Species

A discussion with Marta Kowal on beautification and what predicts it.

Marta Kowal (PhD) is a post-doctoral researcher at the IDN Being Human Lab, Institute of Psychology, University of Wrocław, Poland. Marta's academic background is in evolutionary psychology, and her research primarily focuses on mate attraction, physical attractiveness-enhancing behaviors, and romantic love, particularly from a cross-cultural perspective. During her PhD program, under the guidance of her supervisor, Professor Piotr Sorokowski, Marta secured a grant from the Polish National Science Centre to explore beauty-enhancing behaviors across different cultures. Marta takes one of the leadership positions in an extensive international consortium of over 400 scientists from more than 100 countries passionately committed to facilitating large-scale cross-cultural research projects.

If you want to listen to my audio course on human evolution, you can find it here: https://mackenmurphy.gumroad.com/l/humanevolution?layout=profile

If you want to donate to support Species, you can do so, here: https://donorbox.org/keep-species-free

If you want to keep up with my work, everything is here: https://linktr.ee/mackenmurphy

Timestamps

0:00 Intro

5:08 231 minutes daily on beauty?

10:38 The Benefits of Beauty

12:23 Beauty: Not (Just) a Social Construct

19:35 Collecting Big Data

23:34 Gender & Beautification

48:51 Age & Beautification

54:28 Social Media & Beautification

1:08:25 The Beautiful Beautify More

1:12:57 Wealth, Education, Politics & Beauty

1:24:32 Intrasexual Competition All The Way Down

1:28:44 The Pathogen Prevalence Hypothesis

1:36:57 Cultural and Individual Differences in Strategies

1:47:14 Conclusion

1:50:10 Outro

A natural history of infidelity and a history of science on the topic. Listen and learn about the oldest known laws in history, fish that get pessismistic without their boyfriend, the costs of monogamy, the ovulatory shift hypothesis (and a conspiracy theory about it), the mate-switching vs. dual-mating debate, and so much more.

If you want to listen to my audio course on human evolution, you can find it here: https://mackenmurphy.gumroad.com/l/humanevolution?layout=profile

If you want to donate to support Species, you can do so, here: https://donorbox.org/keep-species-free

If you want to keep up with my work, everything is here: https://linktr.ee/mackenmurphy

Timestamps:

0:00 Intro

12:38 Theme

13:42 The Costs of Monogamy

20:01 The Many Strategic Functions of Infidelity

27:16 The Primary Reason Men Cheat

29:21 Intro to The Dual Mating Strategy

32:02 Ovulatory Shifts in Mate Preferences

34:26 Intro to the Mate Switching Hypothesis

36:13 Initial Impressions

42:15 Testing Mate-Switching vs. Dual-Mating

46:35 Addressing Critiques

48:16 The Usual Caveats

50:26 The Manosphere Reaction

51:31 Rollo’s Conspiracy (lol)

55:01 Nature’s Curse, Nature’s Gift

58:15 Outro

Selected references (most key information is in, or referenced in, these texts): Murphy, M., Phillips, C. A., & Blake, K. R. (2024). Why women cheat: testing evolutionary hypotheses for female infidelity in a multinational sample. Evolution and Human Behavior, 45(5), 106595.

Buss, D. M., Goetz, C., Duntley, J. D., Asao, K., & Conroy-Beam, D. (2017). The mate switching hypothesis. Personality and Individual Differences, 104, 143-149.

Gangestad, S. W., & Thornhill, R. (1998). Menstrual cycle variation in women's preferences for the scent of symmetrical men. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences, 265(1399), 927-933.

Gangestad, S. W., Thornhill, R., & Garver-Apgar, C. E. (2005). Adaptations to ovulation: Implications for sexual and social behavior. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 14(6), 312-316.

Also:

Finkelstein, J. J. (1968). The Laws of Ur-Nammu. Journal of cuneiform studies, 22(3-4), 66-82.

Hicks, T. V., & Leitenberg, H. (2001). Sexual fantasies about one's partner versus someone else: Gender differences in incidence and frequency. Journal of Sex Research, 38(1), 43-50.

