[ConfusedHermit (OP)]

I'm curious how much of our interest in action media (or even mythology) where one person can take on impossible odds with little effort or consequence has to do with culture or being something males are chemically/psychologically drawn to.

Even more simply:
- Is power fantasy a thing all humans can like or dislike more because of culture?
or
- Are males of any culture or creed going to find this genre interesting more by instinct?

[grizelda]

All else being equal, the females of all species breed with the most aggressive males. This produces more of the same. Lesbians, of course, do not need aggressive males, so political correctness bans them.

[ConfusedHermit (OP)]

Not sure where the sexuality thing came up. Humans aren't always drawn to one another based on the short list of attractions in the non-human animal kingdom, but... okay :{o~

So do you think there is an instinctual pleasure center in males for seeing a dominant and reality-defiant character in media?

I wonder how often the brain interprets those characters as 'that's like me and it makes me feel good' or 'I'm jealous and will immediately call this unrealistic'... I'm a selfish, self-satisfied person, so I don't ever look for icons or leaders as much. Or care if someone can lift something heavier than well... me.

I do, however, like certain power fantasies on an aesthetic or symbolic level.

Such as 'wow he just kicked a tank and it flew into a helicopter, that looked really cool' and 'YEAH! STICK IT TO THE MAN! THAT TANK-KICK IS LIKE MY BRAIN KICKING POLITICIANS WITH REAL SCIENTIFIC FACTS!'

I'm not sure how much of instinctual attraction there is for me, though...

[grizelda]

Games tend to mimic real-life sports in that they demand concentration on the gameplay and patterns. Speed and agility are necessary to stay alive, any distractions are usually fatal. In real life sports, like boxing, stopping to meditate on your last blow to the head will immediately get you three more to snap you out of it. Ali was famous for distracting his opponents, wasting their resources until they were tired and he could pounce.

[bizerl]

I'd imagine a love of violence would have an evolutionary advantage for the stronger sex in a hunter/gatherer society. The populations with males that loved to kill things and rip their guts open probably had more to eat than the ones in which the men cried at the thought of hurting a deer.

That could be over-simplifying things but I guess I am kind of over-simplified myself.

Also, I'm sure that populations with females who went out killing and ripping probably did quite well too, but perhaps that left too few to stay at home and make babies, and therefore left the dangerous stuff up to the man.

I should probably just make this my signature, but "I have no evidence to back up my statements. Everything is based on what I reckon!"

[cheryl j]

Dominance or aggression without consequences probably is an appealing fantasy, but in nature it doesn't seem to work that way. There are always risks and consequences, and its interesting to see the sorts of behavior in both peop0le and animals that has evolved because of it, such as aggressive displays that determine who is dominant without either party getting mortally wounded, alliances, deception, etc.

[CliffordK]

In many relationships, male power is likely just a "fantasy".  The women certainly hold a significant amount of power.

Many couples strive for equality.