Jeffst nailed it- status trumps all, alphaness runs a close second, and looks are the runner up.
I will say though that a friend of mine awhile back was 21 years old and probably what most women would consider to be a "10". Maybe a nine if she wasn't into blonde hair. He was even auditioning with Perleman to be in a boy band. And let me tell you.....this dude had women literally crawling on him when we went out.
He was a marriage-as-a-goal beta, which was his ultimate demise, but for pulling club chicks I've never seen one guy get more attention.
1) They are saying that their dudes are "ugly". I wonder if other women feel the same way? And 99.9% of people (men OR women) will not become involved with someone who repulses them.
2) Some of the women responding admit to having had self esteem issues. How many more aren't admitting it?
3) A couple f them mentioned enjoying the control they have over the relationship. Not the kind of woman I would want.
Isn't this looks debate dead already? People TEND to date within their category, but women are more likely to be involved in a relationship with a slightly less attractive man due to mitigating factors, men are more likely to have a sexual relationship with a woman BELOW his category, usually on the DL.
That said, today I did meet a mismatched couple. The dude was about 5'3", 210 lbs. He was ROUND. The chick was a svelte 5'4", 115ish. I honestly thought the dude might have been a chick at first, since his chubby features gave him a feminine look. I would say he was a 3-4 on most women's scale, and SHE was probably a 6.5 bad day, 7.5 all dolled up.
Thing is, I noticed it because it was HIGHLY UNUSUAL. You generally don't see more than a couple of point difference.
edger, I'm sure you're a cool dude but some of your ideas about women and money are wack. My theory- you need to tighten your game, playa.
I would venture to guess that it's usually more of the beta provider type of guy who attracts her with his good dad traits. And I would say that the steady provider type (not a mega status bajillionaire) that is also several points lower on the looks scale is probably twice or three times as likely as likely to get cheated on.
I will say though that a friend of mine awhile back was 21 years old and probably what most women would consider to be a "10". Maybe a nine if she wasn't into blonde hair. He was even auditioning with Perleman to be in a boy band. And let me tell you.....this dude had women literally crawling on him when we went out.
He was a marriage-as-a-goal beta, which was his ultimate demise, but for pulling club chicks I've never seen one guy get more attention.
also-Rollo Tomassi said:Between women who self-proclaim they're hot behind the anonymity of the internet, and those who are in real life lies a world of difference.
1) They are saying that their dudes are "ugly". I wonder if other women feel the same way? And 99.9% of people (men OR women) will not become involved with someone who repulses them.
2) Some of the women responding admit to having had self esteem issues. How many more aren't admitting it?
3) A couple f them mentioned enjoying the control they have over the relationship. Not the kind of woman I would want.
Isn't this looks debate dead already? People TEND to date within their category, but women are more likely to be involved in a relationship with a slightly less attractive man due to mitigating factors, men are more likely to have a sexual relationship with a woman BELOW his category, usually on the DL.
That said, today I did meet a mismatched couple. The dude was about 5'3", 210 lbs. He was ROUND. The chick was a svelte 5'4", 115ish. I honestly thought the dude might have been a chick at first, since his chubby features gave him a feminine look. I would say he was a 3-4 on most women's scale, and SHE was probably a 6.5 bad day, 7.5 all dolled up.
Thing is, I noticed it because it was HIGHLY UNUSUAL. You generally don't see more than a couple of point difference.
edger, I'm sure you're a cool dude but some of your ideas about women and money are wack. My theory- you need to tighten your game, playa.
I don't really buy that women would consciously make this choice. If anything, women are much more attracted to men they HAVE to compete over. I have a feeling that both of the two best friends I recently fukked were MUCH more inclined to have sex with me because they each knew that the other wanted to fukk me. The first one wouldn't fully give it up the first couple of times I hung out with her, but last weekend when I ran into her AFTER she found out I was banging her friend it was GAME ON. Her goal that night was to fukk me, and make sure her friend found out about it.Luthor Rex said:This is actually a good point. A woman could pick a man who has other qualities she finds attractive but who isn't the handsomest man in the world so that she won't have to constantly worry about him fvcking other women.
I would venture to guess that it's usually more of the beta provider type of guy who attracts her with his good dad traits. And I would say that the steady provider type (not a mega status bajillionaire) that is also several points lower on the looks scale is probably twice or three times as likely as likely to get cheated on.
I see that someone hasn't been getting her daily dose of roissy.....plaything said:Beauty truly is in the eyes of the beholder.