How attraction works. part II (very long)

[ELITE_WOMANIZER]

have you ever wondered why guys are so horny compared to women? have
you ever wondered why we are so attracted to women with nice lips,
big tits, pretty face and a nice ass?

well the answer is that this is a genetic thing, and that its all part
of our attraction mechanism.

our male ancestors survival in relation with mate selection was based
on 2 things:

1) to pass on as many children as possible.

2)to find the most fertile female mate with the healthy genes.

when you see a hot woman with a cute face, nice tits and ass, you
think "damn, that looks soooo good" have you ever wondered why it
looked so good? ever wondered why two blobs of skin with a nipple
slapped on it look so good? and why smaller ones just dont?

why plump lips looks so good, and small skinny ones dont?
why smooth skin and a youthful face look good, and an aged, non smooth
skin face doesnt?

you might say "well, becuase it just looks ugly, if it doesnt look that
way."

but why?
think about it, every guy agrees thats what looks good in a woman, but
not everyguy agrees the color red is a good color. some guys would say
red is an ugly color. obviously theres some kind of genetic programming
making you see big tits as attractive, its not an opinion, or a learned
thing.

or maybe youll say: "we guys were raised to like big tits and all that
stuff, its a learned thing."

well, if that were true. would you say that you LEARNED TO BE ATTRACTED
TO WOMEN AND NOT MEN? i didnt think so. its obvious that we are
programmed from birth to like women. just like we were programmed from
birth to like nice lips, smooth skin, youthful face, big tits, nice
ass etc.

we are are genetically programmed to like beutiful women. who have
large tits, a nice curvey ass, plump lips, narrow nose, and the other
features.

those boobs look so good to you becuase its in your genetics to like
them. its a genetic thing. the best way to describe it is that its an
overwhelming desire to like it and want it. its not exactly an emotion,
its something else, currently theres no word invented to describe this
overwhelming desire, its in its own category. Its Natures way of
guaranteeing youll go after it.

Now how does beauty play a role in survival, and the correct mate
selection?

Back when during our great ancestor's period. There were fertile women,
with healthy genes, and there were unfertile women with unhealthy genes
.

The women with healthy genes back then had narrow noses, plump lips,
smooth skin, and what we consider a nice ass. All of these traits
suggest that she had healthy genes. a nice buttocks tells alot about
your health. and a narrow nose suggested that she didnt have any
dismorphic genes. where a woman with deformity in her genes wouldnt
likely to have symetrical narrow noses. there are alot of traits that
we find attractive that im not gonna get into. but you get the general
ideah.

big breasts suggest fertitlity, thus could bare young alot better than
non fertile women.

the effect natural selection had was this:

some males were genetically attracted to some traits, while others were
attracted to other traits in women(genetic variations). But natural
selection would change this.

if you were attracted to the women with big breasts, and the traits we
males today consider "beautiful", your genes would be passed on, she
would more likely to be fertile. and since her genes were healthy, so
would your offspring.

if your were attracted to the women we males today would consider
"ugly". then your genes would be erradicated by natural selection.
becuase these "ugly" women were unfertile, and had bad genes.

so today, only the males that carry the gene of being attracted to "narrow
noses, large breasts, nice lips, the whole bit" exist thanks to natural
selection and evolution.

and this is why those things look so good to you, and why beauty plays
a huge role in attracting men. its all genetic and biological.

Now the next question is, why are men so horny?

most guys never actually think about why. they just figure "women look
good, how an you resist?" they never think about the real reason. Or
they will say "we have the hormones that make us like this". But why?
why is it neccessary your body creates these hormones as a male?

the whole reason is this. basically, our ancestors had to pass their
genes on. and i already discussed how healthy fertile women were one
way to guarantee this. but theres another way. nature would see to it
that the male follow both routes to acheve the goal of passing his
genes on.

so it wouldnt be beneficial if the male only impregnated one woman. It
would be beneficial to impregnate as many women as he possibly could.
And his sex drive would determine this.

so basically, males with a higher sex drive back then ended up passing
their genes on. where as the males with a low one, who only impregnated
a few women due to a low sex drive, wouldnt get his genes too far.

so that explains why we today have that sex drive. why we guys only
seem to think about sex. and women always ***** about it.

