Sexual past matters for women, but not men

[Mad Jack]

What does hypergamy actually mean. I've heard neckbeards say it but idk what it is

It means women having sex with more than one guy. It's their way of saying slut without saying slut, because to them any woman that gets more than them is a clearly a slut.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[WildZoo]

Anecdotal evidence of course, but among my group of friends from high school, most of the guys were pretty average looking. There was one guy who everyone agreed was super attractive, and we all assumed he could date any girl he wanted...but he never showed interest in any of us. Turns out he was (and continues to be, four years later) horrible at talking to girls. There we were thinking he just had that cool, aloof, brooding personality...but no, he was terrified of us. Meanwhile there was a very high degree of friend group incest between the average looking guys and the girls in the group. Dude was gorgeous and he couldn't get a girlfriend until the other guys decided to help him out. Still, I don't think he dated anyone until this past year.

 

[WildZoo]

It means women having sex with more than one guy. It's their way of saying slut without saying slut, because to them any woman that gets more than them is a clearly a slut.

Wait I thought it meant dating or marrying "up" in terms of social standing or whatever

 

[Hustler101]

Anecdotal evidence of course, but among my group of friends from high school, most of the guys were pretty average looking. There was one guy who everyone agreed was super attractive, and we all assumed he could date any girl he wanted...but he never showed interest in any of us. Turns out he was (and continues to be, four years later) horrible at talking to girls. There we were thinking he just had that cool, aloof, brooding personality...but no, he was terrified of us. Meanwhile there was a very high degree of friend group incest between the average looking guys and the girls in the group. Dude was gorgeous and he couldn't get a girlfriend until the other guys decided to help him out. Still, I don't think he dated anyone until this past year.

lol those are outliers... Every guy I know that's good with girls is a 7+/10. Most have pretty good social skills as well which are **also required** @Mad Jack .

I know quite a few average looking guys who are very funny, fun to be around and have excellent social skills. They always get friendzoned by the hotter chicks but find it very easy to date/sleep with average girls. Hence why we have "leagues."

 

[Hustler101]

What does hypergamy actually mean. I've heard neckbeards say it but idk what it is

20% of guys sleeping with 80% of girls... it runs off of that. Neckbeards nowadays blame their genetics, they don't blame women.

 

[WildZoo]

Friend zone talk might be my cue to go back to pretending this thread doesn't exist

 

[studentdoct69]

lol those are outliers... Every guy I know that's good with girls is a 7+/10. Most have pretty good social skills as well which are **also required** @Mad Jack .

I know quite a few average looking guys who are very funny, fun to be around and have excellent social skills. They always get friendzoned by the hotter chicks but find it very easy to date/sleep with average girls. Hence why we have "leagues."

They're not outliers, look around

 

[Mad Jack]

Wait I thought it meant dating or marrying "up" in terms of social standing or whatever

Nah, there's not really a term that I can remember for that one in particular. There's a bit about it discussed in regard to sexual market value, in which having enough money can boost your sexual and relationship prospects, but other than that I don't think there's much.

 

[WildZoo]

Nah, there's not really a term that I can remember for that one in particular. There's a bit about it discussed in regard to sexual market value, in which having enough money can boost your sexual and relationship prospects, but other than that I don't think there's much.

Google lied to me then

 

[Zweihander]

All religious people who secretly sleep around condemn others for doing so.

Nonsense.

 

[Hustler101]

Friend zone talk might be my cue to go back to pretending this thread doesn't exist

A guy who's fun to hang out with and talk to but isn't sexually appealing gets friendzoned. It means the girl wants the guy around but doesn't find him attractive. If the girls looks are equal to the guys though she'll date him since she knows that she can't do better looks wise.

Every girl would want a guy like the one I posted a pic but knows that such guys are unattainable or wouldn't stick around.

 

[Hustler101]

They're not outliers, look around

I've never met a good looking guy with poor social skills. I've met endless unattractive guys with poor social skills though.
Anyway looks just determine your league and get your foot in the door. Personality and then things like status/money are what actually get you further in your own league. Obviously just standing around looking good isn't enough.

