Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.
To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here:
Cookie Policy
Highest Quality Marriages — Those Who Married At Ages 22 – 25
Not too long ago I had a conversation with a group of recent college graduates (both men and women). To a person, they all agreed that they would not be getting married anytime soon, and several of them were willing to put a number on it — “definitely not until after 30.”
I walked away wondering — Why wait?
Men have long been known for their stiff-arming approach to marriage. But did you know that single women are the fastest growing demographic in the U.S.? The median age at first marriage for women has gone from 21 in 1970 to 27 presently. Furthermore, the marriage rate for women under 35 has declined nearly 50% since 1970 — from 75.5 marriages per 1000 unmarried women to 39.5.
A couple months ago I had a conversation with a young man named Eric. He is a former student who is now 27. When Eric was in college, he dated a woman (Andrea) whom he described as “the love of my life.â€Â As Eric put it: “Andrea and I got along great. We had chemistry. We could talk for hours. Or we could just hang out, perfectly comfortable simply being together, saying almost nothing. We never seemed to be at a loss for things that we enjoyed doing together. And it stayed this way for over 3 years.”
What could be better? Eric had found the love of his life. They had chemistry. They were able to communicate. They enjoyed each other’s company. The relationship had shown staying power (thriving for over 3 years).
But a problem emerged shortly after graduation.  Andrea wanted more. She was interested in “a future†together. And the more she wanted to talk about their future, the more Eric pulled away. Within a year, they had split up.
Eric lamented to me: “I have dated a lot of women since then, some more seriously, most less so. But I haven’t found anyone quite like Andrea. I think I blew it. I think I missed out on a wonderful woman. I let her get away.”
I wish I could say that Eric’s situation is unique — that very few people begin to think after breaking up that they’ve blown it, that they’ve passed on a person who would have made a great life companion. But unfortunately, I can’t — I’ve heard it dozens of times — men and women who realize (almost always too late) that they let a really good partner get away.
I suspect that nearly all of us are familiar with the studies reporting that age at marriage and marital success are inversely related — in other words, the earlier you marry, the less likely you are to experience marital success.
In light of such studies, it is only logical to wait. And we are led to believe that the longer you wait, the better.
But did you know that this is only true up to about age 22? If you marry prior to 21 or 22 years old, then the probability of marital success goes down drastically.  BUT after age 22, this is no longer true.
In fact, recent evidence has suggested that the highest quality marriages are found among those who married at ages 22 – 25.
Furthermore, recent evidence has revealed that couples who wait until after 30 to marry run the risk of ending up with poorer quality marriages. As many of us probably realize (at least those of us who are over 30), as people get older, they tend to get “set in their ways†— and this is one characteristic that is notoriously detrimental to the type of mutual give-and-take that is so essential to close, loving, caring, and giving relationships.
Obviously, this does not mean that all marriages that occur after the age of 30 are doomed to mediocrity, but it does suggest that such marriages may require a modicum of extra time, energy, effort, attention, AND give-and-take if they are going to be successful.
But I am still left with my query: Why wait?
If a person has the desire and the intention of marrying AND this person has found someone who would make a wonderful traveling companion along the journey called life, then why not seize the opportunity and make it official? Why not marry this person?
Correlations are what makes the blogosphere go round, so maybe I should start off this post by cutting straight to the chase: The prettier a wife in comparison to her husband the happier the marriage.
The source for (the underlying statistical truth behind) this correlation is a recent article in the Journal of Family Psychology, which analyzes self- and other-reported ratings on Marital Satisfaction, Marital Interaction Behavior and Physical Attractiveness for 82 newlywed couples (i.e. couples married for less than 3 months).
Taking the sample into account, one might consider revising the above statement to read: The prettier the wife in comparison to her husband the higher the marital satisfaction score for a fairly homogeneous group of couples at the very early stages of their marriage.
That being said, it might also be worthwhile noting that the study only looked at physical attractiveness in respect to the marriage partners faces, and possibly I should be a little more careful about stating correlation as causal dependency, so maybe I’d better say that the degree to which the female partners face is prettier than the male partners face is correlated with marital happiness scores for a fairly homogenous group of couples at the beginning of their marriage.
Another look at the data and a reminder that “people who do well at mathematics usually play an instrument, doesn’t imply that people who play an instrument usually do well in mathematics”, forces me to admit that in reality it is not so much that marriages are happier when the female has a prettier face than her husband, but that males in this data set are unhappier when they are married to women less attractive than themselves. Hence, I should say: In the sample of examined marriages, the degree to which men have more attractive faces than their wives correlates with reduced marital satisfaction scores.
However, it is not so much the degree to which men and women are unequally attractive, that is driving the correlation in this dataset, but simply the fact that the man has a more attractive face than the woman. It’s the direction (not the magnitude) of the difference that counts!
So I might conclude that there are husbands out there, who look better than their better (but not better-looking) halves, and these guys are also miserable…or at least they score lower on a six-item marital happiness scale, which makes me wonder: What does a 4 for one person on a marital happiness score really mean in comparison to a 5 on that same scale for a different person?
You don’t love the man you’re with but don’t think you’ll do any better?
Leave him. Do yourself and the poor guy a favor.
If you stay with a man because you’re afraid to be alone, you’ll end up ruining two lives. The woman who makes such a choice is hedging her bets, and basing her choice on fear, not love.
Women who marry men they don’t love come to resent their mates, and heap upon them their own feelings of inadequacy, self-punishment and rage.
Resentment will, in some cases, turn not only into contempt, but into hatred.
“On Women Who Hate Their Husbands,” a paper originally read at the New Orleans Psychoanalytic Society, dealt with the phenomena of women who married in order to “play it safe.”
Discussing patients who married “second-choice husbands,” Dr. David Freedman argues that in each case the woman’s “choice of mate had been based on the specific defect of her own ego system implied by inability to see herself as a person of sufficient potential significance and ability to hold a man she really admired.” In effect, the women in question believed that they were not worthy of fully desirable husbands, and so chose mildly undesirable men instead.
“She had chosen someone who combined the contradictory, but for her safe, qualities of substantial but not outstanding ability in his own professional sphere, and a passive, dependent, and placatory orientation to the significant female in his life.” But this proved to make such women dreadfully unhappy because “Rather than satisfying, the relationship proved inevitably to be fraught with anxiety and frustration.”
I knew one woman who, having resigned herself to marring a “second-choice husband,” then made a career out of belittling any sign of happiness between two other people. “Those love-birds are headed for a fall,” she cluck over any new couple, palpably longing for disaster. She couldn’t stand the idea that anyone might actually have a relationship based on passion, fun, or even simply the promise of an equal match between the partners.
When her own daughter wanted to marry an interesting, handsome and devoted man, this woman was torn. She wanted her daughter to be happy, of course. But, on some level, she was also tormented by seeing her own compromised and diluted life pale in comparison to the promise held by daughter’s union.
If this was playing it safe, I thought to myself, I can’t abide the payoff.
To marry a man simply because he seems a “safe bet” is cheating: it cheats the woman out of actually working through towards a real understanding of herself and what she needs, and it cheats a man out of being the real love-object for a woman who believes he is the best man she could find.
