Dating your "equal" - ?????

[ThaWholigan]

Seen a few posts in another thread about women who want to date "above their league" and should lower themselves to date their "equals". I wanted to give a platform to expand on this particular theory.

 

Now, personally I don't believe in this at all, simply because it clashes with my personal view that attractiveness is subjective and that not everybody finds the exact same things beautiful in members of the opposite sex. I myself have been attracted to a wide range of women, of different shapes and sizes. And I know a lot of men who have vastly different tastes in attractiveness.

 

As for women, their tastes are just as evolved, if not more. I don't believe in the top 20% theory personally, and I never have. I know too many guys getting laid and in relationships with a wide array of women, in fact I am the only one of my ENTIRE social network who is completely dateless . I know quite a few girls who despite being HOTTER THAN JULY, they were dating broke, butters guys who were - yep, you guessed it - UNDER 5 foot 9. So short, ugly guys with no money were getting laid by good looking girls? Surely, it's a lie!

 

Basically, attractiveness is a very complex entity in the world of dating, sex and relationships as we know it. It's not as black and white as we might think it is IMO.

 

I'm happy to entertain any theory that claims I'm wrong however, so fire away

[FrustratedStandards]

I agree with you TW.

 

The whole "women have evolved to like a specific thing" is very true. We are more objective in what we find attractive in comparison to men.

 

I think this goes back to the whole instinct thing. Women just want the strongest, alpha male while men just want to spread their seed (thus by spreading their seed they will have more success if they aren't as picky).

 

Women, however, are more picky about it (for whatever reason) but it seems to balance out because at the end of the day, and i'm sure everyone agrees, a woman can get laid far more easily than a guy.

[ThaWholigan]

I agree with you TW.

 

The whole "women have evolved to like a specific thing" is very true. We are more objective in what we find attractive in comparison to men.

 

I think this goes back to the whole instinct thing. Women just want the strongest, alpha male while men just want to spread their seed (thus by spreading their seed they will have more success if they aren't as picky).

 

Women, however, are more picky about it (for whatever reason) but it seems to balance out because at the end of the day, and i'm sure everyone agrees, a woman can get laid far more easily than a guy.

I don't see how you agreed with what I said to be honest.....

 

I basically said that both women and men have different things they find attractive. I met more than 1 girl who (gasp)....didn't like 6 packs! They just didn't find them attractive, and just preferred regular looking guys with a bit of a belly. I was a little shocked. And their future boyfriends usually reflected that preference.

 

Don't get me wrong, I'd imagine that having the alleged "Alpha" physique is attractive to a large degree to a lot of women, but I think we're underestimating the scope of attractiveness to everyone as an individual. Who's to say that I won't fall in love with a big girl?

 

I think men can be just as picky as women. I think what you're posting is true of a significant number of women, but whether it is the majority or not is once again - subjective.

[xxoo]

I think that people tend to pair up in general overall attractiveness, but that includes a lot more than physical appearance. Too often, people underestimate the role that personality and character plays in their overall attractiveness (and other's!).

[pteromom]

Dating "up" and dating" down" is so subjective anyway.

 

What is attractive to one person is hideous to another. Unless we are talking about male and female supermodels, there is no clear cut "up" or "down" when it comes to attractiveness.

[xxoo]

Personality comes into play after you get your foot in the door. Chances are if you are at the point where a woman where she cares what your personality is like, you are already physically attractive to her.

 

A lot of women won't even show you common courtesy unless you're one of the top 5% of 'hot guys'.

 

Nah, workplace romances (and affairs ) show how women grow attraction to men around them. These are usually not "hot" guys. Just guys with a job, who paid them a little attention, and made them feel special.

[pteromom]

So a tall guy being more attractive than a short guy is subjective to women? A guy with a sixpack compared to to a fat guy is subjective? A square and defined jaw is equal to a double chin?

