The bandwagon effect

[MatureDJ]

I was reading this article about the election:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20081030/pl_politico/15070

It got me thinking that the dating "election" is the same way. Women want to go with the man that they perceive as the winner. If they first determine that a potential suitor is uninteresting, but then notice that other women find him interesting, they will reevaluate their decision - perhaps even deciding that the suitor is indeed interesting.

 

[MacAvoy]

Yes, theres a common saying around here that backs up what you're thinking. It goes something like this:

A women would rather share a successful man than be straddle to a faithful loser.

 

[Victory Unlimited]

Mac is right.


Also, add to his statement:

Some women are like lazy-assed lemmings with low IQs. It's easier for them to just follow the opinion of the crowd as opposed to either taking the time to form their own opiinons, or to expend the mental energy that it would take to investigate a man's true value for themselves.

 

[mintxx]

I'll vouch for that, as far as women:

After a tax exam on Monday, I hung out at a pub with two girls who'd taken the exam with me. After some discussion they became aware that I'm not averse to hookers, strippers, threesomes etc, that I treat women 'badly', that I'm the guy that several of their friends have slept with etc. Because I didn't know them and most of my 'exs' are graduating and heading off to top firms where i'll have nothing to do with them professionally, I revealed all..

Result: the single one throws herself at me, after taking them along for my mission to the city to do some deals and hang with friends, the one with a boyfriend then suggests we have a threesome. I was actually shocked; these chicks were totally normal seeming, but it was like some switch had flippped as soon as I bluntly and humourously revealed how 'deviant' I was; it became a competition. They were both openly talking about past experiences and speculating on what it would be like for me to fukk them in the a55 etc.

I took the single one home and she was a lousy fukk, I sent the other one off as she was 28 and not so hot. SO no result really.. but holy ****. I went out of my way to scare these chicks off and shock them as entertainment and instead they got all randy. It was as if I was a small time version of Tucker Max for a night.

Incidentally, I think I ripped that ''exactly. fvcking men' line off a guy here, because it just fit so well at one point. crazy.

 

[Phyzzle]

I believe a prominent Nazi said that dealing with the masses of the public is like dealing with a woman. Just talk like you believe your own bullsh!t. The worse you treat them, the harder they will work to justify it to themselves. ("They're ruthless, shady guys, but they're the kind of guys we need to protect us from the enemy.")

 

[jophil28]

Some women are like lazy-assed lemmings with low IQs. It's easier for them to just follow the opinion of the crowd as opposed to either taking the time to form their own opiinons, or to expend the mental energy that it would take to investigate a man's true value for themselves.

I have spent the past 30 some odd years playing and dumping women and hoping that the essence of VU's statement above is not true.
IT is .

 

[taiyuu_otoko]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_proof
http://www.media-studies.ca/articles/influence_ch4.htm
http://www.uncommon-knowledge.co.uk/social/social-proof.html


I wouldn't be so discriminatory, VU.

ALL PEOPLE are lazy ass lemmings, and would rather follow the crowd than make their own opinions.

Social Proof is the glue behind all the matrix's you can't escape from.

See, a long time ago, there were a race of matrix-free people that didn't respond to social proof. Then came a tiger. Everybody ran, except for the matrix-free people. They wanted to form their own opinion, you see. They didn't want to follow the opinion of the crowd, you see.

Unfortunatley, they all got eaten, and none of them lived long enough to pass on their social proof lemming resistance genes, and here we are today.

bank runs, market crashes, ray-bans, three button suits, you think that

YOU


are any different?

 

[STR8UP]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_proof
http://www.media-studies.ca/articles/influence_ch4.htm
http://www.uncommon-knowledge.co.uk/social/social-proof.html


I wouldn't be so discriminatory, VU.

ALL PEOPLE are lazy ass lemmings, and would rather follow the crowd than make their own opinions.

Social Proof is the glue behind all the matrix's you can't escape from.

