blue_jay_bird Posted February 12, 2013 Posted February 12, 2013 I'm sorry but who decides what league your in. Does this league divide into three categories, looks, personality and income. Why is it, that women seem to settle. And this is where all the men say this is not true. But when it comes to looks i often have never seen a girl jump out of her league. Is it possible? I sound vain. How you as a woman every dated someone better looking then you?
starla33 Posted February 12, 2013 Posted February 12, 2013 I'm sorry but who decides what league your in. Does this league divide into three categories, looks, personality and income. Why is it, that women seem to settle. And this is where all the men say this is not true. But when it comes to looks i often have never seen a girl jump out of her league. Is it possible? I sound vain. How you as a woman every dated someone better looking then you? Honestly? Because most women want to look better than their partner....also hotter guys can cheat easier than guys that are not as good looking.
Leigh 87 Posted February 12, 2013 Posted February 12, 2013 Looks and therefore leagues, are subjective. I have been told I am ugly online on this website, yet it does not hold me back in going after guys I am into. For every guy that says a girl is ugly, there are also men who find her attractive too. ....I certainly do not walk out the door every day, and think that only guys I am not attracted to will ever be interested in me. .............I never settle, and I do not have to, because ... In spite of my looks, there are always enough guys who seam to be into me. I guess unless your hideously ugly, your looks will not necessarily hold you back. . 5
ls32ssibm Posted February 12, 2013 Posted February 12, 2013 Honestly? Because most women want to look better than their partner....also hotter guys can cheat easier than guys that are not as good looking. This isn't always the case but is funny when you see it. My ex-girlfriend (8/10 maybe) has been with her new boyfriend (a 4/10 if lucky, the dude looks inbred) for awhile now because she likes to look good. I'm an 8/10 (I've been told) and she was always very heavy makeup when out with me.
yongyong Posted February 12, 2013 Posted February 12, 2013 Yes, I see plenty of not good looking guys with cute girls. I don't the oppositie often. I saw this normal body guy with a really fat girl. he seemed unhappy, ashamed and couldn't make eye contacts with me. I am sure all women have a desire for handsome men too. But they can't cope with the stress about getting cheated on or getting dumped. Plus their priority changes as they get older (looks to stability) They don't feel like a woman if he is hotter than her. (what kind of woman wants to hear 'your husband is hot'. the correct comment is 'your wife is beautiful', 'you have a good husband') This is why I don't talk to uglier woman at a bar. maybe they think there is no way I will date them but just want to use them as a toy for that night. their attitude is really bitter.
oldschool1 Posted February 12, 2013 Posted February 12, 2013 I have definitely seen insanely perfect looking men with not-so-perfect women, but it's rare! One of my serious boyfriends was a spectacularly gorgeous and tall man, whereas I am short of beautiful (literally and figuratively). He was so fabulous looking that he hardly needed a knockout on his arm to prove his fabulousness. Furthermore, he was in love with me, so I might as well have been Christie Brinkley at that moment. Even gorgeous men fall in love! I think that attractive, non-losery men are actually LESS likely to cheat on you. Women assume that marrying a geek will result in faithfulness, but that can backfire. That nerd starts to make some money, and BAM--he leaves you for Christie Brinkley. If, conversely, you marry an attractive, confident man, you know that you're not his only option. He knows what's out there, but he's CHOSEN to be with you. Of course, these are only generalizations, and every person is different. My two cents... 2
Author blue_jay_bird Posted February 12, 2013 Author Posted February 12, 2013 Even after i typed this it took me some time to think heyy y... i know a married couple like this. It's not even noticed anymore. The difference is not huge but he did once say to me he was worried about her looks...thinking he could do better. But when it came down to it her personalty just closed the deal. You couldn't help to feel her confidence, and control when she was in a room.... lol she puts him in his place all the time and has a strong hand. ( he still say's she very insecure on the inside) ...
