Tiedettä koteihin

The Matching Hypothesis Reexamined: Murstein and Christy (1976)found a husband-wife correlation of . 60 among couples married for a
number of years, considerably higher than the correlation of . 38 Murstein had earlier found among premarital couples. White (1980) found an intracouple correlation of . 56 for serious daters, as compared with . 18 for casual daters and . 63 for engaged or married couples.

White (1980), in a careful longitudinal study of couples at various stages of commitment to one another, sought to compare equity with marketplace explanations of the matching phenomenon. His conclusion was that the marketplace analogy appears to be more parsimonious; that is, mismatched couples are unlikely, and unstable, because the more attractive person has many alternatives, rather than because the potential couple-mates feel ill at ease over their imbalance.

Mitä suurempi on parin viehättävyysero, sitä epästabiilimpi parisuhteesta tulee.

Effects of Gender and Sexual Orientation on Evolutionarily Relevant Aspects of Human Mating Psychology: Homosexual women were significantly more interested than heterosexual women in visual sexual stimuli and were significantly less concerned with partner's status.

Compared with heterosexual men, homosexual men weighed sexual jealousy relatively less and placed somewhat less emphasis on partner youth.

Homosexual men have more sexual partners than do heterosexual men because of a difference in opportunity rather than a more fundamental psychological difference.

Our homosexual female subjects avoid sex with men for the most part; nevertheless, they do not appear to be any more interested than heterosexual women in casual sex. Nor do homosexual men appear to be any less interested in casual sex than heterosexual men.

The fact that heterosexual and homosexual men were similar constrains possible explanations of the heterosexual sex difference; for instance, it is unlikely to be a byproduct of a social organization in which female beauty has been emphasized more than male beauty. If that were the case, gay men should have been as uninterested as heterosexual women in physical attractiveness of partners, and lesbians should have been as interested as heterosexual men.

Homosexual and heterosexual women's scores differed enough (nearly half the magnitude of the heterosexual sex difference, with lesbians less concerned with partner's attractiveness) that it may not be prudent to treat their nonsignificant difference as trivial.

That homosexual men appeared as interested as heterosexual men in such stimuli argues against an explanation based on the role of women, such as their less powerful social position ( Dworkin, 1981), in causing the heterosexual sex difference.

Unimportance of Partner's Status was also associated with sexual orientation for women but not for men. Heterosexual women were substantially more concerned with partner status than the other three groups, who were all similarly unconcerned.

Heteromiehet preferoivat nuoria parnereita, heteronaiset korkeaa statusta, lesboille partnerin ulkonäkö merkitsee kaikista vähiten (mikä selittää feministilesbojen rumuusstereotypian, jossa ilmeisesti on perää ja tietenkin sen, miksi fab 5 ei koostu 5 lesbosta), naiset eivät ole kovin kiinnostuneita satunnaisseksistä, sekä homo- että heteromiehet arvostavat ulkonäön korkealle, mikä todistaa sellaisia teorioita vastaan, joissa naiskauneuden tärkeyden ajatellaan olevan sosiaalisesti konstruoitua.