See, a long time ago, there were a race of matrix-free people that didn't respond to social proof. Then came a tiger. Everybody ran, except for the matrix-free people. They wanted to form their own opinion, you see. They didn't want to follow the opinion of the crowd, you see.

Unfortunatley, they all got eaten, and none of them lived long enough to pass on their social proof lemming resistance genes, and here we are today.

bank runs, market crashes, ray-bans, three button suits, you think that

YOU


are any different?

I actually agree with you.

 

[Victory Unlimited]

I wouldn't be so discriminatory, VU.

ALL PEOPLE are lazy ass lemmings, and would rather follow the crowd than make their own opinions...

Unfortunatley, they all got eaten, and none of them lived long enough to pass on their social proof lemming resistance genes, and here we are today.

bank runs, market crashes, ray-bans, three button suits, you think that

YOU


are any different?

Good point, Taiyuu. And much RESPECT to you.

And I agree with much of it. That's why I didn't say "all" women----I said "some". And yes, human beings overall have a strong bent toward conformity in many areas-----so NO ONE is totally exempt from this----but that's not really the point I was trying to make.

What I was referring to specifically was that I've personally known a whole lot of women who gravitated toward liking, and even pursuing a particular type of guy----WHEN they noticed that that guy had suddenly garnered the spotlight. And whenever I've asked them "Why THAT guy?", very few of them could explain or adequately articulate their rationale behind their desire to chase him.

And some of the guys in question were guys that those SAME women rejected earlier, simply because those guys weren't "popular" or whatever at an earlier point. I'm sure there are exceptions to every rule, but sometimes the existence of the "exception" PROVES the rule.

Here in my theater of war---The Front Lines of the "dirty south" of the United States, I've known many women who decided that they suddenly "wanted a guy" simply BECAUSE a whole lot of other women wanted him. But to the contrary, I can't remember ONE guy that I've encountered that "changed his mind" and decided that he NOW wants a woman simply BECAUSE he found out a whole lot of other guys NOW want her.

Example:

If all of a sudden, "Whoopi Goldberg" suddenly got the attention of a plethora of men, I doubt VERY SERIOUSLY that guys who NEVER were attracted to her before that would suddenly start salivating over her and chasing her like she was "Halle Berry"---------SIMPLY because "Hey, all the other guys are doing it!"




Therefore, my uncontrolled, unscientific, and admittedly PERSONAL observation has been that The Lemming Effect (or as Mature DJ dubbed it---The Bandwagon Effect), as it pertains to relationship pursuits, is MOSTLY a female phenomena. And the reason I tend to call it the Lemming Effect is because most romantic relationship decisions made in the ABSENCE of "fore" thought AND "during" thought, usually share the same fate as those little animals who just love to routinely throw themselves off the nearest cliff-----only to drown in an ocean of REGRET.

I've found that just following the crowd in regards to matters of the heart is shortsighted at best, and foolhardy at worst. And I believe this may also be a hidden reason why SOME women can "fall out of love" with SOME men so easily.

Because they MOSTLY viewed the worth and value of that man through the lens of other women's collective eyes.

So just like any fad...when that guy STOPS being "trendy", or if he STOPS being the "it" guy, then he's easily discarded by such women-----and they're off to the next guy.

Yes, it's off to the "Lemming Races" AGAIN!!!!

So in an ironic way, that's what my Actresses in the Theater of War post was all about. It explains why some women can eliminate their boyfriends and husbands from their lives-----seemingly without ANY emotional difficulty whatsoever.

So again, my post was not meant to be an indictment of all women by any means-----but it WAS meant to be a direct, UNAPOLOGETIC indictment of the actions of that rather large segment of women who DO conduct their romantic lives in such a thoughtless way.


March on.

 

[ketostix]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_proof
http://www.media-studies.ca/articles/influence_ch4.htm
http://www.uncommon-knowledge.co.uk/social/social-proof.html


I wouldn't be so discriminatory, VU.

