It is generally wrong to manipulate. One leading reason is because manipulation interferes with autonomy, in particular the component of autonomy called ‘independence’, that is, freedom from intentional control by others. Manipulative health promotion would therefore seem wrong. However, manipulative techniques could be used to counter-manipulation, for example, playing on male fears of impotence to counter ‘smoking is sexy’ advertisements. What difference does it make to the ethics of manipulation when it is counter-manipulation? This article distinguishes two powerful defences of (...) counter-manipulative health promotion: that the counter-manipulation would prevent manipulation occurring, leaving people unmanipulated; and that the counter-manipulation would make people healthier without being any more manipulated than they would otherwise be. The article explains how counter-manipulation might work and the limits to its scope. The upshot is that counter-manipulative health promotion could respect the independence people are owed in virtue of their autonomy. However, autonomy is not the only consideration, and the article discusses further potential problems. Counter-manipulative health promotion might be misapplied, it might undermine trust, it might infringe on some norms for role behaviour and it might encourage a regrettable social practice. These objections are likely to be decisive against the counter-manipulation in some but not all cases. (shrink)

Lonely hearts advertisements (LHA) published in Japan were examined in a comparative study on sexually dimorphic mate preference. I analyzed 944 LHA written by Japanese (730 by males and 214 by females) seeking short-term relationships and 780 LHA (577 by males and 203 by females) seeking long-term relationships. Some universal patterns of mate preference were confirmed and others were not. Female advertisers in both categories sought more traits than they offered; they also sought more traits than male advertisers. Males tended (...) to offer their financial and social status, and females tended to seek those traits. More females requested family commitment than males. While there was no sex difference in offering and seeking physical appearance and health, females tended to request photographs of their potential mates. Males were more likely than females to be willing to accept children from previous relationships, although there was no significant difference in refusing such children. More females seeking long-term mates requested family commitment than females seeking short-term mates. In both males and females, more advertisers seeking long-term mates offered family commitment than advertisers seeking short-term mates. Some predictions for contingent preference were also examined. One prediction confirmed was that females offering physical appearance and health sought more traits than those not doing so. However, males offering financial and social status did not make higher demands than those who did not, which does not support one prediction. (shrink)

We used 7,415 advertisements published in Spain to analyze traits sought/offered by men and women from different age groups. Findings regarding age, socioeconomic status, and physical attractiveness requirements support evolutionary predictions about mate preferences. However, changes in trait preferences among women under 40 appear to be contingent on Spain’s socioeconomic transformation. Women under 40 seek mainly physical attractiveness in men, whereas those over 40 seek mainly socioeconomic status. The trait most sought by men in all age groups is physical attractiveness. (...) Traits sought and offered by advertisers may be conditioned by the personal situation of the advertiser. Mean age of advertisers (around their forties) and Spain’s social indicators suggest that the majority of advertisers have been unsuccessful in the mating arena at the conventional age. (shrink)