are 'the feminist crowd' attracted to men?
Printable View
are 'the feminist crowd' attracted to men?
First off I really need to get this straightened out: why do you two keep suggesting that eyeballs aren't physical? What else are they? Not many people have mentioned them anyway, at least not once we stack eyeball admiration up next to genital admiration.Quote:
Originally Posted by stlukesguild
Okay, moving on. I think if you read over the first page again, you'll see that this thread might have just gradually changed in the first page from "what initially attracts you" (the first post mentioned being largely physical) to "what do you desire in an optimum mate." It just altered course is all, as threads often do, before Neely jumped in.
Also, see Mutatis here:
I think he's right, some modicum of initial brief interaction was implied; otherwise Calidore wouldn't have included intangible qualities, unless he's implying rather that litnet is psychic.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mutatis-Mutandis
I think that both the men and women were unwilling to appear shallow, wasn't "smile" one of the first ones mentioned on the For Men thread? Also Charles said, regarding the physical vs. intangible:Quote:
Originally Posted by stlukesguild
Followed by almost no posts at all for weeks (except two about bottoms, but like I said the ladies and also Pip have been very open about their admiration of male genitals, so there you are). You might be forgetting, it was other men who berated Alex for being shallow (mostly Mark I think). In the original "Attraction" thread, the first three posts were by women and were physical, whereas the fourth and fifth were by men and were as follows:Quote:
Originally Posted by Charles Darnay
Quote:
Originally Posted by paradoxical
Intangibles. So, if Neely is using these threads to judge women as, on the whole, more self-deluded or less honest than men, he appears to be ignoring evidence to the contrary because he is biased as he takes this issue personally (as he noted above: "I personally care because this is actually an insult to all men who possess at least an element of kindness, humor and/or intelligence"); which, ironically, would make him deluded about delusion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lokasenna
This is seen by a large chunk of women as one of the most humiliating female stereotypes and I like it that women argue against it, because I hope that it ceases to be so prevalent. Do you not see how devoid that notion is of pride for someone who works hard to develop themselves to hear someone say “women are attracted to big wallets?” The way we’re talked about, it’s like older men think we’re all schemers who are looking for a free ride. 61% of Canadian university graduates were female in 2007, there are more females with at least a bachelor's degree in my country than there are men. Top of the class was female for every class I've had except three.Quote:
Originally Posted by stlukesguild
I’m not saying there’s no such thing as a woman who is financially dependant on a man: I come from an old-school place, and many of the women who end up staying here marry miners or lumber workers, staying in the home, having babies, and they have to because the work in the mine and mill is VERY physically demanding even to most men, so they can't get jobs in the industry (there are a lot of married couples who both work at the prison though). I just don’t see why all women should live with the stereotype that they’re seeking to be financially dependant on a man when the number of women who actually are financially dependant on men are in the minority (only 7% of Canadian women are unemployed). So if it isn't true for the majority (whereas for example Japan really does score higher in math), then why does the stereotype persist?
"What do you do" is how people are weighed and measured in modern society, it's how you frame someone's identity and worth in your mind when you meet them. It's not fair to blame that whole trend on women.
That was me. Once again, although a woman’s brain might be small, we are capable of being attracted to the abdomen of one man if that’s what is visible at the time and the humor of another during a completely separate encounter.Quote:
Originally Posted by Neely
Haha, that was a very smooth final barb and swift exit. Not obvious at all, your pride must be thoroughly intact.Quote:
Originally Posted by Neely
I cannot help but wonder whether the term "attraction" is causing a little confusion as well.
I take the term to mean the strong liking encouraging one to find out more about someone else. It is possible to look at a guy or a girl and acknowledge that they have nice hair, eyes, smile or body but those in themselves do not make me decide that they would be worthwhile -from my point of view- to get to know.
Someone who shows signs of intelligence and of similar interests is more likely to make me take a double take and encourage to find out more about him. And, for me, that is what attraction is.
