Re: Why Are Courting Signals Ambiguous?

[Edward Dodson]

Ed Dodson responding..

Francois-Rene Rideau wrote:

> On Wed, Nov 29, 2000 at 07:59:35AM -0700, Chris Rasch wrote:
> > I think that one purpose flirting serves is to separate the verbally fluent,
> > socially adept males from their clumsier brethren.  Verbally fluent,
> > socially adept males are more likely to succeed at [...]
> Yes, but this skill is only interesting to the female if she can
> assume it will be used for her (and her offspring's) benefit rather
> than detriment. Thus, whatever criteria will be used must be more complex.
>

Ed Dodson here:
I wonder whether observation of women who are highly educated, engaged in some
type of professional work and essentially economically self-sufficient would yield
results unique to women with this set of "assets." Flirtation may be consciously
avoided as a non-productive use of time. College students, on the other hand, are
more likely to be in receptive to non-productive uses of time, so that flirtations
that result in casual physical relationships -- with minimal emotional demands --
fulfill their particular needs at that particular time in life.



begin:vcard 
n:Dodson;Edward
tel;fax:215-575-1718
tel;home:856-428-3472
tel;work:215-575-1819
x-mozilla-html:TRUE
org:Fannie Mae;Housing and Community Development, Northeast Regional Office (NERO)
version:2.1
email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
title:Senior Affordable Housing Business Manager
note:If you need to reach me during non-business hours, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
adr;quoted-printable:;;1900 Market Street=0D=0ASuite 800;Philadelphia;PA;19103;U.S.A.
fn:Edward J. Dodson
end:vcard

Re: Why Are Courting Signals Ambiguous?

[Francois-Rene Rideau]

On Wed, Nov 29, 2000 at 07:59:35AM -0700, Chris Rasch wrote:
> I think that one purpose flirting serves is to separate the verbally fluent,
> socially adept males from their clumsier brethren.  Verbally fluent,
> socially adept males are more likely to succeed at [...]
Yes, but this skill is only interesting to the female if she can
assume it will be used for her (and her offspring's) benefit rather
than detriment. Thus, whatever criteria will be used must be more complex.

[ François-René ÐVB Rideau | Reflection&Cybernethics | http://fare.tunes.org ]
[  TUNES project for a Free Reflective Computing System  | http://tunes.org  ]
 "Transported to a surreal landscape, a young girl kills the first woman
 she meets and then teams up with three complete strangers to kill again."
   - TV listing for the Wizard of Oz in the Marin Independent Journal

Re: Why Are Courting Signals Ambiguous?

[Robin Hanson]

David Friedman wrote:
>Consider a female looking for a mate. ... she doesn't know who the best 
>male is until she knows what her options are, ... So one might expect a 
>complicated process of each side signalling a possible interest, everyone 
>revising estimates, another clearer set of signals, ...  There is probably 
>a better method with modern technology and ingenuity, but not one 
>available to hunter gatherers.

Yes we would expect a lot of fluctuations in expressions of degrees of
interest because of this.  But if we compare flirting to job hunting, for
example, it sure seems to me that mating signals are more ambiguous that
can be explained by this alone.  Job matching also requires fluctuations
in interest expressed, but seems far less ambiguous.




Robin Hanson  [EMAIL PROTECTED]  http://hanson.gmu.edu
Asst. Prof. Economics, George Mason University
MSN 1D3, Carow Hall, Fairfax VA 22030-
703-993-2326  FAX: 703-993-2323

Re: Why Are Courting Signals Ambiguous?

[Chris Rasch]

I agree with Bill that people flirt because it's "fun"--but I agree with Robin, that 
the reason that people find flirting "fun" is because it is an aid to finding high 
quality mates.

>From what I've read, for the most part, women drive the courship process (1).  Both 
>male and females seek the highest quality mates they can get.(2)  Women however, 
>invest much more in their offspring  than men do, so they have a much greater 
>incentive to be picky about their mates.  I think that one purpose flirting serves is 
>to separate the verbally fluent, socially adept males from their clumsier brethren.  
>Verbally fluent, socially adept males are more likely to succeed at forming 
>alliances, avoiding punishment, and
otherwise moving up the local hierarchy, thereby securing more food, money, etc. for 
the female's offspring.  Ambiguity also allows the female to test the male with less 
risk of direct conflict if she chooses not to go any further in the relationship.