Treasa Posted February 12, 2013 Posted February 12, 2013 I'm in the NFC North, personally. Oh, wait, that's a division and not a league. Ok, I'll be in the AHL, since my boyfriend is in the NHL. That's how important I think "leagues" are. 2
Revolver Posted February 12, 2013 Posted February 12, 2013 Theres leagues in terms of looks, education, and money. I would say women can date out of their socioeconomic "league" far more then men can. People of similar looks, education, and earnings tend to end up together the vast majority of the time anyway
somedude81 Posted February 12, 2013 Posted February 12, 2013 Where I'm at, I hardly ever see women with men less attractive then them.
pbjbear Posted February 12, 2013 Posted February 12, 2013 I'm sorry but who decides what league your in. Does this league divide into three categories, looks, personality and income. Why is it, that women seem to settle. And this is where all the men say this is not true. But when it comes to looks i often have never seen a girl jump out of her league. Is it possible? I sound vain. How you as a woman every dated someone better looking then you? Me either. I have seen two examples in my entire life of a guy dating below his league looks-wise...I see the opposite all the time and no, these men arent rich or famous. Truth: Women will give a guy who doesnt meet her physical standards a chance as long as he has something else to make up for it (personality usually...sometimes money or status) Men dont do this. You HAVE to meet his physical standards first, then personality comes second. Im not saying men dont care about personality, but she has to be goodlooking first. Men are more shallow when it comes to looks 1
pbjbear Posted February 12, 2013 Posted February 12, 2013 (edited) Even after i typed this it took me some time to think heyy y... i know a married couple like this. It's not even noticed anymore. The difference is not huge but he did once say to me he was worried about her looks...thinking he could do better. But when it came down to it her personalty just closed the deal. You couldn't help to feel her confidence, and control when she was in a room.... lol she puts him in his place all the time and has a strong hand. ( he still say's she very insecure on the inside) ... I feel sorry for this woman. I feel sorry for any woman married to a guy who is so concerned with her looks that he thinks he can do better, even if she has the personality. See my previous post I would bet good $ he will cheat the second a better looking woman offers herself to him Edited February 12, 2013 by pbjbear 1
Lonely Ronin Posted February 12, 2013 Posted February 12, 2013 Im not saying men dont care about personality, but she has to be goodlooking first. Men are more shallow when it comes to looks O please, women are just as bad as men. 4
man_in_the_box Posted February 12, 2013 Posted February 12, 2013 Me either. I have seen two examples in my entire life of a guy dating below his league looks-wise...I see the opposite all the time and no, these men arent rich or famous. Truth: Women will give a guy who doesnt meet her physical standards a chance as long as he has something else to make up for it (personality usually...sometimes money or status) Men dont do this. You HAVE to meet his physical standards first, then personality comes second. Im not saying men dont care about personality, but she has to be goodlooking first. Men are more shallow when it comes to looks But this is not even possible. Statistically, on the microscale you are describing perhaps. But assuming that there's an equal amount of men and women in every 'league' (god I feel so stupid rationalizing about leages and that sort of nonsense ) then for every men that dates down or up there has to be a woman that dates down or up. It's like a law of conservation. Only if we change the conditions of the system, as in there's tons more men in the lower leagues than women or all the lower women leagues become lesbians it could possibly be argued. But that's ridiculous. 2
mesmerized Posted February 12, 2013 Posted February 12, 2013 But this is not even possible. Statistically, on the microscale you are describing perhaps. But assuming that there's an equal amount of men and women in every 'league' (god I feel so stupid rationalizing about leages and that sort of nonsense ) then for every men that dates down or up there has to be a woman that dates down or up. It's like a law of conservation. Only if we change the conditions of the system, as in there's tons more men in the lower leagues than women or all the lower women leagues become lesbians it could possibly be argued. But that's ridiculous. Well it could be explained. A lot of the good looking men never commit, good looking women still want commitment so they'd have to date down. Very unattractive women are the bottom of barrel that don't get anything. 2
man_in_the_box Posted February 12, 2013 Posted February 12, 2013 That's a plausible explanation yet it does require that apparently good-looking women are much more eager to commit than good-looking men and I'm not sure if that is true. I thought it takes good-men longer to commit, which in a dynamic system such as the human population would not make a difference as the in- and outflux of good-looking men would not change over the course of time, always leaving more or less the same amount of good-looking men on the market. But yeah, if that's really true then you got me
mesmerized Posted February 12, 2013 Posted February 12, 2013 That's a plausible explanation yet it does require that apparently good-looking women are much more eager to commit than good-looking men and I'm not sure if that is true. I thought it takes good-men longer to commit, which in a dynamic system such as the human population would not make a difference as the in- and outflux of good-looking men would not change over the course of time, always leaving more or less the same amount of good-looking men on the market. But yeah, if that's really true then you got me When the good looking men decides to commit later in life, they go for much younger hot women, which again makes them less attractive than their women due to the effects of age. So although the woman is dating a formerly good looking man, she is still dating down.