ALL PEOPLE are lazy ass lemmings, and would rather follow the crowd than make their own opinions.

Social Proof is the glue behind all the matrix's you can't escape from.

See, a long time ago, there were a race of matrix-free people that didn't respond to social proof. Then came a tiger. Everybody ran, except for the matrix-free people. They wanted to form their own opinion, you see. They didn't want to follow the opinion of the crowd, you see.

Unfortunatley, they all got eaten, and none of them lived long enough to pass on their social proof lemming resistance genes, and here we are today.

I don't agree with your analogy here, it's apples and oranges and SP doesn't have much to do with with threat aversion, but I see where you are going with trying to explain why people follow the crowd. It works both ways though, Germans following the crowd in 30's and 40's brought themselves almost total destruction. Some of the smart ones that didn't follow the crowd left and lived on.

Anyway, I agree with VU in relationship matters it's mostly a female phenomenon to follow the bandwagon. I think men and women go about entering relationships differently.

 

[SoCalMike]

Mac is right.


Also, add to his statement:

Some women are like lazy-assed lemmings with low IQs. It's easier for them to just follow the opinion of the crowd as opposed to either taking the time to form their own opiinons, or to expend the mental energy that it would take to investigate a man's true value for themselves.

And modify that statement to say "Most" instead of "Some"

 

[SoCalMike]

And some of the guys in question were guys that those SAME women rejected earlier, simply because those guys weren't "popular" or whatever at an earlier point. I'm sure there are exceptions to every rule, but sometimes the existence of the "exception" PROVES the rule.

This has happened to me personally. I can't even count the times I met a girl in college, hit on her, got shot down hard, only when she found out later I was a DJ on the college radio (and at local rave clubs) and was therefore "popular" that same chick would start hitting on me big time. It's as if a fvcking switch was flipped. Ridiculous, but hey, women are herd animals.

It also works in reverse. No matter how good looking you are, if you're perceived as "weird" or a "misfit" or "unpopular" then 90% of women won't be ineterested in you, or they will be but will hide it from their peers.

 

[taiyuu_otoko]

Anyway, I agree with VU in relationship matters it's mostly a female phenomenon to follow the bandwagon. I think men and women go about entering relationships differently.

What? Good Lord! So you mean that females will be attracted to the Alpha Male en masse, and ditch him as soon as a more Alpha Male appears!

What's an AFC to do?

 

[puma183]

It also works in reverse. No matter how good looking you are, if you're perceived as "weird" or a "misfit" or "unpopular" then 90% of women won't be ineterested in you, or they will be but will hide it from their peers.

In his book The Red Queen, evolutionary biologist Matt Ridley explores some of the reasons behind this phenomenon.

http://books.google.com/books?id=fH...&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=4&ct=result

The "herd mentality" that females exhibit in their sexual preferences is described as the "tyranny of fashion". Similar to choices in hair-style and clothes, if a female doesn't go with the herd, she will suffer negative consequences as a result. In the mating-arena an examples is when an independent spirited female (if one historically existed) mates with a male that has unpopular traits. The children of that union will more than likely have the same traits that has made that male unpopular in the first place. These children are going to have a harder time finding mates of their own. Very few grandchildren will be produced, if any. Hence the original female has now shot herself in the foot in Darwinian terms. Her lineage will not be continued into the 3rd generation. All her parental investment in her offspring is for naught and her lineage ends right there.

This is the reason why such "independent" behavior in females regarding mate choices is very rare. It has been bred out of the gene pool due to the "tyranny of fashion".

Not my theory, but Matt Ridleys. I tend to agree with him for the most part.

 

[StevenR]

I agree with this for the most part. However, if you talk about past girlfriends when you are on a date, I would think that would make them more attracted to you by showing that other women were interested in you in the past. However, you are not supposed to do that on a date and from the few times I have talked about an ex it did seem to be a complete turn off to women.