CDPXXX10.1177/0963721417695559BussSexual Conflict in Human Mating 695559research-article2017 Current Directions in Psychological Science Sexual Conflict in Human Mating 2017, Vol. 26(4) 307 –313 © The Author(s) 2017 Reprints and permissions: sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav DOI:https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721417695559 10.1177/0963721417695559 www.psychologicalscience.org/CDPS David M. Buss University of Texas, Austin Abstract Despite interdependent reproductive fates that favor cooperation, males and females exhibit many psychological and behavioral footprints of sexually antagonistic coevolution. These include strategies of deception, sexual exploitation, and sexual infidelity as well as anti-exploitation defenses such as commitment skepticism and emotions such as sexual regret and jealousy. Sexual conflict pervades the mating arena prior to sexual consummation, after a mating relationship has formed, and in the aftermath of a breakup. It also permeates many other social relationships in forms such as daughter-guarding, conflict in opposite-sex friendships, and workplace sexual harassment. As such, sexual conflict constitutes not a narrow or occasional flashpoint but rather persistent threads that run through our intensely group-living species. Keywords sexual conflict, human mating, sexual exploitation, deception Males and females typically require cooperation to repro- conflicts between different genes located in individual duce successfully. The need for sustained cooperative males and individual females (Chapman, 2014; Parker, coordination between the sexes is especially strong in 2006). They are called interlocus conflicts because they species with prolonged childhood. Extended infancy and typically involve phenotypic characteristics encoded by juvenility render offspring vulnerable to many “hostile different alleles at different loci. This class of sexual forces of nature,” such as starvation, predators, and hostile conflicts comes closest to Parker’s original definition of conspecifics. Mating cooperation protects children from sexual conflict: “a conflict between the evolutionary life-threatening forces. From an evolutionary perspective, interests of individuals of the two sexes” (Parker, 2006, a child represents a mutually produced “vehicle” for both p. 235). Although there are important exceptions, sex- parents, forging a partially shared genetic fate. Interdepen- ual conflicts at the genetic level often reduce to sexual dent reproductive fortunes create selection pressure for conflicts between individual males and individual adaptations for harmonious collaboration and cooperation. females (Chapman, 2014; Shackelford & Goetz, 2012), Psychological adaptations for love and attachment, involv- the primary focus of this paper. ing the heavy commitment of time, psychological resources, From an evolutionary perspective, sexual conflict reproductive resources, and parental investment, represent ultimately stems from the fact that the reproductive hallmarks of cooperation between the sexes (Buss, 2006; interests of individual men and individual women Mikulincer & Shaver, 2007). diverge, sometimes dramatically. Sexual conflict is a Given this cooperative context, it may seem surprising “battleground” that creates a form of selection that has that sexual conflict pervades human mating. Indeed, sex- far-reaching consequences for understanding large ual conflict theory has produced a radical change in think- domains of human social behavior, and mating strate- ing within the framework of modern evolutionary biology, gies most centrally. which had previously conceived of reproduction primarily The most fundamental sexual conflict centers around as a cooperative endeavor (Arnqvist & Rowe, 2013). sex itself. Because of asymmetries in obligatory parental Sexual Conflict Defined Corresponding Author: David M. Buss, Department of Psychology, University of Texas, The form of sexual conflict between males and females Austin, TX 78712 most relevant here is interlocus conflict, which involves E-mail: [email protected] 308 Buss Male optimum Female optimum Battleground of Conflict Time elapsed before seeking intercourse Fig. 1. An example of sexual conflict in which the optimum for time elapsed before sexual inter- course occurs differs for men and women. Recurrent zones of sexual conflict over evolutionary time select for adaptations in each sex to influence the other to be closer to each actor’s optimum. Others examples include amount of investment prior to sex, frequency of sex within a relationship, and amount each invests in offspring. investment inherent in human reproductive biology— When asked whether they had ever exaggerated the the large female investment of nutrient-rich eggs, inter- depth