How to Sculpt your Image and Attract the Perfect Partner

I just finished writing this for my psychology class. I hope you enjoy.

How to Sculpt your Image and Attract the Perfect Partner

Of the most fundamental drives in human biology none has such far reaching and abundantly clear implications as the drive to find a partner and mate. This drive has affected the growth of our culture and the inspiration for the great majority of our media and literature. Its power is so ubiquitous that creative and analytical minds have speculated on its source and repercussions since the dawn of their disciplines. Yet we remain without a comprehensive theory of the cause, the power, and the exact science behind it. However, modern science trucks on, ever closing the gap between the mysteries of our world and our understanding as a species, and in these simple steps you can take advantage of the understandings imparted to us, and make yourself the most desirable person you can be; in order to attract the ideal mate.

Step 1: Decide if you want a long or short term experience.

This is the first step in the understanding and crafting of a better relationship experience for a reason. Your approach to a new image and a new self will be guided entirely by your goals. Human mating strategies change drastically given the context in which they are to be employed. (Buss,1994) It is because of the evolution of our species that we see these differences. Men, overwhelmingly prone to interest in short term relationships (Buss,1994) need to be aware of just that fact, that they are more likely to be interested in short mating experiences than their female counterparts, and women must be wary of these men if it is their impetus to craft a long lasting relationship at that point in time. This is, of course, no fault of the male, as his drive to mate quickly and reduce his investment (Buss,1994) may be entirely biological in foundation. In fact in sexual fantasy, a commonly trusted predictor of raw sexual intent, it is proven that males are more likely to be focused on the acquisition of many sexual partners over a short period of time; often going to the extreme of visualizing different partners over the course of a single fantasy (Ellis,1990). This shows through in separate research that inquired as to the ideal number of sexual partners men and women would like to experience at different intervals of time which showed a mean of eight or six as the ideal for men in the next two years, and eighteen partners over the course of a lifetime, whereas their female counterparts showed a mean of one partner and four to five for the respective time periods (Buss,1994). From this point out, it will be assumed that you’ve chosen your path to short term “Fling” or to forming a pair bond with the intent of breeding.

Step 2: Forget Convention

Heuristics are a time and resource saving tool that make daily life much easier than it could be. However, socially influenced heuristics, or folk advice based judgments have no place in the search for a mate. This step is more crucial to those who will be in search of a long term mate than a short term relationship if only because there are many more untested and unsubstantiated beliefs about the way attraction occurs when related to long term relationships. For instance, adolescents are often ingrained with the sentiment that a fitting partner of the opposite sex will often remind them of their opposite sex parent in some way. This folk belief has been perpetuated through repetition and confirmation bias for generations and has never been tested. Young women are often advised to find out how their prospective partner treats his mother to gain some insight into how he may treat them in the future. This “indicator” of a man’s receptiveness to a female figure has never been tested, and this claim remains an unscientific folk belief. To judge a prospective mate’s “worth” one must understand what is important to themselves, and this guide will help you transform that ideal self into your real self while you evaluate your own worth.

Step 3: Identify your own needs and desires

By gauging your experience against evolutionary challenges and the strategies by which our ancestors overcame them you can complete a comprehensive checklist of your needs and desires; once you understand the strategies and how they affect you, you can prioritize what you look for in a partner. This section is where we meet the unfortunate and puzzling sex differences in attraction and mate selection. According to current theories and research men and women have developed different strategies for selecting a mate based on the different challenges faced by their sex. In the short term, men face the challenge of finding fertile and accessible females while balancing the investments that would be necessitated by an attempt at mating (Buss,1994). The more challenging quandaries faced by females in generations past have been how to craft strategies that will allow immediate resource extraction from a prospective mate, and how to make a mate with short term relationship goals into a mate with long term commitment. (Buss,1994) Whereas the solutions to those challenges presented in the short term are contradictory, the long term mating challenges faced by both sexes are solved in more complementary fashion. As males begin to face issues such as uncertainty in the paternity of their supposed offspring and the identification of females with long-term reproductive value, females approach challenges such as finding a mate with quality genetics and a willingness to invest his resources in her and her offspring (Buss,1994). These challenges are all solved by the development of monogamy as a social construct and a prerequisite of long term relationships. These are the needs that guide human mate selection and are evolutionarily built into our species. Once you identify your behaviors that are conducive to overcoming these challenges you’ve grasped the strategies inherited from your ancestors. Establish what you feel like you want out of a relationship by envisioning your life goals for long term, and strategizing on how a partner could complement your ability to reach these goals. In the case of short term, identify your preferences in physical qualities and your willingness to invest (for men) or to what degree you require an investment (for women.)

