“Never trust a man who doesn’t drink,” runs the saying and it is certainly true that I find myself thinking people who come to boozy social occasions and who don’t partake are slightly “odd”.
Or, at least, I used to. For the last two and a half years I have significantly cut down my drinking – mainly because I have found that a large volume of exercise takes away the need to “self medicate” in this way (eg., by leaving more relaxed).
As a result I now find myself sometimes turning down the opportunity to go to social events because I don’t want to drink (not least because it makes going for a run or to the gym more or less impossible – drunk running might not be an offence but it’s not fun).
There just is not enough alternatives to alcohol available – not least because sugar-filled soft drinks are not much of a step up in health terms.
And then there is the social stigma – why be the one you “don’t trust”?
My musical talent never really got beyond self-taught recorder about thirty-five years ago: I did teach myself to read music as a result and could play simple things like “Jingle Bells” on the piano, but I certainly never managed to get so far as writing anything.
That might have contributed to many years of misery as a teenager and point to why so many of my contemporaries (then and now) seemed desperate to be in a band – because it would appear your musical abilities are directly linked to your sexual attractiveness.
Over 140 years ago Charles Darwin first argued that birdsong and human music, having no clear survival benefit, were obvious candidates for sexual selection. Whereas the first contention is now universally accepted, his theory that music is a product of sexual selection through mate choice has largely been neglected. Here, I provide the first, to my knowledge, empirical support for the sexual selection hypothesis of music evolution by showing that women have sexual preferences during peak conception times for men that are able to create more complex music. Two-alternative forced-choice experiments revealed that woman only preferred composers of more complex music as short-term sexual partners when conception risk was highest. No preferences were displayed when women chose which composer they would prefer as a long-term partner in a committed relationship, and control experiments failed to reveal an effect of conception risk on women’s preferences for visual artists. These results suggest that women may acquire genetic benefits for offspring by selecting musicians able to create more complex music as sexual partners, and provide compelling support for Darwin’s assertion ‘that musical notes and rhythm were first acquired by the male or female progenitors of mankind for the sake of charming the opposite sex’.