Recently in Relationships Category

Building Community in Organizations

I found this article through one of my other classes, but I think that it relates to Motivation and Emotion more than anything else in psychology. The article discusses six steps to having a healthy, cooperative community.  Many times it referrers to areas in the business context, but I also think it would be applicable to everyday life.  Although the article does come across as somewhat candy-coated, I still think the general ideas have great meaning behind them, even if they aren't 100% generalizable to every type of community. 

The text discusses the aspect of engagement (Reeve, 165) in a way that encourages motivation.  This is the same basic concept that the article is getting at, only more specified.  The article wants to motivate members of a given community to take part and care about that community, where as Reeve discusses the model of engagement in a broader basis.  Engagement can involve anything that someone cares about, including psychological needs. Engagement also taps into emotions as well, causing for even more intensified involvement in the given activity.  Building a strong community anywhere (whether it's at work, school, or home) can be much easier if these guidelines of engagement are implemented. Table 6.4 (Reeve, 164) in the text shows how the aspects of an environment can trigger engagement and fulfill different psychological needs. While many of these terms are different that those provided in the article, they stem off of the same ideas and constructs. 

 

The six principles of an engaged community are:

1. Communicate a compelling message.

2. Build a guiding coalition.

3. Create principle-based versus compliance-based guidelines for decisions and behaviors.

4. Identify early engagement indicators.

5. Generate continuous opportunities for dialogue at all levels.

6. Plan assimilation strategies for new members and new leaders.

 

While some of the terminology may seem complex, the article explains how simple each principle really is. Many of the terms stem from concepts that we have learned in the past about Motivation and Emotion.  The first aspect, communicating a compelling message, gets into the concept of involvement and relatedness, and almost acts like an advertisement.  Reeve discusses the importance of relatedness (Reeve, 161-162) and how high levels of relatedness can increase levels of social interaction, higher functioning, resilience to stress, and lower chances of psychological dysfunctions.  In order to get people engaged in a given situation, they must first feel as if they have a social relation to that community or event and have a sense of involvement within that situation.

The second principle, building a coalition, corresponds with the idea of leadership. Reeve (196) discusses how leadership skills can effect and influence the people around that leader.  Reeve also discusses how power can also change the attitudes of peers. With a high-quality leader, subordinates will be more likely to participate fully within the community, and be happier with their community overall.   

The third principle, principle-based vs. compliance-based guidelines, revolves around the idea of autonomy and control over situations.  Reeve discusses the importance of fulfilling the need for autonomy (Reeve, 145-146).  This area is crucial in discussing something such as a community or job setting, and can have a huge impact on the level of happiness and satisfaction each individual experiences.  Using guidelines that promote autonomy, rather than strict rules, can enhance individual's level of involvement and engagement within that group.  This can also improve performance and satisfaction in that particular situation.

The next principle deals with early signs of motivational concepts. Once people seem to show an interest in engagement, it reinforces the leaders and those involved by showing them that the engagement is possible and helpful. Reinforcing the behaviors of both leaders and subordinates is a good way to keep motivations high and keep everyone involved (Reeve, 115). In turn, this can help to keep the levels of engagement constant in the community setting.            Principle number five revisits aspects of relatedness and competence.  Encouraging communication is a way to gain relationships with each individual, strengthening their levels of engagement.  This also has an impact on their levels of competence (Reeve, 154).  Increasing communication increases levels of interaction with the environment, establishing a perception of competence.  Competence is the need to have an effect on the environment, as well as master optimal challenges (Reeve, 155).  Increasing the levels of communication and increasing opportunities for challenges is a great way to get individuals engaged in which ever community they may be in.

Assimilation strategies for new members and leaders is applying the concepts of all of these situations into one, making new members feel as though they are involved, making the steps of engagement easier to adapt to. In short, it takes aspects of all of the other principles and applies them to the single new member in order to make them feel as though they are engaged in that community, and so that they can begin to take part in each of the six principles.

 

Can you think of any other psychological concepts that we have discussed in class that relate to this article? Are there any that DON'T apply to these principles?

