Open Thread

Open Thread 2018 (#5)

The Open Thread is a place for open discussion among my readers. Post anything you feel like sharing! From now on, the Open Thread will no longer be monthly. Instead, there will be a new Open Thread whenever it is adequate. The stage is yours. Go ahead! Note that there is also an Open Thread on Aaron S. Elias’s site.

Please consider throwing a few coins into the tip jar, and buy my books! They are great. Your support is greatly appreciated.

24 thoughts on “Open Thread 2018 (#5)

  1. I recently went on two dates with a girl that’s 32 (3 years older than me) and she tells me needs to move. She was previously engaged twice. I did have sex with her and lost my virginity to her. I feel like she would be a good friends with benefits, but not a good girlfriend. She has quite a bit of emotional baggage, though.

    1. Men are not intimidated by smart women, Just annoyed by women that seek attention 24/7 and don’t know when to shut up. My father dated a woman like that. She thought she was the most clever person ever. And so proud on her social and language skills. All she really did was annoy everyone in five different languages.

  2. Hi Aaron, I’ve read through your blog and I want to raise a few questions which have puzzled me about the relation between physical attractiveness, sexual attraction, and human mating.

    But first a quick summary of consensus so far:
    Bearing in mind cases of extremely high status/wealth, in general, I think the idea is that sexual attraction drives both LTRs and casual sex while sexual attraction in turn is driven by physical attractiveness. In the case of casual sex, women prioritize physical attractiveness to the exclusion of all other attributes. In the case of LTR , a woman may at times compromise on looks to secure a mate with dad like qualities

    1. Okay: So my questions
      –Is the whole looks idea meant to be deterministic (as in it’s virtually impossible in this universe for a better looking woman than you to find you sexually attractive and her first choice) or more like a normal distribution curve?
      –How would you account for situations when less attractive men hook up with more physically attractive women outside an LTR? (I’ll assume this isn’t a unicorn and that guys like Krauser, Tom Torero, and people I know personally living in the USA and not abroad aren’t making things up)
      –When a woman pursues an LTR, is this more because she wants an LTR and willing to compromise on a guy’s looks insofar as he has other qualities (i.e. like she’s really out looking for an LTR) or is it more like her going for the best looking guy she can get in an LTR (i.e. like settling). And yes I understand that both can be true

      Thanks — I would really appreciate a response to this (especially from anyone experienced with women + with a science background)

    2. We’ve discussed these questions at great length on my old blog.

      1) Individual perceptions vary, but there is normally agreement on who the better-looking women are. If that weren’t the case, it wouldn’t make sense to even speak of 9s and 10s.

      2) Exceptions are due to the guy happening to be her type. Also, she may be a hooker or a gold digger. Krauser is doing mass approaches in developing countries, so that’s a case of economic disparities (cf. the gold digging case). Tom Torero was caught staging in-field videos, if I’m not mistaken, so there’s that.

      3) For an LTR, she wants stability, but ceteris paribus she’ll of course prefer the hotter guy.

  3. Another thing that I could never quite fully understand is the mechanism behind a guy landing a more attractive woman in an LTR. It suggests there must be a population of women out there actively looking for an LTR regardless of their reason (which also implies a willingness to compromise on looks). This means they must be willing to take a chance to further evaluate a guy if he actually does display dad-like qualities via dating. In an setting like NYC where nearly everyone is from somewhere else, women won’t have readily available social circles to make this assessment; so they persumably have to go to the same bars as women looking for hookups to find LTRs.

    I don’t see any discussion pertaining to this kind of LTR agenda on this blog. To me the idea of a woman wanting to hook up with cads and possibly trying to rope him into an LTR is obvious and would fit in a bar environment. What about men who aren’t cads?

    1. I think you live in a fantasy world. Young women are more prone to fucking around, but the smarter ones are keeping their legs together and look for a provider. The others do so only once they’re past peak fertility and realize that men aren’t paying them much attention anymore.

