Oprah and John Tesh, an unlikely couple. Find out why with the science of attraction
Would you do this guy?
According to the release of an Oprah biography yesterday, the Queen of Talk, and the King of Schmaltz were an item. Think about it, Oprah and John Tesh up close and rubbing their squishy parts together… I wonder if it lasted longer than the 90 second "intelligence for your life" sound bites that Tesh seems to produce as part of his daily life? Today's tabloids says she's joined the other team with longtime friend Gayle. There is life after Steadman, and I'm all for Oprah sharing her new experiences.
As my friend Earl McCrae always said "As long as they spell you name right Sue, there is no such thing as bad press"…
Anyway, it got me thinking about other unlikely couples and the science of attraction. Belinda Stronach and Tie Domi? Gene Simmons and Shannon Tweed? Woody Allen and Soon Yi?
Since I am always interested in the science of attraction, I had a look at the updated Darwinish book about mate selection.
“Choosing a mate is one of the most important decisions made in one’s lifetime and one of Darwin’s core components of sexual selection,” said David Geary, author and Curators’ professor in the Department of Psychological Sciences in the MU College of Arts and Science. “Sex and reproduction complicate our lives in many ways, the most fundamental of which involve the demands of finding a mate. These choices are important because they echo through subsequent generations. The social dynamics that emerge as a result of sexual reproduction usually involve competition with members of the same sex for access to mates or control of the resources that will attract mates.”
In his book, Geary documents how sex differences found in humans and many other species can be explained by Darwin’s sexual selection. One of these sex differences is the level of parental involvement by males. Male parenting is found in less than 5 percent of mammal species. Because the males in many species do not provide any parental investment, females in many species do not compete for mates. In humans, however, men have a significant role in parenting, compelling women to compete for mates.
“The more men have to offer, the more valuable they become to women as a reproductive resource,” Geary said. “For this reason, men in all cultures are highly motivated to attain social status and control of culturally significant resources. The resources can vary from land to herds of cattle to large paychecks. Male-male competition is about making themselves attractive to women but the competition also can lead men to compete in lethal ways to gain control of social resources.”
Female competition may include how they dress or adorn themselves in ways that enhance their traits that men find attractive. Women may degrade these same traits in potential competitors and manipulate social information and relationships to drive competitors away from potential romantic partners. Male-male competition may explain factors, such as greater male mortality, risk-taking and rough-and-tumble play. Female-female competition may account for greater female emotional sensitivity and greater language proficiency, Geary said.
I don't know if this explains the phenomenon but maybe it explains how Keith Richards stays sexual.