As a side note, one thing that is surely not attractive is contempt shown towards modern women in these threads; labeling them "superficial" or "dishonest" simply because they can differentiate between "Such lovely eyes" and "Please, please, please talk to me!"
I feel I should not go into "wallet-hunters" business at all as it already rather embarrassing for the guys here even to have made such immature claims. Well, for most of them at least.
For others, it is nothing less than expected.
oh absolutely, a guy could have the waviest hair in the world but that goes out the window if his hobby turns out to be kicking puppies and knocking old people over.Quote:
Originally Posted by Scheherazade
Oh, I am sure you can overlook those if his wallet is full enough!Quote:
Originally Posted by papayahed
Absolutely! I mean I only spent 5 years getting a degree. I've worked hard to make a name for myself in my field. I have security and independence. The minute I get my claws into a fat wallet I get to give all that up!!!!:cheers2: whooo hooo!!:sosp:Quote:
Originally Posted by Scheherazade
Humm.....about money it may buy happiness but it does not buy beauty or attractiveness and that is when money is truly powerless.:)Quote:
Originally Posted by Scheherazade
I'm wondering why so much money is spent on surgical beautification which seems to be becoming a major industry.Quote:
Originally Posted by cacian
Of course I did think of surgical beautification but one can only play with what they already have.Quote:
Originally Posted by Emil Miller
I have yet to see someone that achieve natural beauty after plastic surgeries. The more you plastify and the more fake and horrifying the face looks.That is from what I have seen and that is my opinion.
I can tell straight away that someone has had botox, lifting you name it and it is glaringly distracting.
This process of beautification does not make any one less or more attractive from when they began.In fact it makes them less natural.
I must add however that this exclude individuals who have had disfigurations of any kind because their case is very different and yes in this instance I admit that beautification has had a positive and life changing experiences.
However, if you are right, why do so many people undergo the trauma and expense of this service?Quote:
Originally Posted by cacian
You are right. Heaps of women are not looking for men. Heaps of women have been burned by guys who treat them awfully and as a result carefully guard their hearts and fear falling in love. These are the ones who have the potential to really crush a man. If you fall in love with one of these you are in for a rough time. It happened to me once long ago and I still sometimes feel a great sadness over it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Delta40
well there are many reasons why people do and that is I am sure a very good reason to them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Emil Miller
There are all sorts of motifs to why people do what they do.
One could be that they were bullied about their looks when they were young and so as a feel good factor they entertain the idea of surgery to erase those memories. Those people were not necessarily unpleasant looking but because of the trauma they were put under when they were young made them opt out for surgery because they really believe what the bullies told them about their looks.
Another reason could be that they are the victims of glossy magazines and media that make them believe that unless they achieve the perfect look a model type of look , a barbie look for example, then they are no good.
I personally call it media bullying towards people. Media is devisive and uses images to upset you and tell you that you ought to look like a designer picture. Beauty by design if you like.
Many people already feel that they have to conform to what the TV and the celebrity tag seek out to sell. It is this constant bubble of images with flauless sking and skinny bodies almost inanimate looking which are bombarded with day in day out. We all know deep down this is just a work of fiction, a type realityanime if you like, unatainable if not impossible task.
IT just like fashism an idealism dictated by the media with constand computer generated images that is very deceiving and achieves nothing but unhappiness.
I think we are now at stage were we are surrounded with plastic beauty on a plate feelings put aside. Just cold looking faces more and more botoxed and lifted it is almost scary. I call it the empty look. There is nothing human about it.
I mean you are to disagree with me but that is how I feel about it.
One has to also add that plastic surgery is highly addictive and apparently once you start you cannot stop it is almost junky like feeling about it. I do not like needles and knives and that is plastic surgery is all about and of course ultimately money whihc goes without saying.
