Posted on 05/29/2024 8:36:35 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
studies on dating sites show that women rank 90% of men (90% of the count of men) as ",in the bottom 50%" (of attractiveness.)
Most people don't take dating sites as an accurate representation of the real world and with good reason. Men far outnumber women on those sites, so of course the women can afford to be choosier than men. In environments where women outnumber men (e.g. college campuses, nursing homes) it's the men who are choosy. This is not even getting into the men who whine about how lonely/sexually frustrated they are while also ignoring every woman who's not an 8 or above. IOW male hypergamy.
I put “men” in quotes because real men are like Harrison Butker. Men who xcrew women only for release that they could get by masturbating or who xcrew women only for notches in their sexual belts are “men” in name only.
The cognoscenti are well aware of the fact that the data from dating sites is somewhat flawed - but what better statistics do you have?
You rightly point out that dating sites are dominated by males - that, in itself, is a telling datapoint!
In environments where women outnumber men (e.g. college campuses, nursing homes) it's the men who are choosy.
You have statistics to back up that claim? Even if you do, I doubt that they will be more robust than the dating site stats - probably based on polling data collected on a handful of campuses, in which a measly few hundred co-eds were interviewed.
This is not even getting into the men who whine about how lonely/sexually frustrated they are while also ignoring every woman who's not an 8 or above. IOW male hypergamy.
Can you cite any studies corroborating this claim?
You seem awfully adept at pulling outlandish claims out of your... hat... and using them to buttress your arguments.
Regards,
Female solipsosm at its finest.
Your one example becomes the rule for all.
No legit purpose, but a hope to further legitimize pedophilia.
One son met his wife when they were 13 years old. They started dating in high school. They got married at 24. I have two granddaughters.
The other son wanted to become a pastor and moved to Texas. Through friends he met at church he met his wife. He soon realized that it is difficult for a pastor to earn enough to support a family. He became a police officer.
Both boys seem to have dodged the modern sex scene bullet. Neither of them believe in divorce...something we hope we taught them...and they both love and respect their wives.
My sister just passed away. She bought into the sexual revolution. Two husbands and MANY boyfriends over the years. It led to low self-esteem, drugs, and bulimia. She died alone, penniless, and miserable. We found her body after two weeks. We were lucky the dogs didn’t eat her. She made her decisions and lived with the consequences.
You rightly point out that dating sites are dominated by males - that, in itself, is a telling datapoint!
Yes, a telling datapoint that women are less interested in casual sex than men, despite the Sexual Revolution's propaganda. It's not exactly news that casual sex is better for men than for women. Nobody with an ounce of sense looks for a life partner on a dating site.
You have statistics to back up that claim? Even if you do, I doubt that they will be more robust than the dating site stats - probably based on polling data collected on a handful of campuses, in which a measly few hundred co-eds were interviewed.
There's not much point in giving links to someone who's clearly already made up his mind, but here ya go anyway:
NIH Study on Loneliness in University Students (Sample size 538 students)
Can you cite any studies corroborating this claim?
Go onto any incel site and let me know how many are willing to settle for "Beckys" instead of "Stacys". Now I know that incels are not representative of men in general, hence my words "This is not even getting into...". But it would be equally foolish to pretend they don't exist or that male hypergamy is confined to the incel community. Men naturally want the best looking woman who will have them and there is nothing wrong with that. It only becomes a problem when the man chooses hatred and violence against women rather than to settle for a woman he can attract, even if she is below his standards.
That's not quite the definition of hypergamy, to be blunt.
Hypergamy can be expressed by the adage "women marry (and date) UP."
The corollary, is even when dating, if the man stumbles, or a much better man (who she thinks she can land) comes along, she will dump the first guy, whether forcing a fake crisis, "I have to find myself (under the other man, that is), or "this just isn't working out".
(70% of divorces are initiated by women; I have read that among college-educated women, that number goes to 90%).
While men may have a floor under which they won't date or sleep around (*), the difference is, if the man is more or less content with his woman, he is not continuously looking to trade up.
(*) slumming by top 10% men among the 6's and 7's excepted, as it is sporadic. The exception, among women, is the difference between "Mr. Right" (marriage) and "Mr. RIGHT NOW!" (hawt, worthy of a fling or one-night stand, but after the deed is done, "it doesn't count" because reasons (I was out of town / on Vacation / in Europe, it was only a BJ, he used a condom, or even the ever-popular "shut up." And yes, I have seen a video within the last 12 hours, over on patriots.win, of a woman saying it doesn't count against her N-count, if he was wearing a condom).