 

 

 

In our society social networking is booming. The rate at which people are creating facebook, MySpace, twitter accounts, and profiles on dating site are enormous. Just the other day my grandmother asked me what twitter was (never did I think I'd hear those words out of my 85 year old grandmother). However, this obsession with the internet and new social networking site makes me ask the question; are they good?  Are we cheating ourselves of out getting to know someone the way out parents and grandparents did? Are we losing social skill that we have taken so long to develop?

            I am sure that everyone can think of someone they know who has met someone on a dating site that has resulted in a successful relationship and marriage.  Personally I do not feel as though there is anything wrong with that.  With women going into the work world and getting higher educations and people no long live in a 100 miles radus of where they grew up there is a definite need for a social network in order to meet people outside of your workplace. But part of me wonders if this new social networking phenomena is just the next step in dating or is it unnatural to find and select a mate online. What do you think?

 

Below are articles that are of positive and negative experiences with dating site. Take a look at them and tell me what you think...

 

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,396461,00.html

 

 

Mothers shares successful experience with online dating

http://www.onlinedatingmagazine.com/datingexperiences/11-online-dating-experience.html

As many of you probably already know (unless you don't keep up with people.com), Sandra Bullock caught her husband, Jesse James, cheating on her with multiple women.  This first came out as only one woman, but many other women have taken it upon themselves and come out with additional related stories (much like Tiger Woods but not to that extent).  I found this whole situation really interesting because of the past of Jesse James.  

This article talks about Two Ways To Be a Happier Parent. It's a sociologists perspective on being a parent and dealing with the stressful times. According to her it comes down to two questions:

1. When are you happiest with your kids?

2. What part of the normal day with your family routinely causes suffering?

She goes on to give a specific example she dealt with personally, and she explains how she changed their routine as a family to decrease the stress levels in their household.

I think parenting is one of the hardest things to do in life, so it is helpful to have any tips. While reading how the sociologist adjusted her family's mornings it seemed a little too military like. If it works than maybe that's all that matters. I just don't know if I liked her approach.

In one of my classes last week we were talking about the importance of mentors in our lives. It took me a while to think of a consistent mentor who has helped encourage me throughout my life. In essence, my experience with a mentor has revolved around persuasion techniques utilized by my mentor attempting to persuade and encourage me to continue a behavior. The textbook mentions how important coaches, parents, employers, therapists, etc. are in our lives and how such figures will always be there (for the most part) to lend a convincing hand. A lot of the time these convincing attempts serve as an efficacy booster for me, the mentee. 

I have grown up in a musical family all my life, and I have also grown up playing the violin. There have been countless times throughout my life where I have wanted to give up and quit playing the violin. These sentiments mostly burgeon from my dissatisfaction with practicing the damn instrument. But, as we all know, "practice makes perfect." Unfortunately for me, I did not want to be a "perfect" violinist, let alone become that prodigious of a player. Fortunately, however, I had a set of encouraging parental figures who have continually given me the positive feedback and support necessary for me to continue my practices, at least all throughout high school and into my first couple years in college. My parents always knew that I didn't really want to quit. They were also well aware that practicing did not come easy for me, nor did it enlighten me. But, they always found creative ways to build up my self-efficacy, with regards to my violin playing skills and habit formation. Consequently, I know have the desire and intrinsic motivation to play the violin. I have played in the UNI orchestra all but one semester and I am a violinist for a post rock instrumental band in Cedar Falls.

 

Who have been positive role models/mentors in your life? 

In what areas have they impacted you and encouraged your own self-efficacy? 

I found this article on how to know if a guy is "Mr Right" and I think that the points made are pretty good. They are things that would be red flags to me that a relationship is not going to be compatible. The first point is one that I think is important, if your friends approve of him. I think this is important because they know you very well and can sometimes so things that you are unwilling to see in a relationship. The second is that he gets along with your family, because it is going to be hard to be in a relationship with someone if they do not get along with such an important part of your life. Number three was if he listens to you, which I thought was a pretty obvious one. Who wants to be in a relationship with someone who doesn't listen to them? Number four is if you share most of the same major values; I think this will just make a relationship easier, but not necessarily be a deal breaker. Numbers five and six are that he is someone you would be friends with and he is trustworthy. These also seem pretty obvious to me. Number seven on the list is he makes you feel special, I think this is important. Having that spark in a relationship and getting that good feeling from a person is important in keeping things fun and fresh, especially in a long term relationship. The eight point is if he is willing to talk about the future. This is important to me eventually, because in the end almost everyone is looking for their future "perfect" person. Number nine is finding a partner who is financially secure. I am not so sure about this point. It would be nice to find someone who is secure, but if everything else works with the person I would not write them off because of financial reasons. The last one is that he loves you for who you are. Overall this article seemed pretty good, and I think it could apply to both sexes as things to look for in a partner.