Without a doubt, dating (or worse yet, marrying) a narcissist is bad news. Both you and the relationship are going to experience the devastating consequences of such a decision.
But narcissism has a first cousin. This relative of narcissism also takes its toll on loving relationships (as well as on those people who are in them). The effects of this relative are not as forceful and blunt as those of narcissism, but in the long run, they can be just as devastating.
The name of narcissism’s first cousin — selfishness.
Lots of relationship experts have made it clear. The most successful long-term love partnerships happen when both people have a desire to put their partner’s needs, desires, and interests above their own.
But what happens if one partner has this desire, but the other partner is mired in a mind-set of self-interest?
Case in point. Marie and Paul had been married for a little over 8 years when I first met them. At the heart of their failing marriage was the fact that Marie could not count on Paul for consistent help around the house. Paul would occasionally take out the garbage or mow the lawn, but his participation in their life together seldom went beyond this. And when Marie did sometimes ask Paul for help with other things around the house, he would typically do them, but never without attitude of indignation.
To make things worse, Paul repeatedly came home late from work without letting Marie know that he would be late, or he would go out with friends without talking with Marie.
Needless to say, Paul’s sense of ME-ness was much stronger than his sense of WE-ness.
Paul had grown up an only child, and his parents divorced when he was nine. He spent much of his teen years by himself with little need to let anyone know his whereabouts. He came and went pretty much as he pleased. Furthermore, being very busy with school activities, Paul was rarely expected to do anything around the house to help support his mother.
When we think of selfishness, we often think of laziness, but Paul was anything but lazy. Throughout his growing up years, he had been very self-disciplined and responsible. But his hard work and responsibility had nearly always been exercised in the pursuit of his own self-interests. He had never been asked to think something like: “If I decide to do this, how will that decision affect US?â€Â As a result, WE-ness was simply not anywhere on Paul’s cognitive radar screen.
Marie tried cajoling, pleading, prodding, and nagging. As you might suspect, none of these did anything to develop a sense of WE-ness within Paul’s cranial cavity. In fact, they only served to make things worse.
Bottom line.
If you want a smooth-sailing long-term love voyage, make sure both partners have an expressed desire to put their partner’s needs, desires, and interests above their own.
If one person has this desire, but their partner does not, then you can plan on setting sail with an anchor overboard. The drag on the relationship will produce anything but smooth sailing.
And if neither partner has the desire to put their partner’s needs, desire, and interests above their own, then prepare yourself for a shipwreck.
Many women enter marriage hoping that their husband will change, whereas many men enter marriage hoping that their wife will stay the same.
Why is this?
Maybe we men simply have lots more problem behaviors that are in need of change?
I doubt it.
At any rate, repeated studies have revealed that women are far more critical of their husbands than are men of their wives.
Furthermore, we know that criticism is deadly to marital satisfaction.
If you want to destroy your marriage with one fell swoop — cheat.
But if you want to slowly bludgeon your marriage to death — criticize.
Women often want men to open up and communicate more — but how easy is it to be open with someone who is critical of you? [You more often want to remain hidden from such an individual — then she will have less ammunition.]
Women want men to be more active and to do more at home — but how often do we want to participate with someone who is so busy pointing out your shortcomings that they seldom notice what you are doing that is positive, good, and helpful? [If someone is often critical, then the less you do, the less she will have to criticize.]
Women want men to be more romantic — but how easy is it to make love to someone who criticizes you? [You may screw someone who is critical of you, but you will seldom make love to that person.]
So why all the criticism?
What is it about men that makes them in need of so much correction and criticism from women?
What is it about women that makes them so critical of men?
Next to infidelity, the best predictor of relationship demise is criticism. If you want to destroy your relationship, criticize your partner.
So then why do so many people express a desire for a loving, healthy relationship, but then engage in behaviors that are sure to prevent from happening the very thing that is desired?
Why would so many women do the very thing that is least likely to accomplish the intended goal?
The Japanese have a term, kenzoku, which translated literally means “family.” The connotation suggests a bond between people who’ve made a similar commitment and who possibly therefore share a similar destiny. It implies the presence of the deepest connection of friendship, of lives lived as comrades from the distant past.
Many of us have people in our lives with whom we feel the bond described by the word kenzoku. They may be family members, a mother, a brother, a daughter, a cousin. Or a friend from grammar school with whom we haven’t talked in decades. Time and distance do nothing to diminish the bond we have with these kinds of friends.
The question then arises: why do we have the kind of chemistry encapsulated by the word kenzoku with only a few people we know and not scores of others? The closer we look for the answer the more elusive it becomes. It may not in fact be possible to know, but the characteristics that define a kenzoku relationship most certainly are.
WHAT DRAWS PEOPLE TOGETHER AS FRIENDS?
1. Common interests. This probably ties us closer to our friends than many would like to admit. When our interests diverge and we can find nothing to enjoy jointly, time spent together tends to rapidly diminish. Not that we can’t still care deeply about friends with whom we no longer share common interests, but it’s probably uncommon for such friends to interact on a regular basis.
2. History. Nothing ties people together, even people with little in common, than having gone through the same difficult experience. As the sole glue to keep friendships whole in the long run, however, it often dries, cracks, and ultimately fails.
3. Common values. Though not necessarily enough to create a friendship, if values are too divergent, it’s difficult for a friendship to thrive.
4. Equality. If one friend needs the support of the other on a consistent basis such that the person depended upon receives no benefit other than the opportunity to support and encourage, while the relationship may be significant and valuable, it can’t be said to define a true friendship.
WHAT MAKES A FRIEND WORTHY OF THE NAME?
1. A commitment to your happiness. A true friend is consistently willing to put your happiness before your friendship. It’s said that “good advice grates on the ear,” but a true friend won’t refrain from telling you something you don’t want to hear, something that may even risk fracturing the friendship, if hearing it lies in your best interest. A true friend will not lack the mercy to correct you when you’re wrong. A true friend will confront you with your drinking problem as quickly as inform you about a malignant-looking skin lesion on your back that you can’t see yourself.
2. Not asking you to place the friendship before your principles. A true friend won’t ask you to compromise your principles in the name of your friendship or anything else. Ever.
3. A good influence. A true friend inspires you to live up to your best potential, not to indulge your basest drives.
Of course, we may have friends who fit all these criteria and still don’t quite feel kenzoku. There still seems to be an extra factor, an attraction similar to that which draws people together romantically, that cements friends together irrevocably, often immediately, for no reason either person can identify. But when you find these people, these kenzoku, they’re like priceless gems. They’re like finding home.
HOW TO ATTRACT TRUE FRIENDS
This one is easy, at least on paper: become a true friend yourself. One of my favorite quotations comes from Gandhi: “Be the change you wish to see in the world.” Be the friend you want to have. We all tend to attract people into our lives whose character mirrors our own. You don’t have to make yourself into what you think others would find attractive. No matter what your areas of interest, others share them somewhere. Simply make yourself a big target. Join social clubs organized around activities you enjoy. Leverage the Internet to find people of like mind. Take action.
As I thought about it, there are four people in my life I consider kenzoku. How many do you?
If you enjoyed this post, please feel free to explore Dr. Lickerman’s home page, Happiness in this World.
