Women find a narrower range of men attractive then vice versa

[GirlontheLam]

It depends on your demographic. There are places where I was the ugly one, and I've been places where I'm the hottest guy around. It all varies.

 

 

This is 100% true. Where I live now....not that popular. I go to other metro areas for a weekend...and get 5 numbers.....even when I say I am only in town for the weekend. Should I move? Apparently my odds would dramatically increase.

[kaylan]

Male physical attractiveness means very little in comparison to wealth/career and social skills/attractive "presence". Not that women all want wealthy men nor social butterflies, but usually one of those two takes precedence over male attractiveness.

 

Men, by contrast, are usually very very shallow.

Money will make some women use you for your status by giving up sex. It doesnt mean they are sexually attracted to the man. Hugh Hefner and Donald Trump come to mind. Its all about trading up for a lifestyle.

 

A males physical attractiveness will make women want to have sex with him whether he is rich or poor. Ive seen this a lot. Men need to stop pretending looks dont matter to a womans sex drive. They indeed do to an extent. Money is just something some women will use a guy for (or it can be an added bonus to a hot guy)... but it wont make her super wet or anything on its own.

Not in my experience. Women in my experience have a lot of qualifications for a guy and while looks help some there are a lot of other factors they weigh more than guys do.

 

In general guys don't care what her career is, what she drives, how nice her apartment or house is, and a vast number of other things woman will disqualify men for.

Id say plenty of younger successful guys care about a womans drive and career when it comes to selecting a girlfriend or wife. When it comes to just sex, both men and women will be less picky.

[iris219]

Money will make some women use you for your status by giving up sex. It doesnt mean they are sexually attracted to the man. Hugh Hefner and Donald Trump come to mind. Its all about trading up for a lifestyle.

 

 

Actually, it could mean just that. Some women become genuinely sexually attracted to a man based on his wealth and power in the exact same way you become sexually attracted to a woman with a perky butt. It's hard for men to understand this because they believe sexual attraction comes mainly from the physical, but many women don't operate like this.

[kaylan]

Actually, it could mean just that. Some women become genuinely sexually attracted to a man based on his wealth and power in the exact same way you become sexually attracted to a woman with a perky butt. It's hard for men to understand this because they believe sexual attraction comes mainly from the physical, but many women don't operate like this.

Im just saying there are studies that show women with their own money pick men more based on their looks, than women who make less. Sexual attraction is far different from selection based on long term factors. Sure Im attracted to a girl whos caring, and may have gret motherly tendencies...but its not the same as being sexually attracted to a sexy face or body.

 

I didnt say sex was mainly physical for women. But the illusion that money creates physical attraction isnt true. We know why some women want the cash. And its exactly why many women end up in marriages with guys they arent having sex with after some time. Because they were never majorly attracted to him sexually in the first place.

 

Ive seen the way women react to a nice body enough to know the difference between sexual attraction and lifestyle attraction. Money and power will create lifestyle attraction and an attraction thats different from raw sexual attraction thats created by physical attributes. When women stop hooking up with sexy broke guys, despite having options for more well to do guys, then Ill equate money with sexual attraction.

Edited October 4, 2012 by kaylan

[fortyninethousand322]

I never even said money created physical attraction. Merely that wealth or career was one way to create attraction, also having a good personality (confidence, social charisma, etc.) was another way to attract women.

 

Actual physical attractiveness isn't as important as the above two tend to be.

[Mrlonelyone]

Are we talking about picking a guy to marry or picking a guy to have a fling with? They are very different propositions.

 

Women can be attracted to a much wider range than most guys think. Especially for long term partners.

[kaylan]

Id say looks are equally important. If it wasnt I wouldnt see or hear my chick friends talking about whos hot and only mentioning the guys physical attributes.

 

In regards to base sexual attraction, not long term, physical attraction is a huge factor.

[iris219]

Im just saying there are studies that show women with their own money pick men more based on their looks, than women who make less. Sexual attraction is far different from selection based on long term factors. Sure Im attracted to a girl whos caring, and may have gret motherly tendencies...but its not the same as being sexually attracted to a sexy face or body.

 

I didnt say sex was mainly physical for women. But the illusion that money creates physical attraction isnt true. We know why some women want the cash. And its exactly why many women end up in marriages with guys they arent having sex with after some time. Because they were never majorly attracted to him sexually in the first place.

Ive seen the way women react to a nice body enough to know the difference between sexual attraction and lifestyle attraction. Money and power will create lifestyle attraction and an attraction thats different from raw sexual attraction thats created by physical attributes. When women stop hooking up with sexy broke guys, despite having options for more well to do guys, then Ill equate money with sexual attraction.