 

Maybe some aspects of physical attractiveness are subjective as long as all the guys being judged are "hot" . A woman might ask herself "wow that muscular Fabio lookalike looks great in glasses", but no woman anywhere ever will say "omg this guy I went on a date with is so hot, he's 5'4"

 

I have known ladies who preferred short guys. I have DEFNITITELY known ladies who prefer some meat over a 6-pack (I am one of them - I don't like hard bodies). I don't know anyone who prefers double-chins, but there are a lot of ladies who don't care about chins at all.

 

No woman anywhere would say "omg this guy I went on a date with is so hot, he's 5'4" - but she might say " "omg this guy I went on a date with is so hot, he has the most awesome smile" or "he had the cutest BUTT" or "his hair was incredible"... the point is everyone has certain traits they are attracted to, and most people are able to overlook other traditionally unattractive traits if the person has those traits.

[xxoo]

I can't think of a single person whose met their significant others through their workplace.

 

I've known dozens, including a bunch of affairs.

 

Give it time.

[RiverRunning]

My ex was short-ish (5'6"), had a birthmark on his face and, as I'm told by many, "was okay-looking." Especially as I've lost weight, I've gotten comments on my appearance. One of our mutual friends - a mutual friend of my ex and I - once blurted out in mixed company, "How did you manage to get her? I mean, look at you two." While he said it in jest, I was pretty shocked he'd say something like that.

 

I still think my ex was hot. Long blond hair, those big blue peepers...oh :/

[SJC2008]

This is my "bulk" response to any thread like this. People for thr most part date within their leagues and if there's any dating up it's the women. Like with anything, there are exceptions.

[FrustratedStandards]

This is my "bulk" response to any thread like this. People for thr most part date within their leagues and if there's any dating up it's the women. Like with anything, there are exceptions.

 

Funny how when an average woman dates a hot guy, she is dating "up". But when an average guy is dating a hot girl, it's "normal" and absolutely amazing because she "looked past his looks".

[udolipixie]

From my experience the gals want to date above their league & should date their equals and the top % theory seems to come from guys who have a hateful bitter resentful attitude towards gals and/or views gals as a sexual resource to be divided equally amongst guys rather than human beings.

 

I don't tend to see this gals should date equals/top % theory with guys in general. When it comes to leagues and equals it seems the meme for guys is that leagues exist when rating gals but when it comes to dating there's no such thing as 'out of his league' or 'above his league'.

 

I do think some gals want to date above their league as people generally want to date above their league. I don't think American gals should date their equals as in my opinion it's a bad bet since studies have shown that guys tend to treat partners who are more attractive than themselves far better than partners who are less or equally attractive.

 

I disagree that attractiveness is subjective as I think there are widespread and common tendencies to me attractiveness is subjective to an extent.

[AD1980]

Funny how when an average woman dates a hot guy, she is dating "up". But when an average guy is dating a hot girl, it's "normal" and absolutely amazing because she "looked past his looks".

 

bs if a guy is with a better looking girl people will say shes out of his league as well as vice versa

[udolipixie]

I don't know where you are Thewholigan, where guys who are short, have no money, and are ugly are sleeping with models, but where I live called reality, that doesn't happen outside of bad sitcoms.

 

When people talk about women dating their equals, I mean all those 5'2 women who say a guy that's 5'7 is too short for them. Or a woman with red hair screaming in horror at the prospect of dating a fellow ginger (and actually continuing the dying genes for red hair, which add to the physical diversity of mankind). Or all those Asian women that will under no circumstances date another Asian (seems to be the rule in the West).

 

Women have an easier time dating "up" (or what their favorite tv shows and magazines tell them is superior) and men usually date down unless they're really rich.

 

That is why I don't understand all the women who believe a guy whose under 6 feet tall or has a certain haircolor or feature has failed genetics and hence is not worthy of even 1 date. I know for a fact a woman who shares my DNA would be worshipped by men and considered extremely hot, yet me as a man, women don't even cough in my direction .

 

That is what I mean by dating your equal, it's the real reason why women absolutely hate it when men assign numbers to their looks or hate the concept of leagues that men know exist. To a woman, particularly under 30, there is a lot of mobilization.

