Towards rethinking the philosophy around relationships, it is plausible to understand the preferences that men and women have over their partners. Psychological debates have indicated the contrast between men and women in determining their inclination to their partners. While men value the physical attributes and attractiveness, women tend to look at the social economic position of their partners.
In view of this, it is important to realize that the basis of attraction between men and women varies along the continuum of socialization, preferences, tastes and values. In light of this, the practical implication of emotional spectrum that shapes the belief around what men and women want in their partners reflects an integration of information and other social principles that guide the decision underlying the romantic escapades of men and women (Berscheid and Reis, 1998).
The sex differences around the gender construction play leading roles in the choice and determination of romantic relation. It emerges that women prefers men who epitomize a sense of intelligence, and success to symbolically reflect a promise of security when considering long term relationship. Comparatively, it emerges that the likelihood of men being inclined to social economic status is low based on the understanding that men prefers their potential partners to manifest values of likeability, beauty and faithfulness. It is on this pedestal that the magnet of romantic contact is activated (Berscheid and Reis, 1998).
Towards demonstrating the how security levels affect the dynamism in the choice of partners, Berscheid and Reis (2008) indicate that the availability and ability of the partners to mutually meet the needs of the partners scores highly in the choice spectrum influencing the responsive design that satisfy the choice of relationship dynamics.
In view of this, the desirability of the potential partner increased based on the perceptual ability of the partner to meet the need of their counterpart. As a result, constructive strategic approach in necessary in gaining mutual support, communication and emotional expression as key components in determining the quality and satisfaction of the relationship (Klohnen and Luo, 2003). This philosophy explains why the choice of a partner is as a result of conflict, alienation and fulfillment based on the attachment dynamics of the characteristics, and actions of the prospective partner and relationship as a whole.
Male selection preferences is primarily guided and motivated by the physical complexion. This demonstrates the findings of Klohnen and Luo (2003) that characterize the female selection criteria anchored on power spectrum. From the principles of attachment theory, it is evident that the importance of physical attractiveness is not only significant among men but also linked to a wide range of positive attribute that depicts women. Research indicate that the personal physical features of a woman predict the kind of men they will attract hence enhancing the ability to conclude that men are more likely to choose romantic partners guided by the physical beauty as opposed to the psychological attributes.
Comparatively, the predictability of romantic partners is epitomized by the personality test among women. This embodies the thinking that the frameworks of personality phycology importantly determine the spirit of romance that indicate the expectations of women in choosing their long term romantic attraction as well as satisfaction. From the understanding of Berscheid and Reis (1998), the psychological and personal qualities of a man play a critical role in the choice of romantic compatibilities.
The attention of psychology and biology in the complexity of the choice of romantic partners underscores the predictable factors that underlie love match. Personality theory illustrates a useful perspective in supporting the relationship between factors of personality vis a vis perceived attractiveness within the social context as well as attachment style. Plausible enough, it emerges that the compatibility of men and women is determined by a host of demographic factors, social cultural values and personal preferences.
A number of studies have addressed the question of partner selection within the foundation of attachment. The functional basis of child-caregiver relationship is anchored on the fulfilment of expectation. From the naturalistic philosophy, the indicative behavior that distinguish the attachment style of men and women formulate a protect regulation behavior.
According to Klohnen and Luo (2003), the cross cultural foundation of partner selection is fostered by the need of security. Men seeking relationship partners identify responsive qualities of pride and care such as warmth, attractiveness and sensitivity. On the other hand, women are induced by a preference to security attachment figure to secure qualities of attentiveness, power and warmth (Berscheid and Reis, 1998). Empirical evidence shows that both men and women end up in romantic relationship with partners who widely confront to a spectrum of set belief about fulfilment of attachment needs.
Men want self-sufficiency, security and confidence in women. This is hinged on the principle of psychological theory of human motivation for the satisfaction of human needs. It is on the platform that men agreed to choose women out of need in respect to emotions and materials. To illustrate, the reflection that men need to be wanted by their partners based on the identity issues so as to fulfil the question of active and independent fulfillment of interests (Klohnen and Luo, 2003).