Significant dating most commonly begins in late adolescence, ages 15 – 18, during the high school years. By “significant” I mean when young people want to experience a continuing relationship that involves more interest and caring than the casual socializing or friendship they have known before. They want to pair up, at least for a while, to experience what a more serious involvement is like.
At this juncture, it can be helpful if parents can provide some guidelines for evaluating the “goodness” of a relationship. To what degree is it constructed and conducted so that it works well and not badly for the young people involved? What should they expect in a relationship, and what should they not want? Remember, in most cases, this relationship education is not addressed in the academic classes that they take in school. It is taught by life experience. I believe parents have a role in helping their son or daughter know how to evaluate this experience.
Parents can begin by describing three components of a serious relationship: Attraction, Enjoyment, and Respect. Attraction is how the relationship gets started. Typically it is based on appearance and personality that motivates wanting to spend some time together. Enjoyment is what keeps the relationship going. Typically it is based on companionship and commonality that allow them to share experience together. Respect is how the relationship is conducted in a sensitive manner. Typically it is based on keeping treatment of each other within limits that feel comfortable and safe for them both.
Parents can declare: no matter how much attraction and enjoyment there is, if how young people treat each other lacks respect for one or both of them, then what they have is not a good relationship. For sure, parents need to tell their son or daughter that any kind of violence (action with intent to harm), be it verbal, emotional, physical or sexual, is not okay. The only good relationship is a safe relationship. Period.
As I describe in my book about adolescence, “The Connected Father,” parents can suggest four basic treatment questions to which their son or daughter needs to ask and answer “yes” to affirm that the significant dating relationship is good, or at least good enough.
First: “Do I like how I treat myself in the relationship?” For example, “Do I give my needs and wants as much importance as the other person’s in the relationship?”
Second: “Do I like how I treat the other person in the relationship?” For example, “Do I accept the right of the other person to view things differently from me?”
Third: “Do I like how the other person treats me in the relationship?” For example, “Does the other person accept my disagreement without criticizing me or pushing to change my mind?”
Fourth: “Do I like how the other person treats himself or herself in the relationship?” For example, “Does the other person manage frustration or disappointment calmly without becoming angry or upset?”
If the young person cannot answer “yes” to all four questions, then there is some work to do on the relationship. For many young people, the path to learning how to have a good relationship runs through the hard experience of having one or more bad relationships. In the words of one high school junior: “I never want to go though another relationship like that!”
If a serious relationship becomes emotionally intensified by first love, then there are more specific questions parents can suggest for the young person to consider because love relationships are the most intimately complex and challenging of all. These are questions relevant not just for late adolescents, but for couples of any age.
— The Expression question: “Do you both feel free to speak up about what matters?”
— The Attention question: “Do you both feel listened to when expressing a concern?”
— The Respect question: “Do you both observe comfort and safety limits that each other sets?”
— The Conflict question: “Do you both manage disagreement so neither of you feels threatened or gets emotionally or physically injured?”
— The Commitment question: “Do you both keep promises and agreements that have been made?”
— The Honesty question: “Do you both trust each other to tell the truth?”
— The Independence question: “Do you both support each other having separate time apart?”
— The Anger question: “Do you both express and respond to an offense or violation so you can talk it out and work it out, not act it out?”
— The Equity question: “Do you both evenly share so neither one does most of the giving or getting?”
— The Communication question: “Do you both keep each other adequately informed?”
It takes a lot of work to create a love relationship in which both parties can answer “yes” to all these questions. As parents, it is NOT your job to manage their relationships. It is your job, however, to provide your son or daughter with the important questions to ask.
What you want is for your teenager to learn from significant dating or in-love experience what it means and what it takes to have a good relationship so that he or she is more likely, if so choosing, to make a well working committed partnership later on.
There’s no point talking about a good serious dating relationship without talking about the potential for sexual involvement. Self-report surveys like the 2005 report by the National Center for Health Statistics indicate around 50% of students having had sexual intercourse by the end of high school.
What this suggests is that a lot of students do have sex, and about the same number don’t. So if a young person elects not to have sex, they have a lot of good company. Generally, parents want to play for delay – not saying “not ever” but “not yet.” For safety, having sex is like using alcohol or other drugs: the later you wait to start, the more mature (and wiser) your decision-making is likely to be.
From what I have seen, the three most common causes for serious dating relationships becoming sexually active are for the sake of “love”, altered judgment from alcohol or other drug use, and for a rite of adult passage – hooking up to act grown up.
Of course, if your son or daughter is “in-love” the possibility of becoming sexually active increases. The relationship becomes more affectionate, affection becomes more sexually arousing, sexual arousal intensifies emotion, emotion overrules judgment, and the immediacy of pleasure is more compelling than being careful about outcomes.
Advice parents need to give their son or daughter is to manage this relationship with maturity by “consulting later before deciding now.” The sexual restraint questions to ask are these. “If I have sex with this person, what emotional and physical consequences might I face, and are they worth the risks that I am taking?”
True love means loving the other person enough to keep them free of sexual harm.
If, against their parents wishes, young people in love are determined to become sexually active, then they need to have the good sense to safely plan their sexual activity by using sexual protection. For sure, parents need to explain how having sex doesn’t mean you have love, how having love doesn’t mean you have to have sex, and how having had sex with someone once does not oblige you to have it again.
Sexual advice for young people who are seriously dating is to keep the relationship sober because most first sexual experiences are drug or alcohol affected. Just as parents tell the teenager not to drink or drug and drive, they need to extend that warning to dating. “Don’t drink or drug and date (either you or the other person) because substance use alters judgment, lowers inhibitions, increases impulse, and causes people to commit and allow behavior that they would not if they were substance-free.” Many emotionally and physically coerced sexual encounters at this age are abetted by substance use.
As for sex as a rite of passage into adulthood, hooking up to proving one is now manly or womanly; well, it doesn’t. It only proves that you are putting yourself or the other person at risk of a whole lot of dangerous outcomes.
Understand that your son or daughter is not obliged to have a serious dating or in-love relationship in high school. From what I have seen, probably not more than half of late adolescents have a serious dating relationship in high school, and less than that experience falling “in-love.”
What I have also seen, however, is that although many parents are reluctant to talk with their teenager about the management of sexual behavior, even fewer ever talk to their son or daughter about what constitutes a “good” relationship.
Teen Girls Talk More to Parents About Their Dating Habits Than Do Boys
ScienceDaily (May 6, 2010) — When it comes to talking to parents about most dating issues, teen girls tend to disclose more than boys, and both sexes generally prefer to talk to their mothers.
However, a new study found that girls and boys are equally close-mouthed about issues involving sex and what they do with their dates while unsupervised. And in this case, teens were no more eager to talk to their mothers than they were their fathers.
Results showed that the amount of information parents hear from their teenagers about dating depend on a variety of matters, including age, gender, and what aspect of dating the topic involves.
“Many parents become frustrated because they feel that the lack of communication with their teenage children is evidence of increasing distance or diminishing influence,” explained Christopher Daddis, co-author of the study and assistant professor of psychology at Ohio State University at Marion.