 

I live in reality and short, broke, unattractive guys do sleep with, date, and marry gals that could be models. The guys usually have confidence, charisma, charm, wit, and plenty of appealing personality. The ones that don't are great in bed according to the gals.

 

Semantics on the height example as it'd differ by country as in my country, America, a 5'2'' gal dating a 5'7'' guy isn't dating her equal. The average gal is 5'4'' and the average guy is 5'10''. Since the gal is 2'' shorter than average her equal would be 2'' shorter than average aka 5'8''.

 

As for gals have an easier time dating up I highly doubt that for my country considering the importance guys tend to place on youth/beauty and how many don't seem to consider gals less attractive than themselves. As well as it seems most guys aren't interested in dating rather hanging out so perhaps it's more of a gals have an easier time sexing up.

 

I don't think dating your equal is the real reason why gals hate leagues from my experiences it's more of a being regarded as interchangeable body parts rather than a human being.

 

I do think many gals would hate dating your equal meaning you're limited to dating those that have the same physical attributes as you- brunettes date brunettes, blacks date black, and so on and such. Not too many take kindly on being told who they can date.

[ptp]

Seen a few posts in another thread about women who want to date "above their league" and should lower themselves to date their "equals". I wanted to give a platform to expand on this particular theory.

 

Now, personally I don't believe in this at all, simply because it clashes with my personal view that attractiveness is subjective and that not everybody finds the exact same things beautiful in members of the opposite sex. I myself have been attracted to a wide range of women, of different shapes and sizes. And I know a lot of men who have vastly different tastes in attractiveness.

 

As for women, their tastes are just as evolved, if not more. I don't believe in the top 20% theory personally, and I never have. I know too many guys getting laid and in relationships with a wide array of women, in fact I am the only one of my ENTIRE social network who is completely dateless . I know quite a few girls who despite being HOTTER THAN JULY, they were dating broke, butters guys who were - yep, you guessed it - UNDER 5 foot 9. So short, ugly guys with no money were getting laid by good looking girls? Surely, it's a lie!

 

Basically, attractiveness is a very complex entity in the world of dating, sex and relationships as we know it. It's not as black and white as we might think it is IMO.

 

I'm happy to entertain any theory that claims I'm wrong however, so fire away

 

I am going to choose to look at this from the male point of view rather than the female.

 

It feels good to think that there are no such things as "leagues". However, these are things people say, but from what I have experienced personally and seen personally this not the truth.

 

People are quick to point out exceptions of where a less attractive person is paired up with a more attractive one, but by and large that doesn't happen. Most people are paired up with people who are in their "league" or a similar level of attractiveness.

 

Even on LS it is evident to me that women respond more strongly to guys who are physically attractive. If it sounds like I am being judgmental, I apologize because I am not. Anyway, these are female posters that I like and respect a lot. It is human nature to be attracted to physical beauty, it isn't something people should dismiss. There is a wide range of physical attractiveness, but generally people couple up with someone on a similar level.

 

Who comes with these distinctions, with these levels? I don't know how it happens, but it does happen. Go to any bar or club and you will generally see the chubby dude with a girl who is a little chubby. Rarely, will you see an average looking guy with a hot blonde in a tight black dress.

[ThaWholigan]

I don't know where you are Thewholigan, where guys who are short, have no money, and are ugly are sleeping with models, but where I live called reality, that doesn't happen outside of bad sitcoms.

 

When people talk about women dating their equals, I mean all those 5'2 women who say a guy that's 5'7 is too short for them. Or a woman with red hair screaming in horror at the prospect of dating a fellow ginger (and actually continuing the dying genes for red hair, which add to the physical diversity of mankind). Or all those Asian women that will under no circumstances date another Asian (seems to be the rule in the West).

 

Women have an easier time dating "up" (or what their favorite tv shows and magazines tell them is superior) and men usually date down unless they're really rich.

 

That is why I don't understand all the women who believe a guy whose under 6 feet tall or has a certain haircolor or feature has failed genetics and hence is not worthy of even 1 date. I know for a fact a woman who shares my DNA would be worshipped by men and considered extremely hot, yet me as a man, women don't even cough in my direction .