 

Not every woman married to a wealthy, unattractive man is imagining Brad Pitt when they have sex, avoiding having sex, or sleeping with her tennis instructor.

 

It's possible Trump's wife thinks he's a sexy as heck because it is very possible to become sexually attracted to a man based on factors like money and social status.

[fortyninethousand322]

Id say looks are equally important. If it wasnt I wouldnt see or hear my chick friends talking about whos hot and only mentioning the guys physical attributes.

 

In regards to base sexual attraction, not long term, physical attraction is a huge factor.

 

You can only comment on physical attributes when it's a stranger. But, physical chemistry is more than just "pretty face, hot body".

[kaylan]

I never even said money created physical attraction. Merely that wealth or career was one way to create attraction, also having a good personality (confidence, social charisma, etc.) was another way to attract women.

 

Actual physical attractiveness isn't as important as the above two tend to be.

And wealth attracts women for the wrong reasons. How many guys have a wife who married them for security and then we see threads detailing how she settled and wasnt much attracted to him?

 

Honestly, the best relationships I hear spoken about on this forum are from women who talk about the frequent sex they have with their husbands and how physically appealing they find him. A good sex life is important glue.

[iris219]

And wealth attracts women for the wrong reasons. How many guys have a wife who married them for security and then we see threads detailing how she settled and wasnt much attracted to him?

 

Honestly, the best relationships I hear spoken about on this forum are from women who talk about the frequent sex they have with their husbands and how physically appealing they find him. A good sex life is important glue.

 

My point is, many woman DO have a good sex life with their ugly, rich husbands.

 

Like I said, it's hard for men to understand this sort of attraction because that's not how attraction works for them.

[Revolver]

I really don't think the guys who are wealthy(as long as they don't marry them) care that the women they're with only are they're because of the money/fame. You think Hugh Hefner doesn't know the deal? He's sleeping with tons of hot chicks. Most guys especially younger men would take that deal

[kaylan]

You can only comment on physical attributes when it's a stranger. But, physical chemistry is more than just "pretty face, hot body".

I agree chemistry is more than just that. But chemistry occurs when one doesnt find their partner physically unattractive.

My point is, many woman DO have a good sex life with their ugly, rich husbands.

 

Like I said, it's hard for men to understand this sort of attraction because that's not how attraction works for them.

Its not hard for me to understand...because thats not a widespread reality to understand.

 

The widespread reality is I see most women nowadays care about looks as much as men do, and that women with their own cash will care even more so. Womens status change in society has made it so this can happen.

 

If I didnt see so many women with broke sexy guys, then Id buy more of what youre selling. But like I said, the threads all over the web, and the stories from women Ive know contradict what youre saying.

Not every woman married to a wealthy, unattractive man is imagining Brad Pitt when they have sex, avoiding having sex, or sleeping with her tennis instructor.

No, some of them just accept their life with an unattractive mate, or some just dont care much for a thrilling sex life, while others actual go out and cheat.

 

Are we going to pretend threads dont exist where the sap who got married for security gets cuckolded for the sexy thrilling guy on the side who actually gets the womans motor going sexually?

 

It's possible Trump's wife thinks he's a sexy as heck because it is very possible to become sexually attracted to a man based on factors like money and social status.

Again. If this was true, why so many threads all over the web about women married to guys with money and status yet they have little sexual attraction to him and thus lament their life?

 

Explain that one to me. We all know the threads Im talking about.

Edited October 4, 2012 by kaylan

[iris219]

Its not hard for me to understand...because thats not a widespread reality to understand.

 

The widespread reality is I see most women nowadays care about looks as much as men do, and that women with their own cash will care even more so. Womens status change in society has made it so this can happen.

 

If I didnt see so many women with broke sexy guys, then Id buy more of what youre selling. But like I said, the threads all over the web, and the stories from women Ive know contradict what youre saying.

No, some of them just accept their life with an unattractive mate, or some just dont care much for a thrilling sex life, while others actual go out and cheat.

 

Are we going to pretend threads dont exist where the sap who got married for security gets cuckolded for the sexy thrilling guy on the side who actually gets the womans motor going sexually?

 

Again. If this was true, why so many threads all over the web about women married to guys with money and status yet they have little sexual attraction to him and thus lament their life?

 

Explain that one to me. We all know the threads Im talking about.

 

Um, there are threads about everything on LS. There are threads about women who are sick of their husbands even though the guy is good looking and good to her. Does this mean all women will get bored with nice, attractive guys? Of course not.

