mesmerized Posted August 6, 2013 Share Posted August 6, 2013 Yes, women do that, ALL the time. How is this even a question? You know how men sleep with anything easy as long as she puts out even though they're not 100% attracted to her? Women too go out or even sleep with men they're not very attracted to because they're the only safe and easy choice they have. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
man_in_the_box Posted August 7, 2013 Share Posted August 7, 2013 Yes. All that this study proves is that men treat hot women better, that's why it's "conducive" to a woman's happiness if she marries a guy below her. Men don't treat average women as good as they treat hot women. You mean their partner instead of 'men'. The article doesn't say anything about how men treat women in general or visa versa. Women treat men based on their appearance as well. Its not a gender thing, its a human thing. It sucks, but it is what it is. I seriouly don't care how 82 couples handle their relationship **** with respect to their relative physical attractiveness. Every adult knows people are influenced by how others look. Deal with it. Link to post Share on other sites
PJKino Posted August 7, 2013 Share Posted August 7, 2013 Yes, women do that, ALL the time. How is this even a question? You know how men sleep with anything easy as long as she puts out even though they're not 100% attracted to her? Women too go out or even sleep with men they're not very attracted to because they're the only safe and easy choice they have. Most couples are pretty evenly matched,an ugly women dating another ugly man doesnt make her a saint it makes her dating the only peopel available to her and vice versa for the guy Link to post Share on other sites
Southern Cal Dude Posted August 7, 2013 Share Posted August 7, 2013 Reading comprehension clearly isn't your strength. The outcome of the study has nothing to do with how the WOMAN sees it. The way you worded it makes it sound like the woman feels like the man should be grateful that she as the better looking part "settled" for him. This isn't the case at all. What the outcome of the study really implies is that men - as we all know - are so shallow in their visual preferences that a woman is only safe in terms of good treatment, his fidelity etc. IF she is hot (or better looking to than him). The study unfortunately says more about men than women. Everyone judges on physical appearance. I get away with a ton of sh*t because of my looks where as someone else would be called on it. Link to post Share on other sites
123321 Posted August 7, 2013 Share Posted August 7, 2013 What the outcome of the study really implies .... Perhaps what you see is based on what you want to be there. I didn't see that at all, what I saw was "Overall, wives and husbands behaved more positively when the woman was better looking." "So it seems the mismatch in looks is actually a perfect match. "Equitable is unlikely to mean the same on every dimension," " Link to post Share on other sites
TB Rhine Posted August 12, 2013 Share Posted August 12, 2013 (edited) I think that social status (as conferred by physical attractiveness, wealth, type of job/career, material possessions, and so on - basically anything that would put one person slightly higher on the totem pole than another, all other things being equal) is the highest indicator of attractiveness for males, whereas physical attractiveness is the highest indicator for females. As Sinbad once said, "A girl can be a fry cook at McDonald's and a guy'll still try to get her phone number." The same does not hold true if the genders are reversed. Some might say that this is a sexist statement, but honestly, I think it reflects badly on men more than anyone else. At the end of the day, we just don't give a sh*t. Women are more selective, owing to evolutionary factors, social factors, the whole selectivity vs. scarcity bias, and so on. And they probably end up better off for it as often as not, in all honesty. In terms of "power" in a relationship, I think that ultimately the person with the most options (or who sees themselves as having the most options) has more power. A wealthy person is more powerful than their super-attractive spouse, because the wealthy person could go out and find someone just as attractive; the attractive partner can't (necessarily) go out and find someone just as wealthy. There are more attractive people than wealthy people, so wealthy folks have the advantage. Emotional balance is also key. An attractive woman, for example, who is needy and desirous of affection, could find herself at a disadvantage with a less attractive partner who is more emotionally reserved. Crappy as it is to say, it's a matter of which one has what the other one wants, and how stingy they are with it. What is held in reserve will always be more valued than what is given away freely. Edited August 12, 2013 by TB Rhine Clarification, and to respond to previously unseen threads. Link to post Share on other sites