Laubu, C., Louâpre, P., & Dechaume-Moncharmont, F. X. (2019). Pair-bonding influences affective state in a monogamous fish species. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 286(1904), 20190760.

Scelza, B. A. (2011). Female choice and extra-pair paternity in a traditional human population. Biology Letters, 7(6), 889-891.

Scelza, B. A. (2013). Choosy but not chaste: Multiple mating in human females. Evolutionary Anthropology: Issues, News, and Reviews, 22(5), 259-269.

Scelza, B. A. (2014). Jealousy in a small-scale, natural fertility population: The roles of paternity, investment and love in jealous response. Evolution and Human Behavior, 35(2), 103-108.

Stewart-Williams, S. “Nurture Alone Can’t Explain Male Aggression.” Nautilus. April 26, 2019. http://nautil.us/blog/nurture-alone-cant-explain-male-aggression

Yildiz, F. (1981). A tablet of codex Ur-Nammu from Sippar. Orientalia, 50(1), 87-97.

An audio essay on human nature, followed by an interview with primatologist Dr. Susan Cheyne. Susan is the co-director of the Borneo Nature Foundation International and the Borneo River Initiative for Nature Conservation and Communities, she is the Vice Chair of the IUCN Section on Small Apes, and she is also a Senior Lecturer at Oxford Brookes; she has been studying gibbons for about 27 years. Our conversation is wide-ranging, but centers on gibbons. We discuss gibbon locomotion, life among gibbons, the nature and function of gibbon song, gibbon violence, monogamy, and infanticide (and lack thereof), and other subjects. Enjoy.

Dr. Cheyne's research: http://www.susancheyne.com 

IUCN Section on Small Apes: https://gibbons.asia/

Timestamps: 

0:00 Are humans naturally monogamous?

17:27 Introducing today's subject and guest

20:25 Gibbon overview (interview starts)

31:57 Why do humans have twins?

34:02 A day in the life of a gibbon

38:57 Studying gibbons

40:37 Forgotten apes

44:06 Monogamy

1:09:27 Violence

1:11:34 Singing

1:17:49 Intelligence

1:23:28 Conservation

Sources relevant to the introduction: 

Stewart-Williams & Thomas | "The Ape That Thought It Was a Peacock" | 2013

Fisher | "The Anatomy of Love" | 2016

Ryan & Jethá | "Sex at Dawn" | 2010

Kramer | Pew Research | 2020

Marlowe | Behavioural Processes | 2000

Chapais | Evolutionary Anthropology | 2013

Schacht & Kramer | Sec Behavioral and Evolutionary Ecology | 2019

Shankman | "The Mead–Freeman Controversy Continues" | 2018 (I'm not sure if this view is correct; once again, you can find academics on both sides of this.)

A deep dive into the manosphere, with the scholar who knows it best, Louis Bachaud.

The manosphere is a constellation of 5 loosely affiliated communities, including pick-up artists (PUAs), men's rights activists (MRAs), "Men Going Their Own Way" (MGTOW), incels (the "Black Pill" communiy), and the "Red Pill" community. Louis details the history of the manosphere, describes the current factions and their differences, and guides us through their use and misuse of science, especially evolutionary psychology. The episode opens with a systematic critique of the manosphere, and the interview starts around 34 minutes in. Enjoy.

Recommended background, especially for critiques of the manosphere:

- Bachaud, L., & Johns, S. E. (2023). The use and misuse of evolutionary psychology in online manosphere communities: The case of female mating strategies. Evolutionary Human Sciences, 5, e28. 

For the size and direction of sex differences, see:

- Archer, J. (2019). The reality and evolutionary significance of human psychological sex differences. Biological Reviews, 94(4), 1381-1415. 

- Stewart-Williams, S., Butler, C. A., & Thomas, A. G. (2017). Sexual history and present attractiveness: People want a mate with a bit of a past, but not too much. The Journal of Sex Research, 54(9), 1097-1105. 

- Schmitt, D. P. (2005). Sociosexuality from Argentina to Zimbabwe: A 48-nation study of sex, culture, and strategies of human mating. Behavioral and Brain sciences, 28(2), 247-275. 

- Buss, D. M. (1989). Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures. Behavioral and brain sciences, 12(1), 1-14. 