“What we found is that adolescents are willing to talk to their parents about some issues, but those issues may change as they grow older and they feel more autonomous.”
The research appeared in a recent issue of the Journal of Adolescence. The study involved a survey of 222 adolescents in the 9th or 12th grade at a central Ohio high school. About half of them were boys and half were girls.
Students were asked to rate how willing they were to disclose specific information to their parents about 22 different issues relating to their romantic lives . Based on the results, Daddis separated dating issues into three categories.
The first category involved the identity of their boyfriend or girlfriend, and information about the boyfriend or girlfriend’s family, their personal character and the type of student they are. The second category involved more personal issues such as what the teen did with their partner without parental supervision and if they had sex. The third category involved the types of things they did to show their affection, such as holding hands, kissing and going steady.
Daddis found that adolescents were more willing to talk to their parents about their date’s identity and how they showed affection. Specifically, girls disclosed information more often than boys, and with both sexes the mother was their primary confidant. Also, results showed that younger and older adolescents were equally willing to talk to their parents about those two topics.
All adolescents disclosed little about what they did when unsupervised and whether they had sex. There was no distinction between sexes when it concerned issues involving sex and supervision, so neither girls or boys expressed eagerness to talk to their parents about it.
However, on most issues, younger adolescents showed a significantly higher level of communication than older adolescents. The study found that teens who reported a higher level of trust with their parents also disclosed more. Daddis was surprised that the connection between trust and disclosure was especially strong for girls, and particularly for issues related to sex and supervision.
“It is important for the parents to provide an environment where the child can feel comfortable and trusting. The presence of a trusting relationship between parent and teen creates an climate for healthy development of autonomy,” said Daddis.
In addition, the researchers found that teens were more likely to discuss issues that they thought could involve harm to others and that may have severe consequences.
“We found that adolescents were more willing to talk to their parents about an issue if they felt that it would render harm to themselves or have some consequences that may affect others.”
Daddis said parents should realize that it is natural for teens to seek more independence and to draw boundaries around what they reveal.
“Developing a trusting relationship is one of the most important things parents can do to maintain consistent communication,” he said.
The study was co-authored by Danielle Randolph, who is an undergraduate at Ohio State.
By Rick Nauert PhDSenior News Editor Reviewed by John M. Grohol, Psy.D. on May 3, 2010
Wonder if your child is sexually active or getting close? New research suggests a review of their social networking site activity may provide considerable insight.
In a new study, researchers discovered that display of sexual references on teens’ Facebook profiles is associated with their intention to have sex.
“Parents and physicians are often seeking clues for when it’s time to have ‘the talk’ about sex with a teenager,†said Megan A. Moreno from the University of Wisconsin-Madison.
“Our study suggests that if sexual content is noted on a teen’s social networking site profile, it’s definitely time for that talk.”
Dr. Moreno’s team previously found that 54 percent of MySpace profiles contained high-risk behavior information, with 24 percent referencing sexual behavior.
The researchers hypothesized that these displays may represent involvement in risk behaviors, consideration of risk behaviors or just adolescent grandstanding.
In the current study, researchers investigated what sexual displays on social networking sites represent in the offline world.
They identified publicly available Facebook profiles of college freshmen, 85 of whom completed a survey measuring sexual experiences, risky sexual behavior, and for those not yet sexually active, sexual intention.
Researchers found a strong association between display of sexual references on Facebook and self-reported intention to initiate sexual intercourse.
The authors concluded that social networking sites present innovative opportunities for clinicians, educators and parents to identify adolescents who may benefit from targeted education regarding safe sex practices prior to sexual initiation.
They met at Starbucks, made flirty small talk, and exchanged numbers. On their first date a few days later, she invited him back to her place—appropriately enough, for coffee. He’d barely removed his jacket when she slammed the door and pounced. “Is this just about sex?” he thought, because he was putatively looking for a good time, but was in reality seeking a relationship. He was no longer the hunter, but the hunted.
After that tryst his interest dropped quickly and steeply. But why? An opportunity to have unencumbered sex is what men want—right? Well, yes and no.
It’s no moral failing to feel lust, and women throughout history have made strategic decisions to become physical quickly, and to couple with multiple males, especially when the men in question commanded either resources or good genes. That said, the blunt truth is that hooking up might be a mistake when a woman’s goal is finding a long-term relationship; men tend not to marry women they label promiscuous. But in fact there are many reasons a woman might opt to hook up, and not all are about immediate sexual gratification.
Under most circumstances, men are the wooers, and if their wooing is too easy they are prone to unwittingly discount a woman’s value. A man may not even realize he will ultimately penalize a woman for giving him the very thing he pressures her for. The fact that his judgment is unconscious makes it no less damning.
Some men are exceptions in that they’re able to overcome the biases with which nature has encumbered them. Some men truly aren’t judgmental. But the average guy will tend to dichotomize women quickly and unconsciously: She’s a whore if she sleeps with him too soon (or with too many people he knows).
A man’s judgments often reflect his assessment of himself as much as of the woman. A man with low self-esteem may be particularly biased against a woman who sleeps with him quickly, because he thinks other (better) men will have even easier access to her. The Groucho Marxist doctrine taps into this thinking: Any woman who would have me must be pretty desperate.
Male hypervigilance about a woman’s sexual choices arises from a basic genetic self-interest. It serves to monitor paternity, since a woman who sleeps around is not a reliable vehicle for any single man’s genes, according to evolutionary logic.
Why, then, do women persist in “sleeping around” or “putting out”? Like most fundamental human behaviors, there are trade-offs that would have made female promiscuity a viable strategy in many cases throughout human history.
A harsh and unpromising environment (say, few available resources and fewer good men) might warrant tenuous liaisons with several men rather than a single connection to an unreliable man. Anthropologist Sarah Blaffer Hrdy has argued that such environments—uncertain provisions for a woman and her progeny—encouraged women to have a mixed strategy: multiple males for now, while preserving the opportunity to “switch up” if and when a more stable mate appeared.
Such behavior may in part account for the fact that ovulation is largely concealed in human females, which allows women to misrepresent or “finesse” paternity so as to accrue resources from more than one male. Concealed ovulation also encourages men to remain emotionally and physically close to their partners, in part to assure paternity even if the circumstances of conception are opaque.
After finding a potential long-term mate, a woman might decide that a virginal reputation could raise her viability. As Oscar Levant noted about Doris Day, “I knew her before she was a virgin.” Granted, ancestral females had limited opportunities to reinvent themselves. Hence the need to be coy, even while engaging in promiscuous behavior.
In the contemporary world, promiscuity takes the form not just of surreptitious couplings with multiple partners; rather, it consists of sexual liaisons with no commitments desired or discussed. “Virtually everyone wants a traditional romantic relationship at some point. However, that’s not necessarily a comfortable decision if reproducing and settling down aren’t an immediate need,” says Justin Garcia of the Laboratory of Evolutionary Anthropology and Health at Binghamton University in New York.
Even in a hookup, Garcia has found, people are still frequently looking for a relationship—in fact, about half the time. And men and women do so equally. Garcia observes that courting—say, dinner and a movie—may be dying in the high-tech instant-gratification world we live in. Instead, “hookups have become a new technique employed to garner a more traditional romantic partner.”