I’ve been reading a couple of articles today on why women are attracted for the bad boy alpha male types. It would be interesting to hear what others think about any of the points raised in any of them – especially those people criticising me. Here’s one for example:
http://www.psychologytoday.com/artic...al-the-bad-boyQuote:
From a Darwinian point of view, females are the choosier sex, and males compete for their attention. The result of this competition is that men have evolved strategies such as seeking alpha status.
For me this is just a dash of common sense – females have to be the choosier sex evolutionary speaking, as they have less reproduction potential in comparison to men. It might be worth pointing out though that if women were really attracted primarily to humour, intelligence and politeness why men, some men, adopt alpha male strategies to beat the competition! Could it simply be that women are attracted to alpha male characteristics? Or is this article just misogynist propaganda?
Cont…
One point raised here for me would be the difference between short and long term relationships. This is something not taken into account with the poll I don’t think. You’d think that there wouldn’t be a difference – that you would be attracted to who you are attracted to, but apparently there is room for different markets.Quote:
The more likely a relationship is to be fleeting, the more likely a woman is to seek a man with high quality genes. Evolutionary psychologists define "good genes" for men as high-testosterone-fueled masculinity, symmetry, height, and, believe it or not, parasite resistance. Men who are blessed with these qualities tend to be confident and dominant. And able to get away with roguish behavior.
It's not all a positive for them, since they are also more prone to taking risks and getting into fights and accidents. Still, they offer a primal appeal that would have been advantageous in the ancestral setting—fighting skills, passion, lust for the damsel.
"Women intuitively get attracted to brave acts of altruism more than to altruism per se," says Daniel Kruger of the University of Michigan, principal author of a study on "dads and cads." "A distinction between long-term and short-term relationships is important for understanding women's partner choices." A love of boldness helps women find strong males as mates. Secretly they harbor the fantasy of turning their genetically gifted cads into loving dads who stick around long-term, long enough to help raise the kids. Think Warren Beatty and Keith Richards; fairy tales sometimes come true.
But wait; don't all women want a kind, understanding guy? Of course; it's just that nice isn't a high-caliber turn-on in the short term, unlike bravado. Says Kruger, "Women want their emotions activated." And audacity grabs attention, even if only in the service of marshaling good genes.
A clue to female psychology emerges in a study examining the cheesy best sellers that set millions of women on a Harlequin high. The male protagonists are invariably studs on steeds who morph into devoted dads by novel's end. That is, the women get the best of both worlds.
That second point is also interesting to me is the ideal of 'domesticating the bad boy.' This is something that is oft repeated I find. Personally it reminds of Cecily in 'The Importance of Being Earnest' who is attracted bad boy Algernon (before she has even met him!) who in turn uses that image in winning her affection, he says “I want you to reform me. You might make that your mission, if you don't mind, cousin Cecily.” Although Cecily can give as good as she gets replying - ‘I'm afraid I've no time, this afternoon’ she still clearly fantasied and fantasies about him in order to escape her rather dull and conservative upbringing, to bring a little excitement to her life.
I guess the main point in bringing up this article to show that there is actually some logic behind the alpha male business and that it is not just me that has invented it.
In this article, which I remember hearing about before elsewhere ages ago, it suggests that what women find attractive actually changes during ovulation. (This unnerves me.) This is old news perhaps but it also supports the idea that, genetically speaking, that women are attracted to the alpha male types and hints at the reforming idea again.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0514134301.htm
Interesting to notice the world ‘delude’ here, which is exactly the word I used before I was come down upon like a ton of bricks. It again suggests that there might be a difference between what woman say they like, in theory, like in a poll such as this, and in the heat of the moment. It concludes:Quote:
Research from Kristina Durante, assistant professor of marketing at The University of Texas at San Antonio (UTSA) College of Business, finds that hormones associated with ovulation influence women's perceptions of men as potential fathers.
"Previous research has shown in the week near ovulation women become attracted to sexy, rebellious and handsome men like George Clooney or James Bond," said Durante. "But until now it was unclear why women would ever think it's wise to pursue long-term relationships with these kinds of men."
