Styleforum › Forums › Lifestyle › Social Life, Food & Drink, Travel › Status and interest from females?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Status and interest from females? - Page 6

post #76 of 89
8/7/08 at 8:59pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magician View Post
Sorry if I came off like a dick, I find this pick-up artist stuff to be highly distasteful . I highly recommend this book for a more academic and highly interesting take on sexuality/mating in contemporary and historical cultures.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lance konami View Post
No worries bro. That book is actually on my list of books to read.

I recommend skipping the above and going for this book instead.

Too much popular evolutionary psych literature, even when written by authors established in the field, has the tendency to devolve in to the author's own conjectural philosophical system building, layered , somewhat dishonestly, on top of a foundation built on peer reviewed articles. I find that to be somewhat inherently wanting.
Reply
Reply
post #77 of 89
8/8/08 at 10:50am
Quote:
Originally Posted by GQgeek View Post

What i find is that girls like the guy that's different from the other guys they know. When I was at a french school, there were 3-4 very cute girls that I'm sure I could have gotten with in retrospect, had I had any balls, possibly because i was different as an english guy and from private schools.

I believe this is explained as "the rare male effect".

Quote:
Originally Posted by lance konami View Post
This creates a problem. Because then the only way men would know that they are attracting desirable women would be to stop displaying status, dress horribly, drive in piece of shit cars, take minimal care of themselves, and make no effort whatsoever to achieve anything, or make any money, or acquire anything, so that they can be sure the girl is interested in him, and not due to any indication of his status or resources.

There is some value in a moderate version of this approach, if you are trying to avoid the more gregious gold-diggers.

A lot of this depends, I suppose, upon what sort of interest from females you would like. If you are not looking for a long-term relationship, who really cares about the motives for their interest? On the other hand, if you are looking for a life partner, these motives are much, much more important.

For myself, I explicitly avoided one relatively wealthy girl who was after me because I anticipated problems long-term -- I couldn't see "keeping her in the manner to which she was accustomed".

Ultimately, if you are going to have a successful long-term relationship, your values must be close in alignment. How you discover this is, of course, entirely another matter.
Reply
Reply
post #78 of 89
8/8/08 at 2:38pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by eg1 View Post
For myself, I explicitly avoided one relatively wealthy girl who was after me because I anticipated problems long-term -- I couldn't see "keeping her in the manner to which she was accustomed".

If she has money, and wants to maintain that money, why would it be your responsibility to "keep her". That strikes me as a particularly pre-feminist, antiquated view. It's sort of my whole problem with the money/status thing in the first place--in an environment where women are no longer prevented from earning their own money, what does it say about a woman who wants money but wants someone else to earn it for her?
Reply
Reply
post #79 of 89
8/8/08 at 3:00pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saucemaster View Post
If she has money, and wants to maintain that money, why would it be your responsibility to "keep her". That strikes me as a particularly pre-feminist, antiquated view. It's sort of my whole problem with the money/status thing in the first place--in an environment where women are no longer prevented from earning their own money, what does it say about a woman who wants money but wants someone else to earn it for her?
It says she's either old-fashioned and maintains those antiquated views, likely because of her upbringing, or she's a lazy gold digger, also possibly because of her upbringing, or some combination of the two. Or perhaps he felt she would just expect him to match the level of finances she was bringing to the table, and I'm not sure what category that one falls into. Even assuming it's neither of those things, the most enlightened about male-female equality when it comes to money in relationships are usually talking about the woman matching the man's contributions, but they're far more hesitant in a situation in which the woman significantly outstrips the man's earning power or existing wealth. No matter how modern and feminist one claims to be, a lot of relationships would at the least experience some stress under that kind of scenario.
Reply
Reply
post #80 of 89
8/8/08 at 3:29pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by lithium180 View Post
I recommend skipping the above and going for this book instead.

Too much popular evolutionary psych literature, even when written by authors established in the field, has the tendency to devolve in to the author's own conjectural philosophical system building, layered , somewhat dishonestly, on top of a foundation built on peer reviewed articles. I find that to be somewhat inherently wanting.

