Men have ability to have more babies than women
which means that
- Women go for quality
- Men go for quantity
This is the preference - with monogamy the norm (although I'd actually say it is a quasi-norm because there is an awful lot of cheating), these two things have influence, but are no longer the overall outcome of the mating scene. It's just an inclination that has ramifications.
- They set the standard of the "desirable man"
- The desirable men as a group show what is the kind of woman they prefer
It isn't the men that set the desirable man, exactly... rather it is the traits themselves that make the male desirable to women, as a whole. The man is like a container of 'traits' that women want.
Think of it through an evolutionary lens - the traits that women find desirable lead to that trait being passed more frequently to children, along with the desire of those traits. Likewise, traits that indicate better chance of survival tend to stay around to be noticed/found desirable.
The popular men set the standard for what is desirable woman
- If a man has to "settle for less" than the standard, is he unsuccessful?
- Does the non-dominant male realize his place and "settle for less" automatically?
Generally, speaking, yes. Guys do get rated on their mates a fair bit. However, any male that gets a female is successful, so the standard is a bit different.
Even though males have an over-inflated sense of their mating worth, they do automatically adjust. It comes about naturally - if women think they can do better, they upgrade, leaving the male without a mate. This happens until a female agrees to be with the male.
This also makes sense - a guy gains a lot by being overconfident (ie: it's a mate or lose situation for him!). It signals that he is 'dominant', he is expendable in the large picture, etc. Women, on the other hand, just want to optimize their mate.
Role of a father is also important to consider
- Why would a woman prefer a weaker man?
- Are the non-dominant males doomed to be fathers of the dominant male's children?
Generally, the logic would be that she cannot secure (or does not believe she can secure) a higher value male.
Non-dominant males are not doomed to be fathers of the dominant males... it actually happens the other way around. The ideal strategy for a non-dominant male is to seduce dominant male's mate(s) and have the dominant male use his resources and abilities to raise the child (more successfully than a less dominant male). It also is effective because the female gains multiple genetic sources while preserving her status (and her children's status), and also can secure a second available mate if need be.
Or so the theory goes, heh. Society makes reading our primitive tendencies rather... difficult.