http://shine.yahoo.com/channel/sex/is-he-the-one-10-signs-to-tell-if-he-s-mr-right-1032610/

This website is a common theme for my posts, but I really enjoy it's variety of topics about relationships and what not to do.

 

At www.askmen.com, I found an article about mistakes people make during their first conversations.  Everyone needs a source of intimacy and relatedness, and I feel that these are two very strong motivators for being in a relationship.  Also, sex can be a strong motivator.  How many people can look at a movie start like Megan Fox (or for the ladies, Channing Tatum) and not think, "Damn. Yes please!!!!"

 

I think that the intensity that these motivators create can be blamed for most mistakes with the awkward first conversation.  The drive to succeed with an opening conversation can lead to becoming nervous.  Your heart will rate, you'll begin to sweat, and then worry if you smell or not.  These nerves can lead to several of these "faux pas".

 

1)    Talking about exes.  They're in the past.  Let's leave them there. As the article says, the first conversation should be fun.  It should leave her interested in you.  Make a few corny jokes.  It will show her that you're light-hearted.

2)    Talking about money.  At this place in our lives, most of us are POOR! We're in college.  If you're both poor, great.  But if you're rich and they're poor, you'll create jealousy.  Not a good way to start something. Also, you'll seem arrogant, and she will be wondering why you're not on "Jersey Shore"

3)    Flirting too much.  Coming on too strong, by being too flirty, is just as bad as being standoffish.  By being sincere, you'll stand out by being original.  (Here's a tip: this is how you get the "okay" from her friends, too.) Just be real with her, and she's bound to be slightly interested in you.

4)    LISTEN!!! Ask her about herself - people generally enjoy talking about themselves - then just relate it back to yourself. Making a conversation with someone involves effort. If you're not going to put any into the first conversation, why would she expect you to put any into a relationship?  And how are you any different from the other hundred guys who have showed interest in her that same night?  Again, this will make you stand out.

5)    Leave her wanting more.  This will sound a little odd, but stop the conversation early.  Stop at a high of the conversation - not when you're looking for a new topic.  She will definitely be interested in talking to you again after this.

 

Obviously this article is geared as advice towards men.  But women, what do you think about this?  What do you agree with / disagree with.  Do you really think that any or all of this will lead to a fulfilling relationship or is this just a load of crap?

 

http://www.askmen.com/dating/heidi_300/378_5-first-conversation-mistakes.html

I found this article that defines 11 things that can kill intimacy.  Our book gives several different angles as to how to look at intimacy.  In one part intimacy is gained by social motivation to engage in warm, close and positive interpersonal relations, without any fear of rejection.  There is also a willingness to "experience a warm, close and communicative exchange with another person" (McAdams, 1980).

The following are the 11 items that can kill intimacy and those should be avoided in all relationship types from friendships to marriage. Dishonesty and silence, lack of trust, desire to change people, inability to express your needs and feelings, not listening, self centeredness, lack of respect, imbalance of power, unhealthy arguments, absence of touch, and extreme separateness.

Some people have a higher need for intimacy than others, but no matter what your level of intimacy those 11 items can kill a relationship.  Intimacy is not something that just happens; it is something that has to be worked on and can be ever changing and evolving.  If someone is willing to put the time and effort into a relationship they are more than likely going to have great returns from that relationship.  I am also sure there are other things that can be detrimental to the stability of a relationship, but I do think that these 11 are especially important to avoid if you do want a long last relationship.  Any one of them on their own could deflate a relationship and a combination of them would likely end the relationship.

