Thursday, July 9, 2009

Why Handsome Men Make Bad Husbands

You may have recently heard or seen the news coverage (in the New York Daily News or CBS news online, among others; you may have even seen the lead author, James K. McNulty of the University of Tennessee, discuss it on the Today show) of a study, published in the Journal of Family Psychology, that showed that couples in which the woman is physically more attractive than the man are happier than couples in which the man is physically more attractive than the woman. Why is this? Why is it better for the couple if the woman is physically more attractive than the man?
If you have been keeping score at home, the findings of this study should have come as no surprise to you. There are two different reasons why couples in which the woman is more attractive than the man are more successful and happier than couples in which the man is more attractive than the woman.
First, as we elaborate in Chapter 4 of our book Why Beautiful People Have More Daughters (“Go Together Like a Horse and Carriage? The Evolutionary Psychology of Marriage”), handsome men on average make bad husbands. Men can maximize their reproductive success by pursuing one of two different strategies: Seek a long-term mate, stay with her, and invest in their joint offspring (the “dad” strategy); or seek a large number of short-term mates without investing in any of the resulting offspring (the “cad” strategy).
All men may want to pursue the cad strategy; however, their choice of the mating strategy is constrained by female choice. Men do not get to decide with whom to have sex; women do. And women disproportionately seek out handsome men for their short-term mates for their good genes. Even women who are already married benefit from short-term mating with handsome men if they could successfully fool their husbands into investing in the resulting offspring. The women then get the best of both worlds: Their children carry the high-quality genes of their handsome lover and receive the parental investment of their unknowingly cuckolded but resourceful husband. (In order to help the women accomplish this, evolution has designed women to be more likely to have sex with their lovers when they are ovulating and therefore fertile, and have sex with their husbands when they are not.)
Thus, handsome men get a disproportionate number of opportunities for short-term mating and are therefore able to engage in the cad strategy. Ugly men have no choice. Since women do not choose them as short-term mates, their only option for achieving any reproductive success is to find one long-term mate and invest heavily in their children -- the dad strategy.
Consistent with this logic, studies show that more attractive men have a larger number of extra-pair sex partners (sex partners other than their long-term mates). Interestingly, more attractive men have more short-term mates than long-term mates, whereas more attractive women have more long-term mates than short-term mates. Most importantly for our current purposes, handsome men invest less in their exclusive relationships than ugly men do. They are less honest with and less attentive to their partners. McNulty’s new study of newlyweds confirms this. Their data show that the more physically attractive the husbands are, the less supportive they are of their wives in their interactions.
I hasten to add that “good” and “bad” (as in the title of this post “Why handsome men make bad husbands”) are value judgments that scientists do not make. However, empirical data do demonstrate clearly that handsome men have more extra-marital affairs and are not as committed to their marriages, which many wives would undoubtedly consider undesirable. In this sense, handsome men make better lovers than husbands.

Sunday, July 5, 2009

Facebook Addiction

With more than 200 million people now signed up on Facebook, it was only a matter of time before we heard about the latest twist in online social networking: Facebook addiction! According to CNN, therapists across North America are reporting a rise in the number of people who’ve crossed the line from social networking to social dysfunction! These are people who spend so much time using Facebook that they neglect their work and family, as well as their own health.
For example, one mother interviewed by CNN realized she had a problem when her daughter started emailing her through Facebook – just to ask for help doing homework! This woman estimates she was spending more than 20 hours per week on the site – checking email, connecting with friends, posting new photos, and updating her online “status.” Psychologists emphasize that there’s nothing wrong with using Facebook itself. In fact, the vast majority of users go on for a few minutes, log off, and are fine. The trouble starts when the thought of going a full day without Facebook makes you feel anxious or stressed. Or if you start losing sleep, or missing work, because you’re up all night surfing Facebook. It’s also a problem if you find yourself “Facebook stalking” old loves.
Dr. Joanna Lipari is a clinical psychologist who says Facebook addiction is especially dangerous for people with “compulsive personalities.” That’s the name she gives for people who think the online world of Facebook is a better place to spend time than the real world. For them, social networking sites represent some sort of Happyland – where you can connect with friends, relive the good ol' days, sneak a peek at other people’s lives, and escape your everyday problems. Unfortunately, Dr. Lipari says Facebook is not a good representation of real life. The fact is, most people only present “the crème de la crème” of their lives online. Very rarely will you find people talking about daily hassles like morning breath, paying bills or arguments over who’s going to go change the baby’s diapers.
If you’re spending more than an hour each day waiting for someone to comment on your latest Wall posting, Dr. Lipari believes you really need to log off and possibly get some help.