Hypergamy can be expressed by the adage "women marry (and date) UP."
The corollary, is even when dating, if the man stumbles, or a much better man (who she thinks she can land) comes along, she will dump the first guy, whether forcing a fake crisis, "I have to find myself (under the other man, that is), or "this just isn't working out".
Men are more likely to divorce their wives when the wife is diagnosed with a terminal illness than a woman is to leave her terminally ill husband. Is that not a man trading up to a younger and healthier woman? And we've all known men who trade their wives in for younger models once the wife starts showing signs of age. Trump has done it twice.
Men 6x More Likely to Leave
While men may have a floor under which they won't date or sleep around (*), the difference is, if the man is more or less content with his woman, he is not continuously looking to trade up.
While men are less likely to initiate divorce than women are, they are more likely to cheat. 20 million, or 1 in 6 married American men, were on Ashley Madison before it was hacked. That's an awful lot of married men looking to trade up from the woman they've got.
Forbes: 20 Million Men Active on Ashley Madison
Men are indeed less likely to initiate divorce than women are because divorce laws favor women, but they are more likely to cheat or otherwise stop fulfilling their part of making the marriage work. I'm not convinced that's any better. A woman whose husband is unfaithful faces a decline of living standards for her and her children (affairs and illegitimate children cost money), shows up to couples' events alone (affairs take time away from the marriage), and takes on more responsibilities, both domestic and bringing in income, as her husband checks out of the marriage. She is already a divorcee in all but name.
The exception, among women, is the difference between "Mr. Right" (marriage) and "Mr. RIGHT NOW!"...
How is this different from the dichotomy men make between "wife material" and "thots"?
...but after the deed is done, "it doesn't count" because reasons (I was out of town / on Vacation / in Europe, it was only a BJ, he used a condom, or even the ever-popular "shut up."
I know a lot of women with unfaithful husbands. Replace "he used a condom" with "she was on the pill" and the excuses are identical. It's not a woman thing; it's a cheater thing. Both men and women should avoid known cheaters for best results.
And yes, I have seen a video within the last 12 hours, over on patriots.win, of a woman saying it doesn't count against her N-count, if he was wearing a condom).
That says something about that one woman, not women as a whole. For all your comments to metmom about solipsism, you appear to have a touch of it yourself.
Can you clarify what you are saying?
Oh I think I see your point. Yes, women have been programmed to be complete 304s. Once upon a time there were cliques in HS where you knew who the easy ones were; now it all over. College is 10x worse.
Hey MM. Women are the gatekeepers to sex. Men are gate keepers to commitment and resources. If they give those away for nothing, the opposite sex views them as low value. Its hard wired biology.
What I mean by that is that women invest a bit of themselves in every guy they sleep with, even in casual sex. Not getting a commitment from a guy ends up hurting women.
There is a term that is used in casual sex to describe women who sleep around. It’s called the 1000 c*ck stare. It’s the look a woman has who has slept with multitudes of men and realizes her only value to a man is her willingness to open her legs.
There is no equivalent term for a man who has slept with multitudes of women and couldn’t get a commitment from them. The only harm a man might suffer, if he is able to sleep around with women is that he develops an in ability to really connect with a woman, but it doesn’t hurt him as it does a woman.
I’m saying, in light of the reality that sleeping around hurts women more than men, that men should be cognizant of that and not be so willing to sleep around but try and value women for what they have to offer outside the bedroom.
It is and it hurts women. More than just being a 304, but having to try and deal with inexperienced men who would like to have settled down with a woman with comparable experience to him.
I’ve read enough from marriage/divorce sites how hurtful to the men it is when they find out how many men their now wives have slept with. When she has misrepresented herself, it’s often grounds for divorce for the man or at least causes him to pull back from the marriage mentally.
Claiming women are the gatekeepers of sex, is only an excuse for man’s lack of self-control.
It’s just blame shifting the responsibility for sexual purity onto women.
If men want virgins for wives, then they need to stop hypocritically pressuring women into having sex with them and then looking on them with contempt for giving them what they pushed for. Men condemn in women (sleeping around freely) behavior they justify in themselves.
It’s hypocrisy. If men want pure women, give them pure men.
I have always thought that women CONTROLLED...THEY HAD THE POWER...THE MORALITY OF A CULTURE.
I hope this report is true.
Yours must be running at 7800 rpm by now.
