Settling for "Mr." OR "Mrs. Right" now better VS waiting for "Mr." or "Mrs Right" new study

from Science Daily

Evolutionary researchers have determined that settling for 'Mr. Okay' is a better evolutionary strategy than waiting for 'Mr. Perfect.' When studying the evolution of risk aversion using a computational model of digital organisms, researchers found that it is in our nature -- traced back to the earliest humans -- to take the safe bet when stakes are high, such as whether or not we will mate.

When studying the evolution of risk aversion, Michigan State University researchers found that it is in our nature -- traced back to the earliest humans -- to take the safe bet when stakes are high, such as whether or not we will mate.
"Primitive humans were likely forced to bet on whether or not they could find a better mate," said Chris Adami, MSU professor of microbiology and molecular genetics and co-author of the paper.
"They could either choose to mate with the first, potentially inferior, companion and risk inferior offspring, or they could wait for Mr. or Ms. Perfect to come around," he said. "If they chose to wait, they risk never mating."

Adami and his co-author Arend Hintze, MSU research associate, used a computational model to trace risk-taking behaviors through thousands of generations of evolution with digital organisms. These organisms were programmed to make bets in high-payoff gambles, which reflect the life-altering decisions that natural organisms must make, as for example choosing a mate.
"An individual might hold out to find the perfect mate but run the risk of coming up empty and leaving no progeny," Adami said. "Settling early for the sure bet gives you an evolutionary advantage, if living in a small group."

Well I think this science has some very valid points. Is there REALLY a Mr. or Mrs. Right for anyone? OR is it just our own notions of a perfect relationship that transform our partners into the "Right" material?

a reply to: DjembeJedi

I always thought this was why infidelity was so common.

Snag Mr. Perfect's genes through cheating while making Mr. Average take care of the baby.

a reply to: OrphanApology

You are definitely on to something I'm sure though that it's not the case for every infidelity

a reply to: OrphanApology

Good Hypothesis! I agree... Probably not every instance of course but i'm sure some.

a reply to: threeeyesopen

Well infidelity involving substances like alcohol change the name of the game. But if you notice when alcohol isn't involved and women cheat it is generally with the bad boy? After all, nice guys would probably shy away from getting involved with an involved woman.

Not that nice guys can't have good genes. But generally if you are choosing a mate that has a jaw that could cut through glass, he'd be more likely to be an asshole I imagine. I think they did a study where they showed women different faces of men and they were able to pretty accurately match up which men were more nurturing(and consequently at times less "bulky") vs. men who were good "donors"(bad boy for a night).

Edit:

I found the article I think I got this from originally:

www.livescience.com...


Read through that article and it is NOT the one:

Here is the study: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

I'm going to check those out later, they seem quite interesting but I'm currently on my way out the door. When I return I'll have a more well crafted opinion lol.

originally posted by: DjembeJedi
from Science Daily

Evolutionary researchers have determined that settling for 'Mr. Okay' is a better evolutionary strategy than waiting for 'Mr. Perfect.' When studying the evolution of risk aversion using a computational model of digital organisms, researchers found that it is in our nature -- traced back to the earliest humans -- to take the safe bet when stakes are high, such as whether or not we will mate.

When studying the evolution of risk aversion, Michigan State University researchers found that it is in our nature -- traced back to the earliest humans -- to take the safe bet when stakes are high, such as whether or not we will mate.
"Primitive humans were likely forced to bet on whether or not they could find a better mate," said Chris Adami, MSU professor of microbiology and molecular genetics and co-author of the paper.
"They could either choose to mate with the first, potentially inferior, companion and risk inferior offspring, or they could wait for Mr. or Ms. Perfect to come around," he said. "If they chose to wait, they risk never mating."

Adami and his co-author Arend Hintze, MSU research associate, used a computational model to trace risk-taking behaviors through thousands of generations of evolution with digital organisms. These organisms were programmed to make bets in high-payoff gambles, which reflect the life-altering decisions that natural organisms must make, as for example choosing a mate.
"An individual might hold out to find the perfect mate but run the risk of coming up empty and leaving no progeny," Adami said. "Settling early for the sure bet gives you an evolutionary advantage, if living in a small group."

Well I think this science has some very valid points. Is there REALLY a Mr. or Mrs. Right for anyone? OR is it just our own notions of a perfect relationship that transform our partners into the "Right" material?

I think it is a good point and or hypothesis. If true, it would make sense that those who have genes that push one to mature or mate earlier would have over time have had more kids, due to the risks explained. Then, therefore, unless it has been long enough since humans lived in that reality that the genes got less focused, we would expect to see evolutionary residual effects within our population leading people to "go for it" rather than wait.

Having said all that, the truth of the point you are making is context-derived. Sure if we were hunter-gatherers or facing short lifespans, it is a solid argument not to wait for another mate. With really small populations and often large distances between groups, it very well may be your only chance whoever you find.

