Double-Standards in Dating

[Shining One]

Many of us have dating preferences that are double-standards. We expect something from a partner that we ourselves do not bring to the table. Both genders are guilty of this behavior, but certain double-standards seem to generate more "hate" than others.

 

Here are a few common double-standards that come to mind:

• Promiscuous man wants a chaste woman.
  
• Old man wants a young woman.
  
• Short woman wants a tall man.
  
• Low-salary woman wants a high-salary man.
  
• Unfit person wants a fit person.
  
• Miserly person wants a generous person.
  

I personally believe that each person has a right to their preferences, double-standard or not. Why are some double-standards accepted as social norms while others generate nothing but vitriol? I'm sure if most of us analyzed our preferences, we would find a double-standard or two in there.

[njoylife]

People are different and can supplement each other, why is that a double standard? A girl who lacks in mental skills to be a money maker won't make much money, ever. But if she is very beautiful, she can fit perfectly with a below average looking guy who has skills to make money, it's a nice combo. She doesn't care about looks much, she cares about comfort and her family to be financially stable. This guy is perfect for her. This guy doesn't care if his wife can make money or not, he cares about looks. Different people, different needs.

 

What is important is to look for the final outcome of the deal and if both people are happy and what's the problem? A perfect world were all women and men are equally rich, have equal mental skills in every field and all look perfect doesn't exist.

 

Also, every person will always want the best even if he/she can't offer anything. This is how people are. It's another thing realizing that you can't really get what you want and settle with something less. You think that a really ugly lady wouldn't want to date a stud? But what's the chance of this happening? So she's settling for something less that's on her level. This is called being realistic, but it's not the same as what you would really really want. So, of course unfit person will want a fit person, the question is if he/she can really achieve that?

[candie13]

not sure if it's double standards, but there I go:

 

- I'm more in tune with my fears and get scared rather quickly. I need time to overcome them, get the courage to face them and then do whatever needs to be done. I do prefer a man who's more courageous and more of a risk taker, because it inspires me to do the same

 

- I'm occasionally impulsive, I get excited very quickly and I make rash decisions - like going on weekends / holidays or going skydiving from a day to the next because it seems fun. While I like these qualities in a partner, it is important to me to find patience and a cold/cooler mind in my partner. I also have a rather quick temper - and I am working on it. I think someone likeminded would make the couple explosive...

[njoylife]

Why are some double-standards accepted as social norms while others generate nothing but vitriol?

 

The only ones that are not much socially accepted from the listed ones are

 

Promiscuous man wants a chaste woman.

 

Old man wants a young woman.

 

Because women don't like the first one, that's restricting directly their needs and free will. The only ones who speak against it also are women of course, men have no interest to be bitter about it even if they don't agree with it. Women have the full right to be against this.

 

Second one, because it just looks bad. In case of course you see an old man with much younger woman. Because we all know that the woman is with him for some reason, and that's not love in 90% of the cases, it's for some other benefit. So giving your body for sex in return for money or some other benefit doesn't look good, no matter how you look at it.

[Got it]

Not how I dated, I am a big proponent in equality in my relationships so "what is good for the goose is good for the gander". So I don't expect anyone else to bring something to the table that I can't equal.

 

I do like that my husband is more of a extrovert than I am. But I could be fine with someone at the same level as myself but have found, based on experience, that I don't want someone more of an introvert than myself.

[RedRobin]

Not how I dated, I am a big proponent in equality in my relationships so "what is good for the goose is good for the gander". So I don't expect anyone else to bring something to the table that I can't equal.

 

 

Ditto. I've always looked for a partner and someone who shares my values.

 

 

Here's an example on where things are more unequal than they look... Money for instance... the person with lots of money got it from a huge inheritance and never had to work for it.

 

 

Person with same amount of money, but made it all himself/herself.

 

 

Will they be compatible? Not necessarily. Just having the same amount of money isn't a measure of their drive or aptitude.

 

 

Ok, another example... One person makes less money, but works in the public sector or non-profit. They are a highly respected member of the community and in their profession. They don't make a lot, but they live within their means. They chose their profession and are very happy with it.

