Author Pompeii Posted March 14, 2013 Author Posted March 14, 2013 What's the reverse? Are there top women? I believe that there are women more desired by a large amount of the male populace, so I do believe in that context, they would be considered "top women". However, many people seem to make a big deal out of this "elect" percentage of men, so that is why "they" are the crux of this discussion.
Archgirl Posted March 14, 2013 Posted March 14, 2013 I believe that there are women more desired by a large amount of the male populace, so I do believe in that context, they would be considered "top women". However, many people seem to make a big deal out of this "elect" percentage of men, so that is why "they" are the crux of this discussion. Thanks. I'm just wondering if that might be part of the explanations you are missing, ie "top" women select who the "top" men are, thereby making them more attractive to women generally. On the principal that women tend to act in groups, following a leader.
Author Pompeii Posted March 14, 2013 Author Posted March 14, 2013 (edited) 50th percentile in her pool, and remember "mating" in this context means sex, not necessarily dating or a relationship. And yes, ask an average, not fat, but not necessarily body beautiful, set of female friends how often they get hit on, go out with them and watch. Find out how many guys are pursuing them at any given time, in a city or larger town. You may be surprised what you find. Average men have to work much harder to develop the same amount of opportunities. Otherwise, you are certainly welcome to your opinion and your interpretation of yours and friends experience. I know what I have seen and experienced living in many different pools and being both in and out of the 90th % in many different contexts over two decades of mating and dating. I am not discrediting your experiences or your opinion just so you know. I have been out with several female friends and I know that they get hit on, but not often. These girls are quite beautiful as well. Then again, I've been hit on when I'm out as well but it is also not often. I wouldn't expect it to be. I do believe that in general, men would have to work harder to be noticed mainly because women have little incentive to approach the average man whereas the average man has much more incentive to approach the average woman. Men biologically value quantity, women biologically value quality, generally speaking. That's why you'll only see a woman hit on you if you're high value in her opinion. It is generally still seen as somewhat desperate if a woman hits on a man, especially if she doesn't know him. Your worth is higher than the presumed societal risk she will take on from approaching. At least, that's how I interpret it. Uhh bad math. Cause not all women date or want to have any love. Plus some are lesbian. So it's more like this The 20% top guys sleep with 50% of the women. Here's the fomula of women AvailableWomenFor20%Topmen = Stragith ones - lesbian ones - angry frustrated feminists - women who hate men - women who not necesarily hate men but are not interested in dating - Asexual women. Simple math I sure hope you aren't an Economist, because that's some REALLY bad math. Edited March 14, 2013 by Pompeii
jma500 Posted March 14, 2013 Posted March 14, 2013 I define "top men" as those who have minimal difficulty getting dates, sex or relationships. I worked with a guy who was so smooth he had his first child at 16 lol. This guy was a total womanizer and had a constant stream of women trying to get with him. He was good looking and very smooth when he talked though. The men who try but still have practically no success are not "top men" This man is not a top man he is a sleazebag. That you and the other women you mentioned consider him to be a top man is the major malfunction of this post. Good job creating and continuing to feed a monster. I suspect that very soon you will be posting a thread about how there are no good men left to date.
TouchedByViolet Posted March 14, 2013 Posted March 14, 2013 This man is not a top man he is a sleazebag. That you and the other women you mentioned consider him to be a top man is the major malfunction of this post. Good job creating and continuing to feed a monster. I suspect that very soon you will be posting a thread about how there are no good men left to date. A sleazebag can be a "top man" with my definition. As long as the guy is excellent at pulling women it satisfies the criteria. It has nothing to do with morals, good vs bad, integrity, etc... Plenty of good men who are perpetually single and women are not interested in them. Interesting > good As a guy who has to work extra hard for dates, I tried to learn things from this man about attracting women. I wasn't necessarily interested in his negative qualities but rather finding out how to have lots of women interested in me. He was in his late twenties and early thirties when I worked with him. He had four kids and regularly cheated on his wife with no shortage of options. I personally have never cheated and would love to find an awesome girl to be with but that has nothing to do with being a "top man"
jma500 Posted March 14, 2013 Posted March 14, 2013 A sleazebag can be a "top man" with my definition. As long as the guy is excellent at pulling women it satisfies the criteria. It has nothing to do with morals, good vs bad, integrity, etc... Plenty of good men who are perpetually single and women are not interested in them. Interesting > good As a guy who has to work extra hard for dates, I tried to learn things from this man about attracting women. I wasn't necessarily interested in his negative qualities but rather finding out how to have lots of women interested in me. He was in his late twenties and early thirties when I worked with him. He had four kids and regularly cheated on his wife with no shortage of options. I personally have never cheated and would love to find an awesome girl to be with but that has nothing to do with being a "top man" Sorry but with your screen name and avatar i tbought you were a woman. I wouldn't even have bothered to learn anything from him. Because i know the only thing i would learn is how to attract these same sleazy, intellectually bereft, women whom have so low a level of self worth and esteem that they line up to be his next baby mama. Even if i never have a girlfriendfor the rest of my life i can go to my grave knowing i never lowered myself nor used and abused anyone. Anyone can get these women. I prefer a better caliber of ladies.