 

[WildZoo]

It means the girl wants the guy around but doesn't find him attractive.

Or, ya know, it means she doesn't have romantic feelings for him, for whatever reason, but values his friendship.

 

[Hustler101]

Or, ya know, it means she doesn't have romantic feelings for him, for whatever reason, but values his friendship.

Meanwhile the guy thinks she's hot and wants her. Another reason why looks are #1.
I have seen attractive guys get friendzoned though but only cause they had red flag traits. However the girl still initiated a friend with benefits thing with them lol.

 

[WhtsThFrequency]

Every girl would want a guy like the one I posted a pic but knows that such guys are unattainable or wouldn't stick around.

Wat. He looks like a high schooler who couldn't even grow a beard.

 

[WildZoo]

Wat. He looks like a high schooler who couldn't even grow a beard.

Apparently he's 24. Must be a member of the perpetual pre-teen club.

 

[The_Sunny_Doc]

A guy who's fun to hang out with and talk to but isn't sexually appealing gets friendzoned. It means the girl wants the guy around but doesn't find him attractive. If the girls looks are equal to the guys though she'll date him since she knows that she can't do better looks wise.

Sex appeal encompasses so much more than looks. And did you ever stop to consider that people's taste run the gamut? A "9" in someone's eyes will be a "6" in another's? We each have a different idea of what's beautiful and what's inside can heavily shape that, speaking as a woman who has gone from not being attracted to being totally gaga over guys who didn't immediately interest me in the romantic sense. It's a big wide world out there, and it doesn't play by your shallow rules.

You underestimate the importance of emotions. If you help the other person to feel good about themselves in your presence, it can transform their view of you.

 

[touchpause13]

Wat. He looks like a high schooler who couldn't even grow a beard.

Hahahahaha I had the same thought.

I'd prefer to have sex with men who look like men. Beard or GTFO

 

[studentdoct69]

.

 

[jl lin]

I haven't even followed this religious debate. If you claim to practice a religion but have ongoing premarital sex then you're a hypocrite. End of story. There's no ifs or buts.

People can rationalize a lot, Christian or not. I mean you could argue this a lot of ways. My point is the even in a person's rationalization--as tightly held as it may be, in time, if they belong to Christ, He will do his business/work in their spirits/souls, if they are truly his and they are open to obedience. It's the whole deal of no commitment and monogamy and habitual disobedience w/o conviction and repentance that at least eventually has to make one wonder if their relationship with God is genuine. It's not our job to condemn people. We can and evaluate and judge/discern behaviors; but it isn't our job to judge in the sense of condemnation. Everyone is a hypocrite to one degree or another--what goes on deeper or beyond that is for God. Not my place to play God.

 

[studentdoct69]

Sex appeal encompasses so much more than looks. Did you ever stop to consider that people's taste run the gamut? A "9" in someone's eyes will be a "6" in another's? We each have a different idea of what's beautiful and what's inside can heavily shape that, speaking as a woman who has gone from not being attracted to being totally gaga over guys who didn't immediately interest me in the romantic sense. It's a big wide world out there, and it doesn't play by your shallow rules.

You underestimate the importance of emotions. If you help the other person to feel good about themselves in your presence, it can transform their view of you.

Actually, for the most part, this has been scientifically proven as well. Ever heard of the golden ratio? Women with features that align to the golden ratio are more physically appealing . Technically physical beauty is objective. But it's a different ball-game when you fall in love with someone

 

[touchpause13]

20% of guys sleeping with 80% of girls...

This is the stupidest thing I've read all day, and I read multiple posts by Dave today.

 

[jl lin]

I don't disagree with you. There are *more* than looks. However looks are #1 and can't be compensated for. A 5/10 guy could never compete with an 8/10.

Also appearance/looks are highly objective for men and somewhat subjective for women. Basically a 1-10 scale rating would be very accurate for a guy and there wouldn't be much disagreement whereas for a girl it'd be different since guys can have widely different preferences.