On the other hand, women are inclined too men based on the desire for love, recognition and trust. This is informed by the foundation that women think of men as agents of security and must harbor the ability to express appreciation by spending considerable time with them. As a result, the belief that women are attracted to the future attraction potential is a possible reason why they prefer power spectrum as opposed to physical attraction.
According to the theory of parental investment, the tenant of reproduction portends a much more costly proposition to explaining what women needs in partners. The underlying reason is constructed from the understanding that the ability of a man to contribute to the joys and happiness of a women manifest a selective platform that determines their choice of partners (Berscheid and Reis, 1998). With regard to this, it is evident that the environmental perspective constitute a leading insight into the survival aims and motivation for a woman preference designs.
The shifting trajectory in the woman’s preference of a mate is informed by the evolutionary perspective where the levels of fertility and the desire for socially and masculine dominate men plays a critical role in their choice process (Klohnen and Luo, 2003). Such foundation is illustrated by the difference in masculine and feminine personality constellation that touch of the principles of Machiavellianism as well as psychopathy.
The scientific thinking around the subject portrays a claim that the tendencies of behavior, personality features and physical characteristics promote the collective and generalized approaches that determine the choice differences. Such foundations promote the chances of survival for both men and women in choosing their partners by virtue of desirability.
The anatomical and biological differences between men and women dictate the optimal spectrum of choice solutions. In essences, the evolutionary perspectives predict the need for help and protection during periods of vulnerability, making it sensible for attractiveness. Matters of long term relationship lead women to overemphasis on the parameters of social status while men on attractiveness (Berscheid and Reis, 1998).
The basis of social role theory postulates a different line of thinking where argument around the social and biological process dictate the sociological and emotional choices. With regard to this, it emerge that the rule of partner selection is informed by the roles that men and women occupy in the society. As a result, Klohnen and Luo (2003) underscore that the preference of both men and women within the context of searching for a partner are dynamic shifting in accordance with the social role changes and norm shifting.
Success and satisfaction in given choices in relationship partners is partially a factor of patterns of attachment and the involved individuals. Klohnen and Luo (2003) note that while the social dimensions of both men and women have bordered on promoting the relationship wellbeing of their partner’s expectations, the portrayal of positive emotions, commitments and other social shifts adjust the objectives and management of romantic relationships. Psychological debates have indicated the contrast between men and women in determining their inclination to their partners. Such foundations promote the chances of survival for both men and women in choosing their partners by virtue of desirability.
The anatomical and biological differences between men and women dictate the optimal spectrum of choice solutions. In essences, the evolutionary perspectives predict the need for help and protection during periods of vulnerability, making it sensible for attractiveness. Towards demonstrating the how security levels affect the dynamism in the choice of partners, the availability and ability of the partners to mutually meet the needs of the partners scores highly in the choice spectrum influencing the responsive design that satisfy the choice of relationship dynamics. In view of this, the desirability of the potential partner increased based on the perceptual ability of the partner to meet the need of their counterpart.
The scientific thinking around the subject portrays a claim that the tendencies of behavior, personality features and physical characteristics promote the collective and generalized approaches that determine the choice differences. While men value the physical attributes and attractiveness, women tend to look at the social economic position of their partners. In view of this, it is important to release that the basis of attraction between men and women varies along the continuum of socialization, preferences, tastes and values.
As a result, constructive strategic approach in necessary in gaining mutual support, communication and emotional expression as key components in determining the quality and satisfaction of the relationship. This philosophy explains why the choice of a partner is as a result of conflict, alienation and fulfillment based on the attachment dynamics of the characteristics, and actions of the prospective partner and relationship as a whole.
References
Berscheid, E., & Reis, H.T. (1998). Attraction and close relationships. In D.T. Gilbert, S.T. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (4th ed., Vol. 2, pp. 193-281). New York: Mc- Graw-Hill.
Klohnen, E.C. and Luo, S. (2003) Interpersonal attraction and personality: what is attractive - self-similarity, ideal similarity, complementarity or attachment security? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 709-722
