'Youre too nice' etc etc...

[K e r b e r o s]

It's this sort of thinking that really kind of disheartening for me; that women and men are somehow fundamentally different, separate from one another, and monolithic groups by their natures and not by upbringing. While it's absolutely true that people tend to be attracted to certain physical features and personality types, and there may very well be a basis in evolution and instinctual mate selection, the fact remains that there is so much heterogeneity amongst people of both sexes, whatever gender identities and sexualities they take on, as well as across different cultures and time periods (just look at what was considered attractive in 15th century Europe), and because of this, it is impossible for me to accept such broad, sweeping generalisations.

Exactly.

I find that some women aren't attracted to fame, social confidence, or money in the least bit. Heck, in the world of ******ry (my place), fame, social confidence and money isn't in the least bit a concern and it all boils down to how much you can relate to someone of you're own peership. For example, working on cars or an interest in general mechanics being just a few of the area's in careership where men and boys can relate to one another.

Although, that's not to say women don't have those interests too. I find that interests and hobbies bring more people together then say, a sleight of hand in reguards to who has more money or social confidence. There are a lot of people out there who are that methodological in determining partner's by estimating an imaginary success ratio, but then the human relationship is destroyed when you undermine you're partners individuality and freewill with a replacing thought of, "How much can he/she provide for me?"

Though relationships between all genders and ages can be shallow, I still believe that as our species makes continued progress, we discover other reasons to like or love someone and that we've never been limited in our ability to find common ground.

 

[Solaris]

I think I can demonstrate why my explanation of attraction is correct.

Accept that all high level footballers are high status males: The vast majoirty, who found a women whilst they were footballers, have very attractive girlfriends.

Becuase they seek attractiveness and girls seek High status males who have both the social status( Famous) and the ability to provide(Money but I don't think is as important when genuine attraction occurs).

Now how often is the reverse true? How many great looking guys marry normal/ugly looking women becuase they are CEO's or sportstars or whatever. The answer is I cannot think of a single example and I doubt you can too.

 

[Sulkdodds]

Although that's a bit iffy because
a) sports starts have to have firm, attractive bodies (unless they are weightlifters)
b) there are far fewer women who are famous in the same way - CEOs for example - and indeed far fewer women who are famous without also being attractive
But I may have actually helped your argument with that last point, seeing as it kind of implies that societal acceptance of accomplished women is at least in part predicated on beauty - more than it is for males anyway.

 

[Dodo]

listen if you still want to sleep with her ...

-dodo

edit: uganda must have been an awesome place to meet a girl, siriously... +1

 

[K e r b e r o s]

Accept that all high level footballers are high status males: The vast majoirty, who found a women whilst they were footballers, have very attractive girlfriends.

Becuase they seek attractiveness and girls seek High status males who have both the social status( Famous) and the ability to provide(Money but I don't think is as important when genuine attraction occurs).

Now how often is the reverse true?

Uhm, there's a slight flaw in you're logic.

First, you must acknowledge that status isn't nessecarly generated by popularity or sports and that it can also be an unattractive thing. For example, a female who we might say is substantially attractive could also reject the wealth of a male CEO, because he's either unattractive or behaves in a way that she views as eccentric or socially unacceptable.

Whereby we can observe now in this example, her selection for a partner isn't based upon wealth or social well being, but outward appearance or personality.

Footballer's don't nessecarly need to have firm or attractive bodies to achieve selection -- women, who are naive of clinical health, routinely reject males who are slender due to the fact they're partners, have, display, or allow certain characteristics that do not prompt an immediate sexual response or attraction. Features such as inverted nipples, a happy trail for some, birth mark or love handles are just some traits which a female can choose to reject a partner.

Females seeking status and protection is also not looking at the full picture -- males who are just as intellectually or emotionally naive can seek the same exact things out of there partners. Some men seek the status that an attractive young female can provide because her presence will elevate his social position amungst peers. While alternatively, men will also seek fiscally succesful females as a method of producing a relationship that does not require all of the resources a male has to earn and inadvertendly share because of it.

I hope our recent infatuation with explaining the sexual ecology of men and women isn't some veiled form of unexplained sexual jealousy.