You are incorrect in that comment--whatever the 5/10 vs. 8/10 means. The only real objective measurement we have for physical beauty is symmetry--everything else varies from place to place, culture to culture, era to era.

At any rate, you'd be surprised, women in particular, can often be more holistic in appraisal for mates, in general, as compared with men, which is not to say that men cannot be holistic in making their choices as well. The later usually requires a lot of inner confidence, balance, and maturity within the individual man or woman. You can't go by purely high schools relationships or early college; but especially in more recent generations, the general level of overall maturity is lacking comparing to say 20 years ago or more. People have also been "idiotized" by the plethora of incessant media influences and such--so much that they think something that should be much more than sexual pleasure is just "banging." They don't even get the depth of emotional/spiritual expenditure that goes into sexual encounters--whether it is conscious or subconscious. Yes, you know there have been studies on this. Playing fast and lose with sexual intimacy can be a real problem for people.

Also, one of the biggest things that are important to women is the ability to trust. They may have developed the opposite in their own behavior, b/c they feel that having a trusting relationship is a joke, so if you can't beat em, join em.

Geez, Billy Joel just married, what, his forth wife. NOW the dude is talented and has some bucks; but he wouldn't be considered in our culture as highly physically attractive. Woman are less likely, in general, however to see men as trophies, as men seek out certain types as "trophies." Part of that is a subconscious desiree to reproduce with optimally genetically healthy individuals. Some women may well see them as meal tickets or holders of the gold. In general, when women are interested interrelationships, they physical becomes a smaller part of the whole--and ultimately that is probably true for males also that want long-term, meaningful relationships. Like most men that go primarily for the "trophy" wife, gold-digging women will also probably not be ultimately happy and fulfilled in their relationship with the partner in the long-term. Same thing is also true when people marry others in order to try to happy pretty kids; the connection will be a plus; but ultimately that alone does not guarantee the longevity of the relationship--there's got to be a lot more to make the long haul.

 

[mercaptovizadeh]

What a superficial discussion.

 

[mercaptovizadeh]

Hahahahaha I had the same thought.

I'd prefer to have sex with men who look like men. Beard or GTFO

How heterosexist of you. I'm surprised you as a bisexual care. I would think you would be all over the androgynous.

 

[jl lin]

Actually, for the most part, this has been scientifically proven as well. Ever heard of the golden ratio? Women with features that align to the golden ratio are more physically appealing . Technically physical beauty is objective. But it's a different ball-game when you fall in love with someone

That goes for men, women, a lot in art and music, and how we relate to what is considered beauty. Again symmetry is the only universal acceptance of what is beauty. That symmetrical appreciation goes beyond mere "taste" or the particular, dominant, sociological/cultural influences. It is probably based in a core need--physiological programming to seek out that which appears to be healthiest--by way of symmetry--for the reasons of reproduction. Much of it is not necessarily conscious.

 

[mercaptovizadeh]

That goes for men, women, a lot in art and music, and how we relate to what is considered beauty. Again symmetry is the only universal acceptance of what is beauty. That symmetrical appreciation goes beyond mere "taste" or the particular, dominant, sociological/cultural influences. It is probably based in a core need--physiological programming to seek out that which appears to be healthiest--by way of symmetry--for the reasons of reproduction. Much of it is not necessarily conscious.

Why do people find the need to find some underlying evolutionary psychology behind attraction like symmetry and such. Perhaps we just like shiny thing? Lord knows the birds do - the magpies with their shiny metal objects, the peacocks with their huge (dysfunctional) tails, the red cardinals. No obvious sign of health - only of beauty itself. The finest art, beauty for its own sake.

 

[Hustler101]

Wat. He looks like a high schooler who couldn't even grow a beard.

There are pics of him with facial hair.. he's an elite supermodel lol. Look up Gandy if you want a more mature look. Just different examples of guys in the 9-10 range.

Sex appeal encompasses so much more than looks. Did you ever stop to consider that people's taste run the gamut? A "9" in someone's eyes will be a "6" in another's? We each have a different idea of what's beautiful and what's inside can heavily shape that, speaking as a woman who has gone from not being attracted to being totally gaga over guys who didn't immediately interest me in the romantic sense. It's a big wide world out there, and it doesn't play by your shallow rules.