 

That is what I mean by dating your equal, it's the real reason why women absolutely hate it when men assign numbers to their looks or hate the concept of leagues that men know exist. To a woman, particularly under 30, there is a lot of mobilization.

 

I think it helps my disposition that I live in one of the most multicultural cities in the world. Ironically it should be one of the most elitist, but I find that class is more of an issue than physical attractiveness when it comes to dating.

 

My city is so vast, that there is probably a dude who can come on here and support your view. I have quite a large social network due to being a musician, so for a guy like me who can be a hermit at times, I have actually met a LOT of people and known almost as many. It's interesting that a wide variety of people seem to all be in relationships with each other, and it's not just a mismatch of a bunch of women swimming around one big muscly fish . Don't get me wrong, they have their groupies. But it's far from the 5% you're touting it to be - at least in my experience.

 

I think my outlook is different from yours anyway, so as much as I can find quite a few examples that support your viewpoint (and there are), there are also many that support mine. Just goes to show how diverse this planet actually is IMO.

[ThaWholigan]

So do I , and that makes it worse. The incoherence of countless cultures living side by side can never translate into an organic community, which is what brings familiarity (and hence an easier time for guys that aren't "extremely hot" to actually find a female companion in some shape or form). Melting pot my ass, more like the the salad bowl. It's not even about "white" or "black" either, in my beautiful multicultural utopia the greeks stick with the greeks, the russians stick with the russians, the poles with poles, and so on and so on. If you're an undescript "white person" like me, there is no real little clique you can go and find women in. I mean yeah I see some hideous Indian guys with their decent looking arranged marriage brides, or some hairy retarded looking Albanian furball giving the vows to his stunning Albanian wife, but there are a lot of complexities of immigrant life as well as cultural reasons for this phenomenon. In other words, multiculturalism fails for most people, romantically as well as socially.

 

White people tend to be very interchangeable where I live. They're involved in whatever takes their fancy, and that's that. White guys are getting a lot of tail right now from lots of girls. I'm meeting a lot of black girls even that don't date black guys, they only want white guys! It's quite funny how things have changed since I was in school. And quite a few of the greek and turkish girls are quite taken with black guys at the moment, at least in certain parts of London . White girls tend to vary, they like everyone. My uncle's ex was a russian, tall and thick with massive ( . )( . ).

 

It could be that it doesn't work for some people, but it works for everyone else.....

 

 

 

 

London right? Well from what I've seen on this forum, after NYC and California, most men with failed or miserable romantic lives seem to live in London.

I would imagine so. I would think it has something to do with the way they view their reality, but that's just how I feel about it. It's easy to subscribe to this view that women are to blame for lack of romantic options, but I prefer to be a little more introspective with my analysis of that particular problem. It seems to be helping .

 

 

 

 

That was a tasty half-full glass of feel good cola, but you shouldn't be so upbeat. The fact that you're a guitar playing black guy in the worlds capital of race mixing, London, and still have your virginity ought to deeply disturb you

I don't disturb easily. In fact, a part from a few sexually frustrated nights every couple of months, I'm rather comfortable with my virginity right now, at least to the extent that my lack of romantic options doesn't make me angry. I'm naturally an optimist, it doesn't take much for me to look on the bright side of something, so I will keep sipping my cola with pleasure.

 

Oh, I'm a pianist by the way, I can play guitar but isn't really my speciality .

[udolipixie]

No, they don't, they just give off the vibe that they do. Guys who have those traits and are confident are seen as annoying or creepy by women.

 

I probably fit most of that description (I'm under 5'10, pretty broke, and probably hence seen as unattractive by women) yet everyone thinks I am some kind of player or get a lot of girls because I have days where I can be funny and charismatic. But that , on its own merit, doesn't translate into being a "hot guy" or getting female attention even from average looking women, no matter what people on the internet claim they see.

Bit illogical to me to state that the guy's give off the vibe of personality

traits and bedroom skills considering I've met them and heard raves of their sexual skills.