The article can be found at http://www.selfgrowth.com/articles/Radun29.html

Earlier in the semester we talked about the brain and how certain hormones influence or are activated due to emotions. Neurotransmitters such as dopamine, serotonin, norepinephrine, and endorphins are just a few that have been shown to influence mood and emotion. What we did not go in detail about was the parts of the brain that make contribute to moods, emotions, and behaviors. I found an article that discuss' this very topic.
Arousal is a process that involves cortical, behavioral, and autonomic mechanisms (Reeve, 2009, p. 374) This article talks about the cortical (activity of the brain) part of being aroused and the emotional reactions that can evolve from being aroused. Reeve (2009) lists four principles to explain arousal's contribution to motivation. There are two that relate to the study explained below:
1) A person's arousal level is mostly a function of how stimulating the environment is.
2) People engage in behavior to increase or decrease their level of arousal.
A new study was done to test if the lateral prefrontal cortex (LPFC) was a region of the brain that could help people control emotional reactions such as negative moods, rumination (not being able to get something off your mind), and substance abuse. After having several people in stable, healthy relationships journal daily and have brain scans done while viewing positive, negative, and neutral facial expressions of their partner, it was found that LPFC activity did predict how one would react to an interpersonal conflict. When there was a day of no interpersonal conflict, the LPFC activity was not related to the next day's mood or behavior. On the contrast, when there was a day when interpersonal conflict did occur LPFC did predict mood and behavior the next day. Low levels of LPFC activity was related for high levels of negative moods, rumination, and substance abuse.
This study is helpful when talking about coping with stress. To avoid bad coping strategies like over-eating or substance abuse, people can become aware and learn to introduce positive strategies such as counting to 10. If you are a person who has low LPFC function, it is possible you may become more susceptible to such behaviors.
Link:
http://news.oneindia.in/2010/03/03/howto-control-emotional-outbursts-in-front-of-yourpartner.html

I know a lot of people especially girls want to get married someday, and want to find their true love so I researched what motivates us to find true love and found this article which I found very interesting.

http://www.independent.ie/lifestyle/independent-woman/love-sex/how-to-find-true-love-2051038.html

Helen Fisher the women who dedicates most of her life on How to find true love believes there are four personality types.

"all of us conform to one of four personality types, which are controlled by different chemicals in the brain. These chemicals mould us, and cause us to be attracted to people who complement our personality types (see panel). There is the Explorer, a sensation seeker ruled by dopamine; the Builder, a respecter of authority driven by serotonin; the Director, analytical and ruled by testosterone; and the Negotiator, intuitive and fired by oestrogen. Negotiators need to connect with others on a deeply personal level, are very trusting and good at talking."

What personality type are you? and if you have a boyfriend or girlfriend are they compatible with you according to Helen Fisher?

Chapter 6 talks about relatedness and how relationships that are caring, accepting, and valuing satisfy the need for relatedness. Loneliness is used as an example of a characteristic of someone who has not fulfilled the need of relatedness. Having close, personal, and intimate relationships will help satisfy this need. Any social bond such as a sibling, spouse, or friend has the potential of being an intimate relationship. But even people who have siblings, spouses, and friends are not gaurunteed to have their need for relatedness satisfied. There are many marriages, as the text suggests, that may not satisfy one or both of the partners emotionally. The texts stresses the importance of fulfilling the need of relatedness because it has been shown that neglecting such needs can lead to loneliness and depression. Here is a website that explains how to start the process of trying to beat depression related to loneliness. It focuses on the importance of getting out of isolation and meeting new people. This should be done in hopes of finding someone that you could eventually develop a social bond, and thus, fulfilling the need of relatedness. I think this site has a good message behind it, but makes it sound a little easier than it probably is for depressed people. The textbook supports the need for meeting new people as a way of lessening depression and loneliness though.

http://www.ehow.com/how_5517599_beat-depression-related-loneliness.html

I found this article in Cosmo magazine and it caught my attention. I found it funny how they have a whole article on "How to be a good girlfriend" because I don't think you can become a good girlfriend simply by reading articles. I think it takes experience and trial and errors. Not all men are alike so something that may seem like a good girlfriend to some men may not make a good girlfriend in other men's eyes. I say this because I have been with my boyfriend for almost 7 years and there are some things in this article they say good girlfriends "shouldn't and won't do" but they are things that make my boyfriend view me as a good girlfriend and things in this article they say a good girlfriend shoulda always do that would absolutely drive my boyfriend and make him mad. So I think it's funny how some women live by articles such as this and really take them seriously, like if they follow these "rules" they will automatically be great girlfriends and their boyfriends will automatically always be happy. I don't think it works that easy LOL

