When social strategies involve competition and relative advantage, certain foraging behaviors may take on symbolic importance far beyond their original purpose as a way to acquire food for consumption. Some men’s subsistence activities might be more explicable as an outcome of subtle social competition, and as such, might be a metaphorical "peacock’s tail", or costly signal. When hunting entails marked opportunity costs by yielding lower nutritional returns than alternative foraging choices, or when it entails net costs through unconditional sharing, hunting could be a handicap that honestly indicates quality. Hunters might also reap social benefits from the signal produced by their ability to consistently bear the burden of generous public provisioning. As a result of this reputation, observers might find it in their interest to grant good hunters some level of deference, which may in turn produce material, political, and reproductive gains, as seems to be the case in a number of societies. Recipients of the signal may benefit through obtaining clear evidence of a hunter's underlying qualities and intentions, and thus reduce the costs of acquiring critical information about potential competitors, allies, or mates.