pbjbear Posted February 12, 2013 Posted February 12, 2013 If a guy has the options to, he wont date someone who is in his league looks-wise. Most men dont have those options though. Thank the lord most have figured out what is realistic and what is not. However, then you have all of these men who secretly wish they could do better...more men do this than women want to know
Eternal Sunshine Posted February 12, 2013 Posted February 12, 2013 Well it could be explained. A lot of the good looking men never commit, good looking women still want commitment so they'd have to date down. Very unattractive women are the bottom of barrel that don't get anything. This is true. Women are more relationship oriented, they want marriage and family more so they date down to get it. Men are more commitment resistant and they often need a more attractive woman than themselves to inspire them to commit. Even the guys here that never had girlfriends, once they had an average or plain gf to get them over the confidence hump, they would quickly discard her and start chasing hotties. 1
pbjbear Posted February 12, 2013 Posted February 12, 2013 This is true. Women are more relationship oriented, they want marriage and family more so they date down to get it. Men are more commitment resistant and they often need a more attractive woman than themselves to inspire them to commit. Even the guys here that never had girlfriends, once they had an average or plain gf to get them over the confidence hump, they would quickly discard her and start chasing hotties. Be careful...I say stuff like that and I get called a manhater though its the truth. Your second point, many here will say over and over again they wouldnt do that but in real life, their actions say otherwise There is an epidemic of men today that feel society owes them a woman much hotter than they are. I dont get it
mesmerized Posted February 12, 2013 Posted February 12, 2013 This is true. Women are more relationship oriented, they want marriage and family more so they date down to get it. Men are more commitment resistant and they often need a more attractive woman than themselves to inspire them to commit. Even the guys here that never had girlfriends, once they had an average or plain gf to get them over the confidence hump, they would quickly discard her and start chasing hotties. Truer words have never been spoken. 1
man_in_the_box Posted February 12, 2013 Posted February 12, 2013 When the good looking men decides to commit later in life, they go for much younger hot women, which again makes them less attractive than their women due to the effects of age. So although the woman is dating a formerly good looking man, she is still dating down. Good analogy but if it were true there would have to be some sort of huge, statistical evidence that the 'lower leagues' of women are massively stuck being single as that would be the logical outcome of this system. Is it really the case? I would just assume that on such a massive scale things are equal in the absence of evidence to proof the contrary. Plus if the guy is rich, then is it really dating down? I thought rich men were in high demand. The 'leagues' (excuse me, I don't really believe in them myself) aren't merely limited by appearance. Especially not for men. I think I'm way too analytical for this kind of thing.