 

I actually think what I'm talking about is widespread. Women routinely become very sexually attracted to and fall in love with men for reasons that have little or nothing to do with the way the guy looks physically.

[kaylan]

Um, there are threads about everything on LS. There are threads about women who are sick of their husbands even though the guy is good looking and good to her. Does this mean all women will get bored with nice, attractive guys? Of course not.

Its not just LS but many dating sites online. And its not just online but many people I know and many things I have seen.

 

Women getting sick of their good looking husbands who are good to them has nothing to do with this convo. My earlier point was that innate physical attraction...aka raw sexual energy...doesnt come from money. When I stop seeing the role looks play in most relationships, then Ill buy what you are selling.

 

What I continue to see is that some portion of women will forgo their sexual urges so they can get security. What I see and hear from women when they speak of the men that gets them wet, are guys they find physically attractive. When I see women get wet over rich guys, Ill buy what you are selling. All I see in reality is some women knowing the lifestyle boost theyll get from status and money....not that it gets their panties wet in the same way the sexy toned guy will.

I actually think what I'm talking about is widespread. Women routinely become very sexually attracted to and fall in love with men for reasons that have little or nothing to do with the way the guy looks physically.

But my point is looks play a role in sexual attraction, and that money doesnt really do that. Money is about long term benefits and settling down. Its not about raw sexual energy and "getting it in". Many women simply trade up the sex for the lifestyle.

 

Yes women fall in love with men for reasons other than looks. But lets not pretend looks have little or nothing to do with that. You need to find your partner physically appealing in order to be IN LOVE with them...because being in love is romantic love which requires sexual attraction.

 

Again, all Im saying is that though some people always try to throw out the idea that women dont care much about looks, or that men can simply use money as a trump card....I still continue to see attractive guys getting girls hot and bothered despite those other things.

 

Like people say on this forum...Pay attention to what people do, not what they say. I dont buy into the idea that men are super visual and women arent. Id say we are all somewhat visual and other things play a role...but that physical attributes have their high place in creating sexual attraction.

Edited October 4, 2012 by kaylan

[iris219]

Its not just LS but many dating sites online. And its not just online but many people I know and many things I have seen.

 

Women getting sick of their good looking husbands who are good to them has nothing to do with this convo. My earlier point was that innate physical attraction...aka raw sexual energy...doesnt come from money. When I stop seeing the role looks play in most relationships, then Ill buy what you are selling.

 

What I continue to see is that some portion of women will forgo their sexual urges so they can get security. What I see and hear from women when they speak of the men that gets them wet, are guys they find physically attractive. When I see women get wet over rich guys, Ill buy what you are selling. All I see in reality is some women knowing the lifestyle boost theyll get from status and money....not that it gets their panties wet in the same way the sexy toned guy will.

But my point is looks play a role in sexual attraction, and that money doesnt really do that. Money is about long term benefits and settling down. Its not about raw sexual energy and "getting it in". Many women simply trade up the sex for the lifestyle.

 

Yes women fall in love with men for reasons other than looks. But lets not pretend looks have little or nothing to do with that. You need to find your partner physically appealing in order to be IN LOVE with them...because being in love is romantic love which requires sexual attraction.

 

Again, all Im saying is that though some people always try to throw out the idea that women dont care much about looks, or that men can simply use money as a trump card....I still continue to see attractive guys getting girls hot and bothered despite those other things.

 

Like people say on this forum...Pay attention to what people do, not what they say. I dont buy into the idea that men are super visual and women arent. Id say we are all somewhat visual and other things play a role...but that physical attributes have their high place in creating sexual attraction.

 

These women (ones married to ugly rich guys) DO find their husbands physically appealing. They aren't blind; they see that the guy is balding, has a bad combover, or flabby belly. They didn't look at the guy across a room and think how hot he was, but when you add in power and social status, that fat belly starts looking cute.

 

It's a very male-centric way of thinking to discount the idea that women can become genuinely sexually attracted to and fall in love with men based on money and power.

[Mme. Chaucer]

I agree chemistry is more than just that. But chemistry occurs when one doesnt find their partner physically unattractive.

 

It's commonplace for a woman to look at her loved one and see his physical flaws clearly - and they might be significant ones - and still feel like jumping on him.

 

I mean, she might be able to recognize that this man is not "attractive" but she still feels sexually drawn to him.

[kaylan]

These women (ones married to ugly rich guys) DO find their husbands physically appealing. They aren't blind; they see that the guy is balding, has a bad combover, or flabby belly. They didn't look at the guy across a room and think how hot he was, but when you add in power and social status, that fat belly starts looking cute.

riiiiight which is why threads pop up, and discussions come up over women finding these guys unattractive despite their cash.