In the first study women viewed online dating profiles of either a sexy man or a reliable man during periods of both high and low fertility. Participants were asked to indicate the expected paternal contribution from the men if they had a child together based on how helpful the man would be caring for the baby, shopping for food, cooking and contributing to household chores. Near ovulation women thought that the sexy man would contribute more to these domestic duties.
"Under the hormonal influence of ovulation, women delude themselves into thinking that the sexy bad boys will become devoted partners and better dads," explained Durante. "When looking at the sexy cad through ovulation goggles, Mr. Wrong looked exactly like Mr. Right."
Quote:
"While this psychological distortion could be setting some women up to choose partners who are better suited to be short-term mates, missing a mating opportunity with a sexy cad might be too costly for some women to pass up," said Durante. "After all, you never know if he could be the 'one'."
Yeah right! I’m sure he could be ‘reformed’, anyway…
This last paragraph also reminded me of something I once heard or read. (I definitely tried to bury it because it is too horrible.) This suggested that women are only too happy to mate with the ‘cad’ and marry the ‘dad’ (ouch awful phrases, but not mine...) Whether this was intentional or evolutionary I can’t remember, but it is just too horrible, even for an evil, sexist, misogynist like me, that just can’t be true can it?
On the whole though, there is plenty of stuff out there that support the point that women are attracted to the alpha male type, whether this is overt confidence or rugged good looks or something along those lines. It’s certainly not intelligence or politeness that’s for sure - in fact probably something quite opposite to politeness, certainly as first attractant.
Does it occur to you guys that women might have noticed that humanity has ventured out of caves for while now and that how Alpha male is viewed has changed?
There is little need for 'hunters' and intelligence helps more in the way of survival these days.
This is it I think. I have no need for a strong well built man, at the moment I just need someone who can connect my laptop and dvd to the tv.Quote:
Originally Posted by Scheherazade
{edit}
As for the quoted articles, I was interested to discover that I'm an unreformed sexy cad but sorry to admit that I have never been a stud on a steed, although I did once go on a donkey ride when I was about three-years-old.
In all honesty, I have never worried about female ovulation or whether they want to reform a cad into a dad, or an Alpha male into a Beta male which is perhaps a better analogy. It seems to me that we should, through trial and error, go through relationships until we find someone who matches up to what we are looking for or at the end of the day simply give it up as bad job.
Right? I would love to have somebody to get up on the ladder to change the recessed light bulbs.Quote:
Originally Posted by Helga
This process of beautification does not make any one less or more attractive from when they began.In fact it makes them less natural.
I must add however that this exclude individuals who have had disfigurations of any kind because their case is very different and yes in this instance I admit that beautification has had a positive and life changing experiences.
Now this is surely contradictory. It seems you want it both ways. Plastic surgery does not make an individual look more attractive... except when it does make someone look more attractive?
SLG (quote)- I will also say, in Neely's favor, that it may be difficult not to imagine that something as "shallow" as material wealth is a major factor in sexual attraction... especially when one of the first questions many women will ask in the bar/nightclub situation is "So, what do you do?" This is followed with a clear recognition that answering "I'm a doctor" or "I'm a lawyer" or "I'm an investment banker" is far more likely to impress than declaring "I'm a school teacher" or "I'm unemployed at the moment".
JuniperWoolf- This is seen by a large chunk of women as one of the most humiliating female stereotypes and I like it that women argue against it, because I hope that it ceases to be so prevalent. Do you not see how devoid that notion is of pride for someone who works hard to develop themselves to hear someone say “women are attracted to big wallets?”
Did I say "All women...." or "Most women...?" You effectively misinterpret my comments by removing them from the context. For example... in the very next sentence after the above quote, I wrote:
Of course, this could also be the result of the context. One might presume that women on the prowl for a wealthy husband may frequent the nightclubs more often than they hang out in the book stores, library, etc...
