Mate Selection

It is not uncommon for individuals to bargain with themselves in an effort to create demand where none exists If I get the lawn mowed before noon, Ill spend the rest of the day watching football if I lose five pounds, Ill grease ones palms that new dress. Sometimes, when individuals bargain, it isnt as much for motivation as it is for justification If my boss wont give me that raise, Ill stop working those bare(a) hours I had every right to flip that guy off because he cut right in front of me.These are instances in which the dicker is self-motivated, self-serving, and self-indulgent, and sequence effective and perhaps necessary, the stakes in most of these circumstances isnt necessarily high. After all, whos going to know or care if a yard goes unmowed, a dress is prematurely purchased, an extra hour isnt spent at ones desk, or a flip-off wasnt frankly deserved? However, when it comes to choosing a check in a relationship, the role played by bargaining carries a much higher st ake, and the consequences of poor judgment age bargaining and/or poor bargaining tactics can be devastating.The compass point to which bargaining occurs during the mate selection process varies from person to person as do the focal point(s) of the bargain however, there are a offspring of areas that are particularly intriguing.The Necessities and Luxuries of Mate Preferences exam the Tradeoffs (2002)focuses on the spot to which women and men number 1 ensure sufficient levels of necessities inpotential mates before considering many other characteristics (Li, Bailey, Kenrick, &Linsenmeier). Factors such as a potential mates drawing card and cordial status are essentialaccording to Li, et al. (2002) however, because their research placed greater emphasis onrealistic economic potential as contradictory to that of previous research (which allowed forspeculation regarding how to spend imaginary lottery winnings), a pattern that had notpreviously emerged became clear the sexes do not forever and a day agree on what constitutes anecessity versus what constitutes a luxury (Li, et al., 2002).American social construct is partially responsible for this difference. Men are far much likely to have access to status, power, and resources therefore, these are deemed necessary traits by women who seek a mate. On the other hand, men view women as the means by which offspring can be produced, and based on this, they see physical attractiveness and age as necessary factors in mate selection (Li, et al., 2002). Obviously, this requires a great degree of bargaining as the two subjects are (at least initially) focused on absolutely different traits while evaluating a potential mateWhere Li, et al. conclude that much of the bargaining that occurs in mate selection is based on the differences between what men and women consider necessary, Gender Socialization How Bargaining strength Shapes Social Norms and Political Attitudes, (2005) examines the social dynamics that might be responsible for creating the basis for the differences between the sexes regarding what is necessary (Iversen & Rosenbluth).Iversen and Rosenbluth (2005) focus on the issue of patriarchy and research its effects on female social, economic, and political status in order to evaluate mate choice preferences between agricultural, industrial, and post-industrial societies. This research was an intriguing undertaking, and what it revealed was the effect that social structure had on the bargaining that took place in mate selection.Social settings that required brawn (i.e. the agricultural and industrial periods) required women volitionally bargain to recall a mate who was physically capable of performing basic household and wage-earning duties (Iverson & Rosenbluth). Women often bargained for a mate with physical strength by grownup up living arrangements, locations, and circumstances. Because women of the agricultural and industrial periods were not physically capable of performing some tasks and legally barred from others, there was little choice still for them to put aside almost everything but sheer physical strength when undertaking bargaining during mate selection (Iversen & Rosenbluth).When the post-industrial period was examined, two significant differences were seen. First, because the get hold of for physical prowess to survive at home and at work had diminished, women were far less likely to bargain past everything simply to potent a strong man. Once employment opportunities for women began to approach those of men in quantity and quality, socialization began to shift away from womens playing the marriage market (Iversen & Rosenbluth).No longer would women willingly pack up and move hundreds of miles away from all family and all friends, nor would they automatically settle for a man of lower social and economic status in order to marry brawnwomen could consider themselves wage-earners and be more than choosey when it came to potential mates (I versen & Rosenbluth).The second phenomenon that was revealed was the declining importance of virginity that factored into the bargaining (Iversen & Rosenbluth). Where women of the agricultural and industrial periods had to secure their virginity absolutely, women of the post-industrial period were not as likely to be dismissed as ineligible brides by the men of the era simply because they were no longer virgins. This degree of personal control had a freeing effect on women who began to see themselves as capable of autonomy (Iversen & Rosenbluth).Much of this seems to indicate a breaking away on the part of women, and Iversen and Rosenbluth (2005) conclude that while mate preferences in agrarian societies seemed to reflect an inevitable female resignation to their subordination, modern mate preferences are more egalitarian, and the gender gap in policy preferences suggest that many women are hoping to use the democratic state to make them more egalitarian still.Given the number of ti mes a day an individual is likely to bargain with him/herself over routine actions or mundane decisions, it seems reasonable that a great deal of bargaining go into something as significant as the selection of ones mate. Research seems to indicate that like other acknowledged differences that exist between the sexes, the degree to which certain factors influence bargaining with and selection of a potential mate may depend on the gender of the evaluator.Further, it seems that as time passes and the more mugwump women become, the more the evaluative items regarding what is necessary may change in the minds of both males and females.ReferencesIversen, T. & Rosenbluth, F. (2005). Gender socialization How bargaining power shapes social norms and political attitudes. Retrieved October 22, 2006.Li, N. P., Bailey, J. M., Kenrick, D. T., & Linsenmeier, J. A. W. (2002). The necessities and luxuries of mate preferences Testing and tradeoffs. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82(6). Retrieved October 22, 2006