 

 

Other person doesn't have a lot of money... they spent it all on fancy clothes and cars. They landed in whatever job their parents wanted for them and they are very unhappy.

 

 

Two people, again, who make about the same, but are likely to bring two very different qualities to a relationship.

 

 

Third example... rich business person meets successful non-profit manager. They share a love for a particular goal, even though one makes a ton more money. They are both driven and intelligent.

 

 

Who is the more compatible? The people who make the same? Or this last couple?

 

 

Long story short.... there are lots of reasons why people turn out the way they do. Most of them boil down to value choices. Figure that out, then decide compatibility.

 

 

As far as double standards go... what I find are people who choose others because of qualities they WISH to have, not qualities they actually have. It is a form of self delusion. That to me is the basis of problems in a relationship. Sure, I guess if both people are self aware, and are somehow trading their skills/benefits... but it usually doesn't work in the long run,

[autumnnight]

We basically don't like whatever standard rules us out. For example, if I am a tall woman, then I might whine about how men seem to want petite women.

 

Or, instead of whining, I could grow up, accept reality, and work on attracting those men who ARE out there who like tall women.

 

It is not the job of others to change their standards to make me feel better.

[Els]

We expect something from a partner that we ourselves do not bring to the table

 

I personally believe that each person has a right to their preferences, double-standard or not

 

'Expecting' something and 'preferring' something are two very different things. Personally that is where I draw the line - if someone expects their partner to be something they are not, or passes judgement on someone of the opposite sex for something that they themselves do/are, they're being a hypocrite and have double standards. On the other hand, finding someone attractive isn't necessarily a double standard, even if you don't possess the trait that you find attractive in them.

[Quiet Storm]

People get angry because attraction isn't logical and this frustrates them.

 

A short guy can logically explain that he can make a girl feel safe and protected or that women no longer need a man's protection. A promiscuous woman can honestly explain that her numbers have no affect on loyalty.

 

But attraction and/or turnoffs are emotional, biological, primal and even irrational sometimes. Since it's not based in logic or intellect, people aren't just going to be suddenly enlightened when presented with facts or examples.

 

A guy who is turned off by women with high numbers isn't going to just change his attraction because someone calls him out on his hypocrisy or points out that a formerly promiscuous woman is monogamous. And a girl who is attracted to height isn't going to find short guys sexy because she's short herself or doesn't need physical protection in this day and age.

 

This feels very unfair to women who know their number has no bearing on their ability to be a good wife, and short guys who feel judged on their height alone.

 

People will get upset because they think "You can't want a girl with 10 when you've had 30!" or "You're only 5'2", you shouldn't want tall guys!" And the person who has those preferences thinks, "I can have whatever standards I want".

 

IMO trying to change emotions and attractions and turnoffs is unlikely to work. They can be endlessly debated using logic, facts, examples, science, etc. but since those feelings come from an emotional, primal part of us, they are unlikely to change just because someone is intellectually aware that their feelings are "double standards". Our feelings about these things do often evolve over time with experience and maturity, though.

 

The good thing is that there are many, many guys who don't care about numbers and girls who are attracted to short guys.

[autumnnight]

People get angry because attraction isn't logical and this frustrates them.

 

A short guy can logically explain that he can make a girl feel safe and protected or that women no longer need a man's protection. A promiscuous woman can honestly explain that her numbers have no affect on loyalty.

 

But attraction and/or turnoffs are emotional, biological, primal and even irrational sometimes. Since it's not based in logic or intellect, people aren't just going to be suddenly enlightened when presented with facts or examples.

 

A guy who is turned off by women with high numbers isn't going to just change his attraction because someone calls him out on his hypocrisy or points out that a formerly promiscuous woman is monogamous. And a girl who is attracted to height isn't going to find short guys sexy because she's short herself or doesn't need physical protection in this day and age.

 

This feels very unfair to women who know their number has no bearing on their ability to be a good wife, and short guys who feel judged on their height alone.

 

People will get upset because they think "You can't want a girl with 10 when you've had 30!" or "You're only 5'2", you shouldn't want tall guys!" And the person who has those preferences thinks, "I can have whatever standards I want".