Now days, it is totally different. There are so many myriad sexual partners available that one can and should wait, if they haven't found a good match.

a reply to: DjembeJedi


One man's meat is another man's poison? ....

There's no accounting for taste!

Love is far too corrupted & distorted by materialism & job status for a Mr/Mrs.Right to actually exist.

Until our existence is not based on scarcity of resources & status via measure of disparity, mating is futile; permanent pairing even more so.

I always ask my friends and relatives who are looking for Mr. or Miss Right if they, themselves, can meet the same high standards they are setting for others. Usually the answer is no...lol! When people get real is when they typically start finding mates.

Its BS, the study is basically saying to the equivalent that an arranged marriage, ie settling for those around you, that you don't love, is better than actually waiting for true love. This seems a little sharia like and arranged marraige like to me, as some weird studies have come out lately, and I think to promote agenda.

originally posted by: Unity_99
Its BS, the study is basically saying to the equivalent that an arranged marriage, ie settling for those around you, that you don't love, is better than actually waiting for true love. This seems a little sharia like and arranged marraige like to me, as some weird studies have come out lately, and I think to promote agenda.

It is very singular I would agree, Room 101 job. In any case I found the perfect woman, and I love her even though she is neurotic, very vocal, a nutball and mind bogglingly honest...except to admitting to the above!
To add, did you mean agenda or a gender?

Settling for "Mr." OR "Mrs. Right" now better VS waiting for "Mr." or "Mrs Right"...

It's also true because as Buckaroo Banzai said, "No matter where you go, there you are."

originally posted by: kosmicjack
I always ask my friends and relatives who are looking for Mr. or Miss Right if they, themselves, can meet the same high standards they are setting for others. Usually the answer is no...lol! When people get real is when they typically start finding mates.

LOL, my brother-in-law told me when he was much younger and searching for a mate.

He said, "I want", and described the perfect body type that doesn't exist but is airbrushed in magazines.

I said, well when you regrow your hair (he was balding/before hair plugs and rogaine) then you can demand a perfect body in someone else.

Shortly after that, he "settled" and married.

originally posted by: Eunuchorn
Love is far too corrupted & distorted by materialism & job status for a Mr/Mrs.Right to actually exist.

Until our existence is not based on scarcity of resources & status via measure of disparity, mating is futile; permanent pairing even more so.

The ideal today for Mr and Mrs Right can not be met by a normal, non neurotic, non narssistic, person who does not live their lives in a gym. Even then, no one looks like they do on TV with makeup (even on men - and the fake abs they put on men), or in the magazines with serious photoshopping.

Also, everyone is weird once you get to know them. By that I mean we all have quirks, little habits, ideas, thoughts that are unusual to some extent. That is what makes people unique and what makes life fun.
If you find someone "totally normal" once you have gotten to know them, I'd be suspect.

Only a sociopath can act "totally normal", whatever that is, all the time.
We are all quirky to some extent, all truly sane people have little quirks; only the insane will never ever reveal a quirk for fear of rejection.
So Mr and Mrs Right is a fairy tale.

Which is why we are seeing far less people marrying today than ever before in history.

I call it putting on my beer-goggles.
It's better to regret things you have done than things you haven't.

originally posted by: skunkape23
I call it putting on my beer-goggles.
It's better to regret things you have done than things you haven't.

preach.

originally posted by: Unity_99
Its BS, the study is basically saying to the equivalent that an arranged marriage, ie settling for those around you, that you don't love, is better than actually waiting for true love. This seems a little sharia like and arranged marraige like to me, as some weird studies have come out lately, and I think to promote agenda.

I don't fully agree with you. I think the study is showing the benefits of making a relationship work with a realistic model of a person..ie balding,not the best career etc.. INSTEAD of waiting for a impractical idealized partner that you will most probably not meet.

a reply to: DjembeJedi

Agreed.

originally posted by: DjembeJedi

originally posted by: Unity_99
Its BS, the study is basically saying to the equivalent that an arranged marriage, ie settling for those around you, that you don't love, is better than actually waiting for true love. This seems a little sharia like and arranged marraige like to me, as some weird studies have come out lately, and I think to promote agenda.

I don't fully agree with you. I think the study is showing the benefits of making a relationship work with a realistic model of a person..ie balding,not the best career etc.. INSTEAD of waiting for a impractical idealized partner that you will most probably not meet.

Those waiting for true love and those who are settling, are not seeing the full picture I believe. Waiting for someone who has a lot in common with you from an internal perspective is something we all should do. When this happens, when the majority of people put their emphasis on love instead of simply having a mate, then it will be much easier to find love. Mr. or Mrs. Right.

As it stands now in this rush and hurry world we live in, love is a fairy tale that shouldn't be taken seriously. That study only proves that point.

So go ahead, settle for a mating partner. Take the easy way out. Just don't start bitching about how imperfect your life is and how much better it could be while you're eating your Haggen-Daz reading romance novels and your partner is cheering on The Patriots. You did it to yourself.