> But betting on a rich mate is a pretty good bet that teens make.
I would be interested to hear how you reason to that conclusion. I ask because there are a number of ways where my experience differs (and granted this comes from going to USC in Los Angeles for my BS degree, and that school has a reputation for having a lot of 'rich teens') My experience there was that the more money a person had the less 'functional' they seemed to be. At the time I attributed it to their having so many things done for them that they didn't have to develop the skills to do things on their own. But it wasn't a scientific study at all, just the experience of growing up with a cohort of similarly aged people over 5 years.
Of course it might depend on the definition of fitness. It was certainly true that the wealthier teens had more opportunities to create offspring than I did :-) By the measure of their gene pool was more likely to continue I could agree.
>Of course it might depend on the definition of fitness. It was certainly true that
>the wealthier teens had more opportunities to create offspring than I did
As far as mating fitness, that's actually all that matters. The weight of millions of years of biology are behind that drive. The fact that modern society has abstracted "success" to so many other things is a recent novelty.
Of course it might depend on the definition of fitness. It was certainly true that the wealthier teens had more opportunities to create offspring than I did :-) By the measure of their gene pool was more likely to continue I could agree.