In the modern cosmopolitan setting, the period between menarche and reproduction has grown to upward of 20 years, and the average American woman now has her first child at age 25. Such a span of reproductive freedom gives rise to novel mating strategies, including hookups, booty calls, and one-night stands.
The problem is that even as men may look to hookups as potential long-term relationships, their psychological makeup pushes them to unconsciously discount their partner as a prospect. So hookups become especially tricky for women to navigate, despite the fact that they’re increasingly socially acceptable.
Metropolitan surroundings provide vast opportunities to hook up. But our emotional reactions to these options have not evolved much.
Being judgmental about promiscuity is an emotional pitfall evolution has handed men. Sidestepping it might be easier when men know what they’re up against. Men certainly don’t have to derive morals from biology, but they are well served by consciously knowing their biases, so they can decide more rationally.
Throughout my life (I am now 25) I have had problems with friendships ending poorly, usually with friends betraying and/or abandoning me. This has been a contributing factor to my depression, which, in turn, makes it harder to make new friends.
I have a new best friend, my husband, and he is great, but it’s not the same as having girlfriends. I have tried to reach out to some of the women in my church–inviting them out for coffee or shopping– but no one has been receptive. I seem to be incapable of making new friends and I think my depression therapy is stalling because of it. What else can I do?
Sincerely,
Rose
ANSWER
Dear Rose,
It’s hard to make new friends (and even keep old ones) when you’re depressed so I really applaud your efforts. Depression saps your energy, turns you inward, and creates a distance between you and other people.
Focus on finding an activity or hobby that interests you, rather than on finding friends, per se. Perhaps there is a small group at your church or in your community where you can participate regularly and begin to meet people through common interests. It will give you time to get to know someone and gain some trust before you develop a friendship.
Talk to your therapist explicitly about your problem in making friends. Like depression, friendship problems are real too. Yours may be a byproduct of your depression and/or may stem from something else. He/she may be able to help you identify the underlying problem.
Many people with depression benefit from participation in a support group, such as those sponsored by the Depression and Bipolar Support Alliance, where they can meet other people who understand because they are having similar problems. When your depression lifts, which it will with good treatment, the task of finding a good friend won’t be as formidable. You have your whole life ahead of you and plenty of time!
I wanted to ask you about travel friendships. I just returned home to the UK after a gap year in Australia. While abroad I made lots of new friends, but became very close with one of them in particular as we ended up traveling together for several months.
I would love your advice on how to make the transition from traveling with someone (navigating a foreign country together and sharing things on a daily basis) to being “long-distance” friends once one or both of you have returned home to your respective lives and countries.
Thanks,
Maggie
ANSWER
Hi Maggie,
One of the joys of traveling is making new friends. When I saw your question, I immediately thought of my friend and colleague, whom I knew could provide you with a better response than me ☺. Ellen Perlman is an experienced traveler and accomplished travel writer who blogs at www.boldlygosolo.com.
This is Ellen’s sage advice:
The best advice for maintaining a long-distance friends is to do your utmost to reach out to your friend by email, phone, Facebook – however you choose – to tell her news about yourself, ask her how she’s doing, tell her that you heard or did something that reminded you of your time together, or just to check in.
The good news is you were lucky to find a special person to share what is likely to be a once-in-a-lifetime, months-long travel adventure. The less good, but not bad news, is that, as you suspect, it can be tough to maintain the closeness and intensity of that in-person relationship over time. But it doesn’t mean you have to give up on keeping your friend close, as best you can, and accepting that the friendship is likely to change somewhat.
I’ve experienced a similar friendship transition many times. For instance, when I was in my early 30’s, I met someone at Club Med in the Caribbean who I clicked with. She and I and several others formed a “gang” that had dinner together every night and talked and laughed. A lot. When the week was over, we all flew off in different directions, but Nicole and I kept in touch. The adventure was just beginning. I visited her in Montreal for a weekend and she came to see me in Washington, DC. Within a year or so, she had moved to Budapest. Score! Of course I found a way to visit her there and she showed me all around. I’m not sure I ever would have gone to Budapest if I hadn’t known someone there.
The last time we got together was in Charlottesville, Virginia, at her uncle’s house for a Christmas dinner. I’m not sure what happened after that. Maybe we both got too busy, or found romantic relationships or simply found it too difficult to keep up a long-distance friendship. Or perhaps, after a few years of seeing someone for only a weekend or two a year, the friendship just faded. Not in a bad way. Not due to anger or based on any discussion about what to do next. It just faded.
On the other hand, I spent a year as a university student in England several decades ago and I’m still in touch with my friend Lindsay, who I met that year. I was close with all the girls on my dorm hall but didn’t manage to stay in touch with the others for more than a few years. But Lindsay and I met up and traveled together in Thailand and Hawaii, among other places. We visited each other either in the U.S. or in England a few times. I just got an email from her the other day. It amazes me that we’re still in touch. And likely will indulge our mutual love of travel together again some day again, by choosing some exotic vacation destination to meet up in. It doesn’t matter how many years pass before seeing each other again. We just pick up where we left off.
So have hope that you can make the friendship last and be the one to reach out to her even if it feels like you’re making more of the effort. But don’t panic over the thought that maybe you can’t make it last. Nothing can take away the fun times you’ve already had.
Since the 1980s the number of Americans who say they have no one to talk to has doubled. Where and how do adults make friends?
*Sign up for a group travel adventure: People tend to bond more easily when out of their comfort zone. The experience will provide an instant group of people with whom you share a unique memory.
*Take a class in something you love; enthusiasm is contagious.
*Get a dog (a pet is also good for your heart) and show up every morning at your local dog park. People love to chat about their pooches.
*Track down old high school or college pals who live in your area, and see if old friendships can be resumed.
*Take a fresh look at your neighbors, coworkers, classmates, fellow gym bunnies—the people you meet and greet on a regular basis. If you’ve been standoffish, say hello. If you’ve traded hellos for months, engage them in conversation.
First you talked to each other every day, then once a week, then a few times a month. She got pregnant. You moved to another city. You got pregnant. She got divorced. Soon you were only speaking a few times a year. How do you rescue a friendship?
*Make the friendship a priority. In adolescence, “hanging out” is de rigueur, and thus teenagers tend to have a lot of friends. The multiple demands of adulthood limit opportunities to connect in this informal way. If you want to revive a dying friendship, you’ve got to set aside the time.
*Hug it out. Since intimacy is the keystone of friendship, tell your friend how you feel, that you miss her and don’t want to let this friendship slip away.
*The miracle of free long distance. E-mail is the obvious easy way to keep in touch, but the phone is better. Make sure your cell plan has a lot of minutes and vow to call your friend a few times a month. Put her name on speed dial, and when you arrive at an appointment 10 minutes early give her a buzz. You do call her on her birthday, right?
*Face time. The best remedy is spending time with your friend. If the friend lives in town, arrange a standing coffee or movie date. If the friend lives out of town, make an effort to visit each other once a year or so.
By Rick Nauert PhDSenior News Editor Reviewed by John M. Grohol, Psy.D. on May 6, 2010
According to authorities, the older population is on the verge of a boom. People are living longer and healthier lives than every before.