Now you know, beauty is the cue that tells your mate selection device
"she is a fertile woman with healthy genes. you want her". Thus beauty
in women trigger the man's mate selection device, and then he feels the
attraction overcomeing him and then he decides hes gonna try to get
her. maybe he will, maybe he wont that depends on......

a little about how women cheat nature.

today, our gene pool is rapidly degrading. becuse of all this
technology. human survival no longer depends on genes and natural
selection. but technology. its sad but true. people today actually
have worse genes than we did a long time ago becuase of technology.
with it, we are able to cheat nature. today, a fat person with fat
genes can get away with it. a long time ago, the fat ass would have
been weaved out by natural selection.

and with women. women today really dont have that healthy of genes.
some arent even well fertile. The mans mate selection device was
designed by nature to find a healthy genes female that is fertile.
women are now cheating it. They are able to fool it. able to create
"artificial beauty" with the invention of makeup and cosmetic surgery.
they use clothes and fashion, and makeup to make them selves look more
beautiful than they really are. fooling our attraction mechanism into
going off. soo alot of the women that your after probably dont have
that healthy of genes. they just fool your biological mate finder into
thinking they do.

if we used logic to find a mate today, we could probably do a better
job at finding the 'fertile and healthy mate'. we could just go to a
health club, and find a "healthy woman who is likely to survive."
chances are, shell be ugly, but shes healthy because she cheates her
genes by dieting and working out. and she sure as hell wouldnt trip our
mate selection device. even though her body is in better condition than
most of the other women. it just shows how attraction isnt based on
logic, but genetics. regardless.

our mate selection device is primitive, and it assumes we live in the
same conditions as we did during our ancestors time when it comes to
mate selection. since its genetic, its not like we can change it, and
like anyone would care to change our genes. but you get the idea.

moving along......


WHAT ABOUT WOMEN? WHAT TRIGGERS THEIR MATE SELECTION DEVICE? WHAT ARE
THEY 'ATTRACTED' TO?

well, im glad you asked.

first off. men have a very simple mate selection device. and its
becuase the strategy nature gave them to pass their genes on is a very
simple one. all they have to do is bang as much women as possilbe, and
find a fertile healthy genes female cued by beauty.

this was becuase men had sperm, they can "pass it on"

but women are much more complicated. they have a much more complicated
mate selection strategy, and this is why so many women "get" how men
work. but yet so many men fail to "get" how women work. their mate
selecting process is very complicated.

why is it so complicated?

becuase they carry the egg. they got risks to worry about. they are the
ones who will be stuck with the offspring. and they can only have one
baby at a time. becuase of all these risky factors, women have to be
very picky in selecting the correct mate so they dont choose the wrong
one. choosing the wrong mate could endanger her survival, as well as
her offspring. so its very important she chooses the correct mate.

***warning, this is about to get very complicated, so try not to
get confused***

The things that a woman would require from a man would be:

1) off spring support (this plays a huge roll)

2)healthy genes

3) support in general

It's a known fact that men are more aggressive than women. And this is
again another evolutionary thing. Men would go hunting for food, and
women would care for the offspring. Thus natural selection would force
an aggressive behavior to be geneticaly programmed in men(other
evolutionary pressures for this included competition between other
males). It's only natural that evolution would force aggression to be
a male trait And the women would naturally become genetically
programmed to be more nurturing towards infants. Thus men are strong,
and women are vulnerable.

Since women were vulnerable, that means they werent very effecient at
defending their offspring, nor supporting them with food. So having a
man arround played a huge roll in the support of her offspring.

Did you know that our ancestors will kill infants that werent theirs?
In otherwords, if a male found a woman, and she had an infant, and he
wanted to impregnate her, he would kill the infant. Naturally, they did
not want anyother males genes to be passed on. Our ancestors were very
selfish creatures.

So this was just one threat to a womans offspring that goes to a list
of others. Other threats would include predators. this is a pretty
obvious threat back then in the nomadic life style.

So a man's ability to protect the offspring from other males and
predators was just one of the factors that would be imperitive for the
survival of the offspring. And natural selection would integrate this
concept into the genes of females. Ill get back to this.

Another important thing that would benefit the offspring would be the
providing of food. and again the male would be responsible for this. So
this was another reason having a high quality man around would play a
role in the survival of the offspring.

Its a known fact that human infants are a burden when first born. So It
would be very hard for a woman to go out and find food, and care for
her baby, and protect it all at the same time. So a having a man around
was imperitive for the survival of the offspring.

