Game Theory and Relationships
http://www.slate.com/id/2188684/#add-comment
If you have taken some biology class over the course of your academic career, it is not unreal to come across Darwinian theories about natural choosiness of women. Their natural desire for attractive, sociable and smart men stem from billions of years of evolution according to the theories. However, as much as they are in demand, a supply of attractive men usually runs short very quickly- leaving some women, who believe they are deserving of the best of the best men out there, to protest about how “unattractive” men are in their respective community.
Now, here’s the general situation represented by game theory in this article with a hint of my bias.
Suppose A is a woman generally regarded as attractive by conventional standards (appearance, personality, ETC) and B, not as attractive as A. Here we have a three way network represented as somewhat of an “auction” where 2 women are bidding for one attractive guy. If A decides to bid, B, who knows she can be outbid, will bid even more aggressively while A will be fine with holding out for a better deal. In such case, as long as B sticks with her dominant strategy, to bid, it’s an automatic loss for A. In any case, dominant strategy for A as a “strong bidder” is to just stop bidding and wait for a better deal to come by. Hence, on a long term period, you finally end up with a pool dominated by strong bidders and not so appealing men according to the article’s theory.
Such may be the reason why many females might look at some couples and feel “wow, he can totally do better than that.” However, on a man’s perspective, perhaps the more attractive female was the more comfortable, easier to get along and a decisive one rather than the oh-so-perfect “strong bidder.”