Step 4: Understand the Opposite Sex

This step may be the most crucial of them all. Just as you have been influenced by evolutionary needs, so have all your prospective mates. Once you know what they are looking for you can bring out those qualities in yourself. If both partners are interested in a short term experience the burden of becoming available becomes that of the female. In most cases men are overwhelmingly ready for a short term sexual experience at all times. In a study at the University of Hawaii a startling finding showed that Seventy-five percent of men who were approached by an attractive stranger were receptive to the idea of having a sexual experience with her that night, thus supporting the bias that males have toward engaging in short term sexual endeavors with women who exhibit high levels of promiscuity (Buss,1994). For a woman to engage in a short term sexual experience she must sacrifice some of what characterizes women in their sexual behavior. The female experience of sexual fantasy is very different from the male experience as it is more heavily focused on the idea of a building seduction, importance of the setting which it occurs, emotional investment, and a unique partner that is responsive to them and excites them in a way that no other can (Ellis,1990). None of these characteristics are present in the idea of a short term sexual experience with a partner who has only minimally invested in her being and enjoyment of the event. For a female to engage in one of these short term “flings” she must only make herself available and choose from the dominant individuals of the opposite sex.

Long term relationships are more complicated issues and require a great deal more understanding on both sides of the fence. Luckily, in American culture, the sex differences narrow as more long term commitment becomes a goal. For instance, both men and women record reciprocal love, dependable character, emotional stability and maturity, a pleasant disposition, and intelligence as the top five factors that they find important in a prospective mate, in that order. After those factors men tend to stray toward the area of physical attraction while women record ambition and financial prospects as their next most important concerns (Buss,1990). This deviation is well in line with the adaptive strategies that our ancestors would have evolved to overcome mating challenges such as identifying females with high potential reproductive value, and identifying males who will be capable of contributing resources. These facts should be encouraging as they pave the way for a better understanding of what it takes to make a relationship work in the long run.

Step 5: Use what you have learned

All of this studying is wasted if you are incapable of capitalizing on your newfound knowledge! An understanding of the opposite sex and your own sex should grant you a better ability to sculpt your own image to that of what will be desired while remaining true to yourself and searching for a partner who exhibits what you find important. Some other strategies that will help you to attract your ideal mate are basic facts of human experience that can be used to help build the foundation of a long or short term relationship. Firstly, human beings can very easily mislabel their own experiences and draw sexual inspiration from them. In a field experiment by Dr. Aron, attractive confederates used the anxiety created by the crossing of an unstable bridge to influence how unsuspecting subjects interpreted an ambiguous stimulus. What they found was that the anxiety that was experienced was indeed transformed into sexual energy in a theory that Aron explains as the idea that any strong emotion can be relabeled as sexual attraction if an acceptable object of that attraction is present, and if circumstance does not require the subject’s full attention (Aron,1974).

Physical attractiveness is more powerful than one might expect, as was proven in an experiment in 2009 by Jie Sui and Chan Hong Liu. In this experiment the pair proved that even when given a cognitive task, attractive faces are distracting to the point that they can slow cognitive function. Controlled against unattractive and neutral faces, the attractive faces nearly doubled time spent making decisions as to the orientation of a symbol (Sui,2009).

With these two simple facts, you can construct situations in which your own perceived, intrasexual worth can be improved. Take up exciting hobbies and strive to improve your own physical attractiveness, especially if you are trying to entice a male to find your worth higher than your perceive it to be. This guide is a tool to improving your image in the eyes of your desired sex, whether you are interested in long or short term relationships.

Bibliography:

Aron, A (1974). Some Evidence for Heightened Sexual Attraction Under Conditions of high Anxiety. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 30(4), 510-517

Buss, D.M. (1990) International Preferences in Selecting Mates. Journal of cross-cultural psychology 21(1), 5-47

Buss, D.M. (1994) Strategies of Human Mating. American Scientist 82, 238-249

Ellis, B (1990) Sex Differences in Sexual Fantasy: An Evolutionary Psychological Approach. The Journal of Sex Research 27(4), 527-555

Sui, J (2009) Can beauty be Ignored? Effects of facial attractiveness on covert attention. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 16(2), 276-281

Moral Panic

I wrote this for a Sociology of Crime class and figured you might like to read it. Not as many links this time, but citations are at the bottom.

Moral Panic

A moral panic is a powerful state into which a society can be thrown. This happening has far reach consequences; influencing the social norms that guide everyday behavior, and sometimes bringing about change in legislature that affects us all. Stanley Cohen characterized this state as a reactionary approach to an issue that grips the public’s interests and, in short, abuses the public’s faith in the media( Cohen, 1972).

The term was coined by Cohen in the face of an overwhelmingly typical example of public overreaction that stemmed from the English seaside in the mid 1960’s. This particular moral panic was sparked by a single event that was perceived as indicative of a larger problem, namely the aggressive behavior prevalent in youth culture at the time. Cohen first used the term “Community Sensitization” (1967) to explain a phenomenon that ensued after a fight erupted in a small town in England. That term, a predecessor of Moral Panic, was used to explain the heightened awareness that a community possesses after such events. Arrests are made, a type of offender is identified, and suddenly everyone who exemplifies that type is a focal point for the nation’s issues. Cohen made note of an aggressive cycle in which law enforcement would become more aware of the types of crime that these groups were “apt” to commit after an exceptional case, and thus become more fervent in their efforts to enforce law on said group. This would lead those who were resistant to become agitated, an altercation to break-out, an arrest to be made, and thus more focus being placed on the group and more awareness of their “type” of behavior.