Thanks. I'm familiar with David Buss, though I haven't read that book. He's done some enormous world wide experiments. As you know, Buss has gathered a LOT of evidence that females across the world tend to prefer social status, good income, and ambition. Now even Buss isn't immune to his own prejudices, he interprets this evidence that women evolved to prefer good providers who could provide for their families and acquire resources. This may very well be true, but other evolutionary psychologists disagree with his interpretations, because those traits also correlate to heritable fitness. It may have been that women preferred these men because they tended to produce offspring that were also more intelligent, ambitious, and were better able to survive. It gets confusing when you think in terms of how we perceive status today, compared to what it was in Pleistocene times when there was no money.
Reply
Reply
post #81 of 89
8/8/08 at 4:00pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian278 View Post
It says she's either old-fashioned and maintains those antiquated views, likely because of her upbringing, or she's a lazy gold digger, also possibly because of her upbringing, or some combination of the two. Or perhaps he felt she would just expect him to match the level of finances she was bringing to the table, and I'm not sure what category that one falls into.
Yeah, I think the last one is the defensible one. If she maintains the "I'm a princess and need to be cared for" view, well, she's entitled to try to go find a guy who wants that and wants her to be that; if she finds him, best of luck to them both, but I wouldn't want to be anywhere near that kind of relationship! If she's a gold digger, well, yeah. If she's thinking about matching lifestyles and such, that's a genuine concern (in long-term relationships). How important it is to you depends on your value system, of course, but it's a consideration, no doubt.
Quote:
Even assuming it's neither of those things, the most enlightened about male-female equality when it comes to money in relationships are usually talking about the woman matching the man's contributions, but they're far more hesitant in a situation in which the woman significantly outstrips the man's earning power or existing wealth. No matter how modern and feminist one claims to be, a lot of relationships would at the least experience some stress under that kind of scenario.
I agree, and I think this is either because we're still largely acculturated to believe that men should be the earners, or because there's some sort of underlying biological force at work (this would be the evo psych view), or both. I'm more inclined to believe the former, but sometimes I fear it's the latter. The latter is sort of a dim view of women, and I'd rather not subscribe to it, but obviously whether it's true or not has nothing to do with whether I like it....
Reply
Reply
post #82 of 89
8/8/08 at 5:37pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saucemaster View Post
I agree, and I think this is either because we're still largely acculturated to believe that men should be the earners, or because there's some sort of underlying biological force at work (this would be the evo psych view), or both. I'm more inclined to believe the former, but sometimes I fear it's the latter. The latter is sort of a dim view of women, and I'd rather not subscribe to it, but obviously whether it's true or not has nothing to do with whether I like it....

Sauce - just curious as to why you wouldn't subscribe to it? I mean, it makes perfect sense that it ended up being that way. Thousands of years ago women couldn't be expected to bring home the bacon while being pregnant, and take care of the kids, while the man just sort of kicks it and chills with his homiez all day. Naw mean?
Reply
Reply
post #83 of 89
8/8/08 at 5:56pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by lance konami View Post
Sauce - just curious as to why you wouldn't subscribe to it? I mean, it makes perfect sense that it ended up being that way. Thousands of years ago women couldn't be expected to bring home the bacon while being pregnant, and take care of the kids, while the man just sort of kicks it and chills with his homiez all day. Naw mean?

I'm just not so sure it's that easy to parse what is a culturally-determined preference and what's a biologically-determined preference. The evolutionary psych perspective makes some sense, the question (for me) is to what extent acculturation can alter, channel, or even erase some of what we consider biologically "hardwired". Nature vs. Nurture, blah blah blah.
Reply
Reply
post #84 of 89
8/8/08 at 6:56pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saucemaster View Post
I'm just not so sure it's that easy to parse what is a culturally-determined preference and what's a biologically-determined preference. The evolutionary psych perspective makes some sense, the question (for me) is to what extent acculturation can alter, channel, or even erase some of what we consider biologically "hardwired". Nature vs. Nurture, blah blah blah.
It's difficult to parse it because they are obviously intertwined, like many cultural practices. That being said, I'm with you Sauce. I look for girls who offer to pay at least some of the time (no more than half, though, lest they assault my manhood with their working credit cards) and are motivated first by their own passions and second by their desire to be attached to someone or something. I developed the belief a long time ago that, at least for me, opposites do not go together in the long-term compatibility sense, and that it's very hard to really understand or respect someone that is significantly different from you in the ways that count. So here's hoping a lot of women are keen on shrugging off that yoke of male dependence, wherever it comes from.
Reply
Reply
post #85 of 89
8/9/08 at 2:23pm
I down play how much money I make and what I have. I have no use for women who look at wealth or material objects as their prime criteria for deciding whether or not to date someone. As far as I'm concerned they have no substance or clue as to what really matters in a successful long term relationship.

So yes, flashing the cash does get more interest but that's not necessarily a good thing.
Reply
Reply
post #86 of 89
8/9/08 at 6:55pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crane's View Post
I down play how much money I make and what I have. I have no use for women who look at wealth or material objects as their prime criteria for deciding whether or not to date someone. As far as I'm concerned they have no substance or clue as to what really matters in a successful long term relationship. So yes, flashing the cash does get more interest but that's not necessarily a good thing.
+1. But how old are you now and what age did you figure all this out (about yourself)? FWIW, I'm 32 and came to the same conclusions only a couple years ago.
Reply
Reply
post #87 of 89
8/10/08 at 12:36am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hard2Fit View Post
+1.
But how old are you now and what age did you figure all this out (about yourself)?
FWIW, I'm 32 and came to the same conclusions only a couple years ago.

I'm going to hit the big five O this year and I figured this out in my late 20s along with a few other things that I wanted out of life.
Reply
Reply
post #88 of 89
8/10/08 at 5:26am
right, but wouldn't you rather have figured out how to manipulate women for sex?
Reply
Reply
post #89 of 89
8/10/08 at 12:38pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by oman View Post
right, but wouldn't you rather have figured out how to manipulate women for sex?

I figured that out before I was 18.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
Styleforum › Forums › Lifestyle › Social Life, Food & Drink, Travel › Status and interest from females?