will1988 Posted August 12, 2013 Share Posted August 12, 2013 I got a 7.75 on that site... although, the picture I tried my head was slightly tilted to the side, so one of the problems was that my face was not perfectly horizontle. meh... Link to post Share on other sites
will1988 Posted August 12, 2013 Share Posted August 12, 2013 ROFLMAO!! What a load of hooey! I love that this program totally overlooks wrinkles and sun damage...8.2 and 8.65 (I did get penalized for my big mouth). I got penalized for mouth being too wide and my ears being too big for my nose. lmao Link to post Share on other sites
123321 Posted August 12, 2013 Share Posted August 12, 2013 A wealthy person is more powerful than their super-attractive spouse, because the wealthy person could go out and find someone just as attractive; the attractive partner can't (necessarily) go out and find someone just as wealthy. Also and IMO more important is the fact that physical beauty is a wasting asset; beauty fades, whereas in general wealth grows. Link to post Share on other sites
Revolver Posted August 12, 2013 Share Posted August 12, 2013 How so? If he's well-off, he shouldn't have too much of a problem finding a mistress. And if he isn't, he could still mess around with fat/ugly women or prostitutes. A person's character determines whether or not they will remain loyal, looks have nothing to do with it. I didnt say More safe in general, i mean More safe in comparison with a guy who is more attractive and has a higher social status. To use an extreme example Who is More likely to cheat on Mila Kunis, me or Ashton Kutcher? Of course it's Ashton. He's better looking, famous, and because of this has women throwing themselves at him on a daily basis. Plus he has the added Fact that he can get a girl on the same level or better if she finds out, I for damn sure dont. And of course looks have a big part in this lol. The better looking the guy, the more options he has and the more women hitting on him. Link to post Share on other sites
warrenorabbits Posted March 28, 2014 Share Posted March 28, 2014 So help me, if I hear one more person talk about someone who is "out of his/her league" or use the ten-point rating scale for a potential date, I might just give up on our modern age. In our PC, egalitarian society, how does this concept that people are divided into castes -- especially based on appearance/wealth -- survive? I've met extremely attractive people that are so repellent that I wouldn't date them if you paid me. By contrast, a lot of "ugly" people are bright, sensitive, and well-read. I suppose I'm subdividing people in a similar way by making these assessments, but I'm not suggesting that I'm "higher" or "lower" than any of these people -- and I'm also judging by things other than how much they weigh or how much is in their wallet. I guess "leagues" sort of exist in the sense that certain attractive women, for example, would deem me unworthy of them. But that doesn't make me of a lower "league"; it just reveals that they think on shallow, antiquated lines. Link to post Share on other sites
Noproblem Posted March 29, 2014 Share Posted March 29, 2014 C'mon, those online face-pic upload attractiveness rating sites are no different than the "enter your name and the name of your crush to determine if you're astrologically made for one another" sites.. LOL How is it going to perfectly scan your face on a photo potentially full of objects? If it was even legit to some extent, I don't think it'd be accurate. Most people who're not physically deformed would probably measure around an 8. Which reminds me I need to go the sites enter your name and the name of your crush ..That's my last resort .... Link to post Share on other sites
Strength in Healing Posted March 29, 2014 Share Posted March 29, 2014 Everyone judges on physical appearance. I get away with a ton of sh*t because of my looks where as someone else would be called on it. That's dumb and implies you are lying. My pic is in my avatar, you can be the judge of whether people find me attractive or not. And I think you're lying. Looks don't get me out of anything, they get me INTO plenty. And that was NOT a sexual innuendo. Link to post Share on other sites
topaMAXX Posted March 29, 2014 Share Posted March 29, 2014 So help me, if I hear one more person talk about someone who is "out of his/her league" or use the ten-point rating scale for a potential date, I might just give up on our modern age. In our PC, egalitarian society, how does this concept that people are divided into castes -- especially based on appearance/wealth -- survive? I've met extremely attractive people that are so repellent that I wouldn't date them if you paid me. By contrast, a lot of "ugly" people are bright, sensitive, and well-read. I suppose I'm subdividing people in a similar way by making these assessments, but I'm not suggesting that I'm "higher" or "lower" than any of these people -- and I'm also judging by things other than how much they weigh or how much is in their wallet. I guess "leagues" sort of exist in the sense that certain attractive women, for example, would deem me unworthy of them. But that doesn't make me of a lower "league"; it just reveals that they think on shallow, antiquated lines. Leagues do exist, just like racism still exists. Our PC culture is all about image. As long as we act like these things don't exist, that's all that matters. Link to post Share on other sites
