Dr. Gad Saad on Human Mating and Intimacy: Evolution, Lust, and Consumerism

Friday, November 29, 2024.

Let’s talk about love, lust, and why your ex still hasn’t returned your hoodie.

Dr. Gad Saad, evolutionary psychologist extraordinaire, claims that the answers to these mysteries lie in your DNA—not your Spotify breakup playlist.

Saad’s work unravels human mating and intimacy as a grand performance choreographed by evolution, with humans driven by ancient instincts that whisper, "Find a mate, secure the species!"

But not everyone’s on board with Saad’s views.

To some, he’s a truth-teller who’s slapped modern nonsense across the face with science.

To others, he’s the biological equivalent of that guy at a party who keeps insisting it’s actually about survival of the fittest. Let’s dig deeper into the juicy debates swirling around Saad’s provocative ideas on human mating.

Love, Actually, Is Just Evolutionary Strategy

Dr. Saad’s main argument?

Love and intimacy aren’t just soulful connections or romantic gestures—they’re evolutionary strategies.

That’s right, folks: your tender texts and candlelit dinners are the culmination of thousands of years of ancestral programming.

Saad believes that mating behaviors are shaped by the same principles that determine why peacocks flaunt their feathers or why pandas, well, mostly just eat bamboo (but occasionally procreate).

Men: The Hunters of Fertility

According to Saad, men are evolutionarily wired to prioritize visual cues of fertility—symmetry, youth, and that waist-to-hip ratio that launched a thousand studies (and about as many waist trainers).

Men’s preferences, he claims, have less to do with culture and more to do with biology whispering, “Pick her, she’ll make strong offspring.”

Women: The Choosy Investors

Women, on the other hand, are framed as the savvy venture capitalists of reproduction.

They seek partners who can provide stability, resources, and—ideally—a decent sense of humor. Why? Because evolution taught them to prioritize not just making babies, but keeping those babies alive.

Cue their attraction to ambition, intelligence, and—these days—guys with 401(k)s who know how to load a dishwasher.

But wait! Before you start nodding and thinking, “This makes total sense!” let’s acknowledge the counterarguments that argue biology isn’t destiny. More on that below.

Infidelity and Jealousy: Love’s Dark Shadows

Jealousy—the green-eyed monster that’s ruined countless holidays. Saad views jealousy as an evolutionary tool designed to protect reproductive investments.

Men, he argues, are particularly concerned about sexual infidelity. (Is that child really mine?).

Women, meanwhile, are more sensitive to emotional infidelity. (Why is he sending heart emojis to Karen from accounting?)

It’s a compelling argument, but critics have pointed out that jealousy isn’t always so neatly divided along gender lines. Some even argue that Saad’s evolutionary lens risks reducing the complexity of modern relationships to "biology made me do it." Are we really slaves to our DNA, or can we thank therapy (and boundary-setting texts) for helping us rise above our primal instincts?

Shopping for Love: Saad’s Take on Consumerism

Here’s where Saad gets fun (and a little spicy). He argues that consumer behavior is just mating behavior in disguise.

• Men’s Bling Game: That shiny sports car or Rolex? Saad sees it as a mating call, akin to a bird’s elaborate plumage. Men use conspicuous consumption to signal resources and dominance. In other words: “Look at me! I have a shiny car, ergo I am an excellent provider.”

• Women’s Glow-Up: For women, Saad claims, it’s all about enhancing fertility signals. From red lipstick to yoga classes, many consumer choices reflect the subconscious drive to attract a mate. (Is that why kale is still a thing?)

While this perspective is undeniably entertaining, critics argue it oversimplifies human complexity. Sure, some purchases may be driven by mating instincts, but what about buying a $6 latte just to feel alive? Not everything is about reproduction… right?

The Culture Wars: Saad vs. Postmodernism

If Dr. Saad had a nemesis, it would be postmodernism. It was a persistent and ubiquitous set of ideas at Antioch of New England which I also struggled against mightily.

Saad argues that this ideological movement—championing the idea that everything is socially constructed—denies biological realities in favor of “feel-good” narratives. He doesn’t hold back, calling postmodernism a “parasitic mind virus” that’s infecting academia. (Yes, he has opinions, and yes, they’re strong.)

But critics of Saad’s crusade point out that while biology is crucial, it’s not the whole story.

Social psychologist Carol Tavris argues that focusing too much on evolutionary determinism risks ignoring cultural shifts.

For instance, in societies with greater gender equality, women’s preferences for high-status men seem to decline. Maybe biology gives us a blueprint, but culture gets to scribble in the margins.

Critics and Controversies: A Heated Debate

Dr. Saad’s ideas spark as much admiration as they do skepticism. Here’s a snapshot of the intellectual sparring:

• Supporters:

  • David Buss: The godfather of evolutionary psychology, Buss largely agrees with Saad’s take on universal mating strategies. His work adds credibility to Saad’s claims about the evolutionary roots of infidelity and mate preferences.

  • Jordan Peterson: Peterson aligns with Saad’s critiques of postmodernism and shares his belief in the biological underpinnings of gender differences.

• Critics:

  • Cordelia Fine: A sharp critic of evolutionary psychology, Fine argues that theories like Saad’s can reinforce gender stereotypes. In her book Delusions of Gender, she takes aim at the oversimplification of complex social behaviors.

  • Sarah Hrdy: Hrdy provides a more nuanced view, emphasizing cooperation and maternal investment as key drivers of human behavior. She challenges Saad’s sometimes transactional view of mating.

Why This Matters: Beyond Academic Debate

Dr. Saad’s work touches on more than just dating advice or evolutionary trivia—it dives into how we understand ourselves in a rapidly changing world.

Are we creatures of instinct, forever tethered to our evolutionary roots? Or are we capable of transcending those roots through culture, reason, and maybe even the occasional mindfulness app?

The beauty of Saad’s arguments (and their critiques) is that they force us to wrestle with these questions.

Whether you’re buying a new car, swiping on dating apps, or trying to understand why your partner gets jealous when you compliment a friend, Saad’s work offers a provocative lens on human intimacy.

Final Thoughts: Can Evolution Be Romantic?

If Saad is right, love is both simpler and messier than we think.

It’s an ancient algorithm, fine-tuned by survival, that’s still running in the background of our most modern behaviors.

But love also transcends biology—it’s shaped by choice, culture, and the stories we tell ourselves.

So, maybe the next time you’re pondering your love life (or your partner’s questionable shopping habits), you’ll think of Saad—and maybe, just maybe, you’ll laugh a little at the absurdity of it all.

Be Well, Stay Kind, and Godspeed.

REFERENCES;

Buss, D. M. (2003). The Evolution of Desire: Strategies of Human Mating (Revised Edition). Basic Books.

Fine, C. (2010). Delusions of Gender: How Our Minds, Society, and Neurosexism Create Difference. W. W. Norton & Company.

Hrdy, S. B. (1999). Mother Nature: Maternal Instincts and How They Shape the Human Species. Ballantine Books.

Pinker, S. (2002). The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature. Viking.

Saad, G. (2011). The Consuming Instinct: What Juicy Burgers, Ferraris, Pornography, and Gift Giving Reveal About Human Nature. Prometheus Books.

Saad, G. (2020). The Parasitic Mind: How Infectious Ideas Are Killing Common Sense. Regnery Publishing.

Tavris, C. (1992). The Mismeasure of Woman: Why Women Are Not the Better Sex, the Inferior Sex, or the Opposite Sex. Touchstone.