A few summers ago, I had the opportunity to intern in Denver, Colorado at an organization called TASC.  TASC is a diversionary program for juvenile delinquents.  Here, I came into contact with numerous individuals - the majority of whom were involved in gangs.  This is also when I became more interested in gang involvement, especially among adolescents.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/20100222/sc_livescience/5thingsthatwillmakeyouhappier

 

 

I'm not sure if anyone else has seen this article, but it is about 5 things that will supposedly make a person happier. In short, they are...

 

1. Be grateful

2. Be optimistic

3. Count your blessings  

4. Use your strengths  

5. Commit acts of kindness

 

     Although this first one is rather obvious, there is some merit to mentioning it. I believe that trying to get into the habit of putting a positive spin can make life more enjoyable, but as we have read, each person has homeostasis level that will be resistant to change. (The researcher here seem to admit that people generally have certain dispositions and stable personalities throughout their life, but they argue that a significant amount of happiness can also be attributed to pro-active approaches to increasing one's happiness.) In any case, I suppose making an active effort to appreciate what you have may cause at least a minor increase in feelings of happiness.

 

Being Grateful  - One rather interesting note is that this finding of the study is largely based on an activity where people wrote letters expressing gratitude. In case you are thinking there might be a confound, such as relatedness or affiliation playing a role, I thought of that as well, but it was found that there was an increase in happiness even if people did not actually send the letters out.

 

Be optimistic - In the study, researchers actually had participants visualize "an ideal future" which included imagining having a loving, supportive partner and a great job. I am not sure if this strategy would necessarily lead to long term happiness though - the researchers did not mention whether or not this was exclusively short term happiness in their summarized report. The reason I say this is because I think over time significant cognitive dissonance would arise (people could become delusional) if there is a strong focus on a "perfect" life. If interpreted this way, this finding would actually seem to be in contrast to the first. If you are being appreciative of what you have, you will not be constantly focusing on the perfect, ideal life. I have heard that some studies have found striving for excellence can be much better than striving for perfection. I know the "being optimistic" strategy could probably be taken on a more moderate and healthy level, but I think the activity the researchers used does not necessarily seem healthy over the long term.

 

Count your blessings - I do not believe this one merits any further discussion because this "additional" finding seems to be very similar to "being grateful." In fact, there is no separate research mentioned for this in the article.

Use your strengths - The participants in the study (that contributed to this finding) focused on strengths such as using humor to increase others' happiness. I think this is perhaps related to competence, achievement, and relatedness - all concepts that we have recently mentioned in class. Being able to successfully use's one's abilities to accomplish a goal would lead to feelings of competence and achievement. Having someone identify with your achievement (in this case humor)

Commit acts of kindness - although we have not yet talked about pro-social very much in this class, this finding makes sense, and I think it also has something to do with relatedness.

http://www.cosmopolitan.com/sex-love/relationship-advice/secrets-women-keep-0308?click=pp

This article was about what girls should keep from their significant others.  I thought it was interesting because I work in a shoe department and a lot of women always tell me they are going to be in trouble when they get home.  Some will even tell me to throw away the boxes because it will make it easier to sneak in the new shoes.  I know that men get uptight about it but I don't quite understand it, especially if you aren't married and sharing an income.  Why do you care what shoes or things I buy?  Do you think about the future and that we will waste money on "unnecessary things" in your mind?  Although a lot of us women don't think a 60 inch TV is necessary.  Another question I have is, if you want us to like your gift, why must you get something we didn't ask for?  We don't always want jewelry!   
The top five things to keep from your sweetie were:
1. Past Hookups
2. How you spend your money
3. The way you feel about his family
4. Innocent Flirtations
5. What you really think of his gift

I was at www.askmen.com and saw this title for an article, so I couldn't resist.

As it's part of askmen.com, the article is geared towards providing advice for men - in this instance, particularly straight men.  The article is examining the traits of gay men and why straight women love the gays so much for them.  They talk about clothing style, physical fitness, sensitivity, faithfulness, and fun.