The woman needed a high quality male that would meet these requirements
and that would stay with her. (perhaps the importance of a man being
around genetically shaped why women always seem to want a commited
relationship. its instinctual for women. hmmmmmmm)

There are dominant males, and there are submissive males.

Its a fact that if a male was dominant, he would have the most
territory, he would have the most access to food, and would be able to
beat the **** out of anyother males. He would also monopolize the food.

So as you can see. The dominant male would provide the best support for
the offspring. he would do the best job at protecting the young. He
would do the best job at providing food.

So Basically, natural selection would make it so that women would be
attracted to the dominant males.

Now im gonna quickly jump to a different topic really quick before i
get back to dominant males.

What about healthy genes you might ask?????

yes, healthy genes were important for what would be the best mate for a
woman. Healthy genes meant healthy offspring. Its important, however,
what good were healthy genes if the father couldnt protect the
offspring or provide food for it. What im getting at here is that it is
more important a woman get support for her offspring than to get
healthy genes.

Similar to women. Healthy genes in a man would mean little or no
mutations in genes. some specific facial features would suggest
mutationless genes. so a "good looking man" could have the healthier
genes. but notice how i said its more important for offspring support,
than it is for healthy genes. thus the dominant male would be more
important to the female than the male with healthy genes and a pretty
face.

This explains why women dont put an importance on looks like men do.
The importance for looks on men does exist, however, it is very deluded
comparred to how important it is for a man.

And if youll notice today. Women have make up, becuase becoming
beautiful has been so important in attracting men.

Make up is a tool to make a woman look better than she really is.

So if looks were as important for attracting women as it is for a woman
to attract a man, wouldnt man have invented the tool to look
better(makeup) for men as well?

yes, make up would have been invented for men if looks were that
important. But since it hasnt been invented for men. it just goes to
show how not so important looks are in order to attract a woman.

looks havent been important enough for make up to be invented for men.

Now back to the dominant males

Now, we now know that having an alpha dominant male around was vital
for the fate of the offspring. And Naturrally, natural selection would
have made it so that women today only carry a gene that makes them
attracted to alpha males.

you know how the process goes. There are some women attracted to
dominant males, and some attracted to submissive males.

The ones that were attracted to the submissive males would get their
genes passed on, their offspring wouldnt get very far.

while the ones who were attracted to the dominant males would have a
man that could protect her children and support them, and they would
survive.

Thus, all the women today carry a gene that makes them attracted to the
dominant male.


Now, the big question....HOW DID THE FEMALE MATE SELECTION DEVICE
RECOGNIZE A DOMINANT MALE?

glad you asked.

we all know attraction isnt logical. so a woman couldnt use logic to
identify a dominant male. She couldnt go "hmmmm, i see, you have lots
of food, and territiory, hmmm, i think you might be a dominant male...
im gonna choose to be attracted to him". nope, it doesnt work like
that.

And this just proves the myth wrong that women are attracted to a man
with a fat wallet, and a nice car. women cant use logic to identify a
high status dominant male when it comes to attraction.

Consider this...

Male to male competition is the vehicle the draws the line between
dominant male and submissive male.

since the males are competing with eachother for food, territory, and
women, obviously some would lose, some would win.

the overpowering males always won. thus the overpowering male was
always the dominant male.

so what things would give him the ability to be dominant male?

Lets look at the neanderthal era. During the neanderthal era, the
bigger you were, the more dominant oyu were. you were able to beat
the **** out of smaller males, and over power them, allowing you to
monopolize territory, food, and women.

Thus size was a major contributing factor to being a dominant male
during this era. Thus natural selection would make it so that one of
the things that women would identify a dominant male. Thus women would
be genetically programmed to be attracted to a large male.

becuase size was so important to the neanderthals, natural selection
would force the neanderthals to get bigger and bigger.

natural selection would just weave out all the smaller neanderthal
males, leaving the bigger ones. Then it would happen again, all the
smallest of the left over big males would get weaved out, and it would
just keep happening over and over. And they would evolve into getting
bigger and bigger. Archeological records support this. Scientists have
found that older fossils of early neanderthals were smaller than the
fossils of much newer fossils.

