But clearly that isn't how people think. They resent inequality in luxuries just as much if not more than inequality in necessities. They dislike (and envy) conspicuous consumption, even if it impinges on them not at all. What hurts is not that somebody is rich, but that he is richer.
但是,显然人们并不是这么想的。他们对奢侈品消费能力不平等的愤恨并不比对必需品消费能力不平等的愤恨少。他们不喜欢(而且嫉妒)炫耀性消费,即使它根本不碍他们的事。让他们感到痛苦的不是这个人很富有,而是这个人更富有。
This is a classic statement of sexual selection. It isn't the peacock with the big-enough tail that gets to mate; it's the peacock with the biggest tail. If this sounds old-fashioned in an age of working women, gender equality and relative sexual continence, then open your eyes and look around you: The man with the most money or power still gets more sexual opportunities than the man with the least. Ask David Petraeus.
这是一个关于性选择的经典论述。得到交配权的不是有大尾巴的孔雀,而是有最大尾巴的孔雀。如果这在这个女性外出工作、性别平等和相对节欲的年代听起来很过时,那么睁开你的眼睛,看看你周围吧:最有钱或最有权的男性仍然比最没钱或最没权的男性获得更多性机会。问问戴维·彼得雷乌斯(David Petraeus)就知道了。
【“最性感者生存”能解释文明吗?】相关文章:
最新
2020-09-15
2020-09-15
2020-09-15
2020-09-15
2020-09-15
2020-09-15