11–19 of 19 posts
This really does poke a few holes in the equity of outcomes view. Interestingly it also pokes a few holes in the unrestrained capitalism view. As we've seen society in the past restrain individuals and produce more equitable outcomes. We've seen via enforced monogamy a society with more equitable outcomes. Was it better or worse?
We better get sex robots quick or who knows what’s going to happen when more guys are more frustrated.
Of course, the desire for polygyny exists, but to assume that that is all there is to "mating" is somewhat Hobbesian. Then again, the inequality w/r/t men is somewhat inherent across time keeping in mind the "average man" gives the life vests to women & children, charges across the front into the enemy's machine gun nest, and toils the fields for their master. Hell, if you lost the war you became a eunuch and lived the rest of your life a slave. So I don't think this inequality is anything new.
Ultimately, though perhaps there's still lots of inequality in the "dating economy", I think it's better in our society than it has ever been. Most anyone can work to get in shape, or pursue their hobbies. There's no caste structure, and though some people have it easier than others (resources from parents or genetics), it's more than possible with dedicated effort to change oneself because that seems to be something people struggle hard to do. Additionally, there's more variety in our culture than ever before. Women and men can be attractive for different reasons, and so there's many groups people can fall into. There's intelligent people, athletic people, social people, creative people, spontaneous people, mysterious people, etc. Instead of there just being one group -- royalty ala Madame Bovary -- there are many different groups you can choose to be in which nets you much more opportunity than ever before.
I'm glad I was able to think through this and come out of it with an honest, optimistic take; it's too easy -- at least for me -- to be nihilistic when you see an article like this
I wonder what studies there are on what features women find attractive in order of priority. How many of those could men generally do something about? How easy/hard would it be for a male generally to increase their attractiveness through effort - sufficient enough to compete with the existing top 20%? Or is that not possible - due to genetic fitness (or maybe environmental vars only marginally in their control - die…
Intuitively it seems that it should be possible. Physical fitness, confidence, kindness, empathy, social standing, even appearance: these things can all to a large extent be improved through effort. Facial attractiveness seems extremely important to both genders, and is rather difficult and expensive to change. But certainly someone with a merely average face could achieve overall attractiveness by pumping enough poi…
A lot of men are not photogenic but are perfectly handsome in reality.
I think the solution is simply to ban online dating apps and websites. They do more harm than good. Dating worked perfectly fine - better even - before them. At least if you meet someone in real-life first, you can smell them!
https://www.livescience.com/28812-women-prefer-smell-of-manl...
Let people do whatever they please, as long as it doesn’t violate another person’s property rights. There’s nothing to fix and no problem that needs solving.
Stop telling people what to do and explaining they have a problem. If there’s anything more depressing than being rejected or deprived it’s listening to these “experts” telling people what their problem is and what to do about it.
I wonder what studies there are on what features women find attractive in order of priority. How many of those could men generally do something about? How easy/hard would it be for a male generally to increase their attractiveness through effort - sufficient enough to compete with the existing top 20%? Or is that not possible - due to genetic fitness (or maybe environmental vars only marginally in their control - die…
Pretty easy to test. Look if the data is different based on time period or nationality. The ability to spend time and effort on being attractive is not a natural constant, so it should fluctuate depending food availability, wars, and so on.
I wonder what studies there are on what features women find attractive in order of priority. How many of those could men generally do something about? How easy/hard would it be for a male generally to increase their attractiveness through effort - sufficient enough to compete with the existing top 20%? Or is that not possible - due to genetic fitness (or maybe environmental vars only marginally in their control - die…
Intuitively it seems that it should be possible. Physical fitness, confidence, kindness, empathy, social standing, even appearance: these things can all to a large extent be improved through effort. Facial attractiveness seems extremely important to both genders, and is rather difficult and expensive to change. But certainly someone with a merely average face could achieve overall attractiveness by pumping enough poi…
Ie, by improving physical fitness, confidence, kindness, empathy, social standing, and appearance, are you simply improving your relative status in the dating pool.
I don't think there's anything we can or should do to change but it is a raw deal for guys. Also note that apps like Tinder seem very artificial and surreal (e.g. like they don't actually matter) and I do believe this skews behavior.
I wonder what studies there are on what features women find attractive in order of priority. How many of those could men generally do something about? How easy/hard would it be for a male generally to increase their attractiveness through effort - sufficient enough to compete with the existing top 20%? Or is that not possible - due to genetic fitness (or maybe environmental vars only marginally in their control - die…