      There is no “hack”. To simplify it, for one-night stands, maximize your looks, for relationships, maximize your bank account. There is a reason why rich men have it comparatively easy to find attractive wives. (No, pointing out that Bill Gates married an uglo is not a good counter argument.)

    2. Not sure I understand which bit above is the fantasy (is it because I’m suggesting that women default to short term sex)? It seems there is at least a population of women who default to looking for a provider and therefore an LTR–the driver just happens to be either age, IQ or both (possibly many more). The smart ones probably pursue the LTR because that’s what they’ve always been looking for. The older ones pursue it because they no longer have options. Interestingly, if a woman is looking for an LTR, regardless of the motivation, it seem how good looking a man is may actually have a negative impact in the success of the relationship. So all things being equal it does make sense for a woman to choose the better looking man as long as he’s not ridiculously good looking.

      Anyway, perusing dating blogs and particularly manosphere ones leaves the impression that all these women are having massive amounts of sex with Cads all the time and settle with Betas when they’re over the hill. –this seems contrary to data out there in which Men/Women ave about 8 lifetime partners, with only about 10% of the population really racking up the notch counts. Yeah, so basically did my own research and I think answered my own questions. Thanks for the response though

    1. Thanks for the link! VICE had contacted me about that feature. They were never interested in objective reporting but instead only wanted to expose him.

  4. A friend of mine gave me an interesting thought from the female perspective I had never really considered. Her advice was that men who heavily maintain themselves with somewhat feminine processes like manicures, pedicures, hair dying, skin tanning, hair removal, ect make women think that those things on them are just their naturally good genes and not a product of manufacturing. This is because men very rarely partake in these procedures and women won’t assume they did, in fact they’ll assume they were born that way. Think about that, something you can do often and banal as an eyebrow/nose hair or fingernail trim is something women are assuming is a part of your genetic perfection/imperfection. I imagine women think the opposite about male celebrities, that they aren’t just naturally good looking but are manufactured and maintained daily to look a certain way.

    1. That’s very interesting! On that note, I have met women who told me they are of a certain height, and they seemed oblivious that that was her height in heels. They were walking around in heels so much that they presumably viewed them as a part of their body.

    2. Which is another reason to get rid of the thought that, as a man, having a bit of vanity (not excessively) is bad and unmanly. I know I have to, even though I’ve never been too “unkempt” either.

    3. I don’t think that this is true now that this behaviour is more common. I have actually experienced the reverse. I don’t do anything to my eyebrows apart from pluck a few stray hairs above my nose, but several women have asked me if I have them done professionally because apparently they naturally have a good shape.

    4. In that case it doesn’t relate to what Topher was talking about. He was discussing women getting interested in you.

      Your context is completely different if it’s women you’re already fucking. Of course they start analyzing these things in more depth… different context.

    5. Does the context really change the point that much? The assertion was that women assume these things are natural because so few men do that level of personal grooming. If women ask about these things that shows they’re aware that men do these procedures whether they ask before or after you’ve had sex.

    6. Of course context changes everything. Are you kidding?

      The whole reason why for example PUA is atrocious in advice giving is because it doesn’t take into account context. It often mixes points from different contexts.

      That’s why some puatard will cite a study looking at what women notice when choosing a provider from their social circle, and claim it’s scientific evidence on how to craft your opener to a drunk slut in the nightclub.

      If women ask about these things

      She only asked you after you were fucking… Certain types of analyzing start in certain phases of a relationship. Just because someone knows something, doesn’t mean they’ll think about it consciously every single time they meet a new person.

      Hint: People don’t really think about you that much when they first meet you. There are literally 10,000 things a woman can analyze about you… Most of them she won’t bother to do so in early phases (but rely on assumptions instead). The longer you’re with her, the more she’s likely to re-examine those assumptions and start pondering if the assumptions were true not.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.