I went on to suggest of stereotypes:
Most stereotypes have a degree of truth to them... which is why they arose in the first place... But ultimately such stereotypes may not represent anywhere near the majority of the group the purport to represent...
Now are you suggesting that there are not women who are not on the prowl for a wealthy husband and who willing trade their appearances in for gold? Where does the term "trophy wife" come from? Do you believe the following women were attracted to these men as a result of their baby blue eyes, kindness, and sense of humor?
http://i1245.photobucket.com/albums/...b2642eec2a.jpg
http://i1245.photobucket.com/albums/...5de3263ddc.jpg
http://i1245.photobucket.com/albums/...2e6e87d3c5.jpg
http://i1245.photobucket.com/albums/...96e5ceab37.jpg
The way we’re talked about, it’s like older men think we’re all schemers who are looking for a free ride.
No one has suggested any such thing. As I suggested above, Neely's experiences with women in bars scoping out a guy with a Mercedes of BMW may indeed have simply been the result of the context. None of the girls I dated were hunting for a rich husband... but pretty much all of the girls I dated I met at work or school or at a book store or art gallery... and not a nightclub.
61% of Canadian university graduates were female in 2007, there are more females with at least a bachelor's degree in my country than there are men. Top of the class was female for every class I've had except three.
So... you should have gone to school with me... because I was always the top student in my class.:D:yesnod:
"What do you do" is how people are weighed and measured in modern society, it's how you frame someone's identity and worth in your mind when you meet them. It's not fair to blame that whole trend on women.
Here, perhaps you are right. There is an unfortunate tendency by a great many to base their opinion on another person's worth... intelligence... even their motivation or lack thereof... upon their income.
Neely... have you ever come upon this article?
http://www.denisdutton.com/aesthetic...psychology.htm
It suggests that to a certain extent, even the arts may have initially evolved (a retain a certain residual element thereof) as a result of sexual selection and the desire to impress women.
Hey... I recall a certain light going on in my head :idea: back in high-school when a couple girls started to pay attention to me because of my ability to draw Tweety Bird and other cartoon characters. Of course, that's why I've kept at it all these years... fame, fortune, and all those art groupies!:p
So you are saying that women are immediately attracted to intelligent looking men, not at all looks or any of the alpha male characteristics, but intelligence? So maybe men who read chemistry textbooks or advanced economics are seen as 'hot stuff'? This is what you are saying then yes?Quote:
Originally Posted by Scheherazade
http://rdcltci.files.wordpress.com/2.../brad_pitt.jpg
Not attractive?
http://www.dreamstime.com/man-with-g...mb21836757.jpg
Attractive?
:nonod:
I don't think so. I have bookmarked it thanks.Quote:
Neely... have you ever come upon this article?
http://www.denisdutton.com/aesthetic...psychology.htm
Yep, you are right, we have changed; that is why men are no longer attracted to large breasts and curvy thighs, those are such primeval things, and I am glad to say we have moved beyond that. Alpha-male, Alpha-female-pshht - confidence is such a turn off.Quote:
Originally Posted by Scheherazade
Me: the gambler, the drunk, the reckless and the aloof, the man in love with himself and only himself, the one disinterested with the world and of an old and wealthy family. All these traits are such unbelievable turn-off's for women that I am thinking to make myself gay, as these are qualities which are better appreciated by men.
I think Scheherazade is looking for a guy who looks like the first picture but who is also into advanced economics.Quote:
Originally Posted by Neely
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neely
When I was 14 other girls made fun of me because 'charm' (what ever that is) to me were men like Woody Allen and Steve Buschemi. Today it's more Simon Pegg maybe but always the nerdy or odd guys. NEVER Brad Pitt!!
I'll admit I had a Viggo Mortensen phase but that was around LOTR, and he DID look good on a horse.