 

IMO trying to change emotions and attractions and turnoffs is unlikely to work. They can be endlessly debated using logic, facts, examples, science, etc. but since those feelings come from an emotional, primal part of us, they are unlikely to change just because someone is intellectually aware that their feelings are "double standards". Our feelings about these things do often evolve over time with experience and maturity, though.

 

The good thing is that there are many, many guys who don't care about numbers and girls who are attracted to short guys.

 

I think this is part of what would be funny if it weren't so sad. That people actually think that if they present a good enough "case," that will suddenly make their dream girl (or man) want them. It doesn't work that way. Dating is not a math problem or a debate team topic or a physics experiment. People don't operate that way.

 

There are things you can learn that can increase your "odds" (most of which those who are constantly frustrated won't try), but there ARE NO guarantees. Period.

[njoylife]

Very good post Quiet Storm. Regarding your last sentence, it's better for people to adapt to reality rather than be alone, that's why I girl who can't find a tall guy to her preference will find the second best and so on, better than lonely.

A guy who can't find virgin, will find the closest to it and so on.

 

But if that's biological primal programming as you say, it's not possible there to be some people as you say who generally don't care at all about these things, it's rather they are forced to face reality, and are claiming they don't care, while deeply inside somewhere they know that there's something that fits them better than what they currently have. How is it possible one to go against his biological primal programming and not care at all for tall guys or promiscuous girls? Is that possible? Is it possible through changing of the ideas we believe in?

 

What's the difference between primal programming and the ideas and beliefs we have formed throughout our lives through experience? Are they connected somehow? Is primal programming generating ideas and beliefs on it's own?

 

Because if a man never knows the past of a certain girl, he can fall in love with her and be happy, the moment he understands she was promiscuous something will change in him. So the basic knowledge of some fact about her actions, which are not related to the present will change how he perceives her? Ain't that just weird? Is this primal or not?

 

That's a very metaphysical topic....

Edited August 25, 2015 by njoylife

[elaine567]

Many of us have dating preferences that are double-standards. We expect something from a partner that we ourselves do not bring to the table.

 

Because are usually looking for something that compliments us, that brings something extra to our table.

If you are a depressed pessimist, then looking to date another depressed pessimist, is not going to do you any good, is it?

 

There are no rules to say we should date exactly who we are, no rules to say fat people should not date thin people or those with high numbers are not allowed to date those with low numbers, extroverts should stay clear of introverts, short people should only date other short people, etc. etc. but we all have inbuilt in ourselves the idea that people deserve what they deserve.

 

So in our minds a short man does NOT deserve a supermodel and a single mother on benefits does NOT deserve a multimillionaire.

 

So we tend to use the term double standards and accuse of hypocrisy those in situations that do not fall into what we consider as being RIGHT. We can be offended and upset when things do not work out the way we think that they should work.

 

The supermodel deserves an Adonis, and a multimillionaire deserves a classy woman who is also a high earner or from an upperclass family.

The short guy deserves a below average looking woman and the single mother on benefits deserves some low earning guy or a guy also on benefits.

 

BUT real life isn't usually so cut and dried.

[Shining One]

Thank you all for the responses thus far. I think Quiet Storm covered the topic nicely. I've been following the Dating a woman who has slept around.... thread in which the promiscuous man / chaste woman double-standard is prevalent. Unfortunately, that thread was ruined due to lots of name-calling which drew people away from discussing the double-standard itself.

 

 

 

I understand why double-standards exist. People "like what they like". The question posed here is why some double-standards are socially accepted while others generate "hate". From my point of view, I see no difference in the following:

• 5'3" Woman rejects a 5'8" Man for being too short.
  
• 20-partner-count Man rejects a 15-partner count woman for having too many partners.
  

Each person is following their preferences. One is socially-acceptable and the other is hypocrisy. Why?

[autumnnight]

Thank you all for the responses thus far. I think Quiet Storm covered the topic nicely. I've been following the Dating a woman who has slept around.... thread in which the promiscuous man / chaste woman double-standard is prevalent. Unfortunately, that thread was ruined due to lots of name-calling which drew people away from discussing the double-standard itself.