(1) http://socpsych.lacollege.edu/flirting.html (Lay article from American Airlines 
magazine about flirting research conducted by Dr. Marianne Moore in singles bars)

(2) I found David Buss's arguments about the evolutionary origins of human desire to 
be quite compelling.  I highly recommend his book  _Evolution of Desire_  You can read 
an interview with him at: http://www.clark.net/pub/ogas/evolution/INTERVIEW_buss.htm 
(Interview with David M. Buss, author of Evolution of Desire)  See also this Edge 
interview with Geoffrey Milller:  http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/miller/index.html

Chris

Re: Why Are Courting Signals Ambiguous?

[Edward Dodson]

Ed Dodson responding...

William Dickens wrote:

> I also think there are sex differences on this one. I suspect more women than men 
>enjoy flirting and that more men than women view it as purely instrumental. I'm 
>certainly willing to buy evolutionary explanations for that. -- Bill Dickens
>

Ed Dodson here:
An interesting discussion, on a subject over which years of experience confirm my own 
incompetence. I do wonder how great the gender differences are (i.e., what is a "norm" 
where gender and flirtation is concerned?). Many people are rather shy and flirtation 
is uncomfortable. It seems to me that commitment to a monogomous relationship greatly 
restricts the way we interact with others to whom we are sexually attracted. Absent 
such a commitment flirtation opens the door to exploration of whether there is a 
mutual attraction
and what that attraction might lead to.



begin:vcard 
n:Dodson;Edward
tel;fax:215-575-1718
tel;home:856-428-3472
tel;work:215-575-1819
x-mozilla-html:TRUE
org:Fannie Mae;Housing and Community Development, Northeast Regional Office (NERO)
version:2.1
email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
title:Senior Affordable Housing Business Manager
note:If you need to reach me during non-business hours, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
adr;quoted-printable:;;1900 Market Street=0D=0ASuite 800;Philadelphia;PA;19103;U.S.A.
fn:Edward J. Dodson
end:vcard

Re: Why Are Courting Signals Ambiguous?

[William Dickens]

I wrote:
>> it is 
>>pursued for the fun of it and not exclusively as a means to an end. ...

Robin wrote:
>>OK, but the urge to do certain things "for fun" likely evolved for
>>instrumental reasons.  I tend to take an evolutionary psychology perspective,
>>which insists that most behavior is instrumental at some level.  Young animals
>>"play" in ways that seem instrumental practice at skills that will be
>>required as adults, such as chasing, hiding, etc.  Similarly much of the play
>>of young humans can be understood as practicing for adult roles.

I'll grant that flirting can have instrumental value as practice even if you aren't 
currently in the market for a mate, but the question was "Why are courting signals 
ambiguous?" My response was (in part) aesthetics. Now if you want to propose an 
evolutionary theory of aesthetics I think you have your hands full (if it hasn't 
already been done it would be interesting to take a crack at it), but I think most of 
the answer to the original question would have to come through that channel rather 
than any instrumental reason. 

I also think there are sex differences on this one. I suspect more women than men 
enjoy flirting and that more men than women view it as purely instrumental. I'm 
certainly willing to buy evolutionary explanations for that. -- Bill Dickens


William T. Dickens
The Brookings Institution
1775 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20036
Phone: (202) 797-6113
FAX: (202) 797-6181
E-MAIL: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
AOL IM: wtdickens

Re: Why Are Courting Signals Ambiguous?

[david friedman]

Speaking of evolutionary psychology ...  .

Consider a female looking for a mate. She wants the best male who 
will agree to be her mate. Males similarly want the best female. But 
she doesn't know who the best male is until she knows what her 
options are, and a male doesn't know if he is an option for her until 
he knows whether he has a more attractive alternative. So one might 
expect a complicated process of each side signalling a possible 
interest, everyone revising estimates, another clearer set of 
signals, ...  . There is probably a better method with modern 
technology and ingenuity, but not one available to hunter gatherers.