 

If 'no matter what people on the internet claim they see' is in reference to me nowhere did I state, imply, or suggest that being funny and charismatic translates to being a hot guy or getting female attention. I stated what got those guys and what works for one guy doesn't necessarily works for all or most guys. Case in point you.

 

A good amount of women at 5'2 won't date a guy at 5'8 either. Many won't even date a guy under 6'0. And yes, thanks for that obnoxious semantical argument.

Interesting that you find a correction of the height bit in gals dating their equals an obnoxious semantical argument.

 

There are a lot of guys interested in a monogamous relationship with women, they're just for the most part guys that don't stand out at first glance. They're the guys 1 inch too short for you, or who don't have some really specific arbitrary trait you desire.

From my experiences the guys interested in a monogamous relationship tend to be guys who want one with an above average or attractive gal and if the guy is older than younger/much younger is tacked on. The ones interested in a monogamous relationship who consider average gals tend to be the unattractive and/or severely lacking in social and character development.

 

Of course, everything women do is some deep philosophical dilemma Just because women make up a funny and charming personality in their minds and attribute it to some fist pumping roided up Bro-Dude surfer, doesn't mean you still don't see his body first.

Care to tell how you'd get 'everything women do is some deep philosophical dilemma' from my experiences as to why gals hate leagues is seeing it as being regarded as interchangeable body parts rather than a human being. Seems like logic evasion with a strawman.

 

Why not?

Not too many take kindly on being told who they can date because they want the freedom to exercise their options and select partners based on their own criteria.

 

Besides, I'm not saying brunettes should only date brunettes if there is someone who you get along with well that is different, that if just a very small thing to like or not like someone.

That's not the impression I got from your when people talk about women dating their equals it means short gals that don't want short guys, redhead gals that don't want redhead guys, and asian gals that don't asian guys. I got the impression that dating your equal means you're limited to dating those that have the same physical attributes as you.

 

My issue isn't with that, my issue is with women who will specifically reject a man simply because he has a trait...she herself possesses! I find that kind of retarded discrimination to be mind boggling. I myself am brunette, I have liked brunettes, blondes, red haired individuals, but I would never say "I would never want to specifically date a woman who is not brunette" because that is hypocritical and petty. You can't deny that women do this more often then men, because women are all born with self-hatred and complex's they get from all their dumb magazines.

Egh bit of a reach to me to say it's self-hatred and complex from magazines as having a trait doesn't necessarily mean you'd find it attractive in others. Seems more like preferences on what's appealing in the opposite sex.

[verhrzn]

I don't believe in equals, personally. However, I do believe in "leagues." Your league is, who you can attract. So even if you're a rich, toned, genius, if all you're catching are "ugly" women... there is your league.

 

If you are dissatisfied with what is in your league, figure out what is attracting these types of people to you, and adjust that.

[DjinnAgain]

If you are getting dates with a certain look of person, that is not out of your league. Out of your league means you can't get it - so perhaps you are expecting dates with xx women and are only getting dates with yy women who you think are beneath you, then you probably are looking out of your league.

 

Also, I agree that there is more to the package than looks.

 

 

Lastly, what world are you all in? I see far more good looking women with average guys than vice versa. I can think of one friend who dated someone more attractive than herself and (though I'm not proud of it) it gave me a very confused gut reaction. My other friends dating or married - the female is more attractive... (or similar attractiveness). I am not seeing what is talking about here. Honestly, it makes me suspect that it is as the studies say - men tend to overestimate their attractiveness.

 

 

Yet, it's a moot point. Physical actractiveness is one part of the total package.

[DjinnAgain]

Semantics on the height example as it'd differ by country as in my country, America, a 5'2'' gal dating a 5'7'' guy isn't dating her equal. The average gal is 5'4'' and the average guy is 5'10''. Since the gal is 2'' shorter than average her equal would be 2'' shorter than average aka 5'8''.

 

.

 

 

Even if you are going for "equal" comparing height to height is ridiculous. Say, for the sake of argument, height is highly prized in males. Height is not highly prized in females. Different plumage attracts in this mating dance. For females, perhaps an ample bosem or attractive face, whatever.

