It has been an intriguing topic among researchers to study the preference of mates in males and

females. Their individual preference for mates differs. (Buss & Barnes, 1986; Eagly & Wood, 1999;
Furnham et al., 1997; Gangestad, 1993). According to Buss & Schmitt, 1993; Eagly, 1987; Trivers,
1972, two primary theories explain mate preference processes: sociocultural and evolutionary. As
described by Eagly & Wood (1999), the sociocultural approach emphasizes social structural theories
explaining how men and women behave differently due to their social roles, such as physical
attributes. Whereases to evolutionary theory, men and women adapt to the environment to permit
the human species to reproduce throughout ancestral times. Both ideas explain why men and
women have diverse partner preferences. Individual traits and previous interactions are crucial in
formulating these decisions. These tendencies can differ extensively amongst societies and cultures.
The elements of cultural and social contexts mold sociocultural effects that influence people's
preferences (Liu & Mu, 2022). Examining the evolutionary components also elucidates the reason for
the brain's response to various situational factors in specific ways (Badcock et al., 2019). As a result,
this essay addresses how evolutionary, social, and other contextual influences shape an individual's
mating preferences.

The evolutionary theory can explain why individuals opt for mates through parental investment and
sexual selection (Trivers, 1972). Sexual selection refers to the distinct advantages that each sex has
over the other, particularly for reproductive purposes (Darwin, 1871). A factor driving sexual
selection is each sex's ability to devote time and energy to the offspring, according to Trivers (1972).
The term "parental investment" refers to any investment made by a parent in the survival and
reproduction of their children. (Trivers, 1972). Due to their heavier investment in sex through
physical means of pregnancy, giving birth, and breastfeeding, females prefer men with similar
potential capacity and desire.(Buss, 1989; Cason & Li, 2010). Men with financial power are preferred
since they can offer immediate monetary benefits to their children (Buss & Barnes, 1986), which
promotes offspring survival (Feingold, 1993; Valentine & Li, 2012).

Conversely, men will prefer qualities in women that impart dominant signals about the woman's
reproductive value. A result of missed mate opportunities with less fertile or reproductively desirable
women can be costly, especially in mating systems that demand protracted wooing and prohibit
multiple mating; men are expected to exercise choice (Buss, 1988). As a result, women should
compete to exhibit the features men desire in a mate associated with female reproductive value.
Good genes are based on the sexual selection model; a physical appeal is a visible cue to healthy
partners, and health can be inherited through genes in kids (Weeden & Sabini, 2005). Physical
characteristics such as flawless and transparent skin, well-toned muscles, a cheerful demeanor, white
teeth, and shiny hair can be signs of vitality and wellness. (Buss & Barnes, 1986; Buss & Schmitt,
1993) Women with a robust genetic background appeal more to men (Braun & Bryan, 2006).
Likewise, males value physical attractiveness more than females (Buss, 1989). Although standards of
male physical appearance vary across cultures (Buss & Schmitt, 1993), physical attractiveness has
been found to impact mate preferences across cultures. The waist-hip ratio indicates physical
attractiveness in mate preferences (Furnham et al., 1997). Singh (1993a, 1993b) found that men find
women with a small waist-hip ratio physically attractive. In addition, Buss (1988) proved his
hypothesis using research statistics that men use intrasexual mate selection, including resource
possession and display, more frequently than women. The intersexual selection reflects one sex's
preferences for specific characteristics of the opposite sex. According to Zahavi's (1977) "handicap
principle," members of the choosing sex favor individuals who exhibit costly signals or behavior
indicating good genes and overall fitness. Females, for example, may be drawn to signs of male
power, intelligence, and skill demonstration that reflect their potential to provide resources and
defend their kids. In contrast, women prefer a mate with good financial prospects or a high earning
ability Buss and Barnes ( 1986).

Subsequently, Mate choice copying is a social learning phenomenon whereby the mate preferences
of others influence individuals. This theory, proposed by Erikson et al. (2012), suggests that
individuals find potential mates more attractive when they observe them being selected by others.
For example, in a Waynforth (2005) study, women rated men more attractive when positive
evaluations from other women preceded them. Multiple studies incorporating the evolutionary idea
of mate selection have yielded similar results.

Besides evolutionary theory, contextual factors encompassing societal norms and expectations shape
mate preferences. These norms often define the acceptable qualities, characteristics, and traits
sought in a partner. For example, in some cultures, there may be an emphasis on parental approval
and arranged marriages, where mate preferences are influenced by familial and social expectations
(Broude & Green, 1983). In contrast, individualistic cultures may prioritize personal choice and
compatibility, giving greater freedom to choose based on personal preferences. An example of the
influence of societal norms can be seen in studies conducted by Eagly and Wood (1999), who found
that cultures with more gender egalitarianism, such as the Scandinavian countries, exhibited more
similarity in mate preferences between men and women.

Conversely, cultures emphasizing traditional gender roles, such as India, showed more significant
divergence in mate preferences between genders. Within a given sociocultural context, this example
illustrates how mate preferences are affected by cultural norms and gender roles. Cultural values
play a crucial role in shaping mate preferences by providing a framework for what is desirable in a
partner. Cultural values such as collectivism or individualism can impact the importance placed on
family background, socioeconomic status, physical attractiveness, and other attributes. Individuals
often internalize these values, shaping their preferences and choices. Kasser and Sharma (1999)
researched mate choices across cultures and discovered that materialistic values were inversely
associated with preferences for attributes such as compassion, understanding, and intelligence. This
shows that cultural beliefs emphasizing material prosperity and social standing may emphasize those
characteristics in partner selection. On the other hand, cultures emphasizing communal values may
prioritize compatibility and emotional connection features.

Social roles and power dynamics can also influence mate preferences within a society. Mate
preferences may be influenced by a desire for a spouse who adheres to established gender roles and
expectations in a patriarchal society, where men have more power and dominance (Buss, 1994). This
could involve valuing attributes like submissive behavior or physical appearance that are considered
appealing in that cultural environment. For example, Li et al. (2002) discovered in China that males
from regions with more traditional gender roles placed a higher value on a partner's physical
appearance and household skills. Hence, a culture's social roles and power dynamics influence
identifying mate preferences and partner decisions.

Moreover, proximity influences human mate preferences significantly. People frequently choose
partners that are physically close to them and have comparable cultural backgrounds or settings.
Peer-reviewed studies have presented empirical evidence to back up this claim. Waynforth (2011)
explored the effect of proximity on physical attractiveness preferences. The findings revealed that
physical proximity significantly affected individuals' ratings of attractiveness. Participants exhibited
higher ratings for faces of individuals they believed lived closer, suggesting that geographic proximity
can shape perceptions of attractiveness, potentially due to associations formed with familiar or
nearby individuals. As such, proximity has a profound contextual effect on human mate preferences.

In conclusion, human mate preferences are multifaceted, shaped by contextual and evolutionary
factors. Sociocultural influences, such as societal norms, proximity, and cultural values, profoundly
shape individuals' preferences in selecting a partner. These influences vary across societies and can
significantly impact the criteria people prioritize when choosing a mate. On the other hand,
evolutionary theories argue that our mate preferences are rooted in our evolutionary past, with men
valuing physical attractiveness and fertility. At the same time, women prioritize resources and social
status. Although these frameworks provide valuable insights, it is crucial to acknowledge that mate
preferences are not static and can change over time due to various social, cultural, and individual
factors. Given the rapidly changing dynamics of relationships and shifting societal norms, future
research should explore how mate preferences are evolving in response to these changes to enhance
our understanding of the complexity underlying mate selection.