Men are more likely to divorce their wives when the wife is diagnosed with a terminal illness than a woman is to leave her terminally ill husband. Is that not a man trading up to a younger and healthier woman? And we've all known men who trade their wives in for younger models once the wife starts showing signs of age. Trump has done it twice.
You just moved the goalposts for three reasons:
1) Leaving because of health reasons is not the same as leaving a healthy partner fur purely hedonistic reasons: for illness, the person leaving is fearful, not greedy.
2) Leaving to "trade up" means the male partner is never secure in the relationship.
3) Terminal illnesses are more likely at the end of life, then in the prime of life; and children are more likely to have left the home.
4) What are the total percentages? Apples and oranges, just to use a "tu quoque" fallacy.
Arguing from emotion, just like a woman.
While men are less likely to initiate divorce than women are, they are more likely to cheat. 20 million, or 1 in 6 married American men, were on Ashley Madison before it was hacked. That's an awful lot of married men looking to trade up from the woman they've got. Forbes: 20 Million Men Active on Ashley Madison
1 in 6 is still less than the rate of divorce overall. And some men are looking for a secret fling; whereas a divorce is ALWAYS known by the partner (duh).
Men are indeed less likely to initiate divorce than women are because divorce laws favor women, but they are more likely to cheat or otherwise stop fulfilling their part of making the marriage work. I'm not convinced that's any better. A woman whose husband is unfaithful faces a decline of living standards for her and her children (affairs and illegitimate children cost money), shows up to couples' events alone (affairs take time away from the marriage), and takes on more responsibilities, both domestic and bringing in income, as her husband checks out of the marriage. She is already a divorcee in all but name.
Lay off the bullshit.
A woman who is cheated on, does not face prison time or loss of ability to earn a living by court-ordered revocation of professional licenses, than a man who has been divorced. And, again, far more divorces happen than affairs: how many of the women on Ashley Madison were real instead of fakes to generate traffic to the site? How many of the 20 million actually managed an affair?
The exception, among women, is the difference between "Mr. Right" (marriage) and "Mr. RIGHT NOW!"...
How is this different from the dichotomy men make between "wife material" and "thots"?
The difference is that you pulled that sentence out of context in order to make a specious argument. I brought this up to show how hypergamy manifests in women, but that men are not continually looking for "something better" and you twisted it to make it look like I was praising the men sleeping around, and condemning the women. Typical female dishonesty and male-shaming. The contrast between the top 10% of men slumming, and the women doing "Mr. Right Now" (say, a BJ in the men's room of a sleazy bar, or taking him home for a hot and sweaty romp) is that men are not expected to dress in white at the wedding, and a man's loss of virginity is not considered a deal-breaker for marriage: women look for providers (or used to), and for someone who will be faithful to HER from now on, not necessarily for a man who has never been with anyone else.
I know a lot of women with unfaithful husbands. Replace "he used a condom" with "she was on the pill" and the excuses are identical. It's not a woman thing; it's a cheater thing. Both men and women should avoid known cheaters for best results.
Again, you're lying, and in favor of women. The reason that a man rationalizes "she was on the pill" is that (contrary to your earlier argument) it means he is less likely to have a bastard child, which would draw money and time away from his wife. But when a woman says "he used a condom" (particularly in the example I saw earlier today), that means that the sex never happened, she doesn't have to include it in her notch count, or tell her next LTR about it. Incidentally, pointing out a video re-posted on patriots.win is not solipsism: I mentioned the viedo because that video showed I was not making up the accusation that women lie about their notch count.
How is this different from the dichotomy men make between "wife material" and "thots"?
Women lie about their notch count when trying to land a man for marriage.
It used to be, women saved it for marriage. Now they're not.
The two flaws in your accusation are:
1) women will go have sex in the Caribbean, or in Europe, and it doesn't count, because strong empowered. Also shut up.
2)When women are sleeping with hot men, guess who they're not sleeping with? Right. The 90% of men not in the top 10%.
On the dating sites, women rank 90% of the men into the lower 50% of attractiveness.
And a LOT of those men never have sex at all; unless they manage to grab a 30-something who is done riding the carousel, and marry her long enough for her to have a child and then divorce him. You can even find women online openly talking with each other about "starter husbands" i.e. they are planning to divorce him all along. But he doesn't know that..
But the women blame all men in general, for their own sins with the hawt men when they are youung.
As Jack Nicholson said, "I think of a man, and then I take away reason and accountability."
You tell no lies.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.