pbjbear Posted February 12, 2013 Posted February 12, 2013 (edited) Good analogy but if it were true there would have to be some sort of huge, statistical evidence that the 'lower leagues' of women are massively stuck being single as that would be the logical outcome of this system. Is it really the case? I would just assume that on such a massive scale things are equal in the absence of evidence to proof the contrary. Plus if the guy is rich, then is it really dating down? I thought rich men were in high demand. The 'leagues' (excuse me, I don't really believe in them myself) aren't merely limited by appearance. Especially not for men. I think I'm way too analytical for this kind of thing. Rich men are in demand but our society is leaning more towards women being able to financially support themselves so less women today are focusing as much on income. Now that women can work, they shouldnt NEED a rich man. It depends on your social circle and where you live, but where I live all women my age are expected to support themselves and are called lazy if they dont. Older people prob. arent as harsh Scientific studies show that marriages where the woman is better looking than the man tend to have less fights and be viewed more satisfactorily by both the husband and wife. This is because if a guy has a woman that isnt just as good looking as him or better (usually most guys want the second one), he thinks he can do better and is not satisfied. TRUTH. I roll my eyes when men here try to say this fact isnt true...you dont need a scientific study to get this, its human nature. Men are very shallow in terms of looks Edited February 12, 2013 by pbjbear
Ruby Slippers Posted February 12, 2013 Posted February 12, 2013 It hit me a while back that most of my boyfriends have been quite good-looking, and I would say that most are at least slightly cuter than I am. I've never sought them out. Due to a few factors, I've always waited for the men to approach me, and it's mostly really cute guys who do. I think my main advantage is that I'm above average in intelligence. Throughout my life, I've scored in the top 1% on various intelligence tests, and always stood out in that way. I'm also traditional-looking enough on the outside, but a total free thinker and non-conformist in the way I live my life. I question the mainstream and am automatically suspicious of anything too popular, or any crowd mentality. This seems to be very attractive and intriguing to men, even the very conservative ones. I don't treat a man special just because he's hot, and I'm bold in calling anyone out on their issues. The problem with really good-looking men and women is that too many people just let their BS slide. I don't do that, at all. When I was younger, I was overly critical of myself and others, but as I've matured, I've adapted this habit into a more productive one. I still point out people's weak points, but I do it in a gentle, sympathetic way, only when they're open to it, and this seems to make them feel comfortable to go really deep in discussing those issues with me. People often tell me things that they say they've never told anyone, or even if they don't say that, I get the impression they're comfortable getting very personal with me because they know I won't judge them for it or use it against them - and I'll have good advice. Quite a few people I've gotten close to have told me that knowing me has changed their life for the better. And I see it right in front of me. Now I recognize that one of my best gifts is inspiring people to grow and live more fully. I'm good at it. Most of the men I've been with tell me they've never been so connected to a person and been rocked so hard. Most of the men I've been with never lose touch with me, and they often have that "one that got away" energy toward me. So in spite of my issues and insecurities - which I've come a long way on - I'm very good at having deep, meaningful relationships with people that really intrigue and challenge them. It's the same with my friends. Most of the guys I've had relationships with had many options and got a lot of attention from women, but they were very loyal and never made me feel they were looking elsewhere. The only fears I've had about that have come from within - a nagging worry that this catch of a guy could get a hotter girl and might feel the pull to do so one day. But most of these guys have been with hotter girls who didn't run too deep, and often suffered some of the missing aspects. The thing is, I've never been hung up on looks. Sure, I can recognize a cute guy that appeals to many women - but I've had just as many intense crushes on kinda funny-looking, hyper-brainy nerds as I have on classically handsome, sporty guys. I feel like I never see just the surface - I see right through people. 1
man_in_the_box Posted February 12, 2013 Posted February 12, 2013 Rich men are in demand but our society is leaning more towards women being able to financially support themselves so less women today are focusing as much on income. But that would mean that the older men looking for younger women aren't succesful and have no access to 'higher' leagues. I'm sure these things happen all the time in our social circles (actually in my city it's reverse) but I think that if we extrapolate it to such macroscale proportions it just doesn't make sense anymore because it would result into huge statistical disproportions in what type of men/women (i.e. in what leage) cannot find a partner. And I just don't see these disproportions - there has to be some indication that they are there right? If there's no balance there has to be some physical indication that the system is not balanced.
Recommended Posts