Page 5 of 6 [ 93 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

Who_Am_I
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Aug 2005
Age: 40
Gender: Female
Posts: 12,632
Location: Australia

18 Jun 2012, 8:26 pm

HisDivineMajesty wrote:
Who_Am_I wrote:
So, what you're saying is that at least 12 women would take the offer up? :P


For a lot of individual men, that would be a very good deal.

Who_Am_I wrote:
And still, the assumption that I'd marry for money would make him a d*ckhead.


Apparently, they had some novel research about what women were actually looking for. It's easy to say, speaking in general terms, that you'd never let money play an important role. As a theoretical rule, there are very few women who specifically address material wealth as being a crucial part of their attraction to a man. However, it is.

http://www.pnas.org/content/104/38/1501 ... 83bf767404

That article wrote:
In the context of speed-dating at least, self-reported mate preferences deviate markedly from actual mate choices. As with desires [e.g., for sexual variety] and fantasies, stated preferences can be useful for understanding how evolution has biased the male and female mind in different directions, but they are a fallible base for discovering the process mechanisms of real choice behavior, as Buston and Emlen aimed to do. Contrary to the concerns raised by Buston and Emlen, the mate choice patterns of men and women, as we have found by analyzing speed-dating, are very much in line with the theories of Darwin and Trivers. Furthermore, these patterns imply that the well documented phenomenon of human positive assortative mating, at least when it arises through active mate choice rather than social homogamy, is almost exclusively a result of the picky female choices, not the rather undiscriminating male ones. In this way, humans put themselves in line with most other mammals in following Darwin’s principle of choosy females and competitive males, even if humans say something different.


It actually says it right there. I'm not saying I know what all women want, but I'm saying I know what most of them want. I've heard of other types of research along these lines - unfortunately, I'm unable to find one at the moment - where they let women judge men's attractiveness after seeing their annual income. The differences were rather enormous, to say the least. The difference between being deeply unpopular with women and being able to get married to a pretty one within months is a six-to-seven-figure annual income, to put it very bluntly.

Who_Am_I wrote:
I know of plenty of women who fantasise about a rich man, but who end up happy with Joe next door. Just as there are plenty of men who fantasise about tall, long-legged, chestily-well-endowed women, but end up happy with Jane next door. There's a difference between what you fantasise about and what you'd actually be happy with.


Indeed. However, given the chance, Joe would have a beautiful girlfriend - not wife - and Jane would have a monogamous millionaire husband. The reason they don't is because the beautiful women and wealthy men wouldn't settle for the homely women or the impoverished men.


It sounds very much like you're trying to tell me what I do and don't find attractive.
Please correct me if I'm wrong.


_________________
Music Theory 101: Cadences.
Authentic cadence: V-I
Plagal cadence: IV-I
Deceptive cadence: V- ANYTHING BUT I ! !! !
Beethoven cadence: V-I-V-I-V-V-V-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I
-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I! I! I! I I I


HisDivineMajesty
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jan 2012
Age: 30
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,364
Location: Planet Earth

18 Jun 2012, 9:00 pm

Not going to correct you. I think you can believe what you want to believe. Just know you'd be part of a minority if the things you listed actually were crucial in attracting you to a man.



Who_Am_I
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Aug 2005
Age: 40
Gender: Female
Posts: 12,632
Location: Australia

18 Jun 2012, 9:43 pm

HisDivineMajesty wrote:
Not going to correct you. I think you can believe what you want to believe. Just know you'd be part of a minority if the things you listed actually were crucial in attracting you to a man.


I can accept that I'm part of a minority.
I don't actually recall listing anything that would be crucial in attracting me to a man, all I said was that money was not a factor.
Just FYI, the last 2 guys I fell for:
1 lived with his parents.
The other is on a disability pension.
Not exactly what you'd call rich.

I could, if I'd made the effort, gone out and attracted someone with a steady job and a house of their own. I didn't want to.
One of the biggest factors in developing feelings for them was the fact of having a lot in common with them: constant misunderstandings are a turn-off for me in a relationship, and it's nice to be able to have conversations that go beyond
"So, I see that you are a human being. How's that working out for you?"
It's not about what I want to believe, it's about what I actually have gone for in men.
There are many factors to attraction, and insinuating that someone is lying when they don't fit your very narrow stereotypes is extremely blinkered thinking.

I'll turn it around.