Lyn77 Posted March 31, 2014 Share Posted March 31, 2014 How do you view dating someone out of your league? Men and Women... Do you think it's worth it? Link to post Share on other sites
Emilia Posted March 31, 2014 Share Posted March 31, 2014 Well it can keep you on your toes in a good way or it can make you insecure. A lot of people will tell you that leagues don't exist by the way and that everyone has a chance with everyone else but I don't think that's true. 4 Link to post Share on other sites
Robert Z Posted March 31, 2014 Share Posted March 31, 2014 (edited) How do you view dating someone out of your league? Men and Women... Do you think it's worth it? Very expensive! Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes.... I have 23 year old model for a sugar baby and she has been one of the best things that has ever happened to me. But then it isn't just her looks that make her so amazing. Edited March 31, 2014 by Robert Z 1 Link to post Share on other sites
Lyn77 Posted April 1, 2014 Share Posted April 1, 2014 I've never had the complexity of dating someone out of my "league" until now that I am a single mother in my thirties. And I'm not just talking money here. Most of the successful eligible bachelors my age, do not have children and want children. Which makes it hard for me, since I do NOT plan on more children. 100% sure of it. These men also have the ability to travel anytime they want, which I do not since I have a family. The majority of the responses I've gotten from online, family and friends, are that people don't buy into leagues. I do however, think if someone is in a different place in their life than you, for instance single, successful, wealthy man with no children dating a single divorced mother with a mediocre career, the romance can surely fizzle. Who knows! 2 Link to post Share on other sites
Arieswoman Posted April 1, 2014 Share Posted April 1, 2014 Lyn77, Can you define what you mean by "out of your league" ? Thanks. Link to post Share on other sites
fortyninethousand322 Posted April 1, 2014 Share Posted April 1, 2014 How do you view dating someone out of your league? Men and Women... Do you think it's worth it? I don't think I've met a woman I don't consider out of my league... Link to post Share on other sites
Canucklehead Posted April 2, 2014 Share Posted April 2, 2014 This whole idea of "dating out of ones league" seems flawed in my opinion. If both people see themselves as on par with each other then there is no issue. But, if one perceives the other as "better than" for what ever reason... there is a fundamental insecurity problem that may prevent that couple from achieving a solid LTR I think couples should balance each other and not put the other on a pedestal. Feeling like you are with someone that you do not deserve creates problems. However, being grateful and feeling fortunate to find a good partner is something different and empowering 2 Link to post Share on other sites
Weezy1973 Posted April 2, 2014 Share Posted April 2, 2014 I've never had the complexity of dating someone out of my "league" until now that I am a single mother in my thirties. And I'm not just talking money here. Most of the successful eligible bachelors my age, do not have children and want children. Which makes it hard for me, since I do NOT plan on more children. 100% sure of it. These men also have the ability to travel anytime they want, which I do not since I have a family. The majority of the responses I've gotten from online, family and friends, are that people don't buy into leagues. I do however, think if someone is in a different place in their life than you, for instance single, successful, wealthy man with no children dating a single divorced mother with a mediocre career, the romance can surely fizzle. Who knows! It's not about leagues, but about compatibility. You've lived a very different life and likely have very different priorities than the type of men you describe. I doubt you'd have much in common. You'd likely connect much better with a man that is similar to you. A single father that values his children more than acquiring wealth. Two very different sets of values - people with similar values tend to make much better relationship partners... 2 Link to post Share on other sites
Noproblem Posted April 2, 2014 Share Posted April 2, 2014 There is no league, you only create it in your mind... Once you believe there is no league, everything will work perfectly. Link to post Share on other sites
Grumpybutfun Posted April 2, 2014 Share Posted April 2, 2014 As long as you aren't in "little" league, it can be managed. G 2 Link to post Share on other sites
Canucklehead Posted April 2, 2014 Share Posted April 2, 2014 As long as you aren't in "little" league, it can be managed. G LOL I coach little league and they are easier to manage than most relationships..... 4 Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts