Comments on: Kids, Parents Disagree on Spouses

By: michaela_wiley

michaela_wiley — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 19:43:27 +0000

I have dated the same man for 5 and half years and his parents can not stand me even made it clear they will disown him if he married me my daughter who is now 10 does not have a opinion and I love him with everything I am but he keeps pulling back. I am 33 and white he is 37 and black I am a CNA at a nursing home he is a assistant Dean at a private college. What do I do?

By: Recovering irrationalist

Recovering irrationalist — Sat, 19 Apr 2008 12:10:36 +0000

Sorry I'm late, just caught up on backposts after moving cities.

but the size of the conflict seems surprisingly large - do parent and kid genetic interests really diverge that much?

While I question the study's value as evidence for it, I'd expect that conclusion. As a hunter-gatherer teenager's "choice" of mate is influenced by preferences of both parent and kid (though the balance varies), it makes sense that those preferences would diverge significantly more than would be best for the genes of the parent or kid if the choice of mate was made just on the preference that parent or kid. A gene that would lead the kid to choose the best mate if it's parent's influence was not a factor will be out-replicated by a gene that instead counterbalances the preferences of the parent relative to it's own best interests. Cue the arms race.

By: b.

b. — Fri, 18 Apr 2008 15:15:37 +0000

How about the idea of complimentary coevolution such that parents’ preferences only kick in to modify outcomes if those preferences lead to better fitness? Something like…

IF: environment is such that socio-cultural factors are very important

THEN: parental influence over mate choice is likely to be relatively strong due to these factors, and such influence would lead to the higher probability of a mate with higher social quality, which is beneficial for that given environment.

ELSE: parental influence is less, the child’s preferences dominate and individual genetic fitness (discounting social quality) is more heavily weighted in the mate selection process, social quality being less important for this environment.

By: Barkley Rosser

Barkley Rosser — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 23:47:37 +0000

Well, the evolutionary argument is exogamy versus endogamy, with some amount of the former
clearly having evolutionary advantages. Now, why it is the young who currently seem to
favor exogamy over endogamy is not entirely clear, but it may be a matter of people becoming
somewhat more ethnocentric and racist as they age, along with them worrying about the broader
social aspects of fitting in with the extended family and “will we get along with the in-laws
at the wedding” and other such tripe. Thus, they may end up being the relative advocates of
more endogamy as it were.

By: TGGP

TGGP — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 23:18:53 +0000

No mention of Robin Trivers yet?

By: Maggie's Farm

Maggie's Farm — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 21:55:59 +0000

Love, marriage, and kids

Staying in the dating game.Parents often disagree with kids’ choices of spouse (oh, really?)Do people really like having kids?The breakdown of marriage costs the taxpayers $112 billion/year. JulesWell, I guess there’s always gay marriage as an alternative

By: Peter St. Onge

Peter St. Onge — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 20:48:27 +0000

Could this be seen as an agency problem, as opposed to differential genetic motivation? It seems reasonable that a spouse gains utility from the attractiveness and intelligence or cleverness of their partner, while a parent is indifferent. Anecdotally, some variant of parent-child conflict over the attractive but poor poet seems a recurring theme in fiction.

By: Psychohistorian

Psychohistorian — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 20:25:39 +0000

The EvPsych explanation really does seem like a reach, even ignoring the experimental design flaws. The preference of kids makes plenty of sense. The preference of parents seems to be entirely pragmatic – if I marry some fat, ugly, bad-smelling person, it only affects my parents the few times a year they see me. If I marry someone of a different race or religion, then it might affect my parents socially (it wouldn’t in reality, but it might for a hypothetical person). That seems like a cleaner explanation.

It’s also interesting to note that the study doesn’t seem to measure how much people care, but only how much they care in relation to their parents. Thus, if I don’t care about something, but I know my parents totally don’t care about it, it ends up way on the left side of the scale.

By: Constant

Constant — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 20:10:39 +0000

Considered as a study about actual choices, it’s not even worth speculating about the results of the study given how badly designed it was (i.e. getting the parents’ alleged opinions second hand). But above that, even asking the kids themselves what they would choose is not especially useful. The sizable difference between what people say about how they would choose, and how they actually choose, is sufficiently notorious to be a cliche.

However, considered as a study about what people will say about themselves and others, it’s not all that bad, though admittedly it should ideally be contrasted with a study about the reality that they are talking about. I hypothesize that the kids will greatly exaggerate the political correctness of their own choices, and they will greatly exaggerate the political incorrectness of their parents’ choices. The actual results are consistent with this hypothesis.

By: Patri Friedman

Patri Friedman — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 19:39:22 +0000

“Parents and offspring … genetic self-interests, while overlapping, are not identical. The reason young people care so much about intellectual and physical attractiveness, the scientists suggested, is that these characteristics are markers of genetic fitness. By contrast, they said, parents care about group affiliations because parents are primarily interested in whether an incoming member of the family is likely to make a good parent — and a good all-around team player.”

This is completely bogus. Yes, parent and offspring genetic interest differ – because offspring have a closer genetic tie to their kids than their parents do to the grandkids. But to go from there to saying that kids care about genetic fitness but parents don’t is just ridiculous. Parents genetic self-interest means they care about the genetic fitness of their kids mates. If “good parent” and “all-around team player” are part of “genetic fitness”, then the kids should care too. If they aren’t, then the parents shouldn’t care very much.

The difference is interesting, and there may well be an EvBio explanation for it, but this explanation is clearly not it.