or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Social Life, Food & Drink, Travel › Social Status, clothing, success, and more SEX and partners. Your thoughts?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Social Status, clothing, success, and more SEX and partners. Your thoughts? - Page 2

post #16 of 51
If I saw a man as rich as Donald Trump making that face, I'd bitch slap him, then when he started crying I'd yell at him to get his suit sleeves hemmed (I aint seein no white). His entire image and feigned apparent lifestyle is reason enough to give him a good whipping. His wife needs to buck up too. She looks like a wet kitten, but with more plastic in her cheekbones. Briatore looks much closer to how I would look next to women that gorgeous.
post #17 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by LA Guy
Alpha males don't posture. Beta males vying for position do. Just an observation. Carry on.
Word.
post #18 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by LA Guy
Are you kidding? Bill is supposedly really intelligent, confident, and articulate, even if he looks like a dork. Patrick Bateman is a fictional character who was written as a caricature. He is insecure, paranoid, and homicidal. You think a woman who would choose Patrick Bateman, no matter his looks, over Bill Gates really has her head screwed on right?

Have to agree with LA Guy on this. No woman in her right mind would choose Bateman over Gates.
post #19 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soph
“It’s part of the male identity,” says University of Connecticut psychologist James O’Neil. “We strive for success and upward mobility.” But those who achieve high status still enjoy more sex with more partners than the rest of us, and the reason is no mystery. Researchers have gathered voluminous data on women’s mating preferences over the past half century. They have studied primitive societies, conducted international surveys, run lab experiments—even analyzed personals ads—and they have consistently found that women favor signs of “earning capacity” over good looks. For sheer sex appeal, a doughy bald guy in a blue blazer and a Rolex will outscore a stud in a Burger King uniform almost every time. Power, it seems, really is the ultimate aphrodisiac.

Where to start, where to start?

That's a rather one-sided view. The Burger King reference is about a real study, but it was forced-choice (women had to pick a guy) and not a real-world situation. If a woman meets an otherwise appealing man whose lack of wealth is not obvious, she likely will give him more of a chance than she would the unattractive man who flaunts his wealth. Some recent research findings that look at actual behavior - for example, at speed dating events - show that to be the case. What people say they want and what they actually go for are not the same thing. Another finding is that, in terms of stated requirements, women have become more superficial in recent decades.

Furthermore, as countless studies show, physical attractiveness aids men in becoming wealthy. (So it's not as irrational as it seems to pick a poor younger man with good looks and the "right" set of personality traits.)

Consider, also, that many wealthy unattractive (but not ugly) older men once were nice-looking and retain enough vestiges for women to realize they have good genes. (Donald Trump is an example.)

Will a woman trade some looks for status? Absolutely. But looks still matter.
post #20 of 51
Thread Starter 
Furthermore, as countless studies show, physical attractiveness aids men in becoming wealthy. (So it's not as irrational as it seems to pick a poor younger man with good looks and the "right" set of personality traits.)


---I've found this to be marginal. What helps the most is coming from Money and the social structure of socially knowing professionals. Most of the so called successful people in America are nothing more than 'rich kids'. Trump is a perfect example, he's really nothing specail nor is he a genius. If my dad's estate gets sold for 2.2 billion and I'll I do is buy real estate (even as dumb as Trump has/bankruptcy 90's) and stocks eventually i will look like a Genius as both asset classes eventually rise over time. Yes, you can always cite the celebrities or some other off shoot but it comes down to capital for the best chance of success. You can't get a Harvard Degree waiting tables at the Olive Garden to support yourself thru college and let alone have the time / energy to excel.

If you throw enough money at anything you can achieve much.

Looks and Money together allow the greatest success in life. You pull up to the challenges of life in a mercedes, with your lawyer, personal trainer, tutor, free time, live in the most productive environments, etc.
post #21 of 51
New, busier careers for the lot of you.
post #22 of 51
If a woman was looking for a one night stand then its pretty much looks. The same goes with guys. Men care more about good looks. Women care more about success , education, intelligence howeever it only applies to long term relationships. So the guy who is ugly but rich wont be getting way more ass, hell end up marrying the girl or going out with her for long term vs the guy at mcdonalds. Thers a bunch of psychology studies on this.
post #23 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark_Y View Post
Have to agree with LA Guy on this. No woman in her right mind would choose Bateman over Gates.

+2
post #24 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soph View Post


exactly the example I thought of...
post #25 of 51
girls only like guys with skillzz...like nunchuk skillzz, computer hacking skillzz, bow hunting skillz...

on a more serious note...It's clear that a lot of peeps with a lot of money have a lot of good looking women around them a lot of the time.
post #26 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by Margaret View Post
Depends what kind of partner you (and she) are looking for. These things are more complex than simple two sentence analyses allow.

I don't get responses like these. Do you really think they were speaking in absolutes in that study?
post #27 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by LA Guy View Post
Alpha males don't posture. Beta males vying for position do. Just an observation. Carry on.

post #28 of 51
Might as well give my opinion.

Men and women alike look for alliances that will increase their chances of survival and reproduction. After all, those are the 2 common denominators for EVERY species - humans are no different, we're just a biological machine people. People possessing qualities that increase their own chances of survival and reproduction are of course powerful allies because they will increase your chances as well. Hence we can define attraction: qualities that aid a being in survival and reproduction.

However, not both sexes will respond to these 2 qualities in the same manner. This, again, is biologically programmed and obvious - a woman has to carry a child in her womb for 9 months between mating and giving birth to that child. She is vulnerable for quite some time in that period to predators and she won't be able to find food for herself - she depends on her mate for protection. Of course, it is important for her that her offspring is successfull too, so reproduction qualities do matter for women. But not as much as survival.

It is different for men. Men look for reproduction qualities in their mate, they have not as much need for survival because they can defend themselves adequately. Men want successfull offspring to carry on their bloodline.

I won't go in more controversial topics such as alpha-males, etc. If you are interested: read sperm wars.


Now, the bottom line is that looks in women are more important to men. For women, other things are important: basically anything that increases her chances of survival. Money. Status. Social savvy. All that matters. And looks too.

Finally I would like to respond to this quote:

Quote:
\tIf a woman was looking for a one night stand then its pretty much looks. The same goes with guys. Men care more about good looks. Women care more about success , education, intelligence howeever it only applies to long term relationships. So the guy who is ugly but rich wont be getting way more ass, hell end up marrying the girl or going out with her for long term vs the guy at mcdonalds. Thers a bunch of psychology studies on this.

It's funny that you say this, because it touches a very interesting topic: conscious versus unconscious mind. I won't deny that women looking for one night stands will pay a little more attention to looks. That's conscious. However, she will want a man who can support her and her child while they are vulnerable - she is biologically programmed to set off triggers in the man that will make him want to be with her - bond with her. That's unconscious.

I would like to conclude this by saying that lack of looks are still no reason whatsoever to feel sorry for yourself as a man and think that to be the reason you're not getting any women. I can show you thousandts of pictures with men perceived as 'below average looking' making out with the hottest girl in the club.
post #29 of 51
None of the things mentioned in the title brings any lasting happiness.
post #30 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by insanestyle View Post
None of the things mentioned in the title brings any lasting happiness.

That's deep, man.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Social Life, Food & Drink, Travel › Social Status, clothing, success, and more SEX and partners. Your thoughts?