of their feelings for a woman in order to have nal female fertilization, 9-month internal gestation, and sex with her, 71% of men admitted to having done so, postpartum lactation—the costs of making poor sexual compared with only 39% of women asked a parallel decisions are typically higher for women than for men. question (Buss, 2016). When asked whether they had These asymmetries create different optima for males ever discovered that they had been deceived by mem- and female surrounding many aspects of sexuality, as bers of the opposite sex in this manner, parallel sex illustrated in Figure 1. differences emerged, with more women than men A longer female optimum for time elapsed before reporting having been victimized by this tactic. A study consenting to sex allows a wider window for assessing that requested men and women to list all the ways in a potential mate’s intentions, encumbrances, social sta- which they had been deceived by a member of the tus, resources, disease load, parasite load, relationship opposite sex showed similar sex differences (Haselton load, and other components of mate value (Buss, 2016; et al., 2005). More women than men report having been Buss, Goetz, Duntley, Asao, & Conroy-Beam, 2017). misled about the intensity or strength of a potential Access to the valuable reproductive assets females pos- mate’s feelings for them. Given that women look for sess historically has been the major constraint on male emotional involvement as a cue to commitment when reproductive success. seeking a long-term mate, these findings suggest that Sexual conflict can occur at each of three temporal some men deceive women about the sexual strategy phases of the mating process—prior to consummation, they are pursuing. They feign long-term love in order after a mateship has formed, and in the aftermath of a to achieve short-term sexual opportunities. breakup. Conversely, because women hold valuable reproduc- tive resources that men strongly desire, women can Sexual Conflict on the Mating Market deceive men about their willingness to have sex in order to secure nonsexual resources. The key to the Human mating pools typically consist of individuals success of this strategy is sending signals of short-term who differ in mate value as well as individuals who are sexual interest, extracting resources, and then failing pursuing different mating strategies, such as short term to deliver the sexual benefits implied by the signals versus long term (Buss & Schmitt, 1993). Both dimen- (Buss, 2016). In reports of experiences of deception at sions create opportunities for sexual conflict, starting the hands of the opposite sex, men are far more likely with deception about which sexual strategy one is than women to report having been deceived in this pursuing. way—25% of the men but only 4% of the women (Haselton et al., 2005). Sexual deception Women and men also deceive about their mate value, mimicking qualities desired by the other gender. On Deception is a hallmark of conflict. Empirical research Internet dating profiles, for example, women report shows that men and women display predictable pat- being 15 pounds lighter than they are when their weight terns of sexual deception in the form of psychological is measured in the laboratory (e.g., Toma & Hancock, mimicry of cues to commitment and the emotions of 2010). Similarly, men exaggerate their height, rounding love (Buss, 2016; Haselton, Buss, Oubaid, & Angleitner, up by a couple of inches, as well as overstating their 2005; Toma, Hancock, & Ellison, 2008). income. These sex-linked forms of deception correspond Sexual Conflict in Human Mating 309 to sex-differentiated mate preferences found worldwide, Sexual Deception: Female Initiated supporting the hypothesis that mate preferences dictate the domains of intrasexual competition in the other gen- Female Sexual der (Buss, 1989, 1996, 2016). Deception Antideception defenses Decline in Decline in Female Male Emotions such as anger and upset have been hypothe- Fitness Fitness sized to be evolved defenses, for example by deterring or avoiding interference with one’s preferred mating Male Defense Against strategy (Buss, 1989). Women more than men, for exam- Sexual Deception ple, should experience greater anger when psychologi- cally deceived by a potential mate about the depth of Fig. 2. An example of sexually antagonistic coevolution. In this the individual’s feelings in order to achieve short-term example, female initiated deception decreases the reproductive fit- sex. Results from two different cultures, Germany and ness of male victims, favoring selection for male defenses to prevent becoming victims of deception, which in turn favors more refined the United States, support this prediction (Haselton et al., female deceptive strategies.