Consider a mated female looking for a partner superior to her mate to 
have adulterous sex with. She can't do it openly because her mate 
will stop her. So she has to coordinate with possible partners in 
subtle ways.
-- 
David Friedman
Professor of Law
Santa Clara University
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.daviddfriedman.com/

Re: Why Are Courting Signals Ambiguous?

[Robin Hanson]

William T. Dickens wrote:
>So far everyone's response ... has assumed that flirting is entirely 
>instrumental. ... there is another explanation as well ... I see a lot of 
>people flirting who have absolutely no intention of mating. ... they are 
>just playing a game. Why would they do this if it wasn't fun?  ... a lot 
>of flirting is like dancing (which is itself a form of courtship) -- it is 
>pursued for the fun of it and not exclusively as a means to an end. ...

OK, but the urge to do certain things "for fun" likely evolved for
instrumental reasons.  I tend to take an evolutionary psychology perspective,
which insists that most behavior is instrumental at some level.  Young animals
"play" in ways that seem instrumental practice at skills that will be
required as adults, such as chasing, hiding, etc.  Similarly much of the play
of young humans can be understood as practicing for adult roles.

Presumably people who have no intention of mating at the moment can still
have an instrumental reason to stay in practice and watch out for new
possibilities.  And even if their conscious reason for doing such things
is just "for fun", we can still understand such behavior as instrumental,
in the sense of seeing the evolutionary function served by having genes
that code for such ideas of fun.



Robin Hanson  [EMAIL PROTECTED]  http://hanson.gmu.edu
Asst. Prof. Economics, George Mason University
MSN 1D3, Carow Hall, Fairfax VA 22030-
703-993-2326  FAX: 703-993-2323

Re: Why Are Courting Signals Ambiguous?

[William Dickens]

So far everyone's response to Robin's very interesting question has assumed that 
flirting is entirely instrumental. Although I have no doubt that nearly every 
explanation for subtlety and ambiguity that has been proposed is correct to some 
degree I think there is another explanation as well and I suspect it is the most 
important. First let me introduce the observation that I see a lot of people flirting 
who have absolutely no intention of mating. I know lots of men and women who flirt in 
their relationships with each other where both have an understanding that they are 
just playing a game. Why would they do this if it wasn't fun? I strongly suspect that 
a lot of flirting is like dancing (which is itself a form of courtship) -- it is 
pursued for the fun of it and not exclusively as a means to an end. If I'm right then 
the question of why it is subtle and ambiguous has an obvious answer. Dancers don't 
try to get from one side of the floor to the other as fast as they can with th!
e minimum of effort. People who are flirting don't always want to get into bed as 
quickly as they possibly can for very similar reasons. Subtlety (which I think 
necessitates ambiguity) is normally part of the aesthetic.
-- Bill Dickens

William T. Dickens
The Brookings Institution
1775 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20036
Phone: (202) 797-6113
FAX: (202) 797-6181
E-MAIL: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
AOL IM: wtdickens

Re: Why Are Courting Signals Ambiguous?

[Chris Auld]

The explanation below assumes that all women know what they're looking
for whereas no men know what women are looking for.  Which isn't plaus...
h, wait, forget that remark.

I think we could differentiate between flirting as a way of garnering
information v flirting as a way of mitigating, as David says, the damage
caused by rejected advances by the pattern of flirting.  In places where
relative strangers mingle (singles bars, say), I think the flirtation
tends to border on direct propositioning.  But where friends or co-workers
interact, flirting is much more subtle.  The latter type of environment is
the one in which garnering information about potential mates is relatively
unimportant (you already know them) whereas in the former information is
scant, so if flirting were mostly a way of signalling personal 
characteristics we'd expect to see pattern reversed.  This supports
David's variant on Robin's theme 1.


