Schedules of Mating

Rollo Tomassi's theory of how, in his view, evolutionary pressures shape women's mating choices, and what that means for men. It's one of the core ideas of Red Pill theory.

The starting point

For a species to survive, offspring need the best possible start.
Women, who invest far more in each child, act as the filters of reproduction: looking for the best genes they can attract and a partner who will invest long-term.
Men's broad strategy is less selective: spreading their genes widely. Hormones reflect this; men have many times more testosterone, while women produce more oestrogen and oxytocin, linked with caution and bonding.
These strategies conflict. For her strategy to work, he has to give up his, so he naturally wants assurance that she's the right partner and that he's investing in his own children. (Tomassi cites research suggesting fathers can spot their own children in a crowd remarkably quickly.)

Good genes vs good dad

The qualities that make a man an exciting, attractive partner (risk-taking, physical presence, dominance) and the qualities that make a reliable long-term provider rarely come in the same man. This is the "jerk vs nice guy" paradox on an evolutionary scale. Add that women's window of peak fertility is relatively short, and the theory says women develop two schedules:

Short-term: attraction to the "good genes" man.
Long-term: commitment with the "good dad" man.

Social conventions

Tomassi argues society evolved norms that favour this strategy: women's "prerogative to change her mind", men being held to "do the right thing", players and absent fathers cast as villains, and men who raise other men's children cast as heroes. He also links "let's just be friends" rejections and marriage itself to this dynamic.

"Cheating"

Reactive: a woman already with a long-term partner has an affair with a "good genes" man.
Proactive: a woman has children with a "good genes" man, the relationship ends, and she later finds a "good dad" to help raise them.

Tomassi stresses that most women aren't consciously planning any of this. He sees it as an unconscious influence that people justify after the fact.

The man's position

He argues a man who commits to raising another man's children gives time, money and effort that could go toward his own family, often in exchange for less desire than the earlier partner got. Many men sense something is off without being able to name it; some avoid single mothers for this reason. He concludes that women are ultimately responsible for whom they choose to have children with, and that men who reward poor choices reinforce the cycle.

The starting point

Good genes vs good dad

Social conventions

"Cheating"

The man's position

See also