Does the Evidence Support Evolutionary Accounts of Female Mating Preferences?
Buller argues that “there is no convincing evidence of a robust female preference for high-status males”. Buller’s general claim that mating is based on status similarity. He contrasts this with another alternative explanation for the findings produced by evolutionary psychologists, the structural powerlessness hypothesis. This hypothesis, while admitting that the effects are real, argues they are due only to modern inequalities between the sexes, not evolved sex-differentiated mating mechanisms. (p.336)
No single variable explains why this occurs. Many ideas, however have been proposed for example the resource-defense model (a model that gives an explanation of why primates form groups based on the hypothesis that a group of individuals can defend access to resources such as food). Even the predation model (a model that gives an explanation of why primates form groups based on the hypothesis that a group of individuals can protect themselves better.) It all boils down to subsistence or SES which credits the other side but neither model explains all the variation and complexity of primate social organization. Both may be operating together and other, as yet unknown factors may be present
There is significant variation among hunter-gather populations with respect to male contributions to the diets of their young. In some hunter gatherer population female foraging provided a full 67 precent of the total daily caloric intake. And Kristen Hawkes found that a Hadza woman and her children receive more food from her mother than from her mate. This fact poses a problem for the claim that females have evolved a universal preference for males who show signs of being able providers, For, if ancestral hunter-gatherer populations were just as variable as contemporary hunter gatherer populations with respect to the degree of male provisioning, then a preference for high...