 

Thats a new one...balding, bad combover and flabby stomach is cute now? You JUST made my point. Money makes some women settle on their base sexual desires. Why do you have to add money to make those things cute?

 

Because they arent physically appealing in their own right and because the woman wouldnt be sleeping with the guy soley based on that. The cash is the trade off, but the cash isnt what gets her hot. It makes her soften up her standards.

It's a very male-centric way of thinking to discount the idea that women can become genuinely sexually attracted to and fall in love with men based on money and power.

Its not male centric. I keep telling you this is based on what I hear and see women say. I keep telling you that studies have shown women will care about looks more as their own purses increase in cash.

 

Women fall in love despite money and power, not solely because of it. Thats like me saying a guy will fall in love with a woman solely because of her motherly nature. Sure these things are perks, but they dont create innate sexual energy the same way looks do.

 

Again, this is not about a male centric view. Im talking about what I see in how women behave towards sexually physically appealing men. Im talking about how I hear women speaking about sexy looking guys who get them wet.

[Mme. Chaucer]

Because they arent physically appealing in their own right and because the woman wouldnt be sleeping with the guy soley based on that. The cash is the trade off, but the cash isnt what gets her hot. It makes her soften up her standards.

 

Not necessarily. Often, the cash IS her standard. I know more than one woman (and one of them since 6th grade) who ONLY respond to men who have money and a powerful role in society, like politician or businessman.

 

The one I've known since 6th grade dated a man (gross looking) who was 50 when she was 18. She was / is gorgeous. She was NEVER interested in "hot" guys, even though she recognized that they were good looking human beings. It was the money / power that got her excited, and only that.

 

She wasn't an active golddigger, either. She was EXCITED by that stuff.

 

Interestingly, she has an identical twin sister who liked cute young guys.

[SteveC80]

Its not just LS but many dating sites online. And its not just online but many people I know and many things I have seen.

 

Women getting sick of their good looking husbands who are good to them has nothing to do with this convo. My earlier point was that innate physical attraction...aka raw sexual energy...doesnt come from money. When I stop seeing the role looks play in most relationships, then Ill buy what you are selling.

 

What I continue to see is that some portion of women will forgo their sexual urges so they can get security. What I see and hear from women when they speak of the men that gets them wet, are guys they find physically attractive. When I see women get wet over rich guys, Ill buy what you are selling. All I see in reality is some women knowing the lifestyle boost theyll get from status and money....not that it gets their panties wet in the same way the sexy toned guy will.

But my point is looks play a role in sexual attraction, and that money doesnt really do that. Money is about long term benefits and settling down. Its not about raw sexual energy and "getting it in". Many women simply trade up the sex for the lifestyle.

 

Yes women fall in love with men for reasons other than looks. But lets not pretend looks have little or nothing to do with that. You need to find your partner physically appealing in order to be IN LOVE with them...because being in love is romantic love which requires sexual attraction.

 

Again, all Im saying is that though some people always try to throw out the idea that women dont care much about looks, or that men can simply use money as a trump card....I still continue to see attractive guys getting girls hot and bothered despite those other things.

 

Like people say on this forum...Pay attention to what people do, not what they say. I dont buy into the idea that men are super visual and women arent. Id say we are all somewhat visual and other things play a role...but that physical attributes have their high place in creating sexual attraction.

 

Exactly i see my friends wives lose attraction to them little by little becasue there husbands gained some weight and they end up hitting on me an crossing the line of flirting..not because of my aura or great personality but because they find me HOT

 

Its as simple as that looks are just as important if not more to women its just that theyres not as many guys that are hot enough in a womens eyes to illicit that response to see it often enough..

 

But if a women is around a guy shes extremely physically attracted to married or not in a weak moment shell go for it ive been there..

[kaylan]

It's commonplace for a woman to look at her loved one and see his physical flaws clearly - and they might be significant ones - and still feel like jumping on him.

 

I mean, she might be able to recognize that this man is not "attractive" but she still feels sexually drawn to him.

This is part of the point Im making. Its not about empirical attractiveness. Im saying the woman needs to find him physically attractive overall, and that his looks play into that. Im also saying wealth and status dont play into this innate physical urge the way some people try to pretend.

 

If anything most actions I see from women show the opposite. That the guys looks and personality are what gets them wet. Money is mainly about long run benefits. Again I say this, if money was this huge panty wetter, I wouldnt see all these threads online, nor would I have ever talked to several women who had well to do mates they found physically unappealing.