 

 

 

I understand why double-standards exist. People "like what they like". The question posed here is why some double-standards are socially accepted while others generate "hate". From my point of view, I see no difference in the following:

• 5'3" Woman rejects a 5'8" Man for being too short.
  
• 20-partner-count Man rejects a 15-partner count woman for having too many partners.
  

Each person is following their preferences. One is socially-acceptable and the other is hypocrisy. Why?

 

I'm not sure you can really say one is socially acceptable and one is hypocrisy.

 

For example, the shorter man will consider your first listed preference to be hypocrisy because he is short. But the short girl won't because she likes what she likes.

 

The woman with 10 partners will consider the 20 partner man a hypocrite. The man will say he isn't because he likes what he likes.

 

Like I said, we only call it hypocrisy when it negatively affects US.

[Pull n Pray]

The existence of all of these double standards makes perfect sense when examined through the lens of evolutionary psychology. Over the last millions of years, women were more likely to pass along their genes if they mated with men who could provide for and protect them. Men were more likely to pass along their genes if they only provided for and protected women who had not been mating with other men.

 

I don't approve of slut-shaming. It is hypocritical to criticize a woman for behavior that you wouldn't criticize a man for. But if a woman has a sexual history that would cause me anxiety were I to fall in love with her, then I'm not going to fall in love with her. I'm very attracted to promiscuous girls, but they engender feelings of lust, not romantic love. So I would just keep things casual. I'm not going to judge her or condemn her, but I'm not going to marry her either.

 

I think most guys feel this way but are reluctant to admit to it (perhaps not even to themselves) because they don't want to come across as sexist or hypocritical. As the OP alluded to, there is a double standard when it comes to double standards. It's acceptable for a woman to prefer to marry a man who is taller than her and makes more money than her, but it is considered sexist for a man to prefer to marry a woman who is younger than him and has had fewer sex partners than him. But regardless of societal condemnation, these double standards will persist because they are rooted in our biology.

[Woggle]

People tend to be perfectly fine with double standards as long as it benefits them.

[jen1447]

I understand why double-standards exist. People "like what they like". The question posed here is why some double-standards are socially accepted while others generate "hate". From my point of view, I see no difference in the following:

• 5'3" Woman rejects a 5'8" Man for being too short.
  
• 20-partner-count Man rejects a 15-partner count woman for having too many partners.
  

Each person is following their preferences. One is socially-acceptable and the other is hypocrisy. Why?

 

The examples have to show two different standards for essentially the same thing to be double standards. The first example regards innate physical traits for which a person can't be assigned volitional 'blame' (the standard is volitional and the criteria is innate) while the second entirely involves matters of volition and thus is open for criticism (both the standard and criteria are volitional).

 

A more apt version of the first one that would exemplify a double standard would be "5'3" Woman objects to being rejected based on her height while rejecting a 5'8" Man for being too short." I'll grant that it wouldn't likely produce the vitriol that the second one would, but logical ppl would still find essentially the same logical contradiction in it.

[Pull n Pray]

The examples have to show two different standards for essentially the same thing to be double standards. The first example regards innate physical traits for which a person can't be assigned volitional 'blame' (the standard is volitional and the criteria is innate) while the second entirely involves matters of volition and thus is open for criticism (both the standard and criteria are volitional).

 

A man valuing chastity in a woman is no more volitional and every bit as innate as a woman valuing height in a man. But if you prefer, we could compare a man valuing chastity with a woman valuing status/power. This way, in both cases we are discussing a non-physical characteristic. But just because the thing being valued is a non-physical characteristic, it does not follow that nurture rather than nature is responsible for it being valued. And even if it could be determined that nurture rather than nature was responsible for why men value chastity, it would not follow that men can choose to no longer value chastity. Likewise for women valuing status and power. Environmental determinism is every bit as real as biological determinism. But this is really a moot point since both of these preferences are rooted in biology.