 

Saying height to height or any of that is just silly. What, should we compare our genetic traits and be matched off by the government for ideal breeding? It's stupid.

 

Most the guys I have dated have been 6'2 or taller. They are not out of my league; we dated. If anything, I would by conventional standards (pfft to those) be considered more attractive.

I have friends who prefer short guys.

[zengirl]

I met more than 1 girl who (gasp)....didn't like 6 packs! They just didn't find them attractive, and just preferred regular looking guys with a bit of a belly.

 

Hubby has pretty much a flat tummy -- he's got kind of a lean, tall soccer player type body -- but I was always fine with a bit of tummy as well. Six packs look absolutely disgusting to me. No lie. Never dated a guy with huge muscles anywhere, though decent arm muscles are a turn-on -- a guy who looks like he uses his muscles for ACTUAL work, rather than lifting arbitrary weights at the gym can be very attractive. No one ever got a 6 pack from building stuff or fixing stuff, but strong arms, yes. Even so, I've dated many men with spaghetti arms, and if they can install a kickass tech system in my house that's just as sexy. It's more the trait of being able to build and fix things I find attractive than the muscles themselves; as long as the guy is strong enough to help me move and can keep up with me in a general energy sense, I'm fine with his level of fitness. Guys who are overly fit and concerned with their muscles are a HUGE turnoff to me.

 

I think that people tend to pair up in general overall attractiveness, but that includes a lot more than physical appearance. Too often, people underestimate the role that personality and character plays in their overall attractiveness (and other's!).

 

Agree entirely. I also think that people who want to assess their looks and stamp a number on themselves and everybody else, as though they deserve some "standard" level of mate in a transactional way, are sinking lower and lower because of that mindset. I do think people tend to pair up on overall desirability, but there are many people who fixate on things besides the physical or material, and those people don't concern themselves with their overall desirability anyway.

 

Even on LS it is evident to me that women respond more strongly to guys who are physically attractive.

 

I think all people -- male and female -- respond more strongly to people who are physically attractive to THEM, which can vary, as TW says, and can be augmented or hindered by other traits, as xxoo says. Of course part of almost everyone's criteria (and should be) is feeling sexually attracted to their mate, so someone who sparks that fire is going to be responded to more strongly, especially if other qualities are unknown.

 

However, I think part of TW's point is that there are people who are not objectively classified as "hot" who individual women/men have found VERY hot.

 

I don't believe in equals, personally. However, I do believe in "leagues." Your league is, who you can attract. So even if you're a rich, toned, genius, if all you're catching are "ugly" women... there is your league.

 

If you are dissatisfied with what is in your league, figure out what is attracting these types of people to you, and adjust that.

 

Basically that's what you have to do. Look at the fish you're catching or not catching and look long and hard at yourself and what's preventing you from being happy. Your league is everyone you want to date who wants to date you. For some people, that may be NO ONE, but that's usually when they need to change something and undergo some self-improvement.

[somedude81]

I don't believe in equals, personally. However, I do believe in "leagues." Your league is, who you can attract. So even if you're a rich, toned, genius, if all you're catching are "ugly" women... there is your league.

 

If you are dissatisfied with what is in your league, figure out what is attracting these types of people to you, and adjust that.

And I believe that people who are you equal are your league.

 

I really don't understand why somebody who is not fat and ugly, should date somebody that is.

[zengirl]

And I believe that people who are you equal are your league.

 

I really don't understand why somebody who is not fat and ugly, should date somebody that is.

 

Why should anyone date anyone they don't want to date? At any rate, as this thread says, "ugly" (like beautiful) is in the eye of the beholder. If someone wants to date someone you find ugly, even if you would consider that person not ugly, why would you care?

[xxoo]

I really don't understand why somebody who is not fat and ugly, should date somebody that is.

 

It is usually because they have other attractive traits. People don't generally date people who they don't find attractive, yet many thin people date fat people. Newsflash: some thin people are actually attracted to their fat partners, whether it is because of or in spite of their fat bodies.