Secondly, there was never a clear pattern in responses as to physical traits which were universally appealing, at least in a European/North American context. (Except for the French who preferred "Bruce Willis"/"Winona Ryder" types)

As the great Marlene Dietrich said, “The average man is more interested in a woman who is interested in him than he is in a woman with beautiful legs”