I think guys are just as self conscious about their looks as many girls are and they think girls want someone with a six pack on their body but really they want a six pack in the fridge.
:lol: Yes that's probably the case. Women start with such high expectations (or hopes) and in the end are inevitably disappointed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Emil Miller
I think of it like the woman wants her man to be a beta before her but an alpha towards everyone else, just like a man wants his wife to be dirty with him but a prude towards all other guys. Its what I've noticed in my relationship experience. Fights happen when both act alpha towards the other and neither wants to be a beta.
This is why respect is so vital to a healthy relationship. If the man acts like a beta towards the rest of the world then his woman will act like an alpha ALL THE TIME, even when its just the two of them in private.
And if the man does not respect the woman in private, is alpha on her all the time, then her self-esteem will go down and the relationship will become poisonous for her.
Its a pain in the butt trying to navigate this horrendously complicated dating world. I prefer to abstain from it. Its the most stressful thing, dating, for me at least.
I actually agree that most women don't care too much about how much money a man makes. I know plenty of women who are in relationships with unemployed, alcoholic bums--goes into the whole "women date jerks" idea.Quote:
Originally Posted by JuniperWoolf
So looks don't matter at all, huh? You're above all that? Sure, Scher, sure you are. :rolleyes5:Quote:
Originally Posted by Scheherazade
I'm coming to believe that nothing matters at all: some women are just so gosh darned open minded they don't have any standards at all!Quote:
Originally Posted by Emil Miller
I don't get why there's all this backlash against the idea of women wanting to date an alpha-male, which, to me, doesn't mean the same thing as dating a jerk. Why wouldn't women want to be with the alpha male? Why are some arguing so vehemently that you'll go out with someone not on top of the metaphorical food chain? I think you'd be better of just saying, "You're right, Neely, we do go out with the alpha-males. Deal with it."
How about, 'We're complicated' instead?
On behalf of female population all over the world, thank you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alexander III
Quote:
Originally Posted by Emil Miller
Sorry to disappoint, guys.Quote:
Originally Posted by Neely
Scheherazade is not looking for anything or anyone anymore.
I am quite surprised that this issue is rather confusing to you. Is Brad Pitt goodlooking? Yes. Do I feel tempted to get to know someone looking like him? No. Unless he is carrying that promised Chemistry textbooks, that is.
True, but we all have to make compromises. It's a bitter pill to swallow but it's in the nature of things that the ideal is unattainable. This isn't the thread to mention it, but it's this that makes The Great Gatsby the important literary work that it is.Quote:
Originally Posted by Neely
You're wrong, MM. We do not go out with the alpha-males. Deal with it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mutatis-Mutandis
I am not sure why this "superiority" angle is. All we are saying is that we find different things attractive.Quote:
I'm coming to believe that nothing matters at all: some women are just so gosh darned open minded they don't have any standards at all!
Seems like most men have a chip on their shoulders because they do not like Brad Pitt or is not as rich as Bill Gates.
Well, I think it's pretty stupid if you're not looking for an alpha male. Why would you want someone not attractive, not charismatic, and not successful? I admit it--I was *****ing before because I'm not those things.
Anyways, maybe you don't date alpha males, but you can't speak for all women, not matter how highly you value your own thoughts and opinions.
And you don't play the superior angle at all...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scheherazade
You're perfectly right Mutatis and I guess men simply cannot speak for all women's preferences either.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mutatis-Mutandis
:rofl: :lol: this is hysterically funny.Quote:
Originally Posted by JuniperWoolf
I don't have a chip on my shoulder for these reasons. I am just a little tired of the pretence of you 'women folk' at being attracted to more 'noble' attributes when the evidence, and common sense, seems to point otherwise. This is generally speaking of course, but still it is a bit silly, so come clean now.Quote:
Seems like most men have a chip on their shoulders because they do not like Brad Pitt or is not as rich as Bill Gates.