You underestimate the importance of emotions. If you help the other person to feel good about themselves in your presence, it can transform their view of you.

You're telling me this guy is a 6 on someone's scale?

You cannot have supermodel looks (which is what a "9" is) and only be a little bit above average to some people. Yes there is a little bit of a variation due to personal preference but no one would consider a plain average guy to be an 8 nor would it ever go the other way.
Most guys and girls know that their partners are 5s on average objectively speaking. But they settle for that due to the other factors that you said + the fact that they aren't any better themselves.

And to clarify... a 6 on the 1-10 scale is a bit above average, something like the top 15-20% of guys. A 7 would be top 5% at the most and an 8 is top 2% cause that's essentially model tier. The whole point of the numbers is to allow for accurate communication. As shown by a study most people overrate themselves (since an average is a 5/10).

 

[Hustler101]

You are incorrect in that comment--whatever the 5/10 vs. 8/10 means. The only real objective measurement we have for physical beauty is symmetry--everything else varies from place to place, culture to culture, era to era.

At any rate, you'd be surprised, women in particular, can often be more holistic in appraisal for mates, in general, as compared with men, which is not to say that men cannot be holistic in making their choices as well. The later usually requires a lot of inner confidence, balance, and maturity within the individual man or woman. You can't go by purely high schools relationships or early college; but especially in more recent generations, the general level of overall maturity is lacking comparing to say 20 years ago or more. People have also been "idiotized" by the plethora of incessant media influences and such--so much that they think something that should be much more than sexual pleasure is just "banging." They don't even get the depth of emotional/spiritual expenditure that goes into sexual encounters--whether it is conscious or subconscious. Yes, you know there have been studies on this. Playing fast and lose with sexual intimacy can be a real problem for people.

Also, one of the biggest things that are important to women is the ability to trust. They may have developed the opposite in their own behavior, b/c they feel that having a trusting relationship is a joke, so if you can't beat em, join em.

Geez, Billy Joel just married, what, his forth wife. NOW the dude is talented and has some bucks; but he wouldn't be considered in our culture as highly physically attractive. Woman are less likely, in general, however to see men as trophies, as men seek out certain types as "trophies." Part of that is a subconscious desiree to reproduce with optimally genetically healthy individuals. Some women may well see them as meal tickets or holders of the gold. In general, when women are interested interrelationships, they physical becomes a smaller part of the whole--and ultimately that is probably true for males also that want long-term, meaningful relationships. Like most men that go primarily for the "trophy" wife, gold-digging women will also probably not be ultimately happy and fulfilled in their relationship with the partner in the long-term. Same thing is also true when people marry others in order to try to happy pretty kids; the connection will be a plus; but ultimately that alone does not guarantee the longevity of the relationship--there's got to be a lot more to make the long haul.

So you're telling me this guy:

or this guy:

(which are average guys)

Stand an equal chance as the 9-10/10 guy I posted above when competing for 7/10 girls like these:

????

 

[studentdoct69]

.

 

[Hustler101]

Hustler101 there has been studies done that show looks aren't as important to attract females and it's more holistic. I'm done discussing this topic. You need to go out in the real-world and observe more b/c I have a buddy from college who looks like the chunky dude above and his girlfriend is very hot.

You're wrong that looks are necessarily #1 for a girl. Hell, I'm good looking and I'm telling you it isn't. Yes, it is a factor. But women Are more holistic. You are seeing all of this through "looks only matter" male lens.

Men and women are the same. Women are just as holistic as men are. I know average guys with hot girls too. The girls have horrific histories and/or mental issues that the guy is completely unaware of... Or the girl is cheating on the same constantly and the guy has no clue. So when you use the term "holistic" remember that you can't judge couples superficially without knowing their background details. I also know very successful guys with good social skills who always get rejected by anything above average.