"You're male, so that means you like slender, large-breasted, long-legged blondes.
Wait, you don't? You say you actually care about whether a women is a possessive harpy? You want someone who enjoys your love of insert loved activity here?
No, all the men in my world like busty blondes. Men say they like a variety of women, but that's different from what they actually go for. I bet if you had a really nice girlfriend who was a world chess master, great in bed and a 5-star chef, you'd dump her the second a leggy blonde showed interest."

^ Accurate?


_________________
Music Theory 101: Cadences.
Authentic cadence: V-I
Plagal cadence: IV-I
Deceptive cadence: V- ANYTHING BUT I ! !! !
Beethoven cadence: V-I-V-I-V-V-V-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I
-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I! I! I! I I I


HisDivineMajesty
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jan 2012
Age: 30
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,364
Location: Planet Earth

18 Jun 2012, 9:54 pm

Who_Am_I wrote:
I'll turn it around.

"You're male, so that means you like slender, large-breasted, long-legged blondes.


Definitely. And if they'd go for me, I'd go for them.

Who_Am_I wrote:
Wait, you don't? You say you actually care about whether a women is a possessive harpy? You want someone who enjoys your love of insert loved activity here?


Not at this moment. I want to get laid. That's pretty much my only objective. Of course, I'll never say that to anyone I have a realistic chance of getting laid with. I'll call it intelligence, shared interests, personality, an optimistic outlook on life - but what I truly want is to get laid.

Who_Am_I wrote:
No, all the men in my world like busty blondes. Men say they like a variety of women, but that's different from what they actually go for. I bet if you had a really nice girlfriend who was a world chess master, great in bed and a 5-star chef, you'd dump her the second a leggy blonde showed interest."

^ Accurate?


Wouldn't dump her at that moment, no - 'great in bed'.



Who_Am_I
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Aug 2005
Age: 40
Gender: Female
Posts: 12,632
Location: Australia

18 Jun 2012, 10:00 pm

Quote:
but what I truly want is to get laid.


Which means that what you would look for is different than what someone who's after a stable, long-term relationship would look for, wouldn't you agree?

If you were after a relationship (long-term, someone who you might actually have to live with every day), would your criteria for a partner broaden?


_________________
Music Theory 101: Cadences.
Authentic cadence: V-I
Plagal cadence: IV-I
Deceptive cadence: V- ANYTHING BUT I ! !! !
Beethoven cadence: V-I-V-I-V-V-V-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I
-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I! I! I! I I I


HisDivineMajesty
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jan 2012
Age: 30
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,364
Location: Planet Earth

18 Jun 2012, 10:36 pm

Who_Am_I wrote:
If you were after a relationship (long-term, someone who you might actually have to live with every day), would your criteria for a partner broaden?


Probably. But would I apply them from the beginning? No. It would start with me seeing a pretty woman, and being casual. If an otherwise-perfect woman was ugly, I'd know myself to have no problem saying no to anything she wanted. For women, that seems to be pretty similar. It would usually start with seeing a good-looking man, or a man with status, or being approached by several men and picking one to try out based on one of those criteria.

Why was Stephen Hawking married? Well, his first wife didn't fall in love with a man who had a crooked face and was in a wheelchair. Otherwise, he's the man of a lot of women's dreams. Intelligent, friendly and witty. They also separated. His second wife was a gold digger - married a relatively wealthy man after coming very close to him, divorced him after allegations that she had abused him. His first wife married a musician and wrote a book to rake in additional profit.

Thing is, even if people have great personal qualities, you'll have to look for them. And you won't look for them in a lot of people, because they're ugly or lacking in status.



Aspie_Chav
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2006
Age: 50
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,931
Location: Croydon

19 Jun 2012, 3:21 pm

There are more creepy guys then there are aspies, If creepinesss is such a (evolutionary)disadvantage the creepy gene would have killed itself off, and gone the same way as homoerectus. Every womans preception of creepy is different.



HisDivineMajesty
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jan 2012
Age: 30
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,364
Location: Planet Earth

19 Jun 2012, 3:42 pm

Why is it that I end up agreeing with TM so often on these issues?



TM
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Feb 2012
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,122

19 Jun 2012, 3:58 pm

HisDivineMajesty wrote:
Why is it that I end up agreeing with TM so often on these issues?


Most likely because I speak with a combination of cynicism and lack of idealism on this topic, resulting in a "how it is" rather than "how it should be" view of "love and dating".