Chris Auld  (403)220-4098
Economics, University of Calgary
Calgary, Alberta, Canadahttp://jerry.ss.ucalgary.ca/>

On Mon, 27 Nov 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> 
> Robin Hanson's post was very interesting.  I have wondered that ambiguous 
> signals might play another role.
> 
> Suppose all women like men who wear red ties because those men, for some 
> reason, are nicer or richer than others. Assume that this is the only way 
> women can tell the nice guys from the jerks(the men who are not nice). So 
> women would avoid men who don't wear red ties.  But if women told men that 
> they like men who wear red ties, then the jerks(the men who are not nice) 
> could wear red ties.  If all men wore red ties, then women could not tell 
> which guys were really nice.  So you might not want to give away what signals 
> you are looking for or what they mean.  In your mating, dating, flirting 
> activity you wuold not come right out and say what you are looking for.
> 
> Cyril Morong
> San Antonio College
> 

Re: Why Are Courting Signals Ambiguous?

[Alexander Robert William Robson]

Robsin Hanson wrote:

People are usually not very direct when flirting,  courting, etc.
For example, people usually do not just say "Do you want to have sex?".

One reason could be that some groups of individuals, by virtue of their
natural (or artificial!) physical or other attributes, and by virtue of
the way human tastes have evolved, might have some kind of market
power with respect to the ability to withhold sex from the other.

So a member of one of these groups who simply asks "do you want to have
sex?" is effectively engaging in price undercutting, and
is breaking the implicit (or explicit) collusive agreement that exists
between members of this group.  Such an individual, who lowers the price
in such an obvious way, raises the risk of social stigmatization by other
members of the group and may even be banished from the group, thereby
losing the privileges of being a cartel member.

Therefore members of the cartel have an interest in giving out ambiguous
signals which, on the one hand, say  "I'm interested in having sex with
you" to potential mates, but which, on the other hand cannot be detected
or easily interpreted by fellow cartel members.  I guess this is kind of
a Green-Porter theory of ambiguity in mating and dating.

Alex Robson

Re: Why Are Courting Signals Ambiguous?

[david friedman]

Variants of your option 1: People want to be able to find out if the 
other party is interested without committing themselves, for two 
reasons:

a. The status of "rejected suitor" is different from, and to some 
degree incompatible with, the status of friend--and they want to 
preserve the latter option as long as possible.

b. Rejection hurts.
-- 
David Friedman
Professor of Law
Santa Clara University
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.daviddfriedman.com/

Re: Why Are Courting Signals Ambiguous?

[CyrilMorong]

Robin Hanson's post was very interesting.  I have wondered that ambiguous 
signals might play another role.

Suppose all women like men who wear red ties because those men, for some 
reason, are nicer or richer than others. Assume that this is the only way 
women can tell the nice guys from the jerks(the men who are not nice). So 
women would avoid men who don't wear red ties.  But if women told men that 
they like men who wear red ties, then the jerks(the men who are not nice) 
could wear red ties.  If all men wore red ties, then women could not tell 
which guys were really nice.  So you might not want to give away what signals 
you are looking for or what they mean.  In your mating, dating, flirting 
activity you wuold not come right out and say what you are looking for.

Cyril Morong
San Antonio College

Why Are Courting Signals Ambiguous?

[Robin Hanson]

People are usually not very direct when flirting, courting, etc.
For example, people usually do not just say "Do you want to have sex?".
Instead flirting and courting tend to be extremely complex processes
involving much ambiguity, subtle error-prone interpretation, and
complex analysis.

It is interesting to make up armchair explanations for this ambiguity.
1) Plausible Deniability - people want to flirt without being caught
flirting, or without clear evidence that can be reported to third
parties.  This attached people to consider "cheating," and unattached
people to not look "desperate."
2) Social Ability Sorting - Ambiguity allows shoppers to sort for
people with the cognitive and social skills to read subtle signals
correctly.  Such skills come from innate ability, and from more
successful experience in flirting/courting/mating.
3) Confidence Sorting - Ambiguity creates a cost of misjudging interest.
This cost is lower for those who are more confident that others
will be interested in them.  Such people are more likely to play.
4) Cost Sorting - Ambiguity makes courting take longer, a cost which
might be larger for the attached and the poor, who are less desired.


Robin Hanson  [EMAIL PROTECTED]  http://hanson.gmu.edu
Asst. Prof. Economics, George Mason University
MSN 1D3, Carow Hall, Fairfax VA 22030-
703-993-2326  FAX: 703-993-2323