For extra-pair paternity:

- Wolf, M., Musch, J., Enczmann, J., & Fischer, J. (2012). Estimating the prevalence of nonpaternity in Germany. Human Nature, 23, 208-217. 

- Anderson, K. (2006). How well does paternity confidence match actual paternity? Evidence from worldwide nonpaternity rates. Current anthropology, 47(3), 513-520.

- Bellis, M. A., Hughes, K., Hughes, S., & Ashton, J. R. (2005). Measuring paternal discrepancy and its public health consequences. Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health, 59(9), 749-754. 

For age gaps:

- Conroy-Beam, D., & Buss, D. M. (2019). Why is age so important in human mating? Evolved age preferences and their influences on multiple mating behaviors. Evolutionary Behavioral Sciences, 13(2), 127. 

- Antfolk, J., Salo, B., Alanko, K., Bergen, E., Corander, J., Sandnabba, N. K., & Santtila, P. (2015). Women's and men's sexual preferences and activities with respect to the partner's age: Evidence for female choice. Evolution and Human Behavior, 36(1), 73-79. 

- Buunk, B. P., Dijkstra, P., Kenrick, D. T., & Warntjes, A. (2001). Age preferences for mates as related to gender, own age, and involvement level. Evolution and Human Behavior, 22(4), 241-250.

Today, we explore the befuddling (and surprisingly complex) mystery of the human beard. Our guide is Dr. Barnaby Dixson, a human behavioral ecologist at the University of the Sunshine Coast who uses interdisciplinary methods to investigate human mate preferences across cultures.  His extensive work has bettered our understanding of a wide variety of physical traits; most relevant to today's discussion, he is one of the primary contributors to our understanding of beards. We discuss the evolution of facial masculinity and facial hair, and their role in attractiveness and intimidation across various contexts. You can learn more about Dixson, here: https://www.usc.edu.au/staff/dr-barnaby-dixson

Relevant sources are mostly in Dixson’s past publications: https://scholar.google.com.au/citations?user=LE_ROqQAAAAJ&hl=en

But also, see: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vbEZV65uWCcG3E3Qzk-DEuy2m3rodw07WIt3l6meMSo/edit?usp=sharing

William Costello is an expert on incels, a rising star in the field of evolutionary psychology, and the latest protégé of Dr. David Buss. In this conversation, we discuss incel violence, demographics, mythology, perception vs. reality, and solutions to inceldom, among other things.

There's still time to participate in Costello's cross-sex mind-reading study, here: https://utexas.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_38KyEyGDOs4stN4

You can keep up with Costello on Twitter, @CostelloWilliam: https://twitter.com/CostelloWilliam?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor

Alexander is a psychologist and science communicator. He is best known for his deep dives into the literature on human mating and his nuanced critiques of popular misconceptions about dating. In this data-driven discussion, he talks to Macken about what men and women actually want and what people generally get wrong about dating, before diving into a variety of topics including the Manosphere, the “mating crisis,” hypergamy, and bodycount, among others.

Alexander is @datepsych on Twitter, where he runs online studies and produces fascinating threads on mating. He also runs a popular blog, datepsychology.com, and is increasingly popular on YouTube, @alex.datepsych.

Just when you thought it was safe to go back in the water... a brand new episode of Species. Come listen and learn about their secret social lives, how to survive a shark attack, and some mind-blowing stats.

Bibliography: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Ayzr57teXk06LE21jN9LH934wXhOzIRW9KbKiBeCUVw/edit?usp=sharing

I'm extremely busy and, unfortunately, pausing production on Species, at least for most of this month. If you sent me a donation in January and you want a refund, contact me through mackenmurphy.org, and I will be sure to send it back to you. My sincerest apologies.

"DNA isn't all that matters, but it matters more than everything else put together."

—Dr. Robert Plomin

Blueprint: https://mitpress.mit.edu/9780262039161/blueprint/

Plomin is one of history's most important psychologists and a pioneer in the field of behavioral genetics. He is a research professor at King's College London, best known for his work on twins. In this podcast, Plomin explains how we know that genes impact our behavior, clarifies all the common confusions about the field, and pushes back against some of Macken's criticisms. Enjoy.