Men are not much better to be quite honest. Men tend to get obsessed with women who have that rare combo of physically attractive and mentally unstable, who lead them on chase after chase.

Men overemphasize physical appearance in women for the most part and for some reason physical appearance in women tend to weigh fairly heavily, meaning that an unattractive woman with a great personality tends to be ignored.

Men can frequently be indiscriminate in terms of who they sleep with (women are increasingly catching up here though).

No gender is perfect, and both are quite frankly stupid when it comes to "love and dating". Men tend to pick women who are no good for them, women pick men who are no good for them. Women make men into "bad boys" and misogynists through their behavior in their adolescence, teens and early to late twenties by consistently rewarding males who exhibit this type of behavior.

Men tend to go for the very women who crush their spirit, try to hysterically change them and who go for the bad boys, despite the fact that that type of woman is generally not good for anyone to be around. Furthermore, the males in question tend to have weak senses of self, suck up to women and bend to the woman's every will.

In the "which gender sucks most" contest, its for the most part a toss up.



TM
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Feb 2012
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,122

19 Jun 2012, 4:00 pm

MXH wrote:
my point exactly. if its a guy shes attracted to theres a lot more room to say things in that manner. I believe this is the so called bad boy thing. Its guys who can get away with this sort of actions/attitude based on something else, likely them being attractive. Its not so much women liking as*holes, its women willing to put up with as*holes


It's more that coming from someone she wants to sleep with, she has a higher barrier for them, or finds it attractive. Quite a few women find that type of talk as a positive experience when they are attracted to the person and a negative experience if they are not attracted to the person.

Consider that I've put up with some needy, unstable, outright insane women, just because they were hot, based on my experience, males are no better.



MXH
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jul 2010
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,057
Location: Here i stand and face the rain

19 Jun 2012, 4:08 pm

TM wrote:
MXH wrote:
my point exactly. if its a guy shes attracted to theres a lot more room to say things in that manner. I believe this is the so called bad boy thing. Its guys who can get away with this sort of actions/attitude based on something else, likely them being attractive. Its not so much women liking as*holes, its women willing to put up with as*holes


It's more that coming from someone she wants to sleep with, she has a higher barrier for them, or finds it attractive. Quite a few women find that type of talk as a positive experience when they are attracted to the person and a negative experience if they are not attracted to the person.

Consider that I've put up with some needy, unstable, outright insane women, just because they were hot, based on my experience, males are no better.

ive never claimed men to be better. All i claim is that women are not what we are told they are. If anything they are exactly as bad as us men and exactly as good.



TM
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Feb 2012
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,122

19 Jun 2012, 4:15 pm

MXH wrote:
TM wrote:
MXH wrote:
my point exactly. if its a guy shes attracted to theres a lot more room to say things in that manner. I believe this is the so called bad boy thing. Its guys who can get away with this sort of actions/attitude based on something else, likely them being attractive. Its not so much women liking as*holes, its women willing to put up with as*holes


It's more that coming from someone she wants to sleep with, she has a higher barrier for them, or finds it attractive. Quite a few women find that type of talk as a positive experience when they are attracted to the person and a negative experience if they are not attracted to the person.

Consider that I've put up with some needy, unstable, outright insane women, just because they were hot, based on my experience, males are no better.

ive never claimed men to be better. All i claim is that women are not what we are told they are. If anything they are exactly as bad as us men and exactly as good.


I just felt the need to state it to avoid the inevitable derail about how I hate women. I don't hate women, if I did, why would I put up with all their s**t?

As men, we are socialized by our mothers, grandmothers and so on, who all tell us how we *should* behave to women, except everything they tell us are lies. Maybe not conscious lies, but inaccurate fallacies at best.

It's actually kind of funny that the way my female family members told me to act towards women, is the exact opposite of what "pick up artists" who actually do get a ton of women tell you to do and actually do themselves. Read a book by David D, Style or Mystery and it can in many ways be summed up as "Do the exact opposite of what your mother told you."

The unfortunate bit is that only the most self-aware and intelligent women can understand and accept the material as valid. Most women like to see themselves as something that can't be easily manipulated by pressing 4 - 6 buttons.