Most heterosexual men's fashion is based on three things: sneakers, wrangler jeans, and a t-shirt.  And while this is fine for us men, women are typically more sophisticated.  They want to be able to talk about their outfits, hair, skin care, etc.  Who is going to provide more to a conversation on hair, a straight guy who puts on a hat until it lies flat, or a gay guy who can compare and contrasts features of different products?

It's harder for women to maintain a set weight for various reasons - partly because their bodies are continuously preparing itself to hold a child each month.  As the article says, " [in] many instances, gay men simply take better care of themselves than we do . . ."  Their gay best friend is, however, someone who will tell them the new ways to lose weight or who will go to the gym with them.

 

The website tells how an article by the National Academy of Sciences in 2008 describes how heterosexual women's brains and homosexual men's brains are similar - making it more likely that their brains function the same way.  This would explain one reason why gay men tend to be more willing to talk about their emotions than we, heterosexual men, are.

 

Faithfulness is yet another quality that women love in their gay men.  They don't have to worry about the man leaving them for another woman.  It removes a deep-seated insecurity.

 

And lastly, gay men are just more fun.  They can comparatively talk about sex with women and give them tips from a guy's perspective on what feels good without being embarrassed.

 

This can all be explained with a simple answer: the psychological need for relatedness.  Gay men can just relate to straight women on levels that straight men cannot.  However, this is NOT an excuse to not try.

 

As my mom always says, "try walking in the other person's shoes for a while."  If we straight men try this, I'm sure we can all relate to females much better and avoid unnecessary arguments - because sleeping on the couch sucks!

 

http://www.askmen.com/dating/curtsmith_300/332b_why-women-love-gay-men.html

Some people in the world around me have had friends of friends, or just friends experience some sort of dating violence recently. For me this is a really touchy subject and something that I care deeply about, and am still trying to learn more about as well. I am Vice-President of the student organization here at UNI called Students Against A Violent Environment (S.A.V.E.) and we strive to educate others on violence, including dating violence. Now, of course when these situations occur I know all the "right" things to say like "You should not stay in this relationship" "You need to leave the home/apartment" "Here are the hotlines you can call for help" "It will happen again" and the list seems to get longer. However, these phrases all seem so empty, since I don't fully understand reasons as to WHY a person would want to stay in an abusive relationship. So, I decided to look this up. I was looking for more research-based evidence, however, every article I wished to look at, the Rod Library did not have access to, and so I became frustrated. So, I went a different route and looked at advocacy websites, and others.  The one website I found to be the most clear is Advocacy Center: Domestic and Dating Violence.

This website not only reassured me that it was alright that I did not understand why a victim stays in an abusive relationship, it also went on to explain some reasons as to why victims stay. Fear is a motivator to stay because victims are so often threatened that they are scared to see what will happen when they do leave. This could not only be fear for themselves, but for others they care about such as children, family, pets, or friends. Victims could have low self-esteem due to various mind games and "put downs" for lack of a better term that would make the victims feel as though the abuse was actually their fault. Financial issues always arise, and the victims may depend on the abuser for income, and if the victim decide to leave, then the victim will fear they will not be able to support themselves. This fear of not being able to leave because of financial reasons escalates when there are children involved. The website makes a point to state that when chidlren are involved in the situation is different from an abusive environment without children.
The website continues to state that victims may believe that if they do what the abuser wants then they will be able to control the situation, or victims even hope the abuser will change themselves. It is also hard when victims do not have the support they need from friends or families, and don't know that help is available.
This website helped me to understand a little more about WHY a person would stay in an abusive relationship. However I would be interested in finding out more scientific based research. For instance, is there biological factor that plays a role, or is it purely psychological? Also, from an advocate standpoint, is their enough news, or advertisement on these issues?


So, being the advocate myself, I will add some links that are available here in our community for anyone who may be in an abusive relationship, or for those of you who may know someone who is and are wanting to help them get some assistance.

