Half-Assed Philosophy: Cheating and Women

[bobquasit]

I saw a question on Advicenators recently that led me to think seriously (for about fifteen seconds) about infidelity. Whoops! That didn't come out quite right. I meant about the topic of infidelity.

Specifically, the genetic consequences of infidelity. I like thinking about evolutionary psychology, even though I'm not at all qualified; it's a fascinating field.

After pondering for a few minutes, I reached the conclusion that for a heterosexual couple in a theoretically monogamous relationship, infidelity is much more of a threat to the male than to the female.

(Panic attack: is this obvious? Am I making an idiot of myself? Probably.)

If the female is unfaithful, the male may, without knowing it, lose the chance to reproduce. That is, genetically speaking, a death sentence.

If the male is unfaithful, however, his spouse doesn't lose anything genetically; it is, after all, impossible for her to be deceived as to the parentage of her children. She knows that she's the mother, and at a minimum will know that the father may be one of several men. Her own reproduction is not threatened.

So it's worse for a man when a woman cheats, than for a woman when a man cheats.

I will now issue a couple of disclaimers:

1. Disease is a factor that I didn't include. What effect do you think it would have?

2. The emotional impact of infidelity is certainly something to be considered. Is a male who is unfaithful to his spouse more likely to leave her and any children they may have? Possibly. But the same applies to females - a woman who cheats is more likely to leave her spouse, too, and probably to the same degree of likelihood as a male. Isn't she?

Incidentally, I didn't answer the question on Advicenators. The only answer I could have given wasn't something that the questioner would want to hear. In my experience, that usually means a low rating or no rating at all. It's not worth it.

Comments

[dancing-kiralee.livejournal.com]

I think, in a traditional society, a women has just as much to lose as a man.

Suppose that to suceed, all the couple has to produce is a healthy baby. In this case you're right... infidelity is more of a threat for the male.

But suppose that's not good enough. Suppose that, in order to suceed, the couple needs to produce a healthy adult - one capable of reproducing in turn.

The woman is dependant on the man to provide for her and the child, while she does the work of childrearing. If the man's cheating results in him having children with the other woman, and abandoning her for them, then she's the one who loses out. The man gets to raise his own child, and she's up the creek, unless she can find another man who's willing to expend resources on raising a child not his own.

Finally, while a man with a wife has a great deal to lose from his wife's infidelity, he has a great deal to gain by his own infidelity - or, I could say by the infidelity of other men's wives but that sounds unfair, since it sounds like all of the responsibility belongs to the woman.

Kiralee

[tprjones.livejournal.com]

What I find most interesting when thinking about these things from the standpoint of what evolution would dictate, is that in order to be most successful women should be unfaithful. In order to successfully raise children in a cruel world a woman requires a loyal and supportive mate who will take care of her and her offspring, and so she will tend to marry the "safe guy" who will do just that. At the same time in order to give her male offspring the best chance at breeding as much as possible she needs to cheat on the "safe guy" and have someone more prolific actually father the children, and thus will be sexually attracted to the "bad boy" who is more likely to have equally aggressive and promiscuious offspring.

It's in her best interests to bond with the "safe guy" but cheat on him and never let him find out the kids aren't his. Fascinating, IMO.

[bobquasit.livejournal.com]

It's comments like this that make me profoundly grateful that Sebastian looks SO much like me...and that we don't have any red-haired male friends. :D

[klyfix.livejournal.com]

Uhhh....

Have you looked at my old SD driver's licence?

My hair used to be really, really red.

[bobquasit.livejournal.com]

Damn, you're right! Sorry, I forgot about that. On the other hand, your hair is incredibly curly, and Sebastian's is straight.

And...well, you've seen him, so you know: there aren't many kids in the world who look more like their father. I got so sick of those damned Mini-Me jokes...

[klyfix.livejournal.com]

True; I'm nearly a sheep hair-wise. :)

[rob-w.livejournal.com]

And I think that I think too much sometimes ;-)

[klyfix.livejournal.com]

Okay, as I understand the logic of "evolutionary psychology" which used to be called "sociobiology" a male benefits from spewing his genes as widely as possible while a female benefits from having a devoted mate to take care of her when she's vulnerable (pregnant) and to help provide for offspring. However, if a female has said devoted mate (who may be devoted but boring) but flings with an exciting (and possibly genetically superior) male she gets the best of both worlds. The cuckold male is stuck providing for offspring of other males.

Mind you, I don't really go with this whole notion that organisms are just a means for genes to perpetuate themselves. To some extent stuff happens just 'cause, well, it happens.

And a lot of stuff skews the whole human evolution thing. An organized society is very often going to take care of individuals who, in other species, would not survive to reproduce. Societies that allow for multiple wives reduce the available mates for men, which is kinda handy if you happen to be society that likes to have wars (guys fight to impress women or to just grab wives). Socities that favor male children above females may skew toward males if there is a way to do so; this is happening in India and China where abortion is being used as a means of sex selection. And if your society tends to have men who expect women to behave in certain ways that smart and educated women will reject, well, many women just won't marry; see Japan.

Males, of course, are ultimately unnecessary in a sufficently advanced society. We shall only be "needed" for recreation and opening pickle jars. :)