Unfortunately, sexual problems appear to accompany older age for many individuals. A new study finds that men who talk to their partner about sexual issues report greater happiness — and those who talked with friends felt less depressed.
The research, to be published in the Journal of Gerontology: Social Sciences, shows that the way men and women deal with sexual health and stress in their later years varies greatly and that there is not one solution that can help ease unhappiness caused by sexual problems.
Oregon State researchers looked at 861 people ages 57 to 85 who were married or had an intimate partner, and who reported having at least one sexual problem.
The sexual problems reported by older adults included lack of interest in sex, inability to climax, physical pain during sex, maintaining an erection, or lubrication issues. Respondents were asked to indicate on a scale from 1 to 3 how bothered they were by each problem they listed.
They also were asked about their well-being, which the researchers measured by using typical scales for happiness and for depressive symptoms.
The study yielded several surprising findings. First, fewer than half of older adults with sexual problems discussed these problems with their doctors, although men were more likely to do so than women.
In addition, whether older adults discussed these issues with their physicians did not make a difference in their well-being.
“This was our most unexpected outcome,†Hirayama said.
“Older adults are advised to talk to their doctors about sexual health issues, but not all people do so and talking with a physician is not as helpful as you might expect.”
However, confiding in a partner or with friends was found to be effective for many men in reducing stress and unhappiness related to sexual problems. Unfortunately for women, this same benefit was not reported.
“In fact, women with higher levels of sexual stress who confided in their close friends reported lower happiness,†Hirayama said. “We aren’t quite sure what to make of this finding.”
Women did not see any reduction in stress or well-being (unhappiness and depression) when they talked to their spouses either.
“What this tells is that women’s sexual issues are complex, and that complexity needs to be recognized,†Walker said.
“A woman with a great deal of sexual concerns could feel threatened by talking to her spouse about it, or perhaps simply confiding in a friend is not enough.”
Since the largest effect size was seen with men who confided in both spouses and friends, the researchers said the result brings into critical focus the importance for men in middle and later life of confiding in family members and friends.
“The finding is striking because most people presume men do not have confidants,†Hirayama said. Hirayama is doing his doctoral studies on male identity issues and men’s social ties in current society.
“Men are not believed to be functioning socially in our society, yet research increasingly shows that social networks can be a critical part of a man’s life, especially as he ages,†he said.
Walker, who has done research in the gerontology field for decades, said the medicalization of aging makes some people feel as if there is a “fix†for everything. She said that in some cases, certain sexual issues might just be part of the aging process and that the important part is that couples keep the lines of communication open.
“In the general context of sex and aging, the rule is ‘use it or lose it,’†Walker said.
“The best prediction of sexual activity is to continue to be sexually active throughout your adult life, to make it a part of your life. But it is also true that older people can have sexual problems, and sometimes there are ways to work around these issues by emphasizing other activities you enjoy as a couple.”
In Older Men, Friendship And Confiding In Spouse Eases Stress Over Sexual Issues
Article Date: 06 May 2010 – 5:00 PDT
A new study suggests that it may not help older men and women with sexual problems to talk to a doctor, but men who talk to their partner report greater happiness – and those who talked with friends felt less depressed.
The research, to be published in the Journal of Gerontology: Social Sciences, shows that the way men and women deal with sexual health and stress in their later years varies greatly and that there is not one solution that can help ease unhappiness caused by sexual problems.
The research was conducted by Ryo Hirayama, a Ph.D. student in Oregon State University’s Department of Human Development and Family Sciences, and professor Alexis Walker, who is the Jo Anne L. Petersen Chair in Gerontology and Family Studies at OSU. The study was conducted with data from the National Social Life, Health, and Aging Project.
In earlier posts, I discussed the ethical issues facing the potential adulterer (including the possibility of divorce as an alternative), as well as his or her paramour, and how his or her spouse should judge repeated cheating. But one thing I have not discussed, but which has been a regular question in the comments (which continue to be gratifying perceptive and constructive), is what a person should do after discovering that he or she has been cheated on.
A couple things before we start: First, to make language simpler, I’ll refer to the cheater as “he” and the betrayed spouse as “she.” If you want to switch the genders, simply hold your computer up to a mirror. (Admit it, you almost did it, didn’t you?) Also, I want to take children out of the equation. I don’t do this because children are irrelevant—quite the opposite—but because, if they exist, I believe they are the most important consideration.
The jilted spouse should take of her kids (and any other obligations) in what she feels is the right way, and then take care of herself—and that’s what I want to focus on. (The point of this post from an ethics perspective is that while most ethical systems are very clear about what not to do, they are often less clear about what you should do, especially for yourself.)
It will help to distinguish between two cases. In the first, the cheating spouse leaves the marriage, whether to be with the other woman or not, and the wife (now ex-wife) must deal with the aftermath. In the second, he stays in the marriage and the wife must consider her options, both within and without the marriage. I’ll discuss the second case first, because if the wife does leave her husband, she’ll be in a similar place as the wife who is left by her husband, so we can discuss these together at the end.
If the husband does not leave his wife, but instead stays in the marriage (and presumably ends the affair if it was still going when discovered), then the wife must decide whether to stay in the marriage. Since her husband did break the “forsaking all others” part of the weddings vows, in a sense she has no obligation to continue in the marriage (since he already violated it). Nonetheless, she may not feel that way; in my earlier post on divorce and adultery, I argued that from the potential cheater’s point of view, divorce may not be the “honorable” option if he places a high value on the commitment or relationship itself.
Of course, this goes for the jilted spouse as well. If she places a high value on the relationship—on the “for better or for worse” part of the vows—then she may choose to stay married to the adulterer. Her task then becomes trying to deal with or get past the adultery, which we’ll see is a common concern with all the cases we’re considering, except in this case she must do so while married to the man who cheated on her (which I can only imagine will make reconciling herself with the adultery more difficult, and make therapy all but necessary).
If the wife feels that the marriage has been ruined, damaged beyond repair, or even if she simply has no desire to try to stay with a man who betrayed her trust, then she can leave her husband—certainly few would begrudge her this choice (absent children, remember). If shes does leave him, then she is in the same place as the woman whose husband leaves her, except for one important difference: the first woman chose to leave, whereas the second was left. Being left by the man who cheated on her only serves to compound the offense, including any harm to her self-esteem (already damaged by the affair). But if the woman leaves on her own initiative, then she has taken ownership of the situation; no longer is she letting the man steer their relationship, and she is taking charge of her own life.
But regardess of which spouse left first, the one cheated on has to deal with the aftermath, and I don’t think there’s any one best way to do this (though some of my fellow bloggers, especially those who are therapists, may disagree). Some may need to confront the memory (and perhaps even her ex-husband) directly in an attempt to achieve closure; some may need to forget and put the experience past them; and some may need to forgive as well as forget. The general point is that she must do what is best for her; her only obligation at that point (ruling out children) is to herself.