MXH
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jul 2010
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,057
Location: Here i stand and face the rain

19 Jun 2012, 4:24 pm

TM wrote:
It's actually kind of funny that the way my female family members told me to act towards women, is the exact opposite of what "pick up artists" who actually do get a ton of women tell you to do and actually do themselves. Read a book by David D, Style or Mystery and it can in many ways be summed up as "Do the exact opposite of what your mother told you."

The unfortunate bit is that only the most self-aware and intelligent women can understand and accept the material as valid. Most women like to see themselves as something that can't be easily manipulated by pressing 4 - 6 buttons.


I was agreeing here up to this point. Pick up artists dont get the ammount of women they make it sound to be. They dont have a magical code to sleep with any woman. What they have is having anxiety and such things been beaten out of them to the point they dont care anymore and approach hundreds of women in one night. Thats it, PUA in itself has zero net worth. It, just like everything, is a numbers game. Do you really think if someone managed to figure out how women work and manipulate them into his bed that hed say how todo it on the internet? Hell, read the game for once. It is honestly sad that these guys thought they had so much runing for them when there is an underlying theme of simply going for easy girls instead of being masters of getting laid.



TM
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Feb 2012
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,122

19 Jun 2012, 4:50 pm

MXH wrote:
TM wrote:
It's actually kind of funny that the way my female family members told me to act towards women, is the exact opposite of what "pick up artists" who actually do get a ton of women tell you to do and actually do themselves. Read a book by David D, Style or Mystery and it can in many ways be summed up as "Do the exact opposite of what your mother told you."

The unfortunate bit is that only the most self-aware and intelligent women can understand and accept the material as valid. Most women like to see themselves as something that can't be easily manipulated by pressing 4 - 6 buttons.


I was agreeing here up to this point. Pick up artists dont get the ammount of women they make it sound to be. They dont have a magical code to sleep with any woman. What they have is having anxiety and such things been beaten out of them to the point they dont care anymore and approach hundreds of women in one night. Thats it, PUA in itself has zero net worth. It, just like everything, is a numbers game. Do you really think if someone managed to figure out how women work and manipulate them into his bed that hed say how todo it on the internet? Hell, read the game for once. It is honestly sad that these guys thought they had so much runing for them when there is an underlying theme of simply going for easy girls instead of being masters of getting laid.


Getting fear of rejection and anxiety beaten out of you is the thing that has the most value in PUA training. Everything after that is about displaying your value in the form of who you are, or are pretending to be in order to attract that female.

Also, from personal experience, a lot of the material works surprisingly well.



MXH
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jul 2010
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,057
Location: Here i stand and face the rain

19 Jun 2012, 4:59 pm

TM wrote:
MXH wrote:
TM wrote:
It's actually kind of funny that the way my female family members told me to act towards women, is the exact opposite of what "pick up artists" who actually do get a ton of women tell you to do and actually do themselves. Read a book by David D, Style or Mystery and it can in many ways be summed up as "Do the exact opposite of what your mother told you."

The unfortunate bit is that only the most self-aware and intelligent women can understand and accept the material as valid. Most women like to see themselves as something that can't be easily manipulated by pressing 4 - 6 buttons.


I was agreeing here up to this point. Pick up artists dont get the ammount of women they make it sound to be. They dont have a magical code to sleep with any woman. What they have is having anxiety and such things been beaten out of them to the point they dont care anymore and approach hundreds of women in one night. Thats it, PUA in itself has zero net worth. It, just like everything, is a numbers game. Do you really think if someone managed to figure out how women work and manipulate them into his bed that hed say how todo it on the internet? Hell, read the game for once. It is honestly sad that these guys thought they had so much runing for them when there is an underlying theme of simply going for easy girls instead of being masters of getting laid.


Getting fear of rejection and anxiety beaten out of you is the thing that has the most value in PUA training. Everything after that is about displaying your value in the form of who you are, or are pretending to be in order to attract that female.

Also, from personal experience, a lot of the material works surprisingly well.


did it work well because of the material orbecause you were confident in what you were doing? Again, here goes the attractive not being creepy thing. If you attracted them with your smoothness and confidence it wouldnt matter what you said.



TM
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Feb 2012
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,122

19 Jun 2012, 5:08 pm

MXH wrote:

did it work well because of the material orbecause you were confident in what you were doing? Again, here goes the attractive not being creepy thing. If you attracted them with your smoothness and confidence it wouldnt matter what you said.


It worked well because it presented me with a set of rules to follow, which are easy to copy as you go along.