I read this a few months ago, so unfortunately the best tidbits aren’t top of mind. I will re-read it and add details to this post, since I really enjoyed this book and wish I could convey all the details.
The basic premise of this book is that almost all of our hated ‘dating rules’ are biologically pre-determined and, even if you think you can do it, changing biology isn’t a matter of a well orchestrated sexual liberation (read: feminist) movement.
Now, readers, I am a very dedicated feminist in the work world. I want equality and I want access to all the opportunities out there. The reality, even in this enlightened day and age, is that women’s true equality and liberation just hasn’t happened. According to Trees (the author) there are very good reasons for this. I will say that this book gave me some interesting ideas for working my ‘female’ advantages – primitive, female tactics that work with all men – and that gave me some hope. Still, it’s a sad realization.
Some funny, practical dating tips derived from our primitive selves:
– Again (like Ms. Stanger) – never sleep with someone until you’re all set in the monogamous relationship department. Men read sex as a cue for promiscuity, which, no matter how enlightened they are, registers as “bad risk” for a child that isn’t his. He gets turned off by this. Go figure.
– If you’re a woman and you want to meet a man be sure to stay at the party/bar late. Controlled for alcohol consumption (i.e., this isn’t a result of beer goggles) men gravitate to the last women standing late at night. This is something to do with a scarcity and “time’s running out” model.
– Women choose men. You may not think so, but it’s true. Men respond to female attention and signals and then, and only then, take the initiative. This is biologically driven by women’s need to be super selective (1 egg per month vs sperm). I buy it.
– You don’t know what’s at work when you’re attracted to someone, but there’s a lot more going on than you think. For example, in a controlled experiment women were asked to smell the (dirty) t-shirts of many men and asked which they liked best. 100% of the time the women who had their brothers’ t-shirts in the options didn’t pick them. Scientists think this is because there is a genetic “no sexual attraction” gene link between siblings. When the t-shirt was owned by someone with the opposite gene sequence from the women smelling them they were inevitably attracted (opposites attract to ensure biodiversity).
And on, and on…
This book is fascinating if politically dispiriting. I recommend it though. It’s good context for understanding your own seemingly faulty decision-making with regard to mates (so much of it is chemical!)
For Crying Out Loud 