Intelligent People are More Likely to be Faithful

tumblr_ndtbpw3dod1sbub06o1_500

In the early months of 2010, websites boomed with the headlines that claimed that intelligent men are less likely to cheat because something in the biological make up that makes them less susceptible to their animalistic urges of reproduction.

Dr. Satoshi Kanzawa of the London School of Economics and Political Science is the major proponent in this study. According to the Theory of Evolution by Charles Darwin, men are biologically predisposed to cheat because a species in which it values procreation leading to the conclusion that they have an evolutionary advantage.

Kanzawa has argued that sexual exclusivity is an “evolutionary model” quality that would have been of little benefit to early man, who was programmed to be promiscuous. He says that as species in which we are capable of adapting to our surroundings, we left behind our ancestral programming to adapt to something socially advantageous in the present day.

However, skeptics have questioned the validity of the study. Marty Babits, a clinical social worker and the author of “The Power of the Middle Ground: A Couple’s Guide to Renewing Your Relations”, said that “the kinds of factors that cause people to value or devalue a relationship stem from deep-rooted psychological issues that generally have nothing to do with intelligence.” He claimed that they have more to do with the trust factor between the couple.

Personally speaking, I think the topic had been sensationalized so much that it has blown out of proportion. The study doesn’t even say anything about intelligent women. So does that mean that intelligent women get a premium? I do concede that monogamy may be an evolutionary trait of the human now, but it’s arguable that intelligent men are less likely to cheat for this reason alone.

A few months after his study was published, however, Kanzawa explained his findings by publishing another article, agreeing that his study has indeed been sensationalized and taken in a different and more skewed light. He claims that there are more factors that affect the infidelity of man and women don’t get any premium when it comes to the matter of sex and fidelity. In fact, he argues that it’s the women whom initiate the first stages of mating, an invitation to the already willing male. Meaning, it’s the women who has the say whether or not the intercourse happens.

I can also link a psychological phenomenon with this experiment. While it is true that sex happens whenever women want it, the urges are stronger in the side of the males. They have the stronger urge to propagate then the female’s urges. But since they have the better capability to produce the needed cells for procreation, they become emotionally hardwired to do just that.

Which is why the man of today are required to develop their own mechanisms of self-restraint, self0denial, and a facility that would cater to delayed gratification – something that would be a pillar for monogamy.

But what if the bonds have been broken and the instincts are free? Males generally have two choices: continuing practicing self-control, or run wild and satisfy the narrative of their so-called delayed gratification. The ideal end goal? They would eventually satisfy their libido and settle down sometime in the near future. The worst case scenario? They turn hedonistic, in a sense.

Emperors and despots may be best known for this kind of behaviour. The 18th century Moroccan ruler Moulay Ismali is said to have fathered 888 children with his 500 concubines. But out of every ruler out there, I think Ghengis Khan takes the cake. A 2003 analysis of the Y chromosome of 2 123 men now living across the former Mongol empire showed that there are 16 million males living today whose line stretches back to the great conqueror, or one out of every 200 males now on the planet.

In the context of today, we are no better than Khan or Ismali. Politicians such as JFK, FDR, Schwarzenegger, and other prolific people such as Donal Trump and Tiger Woods have been in the tabloids for years because of their high-profile scandals.

The reason? Powerful men are more likely to cheat, says the Caligula Effect.

“The likelihood [of infidelity] increases the more powerful someone is” says study author Joris Lammers, an assistant professor of psychology at Tilburg University in the Netherlands. The research was published in Psychological Science.

What do you think? Is there a correlation between power and intelligence when it comes to the fidelity of man? What about women? Just because they have the main dictates as to when the intercourse happen, does it mean they have some sort of premium? Take note that women also produce testosterone – albeit in different levels. And with that being said, does the Caligula effect happen in both genders? I’d love to hear from you!

 

References:

 

 

Leave your vote

0 points
Upvote Downvote

Total votes: 0

Upvotes: 0

Upvotes percentage: 0.000000%

Downvotes: 0

Downvotes percentage: 0.000000%

Related Articles

Responses

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Psych2Go

Hey there!

Forgot password?

Forgot your password?

Enter your account data and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Close
of

Processing files…