Not only in this common sense, this is also consistent with almost every school of ethics. Most versions of virtue ethics stress living a good, fulfilled life in action, which includes taking care of yourself as well as others. Kantian ethics (a variant of deontology) stresses duties of oneself alongside duties to others, particularly duties of self-respect and development. And utilitarianism, which asks every person to maximize total well-being, includes the person herself in that. It is not selfish (in the negative sense) to take care of yourself; it is only selfish if you ignore other obligations to do so.
With Tiger Woods back in the game after his “bad decisions” admission on ESPN, I couldn’t help but recall George (not his real name), who had consulted me about how to deal with his new affair. Visions of Woods, Jessie James, Mark Sanford, John Edwards and others came to mind — along with the similar stories of countless patients over the years.
George began by telling me that “She was standing off by herself during a conference break, leaning against a wall, sipping coffee. “As I walked by, our eyes met and I felt a sudden jolt — a rush of energy, real connection. Suddenly we found ourselves talking, feeling like we had known each other for years.” The affair “just “happened,” George added.
That’s an explanation I’ve heard many times. Another one – sounding a bit more “strategic” came from Jan, a 41 year-old lawyer. She told me that her affair was a “marriage stabilizer….safe and discreet, a perfect solution for me.” She decided it was a rational alternative to the disruption of divorce.
Of course the public always enjoys being titillated with stories of public figures’ affairs, especially when hypocrisy is exposed. But cultural attitudes have clearly shifted to-wards acceptance of affairs. They’re seen as a life-style choice; an option for men and women yearning for excitement or intimacy that’s lacking or has dulled during their marriage.
Given that new reality, I put together what I’ve learned about psychology of affairs — their meaning and their consequences for people in our current culture.
Based on my work over the decades, I find six kinds of affairs that people have today. People make their choices, but I think a non-judgmental description of these six kinds of affairs (but with a tinge of humor) can help people deal with them with greater aware-ness and responsibility. Here are the six I’ve diagnosed:
The “It’s-Only-Lust ” Affair. The most common, it’s mostly about sex. It can feel really intense, but it’s also the quickest to flame out. John and Kim met through work, and felt a strong physical attraction. John was separated; Kim, married. They felt pow-erless to resist the pull. “It was inevitable. We ended up in bed, as well as a lot of other places! It was wonderful,” John added, with a big grin. The liberating and compelling feeling from this kind of affair, though, can mask hidden emotional conflicts.
An example is the person who’s able to feel sexually alive and free only in a secret rela-tionship, hidden from the imagined hovering, inhibiting eye of one’s parent – which the person may experience unconsciously with his or her spouse. The lust affair is often short-lived, and passion can slide downhill pretty fast as the excitement declines or un-derground emotional issues surface again. It can also fade if the lovers discover that there wasn’t much connecting them beyond sex. As John later told me, “As great as the sex was, we didn’t really have much to say to each other. Eventually, that became a turn-off.”
The “I’ll-Show-You” Affair. Rachel began realizing the depth of her anger and re-sentment towards her husband after years of an unhappy marriage. She had long felt unaffirmed, ignored, and disregarded by him. His adamant refusal to go to couples therapy pushed her into acting upon her anger. Rachel told me that a previous therapy had helped her recognize her collusion in becoming so subordinate in the marriage. But she couldn’t create a solution, nor figure out how to deal with her desire for revenge.
She knew that “getting back” at her husband wasn’t going to produce empowerment or healing, but nevertheless began a disastrous affair. She subsequently discovered that the man was only interested in a narcissistic conquest, and he quickly dumped her. Eventually, she realized that beneath her anger was a desire for a man who would really recognize her, who could “see” her, as her father never did. But before that awakening occurred, she suffered, and she still had to deal with the reality of her mar-riage and how to heal her own trauma.
The “Just-In-The-Head” Affair. Can you call it an affair if the “lovers” don’t have sex? Consider Paul and Linda. They became very close working together on a volunteer pro-ject. Paul was married, and Linda was divorced but living with a boyfriend. They found they had much in common – a similar outlook on life and a spiritual compatibility as well. They enjoyed talking and looking forward to time together. They spoke on the phone frequently and lingered around afterward working on the project. Soon they real-ized that a very intimate and emotionally close bond had developed. It definitely felt like much more than just a friendship.
So why didn’t they have sex? Linda, who was my patient, said that neither of them wanted to disrupt or leave their primary relationship, or “mess it up.” So, they chose to keep it platonic. That level of intimacy and intensity makes it an affair of the mind, if not the body; it’s more than just a friendship. I find that people in this kind of affair find something in each other that’s lacking in their “real” relationship, and they’re not dealing with that. Aside from the challenge of remaining on the chaste side of the sexual bor-derline, such “lovers” must hope that their primary partners continue to believe they’re telling the truth. And there’s a risk that what they’re not finding in their primary relation-ship will become increasingly disruptive to it.
The “All-In-The-Family” Affair. Bill thought this was fail-safe, because no one would suspect. He and his wife’s sister finally had sex after years of mutual, erotic teas-ing. Suddenly they were in the midst of an affair that neither wanted to end. They thought they could keep it secret; that neither would make any demands on the other and it would be perfectly safe. If you think that was naive, it was. Most “family” affairs are interwoven with family dysfunctions and buried resentments. Neither Bill nor Tina, his sister-in-law, looked seriously at the issues in their respective marriages or inter-locked families; or even how dangerous it was. Postscript: One of their spouses even-tually discovered the incriminating e-mails, and the family affair quickly turned into a family nightmare.
The “It’s-Not-Really-An-Affair” Affair. We humans are experts at creating illusions for ourselves. In this affair one party is available but the other isn’t. The available part-ner believes that the other really will leave his or her spouse, given enough time and pa-tience. Jane, divorced for several years, began seeing a married man. She told me ve-hemently, “It’s not an affair! It’s a relationship!” But that takes two equally available and committed people. I’ve seen many women and women over the years (though it’s usu-ally women caught in this trap) who truly believe their lovers will leave their spouses. Ninety percent of the time it never happens. Jane eventually realized that her lover never had any intention of leaving. In fact, he had had multiple affairs throughout his marriage.
The “Mind-Body”Affair. Here’s the most dangerous one of all for the lovers’ existing relationships. It’s so powerful because it feels so complete — emotionally, sexually, in-tellectually, spiritually. Matt and Ellen, who consulted me as a couple, met through a parents’ function at their children’s school. Right away, they felt a strong, mutual con-nection. “If I believed in reincarnation,” Matt told me, “I would say that we were together in a former life. We feel like ‘soul-mates.'” “I never thought a relationship could feel like this,” said Ellen.
The “mind-body” affair is highly threatening to a marriage because it feels so “right.” Of course, the couple may try to end it or turn it into a “just-in-the-head” affair, but that rarely works. Of all the different affairs, I’ve found that this kind most frequently leads to divorce and remarriage. The upside is that the new relationship often proves to be the right match for the couple. Nevertheless, it generates all the mixed consequences that all affairs produce, especially when children are involved.
Are second marriages more fragile than first marriages?
Are later marriages generally more successful and stable than first-time marriages? And, given that most remarriages (some 90 percent) follow upon divorce rather than death, do the disaffected ex-partners tend to make smarter, more mutually satisfying choices in a second or higher-order relationship?