In the real world I always see looksmatched couples. Not much more to it than that.

http://news.stanford.edu/news/2005/august24/dating-082405.html

"In other words, there was a much higher correlation between what men said they wanted and what they actually did," Simonson said. "Men say that appearance is important, and it is. Women do not say that appearance is particularly important to them, but it is, particularly in the context of speed dating."


I'm sure women value other factors more once their prime is over and their looks fade and they want a long term partner.

 

[mercaptovizadeh]

Dude, the Gandy guy is not going to go for those blonde gals in your photo, they are not "in his league." The frumpers are.

Btw, care to explain how Adriana Lima had no problem marrying a quasimodo if women are universally superficial and looks obsessed?:

 

[Hustler101]

Dude, the Gandy guy is not going to go for those blonde gals in your photo, they are not "in his league." The frumpers are.

Btw, care to explain how Adriana Lima had no problem marrying a quasimodo if women are universally superficial and looks obsessed?:

People of high end status/celebs should never ever been used as examples for anything.

A visit to your local shopping mall would show you just how looksmatched everyone is... at the most there's a 1 point difference.

BTW I used Gandy since the posted made a note that a 5 can compete with a 9...lol...

 

[studentdoct69]

.

 

[studentdoct69]

.

 

[WildZoo]

the peacocks with their huge (dysfunctional) tails, the red cardinals. No obvious sign of health - only of beauty itself.

This isn't true. Unhealthy males will not have the excess energy resources to put into those huge trails, or to find enough carotenoids to contribute to their red coloring. So both are actually very good indicators of health (and good genes). As for symmetry, that stems from the tendency of age and disease to cause asymmetry. It's not as strong of a signal as a peacock tail because not all disease affects symmetry that way, but it is still a signal.

 

[mercaptovizadeh]

This isn't true. Unhealthy males will not have the excess energy resources to put into those huge trails, or to find enough carotenoids to contribute to their red coloring. So both are actually very good indicators of health (and good genes). As for symmetry, that stems from the tendency of age and disease to cause asymmetry. It's not as strong of a signal as a peacock tail because not all disease affects symmetry that way, but it is still a signal.

Evidence of any of these assertions? Please show me the experiments (especially this business of "good genes"). It's all handwaving for now.

 

[deleted480308]

gonna throw it out there.....the bikini shots of girls that look like teenagers feels creepy

 

[Promethean]

That is the thing. It isn't about the physical at all, unless you are just really into the superficial, in which case you might as well get turned on by Real Dolls and save the trouble of dealing with a live human being, with all their faults.

Sexiness is about so much more to me. It is about thoughts and feelings, about the entity operating the controls behind the eyes. So, a pretty face is meaningless if the person behind it is not appealing. A face/body is just a communication device. It can convey information about a person's health and well-being, just on appearances alone. But to find out about other dimensions of the person, what matters is how they use it, not just how it looks in a photo.

Sexy means a kind, open expression. It means smiling often and laughing easily. It means listening and being responsive. It means taking actions that demonstrate confidence, generosity, curiosity, patience. One dimensional adherence to physical ideals can be nice if all you want to do is look and maybe touch, but it is just one facet, and not remotely the most important.

 

[Promethean]

People of high end status/celebs should never ever been used as examples for anything.

A visit to your local shopping mall would show you just how looksmatched everyone is... at the most there's a 1 point difference.

I don't think that dude is a quasimodo, either. He could stand to lose the creeperstache, but he isn't remotely unattractive.

As for looksmatched... I think you are attributing imprecisely, and confusing cause and effect.

People do tend to seek mates who are like them, but I don't think that it is purely a matter of where they fall on your scale of attractiveness. I think that people who are into the same things, live the same lifestyle, are more likely to meet each other and be attracted to one another. People who are into physical fitness are going to pair up. People who hang out in attics playing D&D are going to pair up. Physiques of people who go running for fun are going to be different from those of people who roll dice for fun.

If you are basing attractiveness on a scale that has athletic builds at one end and couch potatoes at the other, then yes, you are going to find that people tend to date within their activity levels.