And anyway, I have been told that I look a little like Brad Pitt by two different people at different times. True, one of them was my friend and the other was drunk, but I'll take the compliment nonetheless. Also, who the hell wouldn't want Bill Gates' cash anyway or is this something that your sex don't like as well? Are you above money as well as looks?
Obviously not so highly to claim to know what men think or prefer better than they do... Nor to call their opinions "stupid".Quote:
Originally Posted by Mutatis-Mutandis
I'd strongly urge you to re-read my post. That comment was directed at those who label women as "fortune-hunters" or "trophy-wife wannabes".Quote:
And you don't play the superior angle at all...
I have no problem with people having money (inluding myself). It is just that it is not one of the things I would like to take into consideration while determining how "attractive" someone is (or not).Quote:
Originally Posted by Neely
At this point, I don't think I have any more to say on this issue.
Have fun.
I don't even know what alpha male means in this day and age. When I hear the term I think of someone who's an obnoxious twat and needs to be brought down a peg or two. But then the term 'alpha male' itself seems to be nothing but a stereotype.
There exists many a guy who makes a respectable amount of income but does not rely on it to get dates, and someone who is attractive to look at but not 'metrosexual' and overbearing. This is obviously more people's ideal partner.
What about alpha females? Would anyone find them ideal partners? Women DO earn their own money these days and there's probably (since I still don't know what the term means) plenty of them around.
Sorry Babyguile. I fully believe that you may not not know what alpha male means in this day and age. But I can give strict assurances, along with every guy seriously and honestly responding in this point, the very vast majority of women inherently know what it means.
Men(and women) have to live and breathe the selection process, and we all know inside how it works. A million years of hard wired evolutionary traits that exist in the very vast majority of humans does not flip in 30 years.
Even feminists like Jane Fonda marry very strong alpha males. Roger Vadim, Tom Hayden(very alpha, despite his political views), and a quintessential alpha - Ted Turner.
Now try this: Try to get Jane Fonda to admit that she is attracted to Alpha Males, powerful men, Tough and Aggressive men. She will Never Ever say that, rather she would state something along what your saying. I'm sure her memoirs (she has written quite a bit) would/might say something along those lines.
Always look at what people do, not what they say they do.
Actually she did admit to marrying strong men (and divorced them as well). Check out an interview between Jane Fonda and Kathy Griffen in which they discuss.Quote:
Originally Posted by tonywalt
Why is this such a black and white issue for men? I like strong men. I like handsome men. However that isn't the be all and end all to the relationship. Compatiablity and likeability trumps all in my world.
Yeah, I might be attracted to the prettiest man in the bar, however if we can't talk about Star Wars or we can't make each other laugh then we aren't going to get very far.
There is nothing Alpha about "though" aggressive men. Have you ever come across any? They are wusses. I've ticked off a few of those, by not obeying their command... It's hard not to laugh at them, and they really aren't as tough as they pretend to be. Not to mention how stupid they are, it's like taking on a half dead inflatable flailing arm man.
They also seem to be the kind of people who slap their ladies around. Oh yea, totally hot...
You are 100 % spot on.
What you described are clearly insecure Beta males who use agressive displays in order to be seen as Alpha. A real Alpha is by defintion in the social animals world - the individuals in the community with the highest rank. Where only certain males and females fulfill this role. Guys who back down or act like wusses or act like half dead inflatible men would not attract women of any quality nor any quantity of women - therefore are not Alpha.
That's just common sense.
But it is good that you are able to spot insecure people and you describe them to a T- it's a good ability.
can anyone please explain what this Alpha is all about?
I truly find the whole word irritating when combined with the word male. I am sure the Greeks inventor of the alpha word won't be happy to have it associated with a gender.
In fact this whole alphamism reminds of the men are from mars and women from venus.
Sorry!! when I first saw that I nearly cried of laughter it was that ridiculous.
I am a firm believer that both men and women have a common ground and a different side but all the same are equal in abilities and thinking.