Now your probably gonna say "so basically being big is all you gotta
do to trigger a woman's attraction mechanism? yeah right"

my answer to that is, "im not done yet"

then along came cromagnon, he would change it all. He had something
that made him more dominant than a huge ass neanderthal.

Can you guess what it was that he had that was so powerful?

....

....

He has something called INTELLIGENCE.

he was able to make tools, and make weapons.

so he would become the dominant male. and he would be why size no
longer mattered. And if you look on an archealogical scale. you know
where it has a small monkey, then a larger one, then a big ape man,
then a larger one, then a smaller humanoid one, than an even smaller
humanesque one, than an even smaller human(homosapien).

This is evidence that size is no longer important in survival and being
dominant. And natural selection hs reflected that with the all of a
sudden shrinking evolution. And this would also change what women were
genetically programmed to be attracted to in a man.

Size no longer determined male dominance. A new set of cues would be
programmed into a womans genes that would allow her mate selection
device to identify a dominant male. As a dominant male was the most
important thing in protecting her offspring, and having her genes passed on.

***********break time!!!!!! im really getting tired from all this
typing. But im gonna have to continue this in part III. Next post, ill
get down to the new cues that triggered the mate selection device wich
would result in the strong emotion of atraction in women. and how these
cues became ingrained into a womans genes via natural selection. I know
its really getting interesting, but its all good.

remember, when we feel the overwhelming feeling of attraction, this
means that our mate selection device has been triggered. a woman has
walked by with the traits that suggest she is the correct mate, and our
mate selection device recognized them, and was set off. The result,
constant staring, drooling, thinking about her in a dirty way,
obsession, all the feeling of this super emotion called attraction.

this should realy make you think of women in a different way now. and, if your smart, youll understand why this is so important in being successful with women.

 

[Donjuanpablo]

Hey EW

This is a good post, but I think you've probably gone a bit too deep into the science of it all when a lot of guys on this forum are interested in smaller, more precise pieces of information.

You are on to something with intelligence, but I will have to see your next post,

DJP

 

[ELITE_WOMANIZER]

im doing for a "just so you will know" purpose. i know im getting really deep into it. but its for informative purposes. the bottom line, youll actually understand exactly why we like the things we like when it comes to choosing partners.

things we dont take the time to wonder about.

and understanding this well lead to more success with women when you incorporate this science into PUing.

 

[Heavyweight]

Are you David DeAngelo?

 

[Cesare Cardinali]

Interesting stuff but it looks like a cut and paste job to me if you compare how his other posts are written.

 

[Starwind]

Very interesting stuff, I'd like to read Part III soon, when you get around to it.

 

[affirmed]

on one hand it does look like a cut and paste (the indents too. But he could have just written it up in a text editor first) but on the other, all his spelling habits (not begining paragraphs with capitals etc.) seem to tie in.

Nah, he probably wrote it but it's obviously not his own conclusions and I don't think he's trying to say they are, this stuff has been written about quite a lot, most famously in the treatise of love. However he's expanding on it in an interesting way and I personally enjoy the detail with which he's gone into it.

Makes a change from most of the same old, same old posts around here.

 

[ELITE_WOMANIZER]

Well. it is a copy and paste job.

i wrote it in ms notepad first. since i knew i had so much to say, i wanted to be able to type my thoughts, save what i got, and take a break, and come back to it later and finish typing it. you get the idea. Then i just copy and pasted it onto here so you ppl could read it.

i dont think i could handle the stress of typing this entire thing out all in one sitting, i needed to take breaks every now nd then.

glad you ppl like it.

------------------
I get more ass than a toilet seat. frogman1@hotmail.com

 

[008]

we have to remember that we humans ARE more advanced than animals. We are also much more self-aware.

The AFC reaches a point where he does not want to be hurt again, assumes all women are bytches, and a good physical appearance in a woman does NOT trigger love feelings on its own, bcos HUMAN interaction and long-term compatability come into play (we are NOT exactly the same as animals, remember that). Good looks + *****iness = potential failed marriage, divorce, drain on resources, lack of future status.

It's becoming MORE of a dog eat dog world and the new era of sluttishness is now forcing the wiser of us men to put up a bytch shield, in much the same way women do towards potentially undesirable partners! HIDE the mask of desire at all costs!

this post is very basic and the Holy of Grail of Dating explains the same theories much more eloquently.

 

[Paradox]

Interesting post.