Apparently not. The rate of marital breakup is spectacularly high in America–currently, over half of all first marriages end in divorce; but the rate of marital breakup in subsequent marriages is 10% higher—some 60%. As sociologists Frank Furstenberg and Andrew Cherlin point out in Divided Families, many remarried families simply don’t make it through their early years together; about one fourth of all second marriages break apart within a five year period. This is a rate of marital disruption which is “significantly higher than the level among first marriages” according to Furstenberg and Cherlin.
But curiously enough, this enhanced risk of re-divorce exists only for the first five years of the remarried family’s existence. At that point in time, the new family’s chances of remaining together are roughly the same, or even better, than those of a family living in an intact, first-time-ever nuclear household.
Women who have a smaller waist in relation to their hips tend to be perceived as more attractive. Some argue this is an evolutionary tendency, a desire for women who are perceived to be more fertile, while others suggest it is just a product of the media who, from porn to Prada, laud the image of small waisted women.
The New York Timescovers a fascinating study which tested these ideas in an innovative way – by seeing whether blind men, who have avoided the body-shape bias of visual media, would also find women with a lower waist-to-hip ratio more attractive.
The study, currently in press for the journal Evolution and Human Behavior, was devised by researcher led by psychologist Johan Karremans who tested the idea by using adjustable mannequins.
The blind stood before them; they were told to touch the women, to focus their hands on the waists and hips. The breasts on both figures were the same, in case the men reached too high. The men extended their arms; they ran their hands over the region. Then they scored the attractiveness of the bodies. Karremans had a hunch, he told me, that their ratings wouldn’t match those of the sighted men he used as controls, half of them blindfolded so that they, too, would be judging by feel. It seemed likely, he said, that visual culture would play an overwhelming part in creating the outlines of lust. And though the blind had almost surely grown up hearing attractiveness described, perhaps even in terms of hourglass shapes, it was improbable, he writes in his forthcoming journal paper, that they had heard descriptions amounting to, “The more hourglass shaped, the more attractive,†which would be necessary to favor the curvier mannequin over the figure that was only somewhat less so.
But, with some statistically insignificant variation, the scores of the blind matched those of the sighted. Both groups preferred the more pronounced sweep from waist to hip.
How this preference comes about is another matter of course, and the scientific article apparently suggests that as body scent is also a guide to attractiveness and is partly genetically determined it’s possible that blind men have come to associate body shape with attractiveness via smell.
The explanation sounds a little speculative to me, but the core finding of the study is fascinating.
The NYT article is also a great brief guide to attractiveness and waist-to-hip ratio argument.
Clothes maketh the man or the woman, and they can make or break your success in the dating game.
It’s not because the world is full of shallow fashionistas. It’s because first impressions are all-powerful, whether we like it or not.
Your clothes make a statement about you. They send a message about your mood, your body image and whether you regard washing and ironing a shirt as a priority. And they can be tribal: think of hooded tops or white stilettos.
Your outfit can also make you feel good or bad about yourself. Clothes have a huge say in your confidence and behaviour – both pretty important in a social situation.
So there’s a lot at stake, but our lucky 13 simple rules will help you get it right.
Rule 1: Be yourself
All our rules matter, but they can be relaxed to accommodate Rule Number One.*
When you dress in a way that clashes with your personality, you don’t feel comfortable. And when you aren’t comfortable, you aren’t confident or relaxed.
Dressing in a way that’s true to yourself will also help attract a lover who’s on your wavelength.
Once you’re seeing someone, don’t change your style just to please them. They’re your lover, not your school uniform supplier.
(* I’d advise against relaxing Rule Two, unless you’re dying to meet someone who’s driven helpless with lust by B.O.)
Rule 2: Keep it clean
Whether you’re on a first date, tenth date, at a party or meeting your future in-laws, a little washing powder goes a long way.
Turning up in a smelly, crumpled T-shirt won’t make anyone think that you’re laid back and lacking in vanity. They’ll think that you’d rather be at home, alone, eating a Pot Noodle in front of the telly.
Scruffiness is especially damaging if your companion made an effort to dress up. They may feel very embarrassed that you didn’t do the same.
It doesn’t take much to wash and iron an outfit. Your effort tells your date that you value their company, and that’s half the battle won.
Rule 3: It’s not a job interview
You can overstep the mark when making an effort. On a date, you’ll fare best if you’re both feeling relaxed, and you probably won’t feel relaxed when trussed up in pinstripes and a starched shirt.
This rule also applies to parties, where a starchy get-up will make you look and feel like a geeky outsider.
Rule 4: Think about who you’re meeting
One of the main rules of attraction is that people like people who are like themselves. So dress in a way that connects with the style of your date, or with the people you’re likely to meet at a party or other event.
Rule 5: Dress to fit the venue
You’ll also feel more confident if you fit your surroundings. Jeans and T-shirt are fine for a few drinks down the pub; a smart restaurant requires more finesse.
Remember to temper this with Rule One. It’s not about being a sheep, it’s about subtly adapting the real you to fit your surroundings.
Rule 6: Comfort equals confidence
Don’t set yourself up for hours of torture in killer heels or too-tight jeans. A grimace isn’t a good look.
Of course you want to look your best, but you’ll be at your most attractive when you’re psychologically and physically comfortable.
You may not feel comfy in either sense if you’re wearing a brand new outfit, especially if the price tag is digging into your back. Wear a trusted wardrobe staple that makes you feel confident about yourself and your body.
Rule 7: Stand up straight
Whatever you’re wearing, you’ll look more confident, slim and attentive if you improve your posture. Gently straighten your back and keep your shoulders relaxed.
Rule 8: Easy on the labels
Style is not about designer brands or bling, it’s about making the best of what you’ve got. Smothering yourself in labels will make you look desperate or intimidating, depending on whom you’re dating.
However, if your date is another fashion fiend, go for it. Good luck with the joint overdraft.
Rule 9: Easy on the slap
Lashings of lippy and enough foundation to float a yacht may do the business in certain nightclubs. Elsewhere, it’s a turn-off. You’ll also look as though you’re hiding the complexion of an old sandpit.
Rule 10: Easy on the perfume, too
Strong perfume or aftershave is another no-no. Gents, be warned: women’s sense of smell tends to be more sensitive than men’s, so your dab of aftershave may register as a choking stink.
Rule 11: Beware the hairdresser
Don’t have your hair cut just before a date. Stylists rarely leave it just how you want.
Rule 12: Keep ‘em covered
You may have the finest set of boobs, biceps or thighs within a five-mile radius, but that’s for your lover to discover when you’re alone together.
If you flash the flesh on a date, your companion won’t think you’re dressed for them, but for anyone who fancies a look. Besides, goosebumps aren’t sexy.
Apply even more wrapping when meeting your lover’s parents. To them, your cleavage, shoulders and knees are throbbing erogenous zones and they don’t want to see them. Ever.
Rule 13: Be prepared
Stick a couple of fabric plasters in your bag or pocket, in case those new shoes start to rub. If you’re wearing tights, take some clear nail varnish to stop any snags. Also take a comb and, if you wear contact lenses, your glasses.
It may sound like a hassle, but these things don’t take up much space – and they could rescue your comfort or confidence just when you need it the most.