 

A more apt version of the first one that would exemplify a double standard would be "5'3" Woman objects to being rejected based on her height while rejecting a 5'8" Man for being too short." I'll grant that it wouldn't likely produce the vitriol that the second one would, but logical ppl would still find essentially the same logical contradiction in it.

By this logic, it would only be hypocritical for a man to reject a woman for having too many sex partners if he were to also object to being rejected by a woman for having too many sexual partners.

[Quiet Storm]

Very good post Quiet Storm. Regarding your last sentence, it's better for people to adapt to reality rather than be alone, that's why I girl who can't find a tall guy to her preference will find the second best and so on, better than lonely.

A guy who can't find virgin, will find the closest to it and so on.

 

But if that's biological primal programming as you say, it's not possible there to be some people as you say who generally don't care at all about these things, it's rather they are forced to face reality, and are claiming they don't care, while deeply inside somewhere they know that there's something that fits them better than what they currently have. How is it possible one to go against his biological primal programming and not care at all for tall guys or promiscuous girls? Is that possible? Is it possible through changing of the ideas we believe in?

 

What's the difference between primal programming and the ideas and beliefs we have formed throughout our lives through experience? Are they connected somehow? Is primal programming generating ideas and beliefs on it's own?

 

Because if a man never knows the past of a certain girl, he can fall in love with her and be happy, the moment he understands she was promiscuous something will change in him. So the basic knowledge of some fact about her actions, which are not related to the present will change how he perceives her? Ain't that just weird? Is this primal or not?

 

That's a very metaphysical topic....

 

I feel that biiological programming plays a part, but we aren't robots. We all have different experiences and influences that shape us emotionally. Biology and primal attractions factors, but I also feel emotions have a big impact.

 

We all have different temperaments and characters, so that will influence our attractions, turnoffs, standards, etc. One guy may be seriously bothered by his GFs number, where another accepts it or doesn't really care We are all different even before we are shaped by our lives. Newborn babies- some will jump or cry at the sound of a dog bark or a knock on the door, while others are not bothered at all.

 

Regarding the reasons why double standards create anger...

 

People feel what they feel, on both sides of it. Those that feel judged by a double standard want to prove that double standard wrong. It feels unfair. It's like being stereotyped- it sucks. I can provide examples and articles and studies showing that certain stereotypes are wrong and people are still going to think what they think. When it involves emotions and sexual attraction, our feelings are often intense. So while a girl may want to feel attracted to the short guy who is perfect in other ways, she can't just make herself desire him. Or guys who logically knows it's hypocritical to judge their GFs number, but can't shake those uncomfortable feelings. People get passionate about double standards because they want to use logical arguments to fight them and it's frustrating when it doesn't work.

[jen1447]

A man valuing chastity in a woman is no more volitional and every bit as innate as a woman valuing height in a man.

No. Both - the valuing specifically -are acts of volition. The woman's number of partners is also. The man's height isn't.

 

By this logic, it would only be hypocritical for a man to reject a woman for having too many sex partners if he were to also object to being rejected by a woman for having too many sexual partners.

No. To break it down again, man uses volition in exercising a preference, which is a judgment of another volitional act - the woman's number of partners. Woman uses volition in exercising a preference, which is a judgement of an innate trait - the man's height, not another volitional act. The woman is simply applying a preference. She has no moral duty as a short woman to date short men. The man tho is contradicting himself and applying a double standard by requiring a behavioral trait that he himself violates.

[kilgore]

No. Both - the valuing specifically -are acts of volition. The woman's number of partners is also. The man's height isn't.

 

 

No. To break it down again, man uses volition in exercising a preference, which is a judgment of another volitional act - the woman's number of partners. Woman uses volition in exercising a preference, which is a judgement of an innate trait - the man's height, not another volitional act. The woman is simply applying a preference. She has no moral duty as a short woman to date short men. The man tho is contradicting himself and applying a double standard by requiring a behavioral trait that he himself violates.

 

But to boil it down, isn't it hypocritical to reject someone for having too many sex partners if you yourself have had more?

[almond]

I expect my partner to have a penis...I can't bring that to the table.

 

Men and women are different. Women vs other women are different, as are men compared to other men.