 

[touchpause13]

How heterosexist of you. I'm surprised you as a bisexual care. I would think you would be all over the androgynous.

Oh bite me. Everyone has sexual preferences, and my "type" in men is very masculine. Why would I not care?

 

[touchpause13]

gonna throw it out there.....the bikini shots of girls that look like teenagers feels creepy

Yeah thanks for pointing that out, I was worried I was the only one getting icky vibes

 

[deleted480308]

Yeah thanks for pointing that out, I was worried I was the only one getting icky vibes

I've had icky vibes for a quite a while in this thread...

 

[touchpause13]

I've had icky vibes for a quite a while in this thread...

Yeah you're not the only one

 

[mercaptovizadeh]

Oh bite me. Everyone has sexual preferences, and my "type" in men is very masculine. Why would I not care?

Oh, I just find it odd that you desire masculinity in men but then on the other hand you also like to have sex with women. I would think that someone bisexual would have the most fluid sensibilities about sexuality and would embrace the panoply of sexualities distributed among the two sexes (yes, I am modeling liberalspeak here). Do you similarly expect your women to be very feminine, or do you want them, too, to be masculine?

 

[Promethean]

Oh, I just find it odd that you desire masculinity in men but then on the other hand you also like to have sex with women. I would think that someone bisexual would have the most fluid sensibilities about sexuality and would embrace the panoply of sexualities distributed among the two sexes (yes, I am modeling liberalspeak here). Do you similarly expect your women to be very feminine, or do you want them, too, to be masculine?

Goes to show that you basically don't understand the sexuality of people who don't share your biases and preferences.

You assume that attraction to more than one ideal is unlikely or hard to understand, and that liking both must mean liking some mediocre blending of the two, because how could someone have two different interests at the same time? That would just be odd.

 

[The_Sunny_Doc]

This isn't true. Unhealthy males will not have the excess energy resources to put into those huge trails, or to find enough carotenoids to contribute to their red coloring. So both are actually very good indicators of health (and good genes). As for symmetry, that stems from the tendency of age and disease to cause asymmetry. It's not as strong of a signal as a peacock tail because not all disease affects symmetry that way, but it is still a signal.

We discussed the peacock tail in our behavioral ecology class. The signalling theory explanation for the evolution of peafowl tails makes sense intuitively, but isn't backed by good data. This guy explains the issues with the science and problems with exploring questions through the lens of evolutionary biology.

 

[mercaptovizadeh]

We discussed the peacock tail in our behavioral ecology class. The signalling theory makes sense intuitively, but isn't backed by good data. This guy explains the issues with the science and problems with exploring questions through the lens of evolutionary biology.

Excellent, yes I suspected as much. Of course none of it makes sense and there genetic and "fitness" correlates are not there because quite simply the case does not support evolution at all.

 

[mercaptovizadeh]

Goes to show that you basically don't understand the sexuality of people who don't share your biases and preferences.

You assume that attraction to more than one ideal is unlikely or hard to understand, and that liking both must mean liking some mediocre blending of the two, because how could someone have two different interests at the same time? That would just be odd.

No, it would be inconsistent, that's all. I can understand the lesbian who likes feminine women. I mean, I don't approve, but she clearly is rejecting the masculine and likes femininity. I don't understand the lesbian who likes butch women. Why would she reject the real thing (men) in exchange for a joke substitute (butch woman, trans F>M) who can't even make biological children with her?

 

[touchpause13]

No, it would be inconsistent, that's all. I can understand the lesbian who likes feminine women. I mean, I don't approve, but she clearly is rejecting the masculine and likes femininity. I don't understand the lesbian who likes butch women. Why would she reject the real thing (men) in exchange for a joke substitute (butch woman, trans F>M) who can't even make biological children with her?

Because she (I) is attracted to butch women. It's not about rejecting 1 over the other. Do you reject effeminate men for feminine women? Of course not - you are just attracted to what you are attracted to. Same goes for everyone else. And it's not like the production of children is always in the forefront of everyone's mind.

Also "joke substitute" really? Is that all others are to you?