 

Wealth/Status doesnt directly tie into raw sexual attraction based on what Ive seen. If it did, then Id think Id see less cases on women sexing up broke guys they find sexy and physically appealing to them. And I think Id see more cases of average or broke guys getting left because the women stopped being attracted to him sexually because of money.

 

In reality many women may not shack up with the broke guy because he wont make the best father, however it doesnt mean they arent sexually interested in him. If anything, sexual energy is what keeps women with guys they dont belong with all the time.

Not necessarily. Often, the cash IS her standard. I know more than one woman (and one of them since 6th grade) who ONLY respond to men who have money and a powerful role in society, like politician or businessman.

 

The one I've known since 6th grade dated a man (gross looking) who was 50 when she was 18. She was / is gorgeous. She was NEVER interested in "hot" guys, even though she recognized that they were good looking human beings. It was the money / power that got her excited, and only that.

 

She wasn't an active golddigger, either. She was EXCITED by that stuff.

 

Interestingly, she has an identical twin sister who liked cute young guys.

Again....are these guys making her panties wet solely based on power? Im saying looks will factor in regardless and life has shown me this to be true.

 

If anything the power has always been a perk or a trade off for sex. Not a pantie wetter on its own.

 

But to each their own opinion. Again ill say, when the vast majority of women start becoming sexually attracted to guys more so based on wealth than on physically attributes (and personality), ill relent. Until then, life has shown me that innate sexual energy isnt predicated by money.

 

If anything money and present day "power" are a social construct and dont get down to the nitty gritty of innate human sexual nature.

Edited October 4, 2012 by kaylan

[ascendotum]

Imo, women find a narrower range of men sexually attractive. That's different from acknowledging that he is attractive/not unattractive.

 

Men are pickier about which women are a great enough package to have a relationship with....but for just sex, I believe men cast the net a lot wider than women.

 

I agree with this and Revolver's post on women having more diversity but lower % of male population they are attracted to at the individual level. I've actually found the same women argue the first part of this from both sides though, depending on the guy's stance/attitude discussing it. From a relationship perspective it is of less relevance, but with women more up for sex these days, it actually does become an issue for those 'single' guys who are outside of that 'narrower range' who want in on more of the action.

[AD1980]

I agree with this and Revolver's post on women having more diversity but lower % of male population they are attracted to at the individual level. I've actually found the same women argue the first part of this from both sides though, depending on the guy's stance/attitude discussing it. From a relationship perspective it is of less relevance, but with women more up for sex these days, it actually does become an issue for those 'single' guys who are outside of that 'narrower range' who want in on more of the action.

 

Its true my friend whos recently divorced and really good looking has slept with a different women every week:laugh: when we rented a summer home and single women came up they al ginroed me and ran into his room where they banged him

 

Its great that maybe one day a women will want to settle down for emtional support with a guy like me while still lusting over men like him:sick:

[kaylan]

^ And stuff like that, which I have seen in real life as well, is exactly why I never buy into the BS that women care less about looks than men, or that personality matters so much more to women than men.

 

If a guy gets women going due to his raw physicality, then he will get them going. The only reason these false ideas exist (that women care less about looks or that women care more about personality than men do), is because mens high sex drive will make many of them have low standards for sex.

 

Hell many guys will sleep with women they dont find sexually attractive overall. They simply found her vagina sexually stimulating enough to get the urge for sex. However, once a guy wants a relationship, he cares as much about personality as women and gets relaxed on looks.

 

Remove the general sluttiness of some men, and ask them to be honest about their assessment of a womans physical beauty and personality...and where they rank certain females...and I bet you it will be on par with women doing the same thing to men. What I am saying is, when you control for sex drive, men and women arent much different. When women are revved up they behave very similarly to men...and the sexual evolution has revved up many women. And when a guy is less revved up, he starts caring about personality more and will value a compatible mate over strict looks requirements.

[xxoo]

Again....are these guys making her panties wet solely based on power? Im saying looks will factor in regardless and life has shown me this to be true.

 

If a guy is physically repulsive to a woman, no amt of money will be enough to make her wet.

 

But if the guy is simply neutral....not particularly attractive or unattractive....and he has a lot of money and power that he is willing to share with her, that can be sexually exciting.

 

Add to that some great rolls in the hay, and now whatever his look are, they are associated with great sex. And now he is a pantie wetter for her

 

If you manage to get her in bed, and you manage to WOW her in bed, she'll associate you with great sex. What more of a turn on do you need?

 

I can't in good conscience claim my H isn't hot, because he is SO hot to me. But I can honestly say that there have been times during our marriage when he was 30+ pounds overweight. Even then, his body is just the body to me. The body that makes me feel so good.

Edited October 5, 2012 by xxoo