Make sure to post your tips in the 'Tips forum.

Topic moved to 'Tips'

------------------
I am The Game

 

[bitrot]

Your ideas were fine (although you can't express them very well) until you said that genes are worse now because of technology. If you knew a little more about biology, you'd find this statement laughable.

Here are two of the main reasons:
1) Genes are neither "good" nor "bad" in a universal sense, but only when considered in the context of the organism's CURRENT ENVIRONMENT.
2) There is absolutely no reason technology would evolve less fertile women.

 

[covenmandj_79]

DO U have the CD's Advanced Series from DoubleyourDAting ?

is the same

 

[affirmed]

bitrot:

If Beauty has become a reliable way to measure health over millions of years of evolution and technology in the form of make-up allows women to look more beautiful than they are, it stands to reason that this could have an affect on a worse generation of genes being created...

I can see that point, correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[ELITE_WOMANIZER]

oh, and bitrot.

if you knew anything about natural selection, you would understand how technology is degrading our gene pool. i find your post luaghable

you idiot

its a known fact there are a hell of alot more fat ppl around today than there used to be. and it doesnt take a rocket scientist to figure out that these are examples of bad genes.

and can you guess why they are around today? becuase of technology. becuase of hospitals, and all the medical technology to keep these fat @sses alive.

along time ago, without the technology of today, these fat fvcks would be whiped out in a blink of an eye.

its a fact: when evolutionary pressures are taken of an organism, natural selection loses its effect. And today, natural selection is losing its effect. genes are getting worse and worse. all becuase of technology, allowing us to cheat nature.

and there you have it.

ill get into how beuty relates to healthy genes in another post. but just to be blunt,...it does relate to healthy genes, and natural selection has made it so.

 

[diplomatic_lies]

This is why Somalians can survive on mud and grass.

 

[bitrot]

The reason we're suddenly seeing lots of fat people is not because of genetic change; in fact, genetic changes happen very slowly.

In fact, it is the genes themselves that are making so many fat Americans. In past times, it was ADVANTAGEOUS to store excess fat that the human didn't need right away. This trait was selected for, since organisms that stored energy for later use survived more. However, in this time of overabundance, people eat fat ALL THE TIME, it's not just a special occaision like it would be for a hunter/gatherer or other person in a 'less-advanced' society.

Thus, the same genes that helped people survive thousands and even hundreds of years ago are now causing health problems.

In other words, please shut the **** up about this topic you have only minimal knowledge in.

 

[akaEnder]

genetic changes happen very slowly.

This is untrue. Punctuated equilibrium is the theroy that says that Genetic change can happen very quickly over time base on changes in evnoirment.

However bitrot, what you said about the genes used to store fat is corrrect.

I have a question though, is the fact that technology has made our gene pool have more variation an bad thing?

Couldn't we all just depend on technology? Would that be a bad thing?

 

[affirmed]

Weak people and those who are GENETICALLY unhealthy can now survive and live a good life. Nothing against that or anything. Women that are not healthy can appear healthy with make up and plastic surgery.

SURELY this must have a detrimental effect on the quality of the gene pool, simply because the alpha males are no longer mating with the healthiest women in such high numbers...

 

[ELITE_WOMANIZER]

the man who wrote:

"Weak people and those who are GENETICALLY unhealthy can now survive and live a good life. Nothing against that or anything. Women that are not healthy can appear healthy with make up and plastic surgery.
SURELY this must have a detrimental effect on the quality of the gene pool, simply because the alpha males are no longer mating with the healthiest women in such high numbers..."

said it well.


and bitriot, shut the fvck up, i know more about natural selection than you ever will. I know more about anthropology than you ever will. i know more about women than you ever will. And im smarter than you will ever be.

and it is a fvcking fact that genes are being degraded becuase of technology. Technology is taking evolutionary pressures off the human species.It's allowing people who should not be alive today, be alive. Thus these peoples genes are being added to our gene pool, and degrading it.

women and makeup is just one example out of many examples of the degrading gene pool and technology.

 

[ELITE_WOMANIZER]

oh, and one more thing. If you knew more about this topic than me, wouldnt you have not only posted this way before me, but also it would have beem better than mine.

i think you(bitriot) are an example of a jealous little dumb ass, who wishes he could post intelectual topics like mine. The only topics you post are "how can i get a date with this girl?" .....so lame.