Treasa Posted March 14, 2013 Posted March 14, 2013 I think the 80/20 Rule came from wealth distribution. Some random person then applied it to dating. Then every guy that couldn't get girls took it and ran with it. Hahaha, I love this so much.
deintrib Posted March 14, 2013 Posted March 14, 2013 Yeah, 10 seems very low to me for a guy....20ish seems about average to me. But I'm from NYC. We're probably at the high end of that. Average man sleeps with 7 women - Health - Sexual health | NBC News Not according to this it isn't. The median number of lifetime female sexual partners for men was seven I know median not average, but close enough. Also note that 26% of adults reported only having one sexual partner and 4% of adults reported being virgins.
mesmerized Posted March 14, 2013 Posted March 14, 2013 Both sexes have people that are naturally going to do better with dating for a variety of reasons. But it is not some exclusive club where your hand has been stamped and everyone knows who you are. Women don't reject guys because they're not "in the 20%". Threads like this is when I laugh at the notion of "men are logical". The average dudes that posts here suck at any type of logic. They all operate with what they call "confirmation bias". 1
Author Pompeii Posted March 14, 2013 Author Posted March 14, 2013 Average man sleeps with 7 women - Health - Sexual health | NBC News Not according to this it isn't. I know median not average, but close enough. Also note that 26% of adults reported only having one sexual partner and 4% of adults reported being virgins. I don't take those surveys seriously because people generally fabricate the truth, no matter what level of anonymity there is.
jma500 Posted March 14, 2013 Posted March 14, 2013 Average man sleeps with 7 women - Health - Sexual health | NBC News Not according to this it isn't. I know median not average, but close enough. Also note that 26% of adults reported only having one sexual partner and 4% of adults reported being virgins. I'll bet the 26% and 4% are low. I can't imagine many people are going to tell a major tv network such personal information.
TheGuard13 Posted March 14, 2013 Posted March 14, 2013 I define "top men" as those who have minimal difficulty getting dates, sex or relationships. I worked with a guy who was so smooth he had his first child at 16 lol. I don't really feel like this is an achievment... 2
iKING Posted March 14, 2013 Posted March 14, 2013 I don't really feel like this is an achievment... Sounds more like a mistake.. 1
jma500 Posted March 14, 2013 Posted March 14, 2013 I don't really feel like this is an achievment... Me either. Men and women like this do not impress me at all.
GravityMan Posted March 15, 2013 Posted March 15, 2013 Still sounds more reasonable than 20. Agreed. Also, median is a better statistic to use than average in this case. A median of 7 (or even a bit lower) seems plausible IMO. A small percentage of men (less than 10%) have high numbers and thus skew the average. On topic - first of all it's stupid to apply the Pareto Principle to dating and sex. Keep it in business and economics where it actually makes some sense. I think the vast majority of guys will have had at least a little success with dating and sex by the age of 25. Forever Alone-rs are uncommon. Furthermore, it's likely true that say 5-10% of men have a much easier (or even effortless) time getting dates and sex with a high number of women than the remaining 90%. Thus their numbers are quite high. Some of them employ the "throw everything on the wall and see what sticks" approach. They may be the so-called "top men" when it comes to hooking up with tons of women...perhaps they are exceptionally smooth talkers and great flirts with good senses of humor...but I doubt that most of these guys are really the greatest catches out there with respect to actually being a great partner. Many of them have agendas. Some of them are players who view women as little more than sex objects to toy around with and then discard. I think a real "top guy" (great catch) is someone with standards who can easily get into long-term relationships with "quality" women...women who are intelligent, caring, mature, fun, have a great personality, healthy, likely attractive and are good judges of character. These guys aren't necessarily the life of the party; hell they could be introverts, but in any case they radiate real self-confidence, stand up for themselves, and have a natural way of making others feel comfortable and safe around him. He has a good people-picker yet easily makes friends and acquaintances - both male and female. They may not have had many past sex partners, but they're likely getting plenty of it from their GFs. They genuinely like women as people. Originally Posted by MrCastle Both sexes have people that are naturally going to do better with dating for a variety of reasons. But it is not some exclusive club where your hand has been stamped and everyone knows who you are. Women don't reject guys because they're not "in the 20%". And pretty much this. 1
jma500 Posted March 15, 2013 Posted March 15, 2013 Agreed. Also, median is a better statistic to use than average in this case. A median of 7 (or even a bit lower) seems plausible IMO. A small percentage of men (less than 10%) have high numbers and thus skew the average. On topic - first of all it's stupid to apply the Pareto Principle to dating and sex. Keep it in business and economics where it actually makes some sense. I think the vast majority of guys will have had at least a little success with dating and sex by the age of 25. Forever Alone-rs are uncommon. Furthermore, it's likely true that say 5-10% of men have a much easier (or even effortless) time getting dates and sex with a high number of women than the remaining 90%. Thus their numbers are quite high. Some of them employ the "throw everything on the wall and see what sticks" approach. They may be the so-called "top men" when it comes to hooking up with tons of women...perhaps they are exceptionally smooth talkers and great flirts with good senses of humor...but I doubt that most of these guys are really the greatest catches out there with respect to actually being a great partner. Many of them have agendas. Some of them are players who view women as little more than sex objects to toy around with and then discard. I think a real "top guy" (great catch) is someone with standards who can easily get into long-term relationships with "quality" women...women who are intelligent, caring, mature, fun, have a great personality, healthy, likely attractive and are good judges of character. These guys aren't necessarily the life of the party; hell they could be introverts, but in any case they radiate real self-confidence, stand up for themselves, and have a natural way of making others feel comfortable and safe around him. He has a good people-picker yet easily makes friends and acquaintances - both male and female. They may not have had many past sex partners, but they're likely getting plenty of it from their GFs. They genuinely like women as people. And pretty much this. Well done! I agree 100%.
Recommended Posts