 

We all want and like different things. Double standards are going to happen...it's just the way things are sometimes, and a diversity of skills/personal attributes often works well within a relationship.

[RedRobin]

I think this is part of what would be funny if it weren't so sad. That people actually think that if they present a good enough "case," that will suddenly make their dream girl (or man) want them. It doesn't work that way. Dating is not a math problem or a debate team topic or a physics experiment. People don't operate that way.

 

There are things you can learn that can increase your "odds" (most of which those who are constantly frustrated won't try), but there ARE NO guarantees. Period.

 

 

That's fine... both autumn and Quietstorm, but the rest of us don't have to buy into these stereotypes or coddle others that do.

 

 

I suppose people are free to conclude that biology dictates everything, but I believe that societal factors play a bigger role, and that's where it's up to everyone not to support double standards or those who have them... because basically, that's where it all starts. It all starts with what we, as a society, choose to support or not support.

 

 

To me, someone who has double standards is character flawed and lacking in integrity... simple as that.

[RedRobin]

Very good post Quiet Storm. Regarding your last sentence, it's better for people to adapt to reality rather than be alone, that's why I girl who can't find a tall guy to her preference will find the second best and so on, better than lonely.

A guy who can't find virgin, will find the closest to it and so on.

 

But if that's biological primal programming as you say, it's not possible there to be some people as you say who generally don't care at all about these things, it's rather they are forced to face reality, and are claiming they don't care, while deeply inside somewhere they know that there's something that fits them better than what they currently have. How is it possible one to go against his biological primal programming and not care at all for tall guys or promiscuous girls? Is that possible? Is it possible through changing of the ideas we believe in?

 

What's the difference between primal programming and the ideas and beliefs we have formed throughout our lives through experience? Are they connected somehow? Is primal programming generating ideas and beliefs on it's own?

 

Because if a man never knows the past of a certain girl, he can fall in love with her and be happy, the moment he understands she was promiscuous something will change in him. So the basic knowledge of some fact about her actions, which are not related to the present will change how he perceives her? Ain't that just weird? Is this primal or not?

 

That's a very metaphysical topic....

 

 

It's not metaphysical at all.

 

 

It's dogma. Some people want to believe we are all genetically programmed so that they personally don't have to think for themselves.

 

 

For lots of people, they really can't wrap their brains around the concept of diversity.

 

 

... and lots of people are on a power trip when looking for another person to spend time with. or seems like that. I don't see how this one up man ship, and idea that 'everyone wants the best for themselves no matter how ****ty a partner they are or what they bring to the table' has anything to do with truly connecting with someone.

 

 

Sure, if you can delude yourself into thinking you seriously have something to offer that other person you aspire to fine. Or if you are the kind of person who can lie long enough to reel someone in... lots of people play that game. Me? Maybe I've just never wanted to lie to myself like that. That's why I've always looked for a partner, and if I aspired for a certain type of partner, I adopted the behaviors of that person or persons in order to have a better chance of attracting them.

 

 

In that respect, having double standards not only indicate a lack of character, but also laziness.

[kilgore]

It's not metaphysical at all.

 

 

It's dogma. Some people want to believe we are all genetically programmed so that they personally don't have to think for themselves.

 

 

For lots of people, they really can't wrap their brains around the concept of diversity.

 

 

... and lots of people are on a power trip when looking for another person to spend time with. or seems like that. I don't see how this one up man ship, and idea that 'everyone wants the best for themselves no matter how ****ty a partner they are or what they bring to the table' has anything to do with truly connecting with someone.

 

 

Sure, if you can delude yourself into thinking you seriously have something to offer that other person you aspire to fine. Or if you are the kind of person who can lie long enough to reel someone in... lots of people play that game. Me? Maybe I've just never wanted to lie to myself like that. That's why I've always looked for a partner, and if I aspired for a certain type of partner, I adopted the behaviors of that person or persons in order to have a better chance of attracting them.

 

 

In that respect, having double standards not only indicate a lack of character, but also laziness.

 

What do you mean you adopted the behaviors of that person? Isn't that inauthentic? Or am I misreading you?