“Just because you belong to a select minority group does certainly not mean the opposing majority is right. They are simple followers: terrified that their majority peers will not accept them if they take a different path.”
I was listening to a local radio show around last Christmas time. It actually pains me to listen to it at times because it’s a team collection of the two main male presenters, the male producer and the female news reader. It epitomizes everything I advocate against in terms of how the three men make the news girl the centre of attention when they need to establish a topic on something she supposes to know about. Excessive supplication, compliments and attention should be everything a man avoids when he is attempting to appeal sexually to a woman.
Then again, if you saw the physical attractiveness level of the two main presenters then you’d understand, whilst not justifying, why they act like this. She is, at her best, a cute woman of 7.25/10 looks grade at the most. Granted though, this is work and not seduction, and it may make the boring hours appear a little more entertaining by talking about her on given opportunities. So as I feel in a good mood with the sun shining, I’ll excuse them on this count. The moral of how they act is more important than their delivery, let’s say.
The topic that did stay with me was their conversation of the radio station Christmas party. One of the presenters made reference to remarks from many of the women there that night who made comments along the lines of “he’s done well for himself.” In other words, to naïve and curious observers, the woman in the couple was significantly better looking than her male partner. It made to chuckle to myself during the drive to work, because this subject is something very close to my heart in terms of what I study, observe and write about. It never seizes to amaze me how the vast majority of people seem to be clueless to the real reasons behind these dynamics of oddly matched visual couples where the woman strikes the eye and the man is a simple territory taker. If they are aware – and this is usually a blanket opinion that a man’s money and power attract the woman – then they conceal it with weak reasoning of him having a great personality and being such a nice guy. I think a fair number are aware of the greater truth, but they conceal their true knowledge due to being worried about rocking any boat or ego.
Nevertheless, the news woman did bring up a reasonable point. For a woman, she does actually talk a decent bit of sense that isn’t totally from fallacy production. On this instance she mentioned how, from a woman’s perspective, they don’t go more than 1 grade up or 1 grade down from their own physical attractiveness rating. Is this true, or is it once more another good lady perhaps clouding the real truth behind women’s choices in men?
First, I’ll take the “1 grade down” theory. On the face of it, this makes sense. I have often referenced to people, and posts in this blog have covered or alluded to this, that a woman has a subconscious predilection to be with a man who is 10% to 15% less eye catching than she is. I use the percentage logic as opposed to the 1 in number per se, as a 6/10 woman would be surpassing the 15% if she chose a 5/10 man. It illustrates more accuracy when you see an 8/10 woman with a 7/10 man, or a 7/10 woman with a 6/10 man. And I bet most people have seen this pronounced situation on abundant occasions in the last year. But yes, the “1 grade down” claim is not a million miles off.
Where this concept becomes more complex, and maybe untruthful, is the fact that women, as stated by the woman I refer to, are willing to be with a man who is a full grade above them in physical looks. The cynic in me, but more importantly the realist and observer in me, doesn’t buy this. I admit that if you were to take the millionth best looking (or worst looking, depending on which way you look at it) woman and man in the country, the woman would be more physically attractive in relative terms. This would feed itself with consistency if you were to drive up or down this position, until the female age consistently arrived in excess of 40 years and the man was no more than 10 years older. So naturally, even if every man possessed the same level on every single desirability metric possible to consider, most women would be with a lesser looking man on the sheer numbers context alone.
But there are over half a million cute women (ranging 7/10 to 7.75/10) in a non-blessed looking country like the UK. How many of these women do you see with men who are a full grade, or even half a grade, higher? My longest relationship was with one of these who was prepared to venture with a man (me!) who was this full grade above her, but the caveats are that she was a rare confident and risk-taking person, in addition to the fact I met her when she was 20. Had I met her a few years later then I doubt she would have been so accommodating.
It’s the old chestnut as far as I’m concerned. First, there are some out there. I do get approached by occasional women who don’t grab be by the gut on immediate sight, but they are cute looking. It’s amazing how often these women have far more urge to get what they want and take risks than their hotter female counterparts. I find this attractive, as I admire and respect a woman who can put her heart on the line in precedence to the fear of rejection. But women of this nature are exclusive exceptions rather than the rule. Most women couldn’t contemplate rejection for a single second in fear of falling into a river of self-doubts towards their worth.
So in conclusion, when would a woman truthfully be prepared to box above her fighting weight? Money, status and power may go a long way to explain this. Rare confidence in women would also pick out isolations. And maybe, just maybe, those women who do place their sexual feelings above their egos. Nevertheless, you won’t find too many of these in your entire lifetime. Gentlemen, if you are searching high and wide for one of these types, I’d advise to not hold your breath.