Seeds of Hope Iowa
http://www.seedsofhopeiowa.com/

UNI's Violence and Intervention Services
http://www.uni.edu/wellrec/wellness/sexualabuse/

The common stereotype of fraternities and sororities is that they are organizations based purely one common goal, drinking as much as you can. Over years and years of this stereotype being glorified by movies like "Legally Blonde" it has become harder and harder to squash this image. A link on the Greek Life homepage of the Ohio Northern University website has finally started clearing the air and labeling the benefits of Greek life. 

 

In my introduction to psychology class my professor asked if we would be more mad if our boyfriend/girlfriend had a sexual infidelity or an emotional infidelity. By a show of has we were able to see that more men would be upset by a sexual infidelity and more women would be more hurt by an emotional infidelity. Why is this the case? To understand mate selection will provide the answer to this. In the link below I found information regarding the answer to my questions and information about the physical appearance that impact mate selection based on evolutionary psychology ideas.

First-in the physical appearance of mates men tend to prefer younger women because they tend to be more fertile. Men like full lips, breast, and hip and a slim waist because this is the features that represent a woman who has a lot of estrogen in turn making her a good candidate for reproduction. Women are often attracted to men who have a more masculine build; broad shoulders, slim hips, a strong jaw line, clear face, and facial hair. This type of physic represents a man with a lot of testosterone therefore reinforcing that this man will be able to fulfill and provide for the family. The idea of infidelity as mention earlier is based on passing on ones genes. If a women has a sexual infidelity then the many is not 100 percent sure that the child they have together would be genetically his. Where the women in 100 percent sure the child she bears is of her genetics. A woman needs a man who is going to be there emotionally and provide support, energy, resources, and protection for her family. Therefore, a woman is going to be more concerned with an emotional infidelity than a sexual one. The first time I read his is was somewhat surprising to me however, after looking at it from an evolutionary perspective it is easy to see why this is the case.

 

http://www.personalityresearch.org/papers/denisiuk.html

I am taking a class this semester that deals a lot with relationships and how men and women communicate. We recently started talking about the famous "Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus" ideas. This term was coined by author John Gray and Mr. Gray has made a killing through his book and seminars that tell his listeners why their relationship may not be working. I was unfamiliar with the content of these books and was slightly horrified when I learned what they are teaching. Gray outlines ways in which to communicate with a man:
Only speak for two minutes
Speak only about one topic at a time
Provide few, if any, details
Be aware that revealing emotions may cause him to pull away
Appreciate him for listening
No eye contact
Expect interruptions
I was appalled by the way Gray says women should talk to men. It seems that Gray thinks that in order to communicate with a man you should treat him like a five year old. I was very confused by "Be aware of revealing emotions". How are we supposed to get close to anyone without revealing our emotions and thoughts? Another that bothered me was that women are supposed to reward men for listening. Should we reward him with sex just because he listened for two minutes? What kind of message is that sending to men? Do what I want and I'll put out? While sex is a huge motivational tool I do not think it should be used just to get your partner to listen to you. I know a lot of people follow John Gray and really connect with what he is preaching, but I think it is completely bogus.
What do you guys think? Should we use sex in relationships to get what we want? Is sharing emotions bad for your relationship? If a man is aloof and uncommunicative what would be the motivation for fixing a relationship if women just accept that "that's how men are"?

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/08/090824115811.htm

 

 

According to this website, women judge men's faces for attractiveness on two parts: sexually and non-sexually.  

 

The first part determines if you have the characteristics of being a good mate.  They're looking for qualities that will help them determine if you have high levels of androgen (testosterone).  According to evolutionary psychology, this is a highly desirable trait to look for in a partner since testosterone is linked to aggression, which will lead to better protection and more food.  These traits will include strong cheekbones, a square jaw, full lips, and over all proportions of the overall face.

 

The second part is overall attractiveness of the face.  If these proportions of the face are symmetrical or not is one key point in determining the attractiveness.   

 

More on this topic can be seen during a short video on the next link.

 

http://dsc.discovery.com/videos/science-of-sex-appeal-attractive-facial-features.html

 

First of all, I love the discovery channel.

 

The video quickly explains that although as children, we all have very similar faces.  However, because of puberty, our faces will change and become more prominent for the men and finer for the women (generally).  According to the video, a strong does of these hormones will indicate good health and fertility.  Also, by saying that someone is attractive, you're saying that they have good genes and would make a good partner for reproduction.