Who is to be blamed for these sorts of moral panics and community sensitization? Cohen identified five groups called the “actors” in his theory(1972). The first actor is the Press who contribute by exaggerating a story and misinforming the public of the facts. An event is publicized with scandalizing details, which in some cases are nothing but rumors, repeated until they become common knowledge; the offenders are stripped of individuality and become a stereotyped, blank face only identifiable by his style of dress and bad attitude, but always prone to commit crime. Often the press will report crimes in a way that distorts the facts but doesn’t change them; in this particular incident one newspaper reported that the windows in “all the dance halls in town” had been broken. While this fact was true, the paper neglected to mention that the town only contained one dance hall. Such exaggerated language is one of the primary reasons that issues are taken to be more serious than they are in reality.

The press, however, would not publish a story if no one was going to read it; so Cohen referred to the public as the second group of actors in moral panic. The public’s interest, piqued by stories of violence and more willing to demonize a stranger than to concern themselves with other issues, latch on to stories such as these. The press is a business and to remain in that business it is compelled to report on those things which the public will find interesting, thus investigative reporters drum up more “evidence” and “Facts” to publish and the cycle begins again. The press reports, the public pays attention and buys their paper, so the press finds similar stories to report, in turn drawing more and more focus to an issue that may not have actually gotten any larger. This effect of magnifying an issue will bring more public attention and outcry to pressure the next group of actors.

The third group of actors, according to Cohen’s work, is the law enforcement group. This group experiences pressure from higher-ups and the common people to “do something” about what is, in their eyes, a growing concern. In this situation law enforcement officials are “re-educated” to combat a specific issue and undergo a series of effects that change the way they operate. The process of “Diffusion” in which the bonds between officials and different groups of officials are knit more tightly helps to create a unified front against the issue which inspired the moral panic. Methods of coping with the issue are shared between groups and members of those groups, and the most effective strategies are formed, sometimes leading to what is called “escalation” by Cohen, in which methods of dealing with the problem become increasingly severe as a quick and effective strategy is brainstormed. This escalation often leads to vicious consequences for perpetrators of minor infractions, and the overall level of civil liberties being reduced. Behaviors once dismissed as mischievous are perceived as criminal in these circumstances, and this is all in the name of pleasing their higher-ups, the fourth group of actors.

The lawmakers and politicians who call to the law enforcement group, alongside the public, misled by the press, are the fourth group of actors in the moral panic. They are characterized by the same overreactions as the public but by the people who have the means to change the way in which the issue is approached. These moral panics are most damaging when focused upon by lawmakers, as they reroute their normal business to deal with an issue that only appears to be larger than it was before they had considered it worth mentioning. In the example which led Cohen to construct his theory of Moral panic, British lawmakers proposed antiquated methods of “fixing” their “rampant” problem of youth violence. Discussions of harsh punishment filled parliament with provocation from an outraged public, incensed by the press who grossly exaggerated the issue. This group is by far the most influential of the actors as they are the top of the chain that leads down to the actual “solution” on the streets. That solution, however, is not always perceived as adequate, leading from the most influential to the most dangerous of the actor groups.

The final group involved in a moral panic is what is referred to by Cohen as “action groups” but what I term more accurately as “reaction groups.” These are the most outspoken subset of the public who find the solutions proposed by lawmakers and the remedies enacted by law enforcement to be insufficient. Two such action groups existed in England during the backlash from the seaside incident; one in favor of mandatory punishment via work camps, the other resorting to the archaic punishment by birch rod, both entirely fueled by a misplaced fear and hatred for a group of dangerously maladjusted youths that didn’t even exist. These “Moral entrepreneurs” (Becker, 1963) are covered by the press and thus help to perpetuate their own fears and throw the entire public into what is called a “warning phase” by Cohen.

Cohen’s warning phase is part of his disaster theory stating that, in a moral panic, the public enters the same state it does during an actual panic that could be sparked by weather disasters. This is characterized by the sensitization previously mentioned, the overreactions previously mentioned, and the speculation which is often employed by action groups to sway the public to support their outlandish and overzealous punitive measures.

Moral panic is a dangerous and possibly destructive state which alters a society’s values, laws, and the fabric of their identity. It is every person’s responsibility to consume press reports responsibly and to analyze the statistics of supposed “growing” problems in their society as to avoid being caught in the fervor of “popular issues” so that they can help to steer their people from the dangers of moral panic and community sensitization.

References

Becker, Howard S. 1963 Outsiders: studies in the sociology of Deviance. New York: Free Press

Cohen, Stanley. 1967 “Mods, Rockers, and the Rest: Community reactions to Juvenile Delinquency.” Howard Journal, 12(2): 121-30

1972. Folk Devils and Moral Panics: The creation of the Mods and Rockers. London MacGibbon & Kee