Leagues in Romance (guys, celebrities, personality, sexy)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Honestly, I think it's easier to jump into another class financially than it is to jump to another class in dating.
Way easier. Here in 'Murica most people at least have access to a trade school or community college. There is only so much you can do if you're short or have an ugly face.
Leagues. The caste system. Mmmmm. It exists in some groups, but not others. It actually an individual thing, but these types do tend to be herd bound. Using criteria such as financial status, noteriety, possession and such is a shallow MO, but there is a large number of people who are like this.
There are also an at least equal number who are not. I had a relationship for a while with a fairly prominent lady attorney. She is quite well known and highly respected in the community I am from, and is also known across the state. Her IQ is off the chart, and she has a photographic memory. Her attraction to me often confused me. So I just up and asked her what it was she saw in me.
She told me that my appearance of being just a worker bee was BS, and she saw through it. That there was something more under the surface. Oh, we could talk for hours about anything, and not run lean on words. However, the simpler side of me was something she liked as well. Her life and career are extremely complicated. As is she , herself.
The end run was rather interesting. The more complex the mind, the greater the need for the simplicity of play.
Leagues are a thing. I don't think they're as well defined as some people imagine. Pretty much my whole dating life comes down to me finding women that are very attractive to most people, including myself obviously, and hoping I'm their type. I'm probably better than average as far as what I can't change goes and then I'm also in pretty good shape but I am not nearly as rare physically as the women I go for. It works often enough for me to keep going back to women of that level of attractiveness.
At the same time a short fat bald man living in a van has no chance with a Scarlett Johansson type.
In all fairness, these marriages may have worked because their other options were limited: divorce was looked down upon; most women didn't work and had little to support themselves if the marriage dissolved. There could have easily been a few unhappy couples who stayed together anyway, yet portrayed themselves as if all was well.
Were there people who were otherwise content? Sure, but not always the case. Are there people who may place too much emphasis on being smitten, not looking at the bigger picture of what it takes to make marriage work, ultimately marry or divorce for flaky reasons? Sure, but not always the case. I don't assume one is better than the other. There are two sides to every coin.
Being rich and having leagues aren't exclusive. It's easy to "look down" upon the rich elitists without realizing the average joe and plain jane is carrying similar attitudes by doing such. People are people and can have similar flaws, whether rich or poor.
Is that last one a league or just logic?
__________________
When in doubt, check it out: FAQ
Anyone who does not believe in leagues just needs to be hit on by someone they find outrageously unattractive.
When I was in college I was out shopping and I got hit on by a homeless guy. He was old and dirty and just gross. Yes, he was a human being. But I thought in my 18 year old mind, "I can't believe this guy is asking me out on a date."
I don't think they are as rigid as some guys think, but they are there. They probably are a combination of class, looks, money, fame, power, personality, etc...
Anyone who does not believe in leagues just needs to be hit on by someone they find outrageously unattractive.
When I was in college I was out shopping and I got hit on by a homeless guy. He was old and dirty and just gross. Yes, he was a human being. But I thought in my 18 year old mind, "I can't believe this guy is asking me out on a date."
I don't think they are as rigid as some guys think, but they are there. They probably are a combination of class, looks, money, fame, power, personality, etc...
I get what you're saying, but I think it's more a sense of "this is my kind of person" vs. "this is not my kind of person" than trying to rank people on a hierarchical scale.
Anyone who does not believe in leagues just needs to be hit on by someone they find outrageously unattractive.
When I was in college I was out shopping and I got hit on by a homeless guy. He was old and dirty and just gross. Yes, he was a human being. But I thought in my 18 year old mind, "I can't believe this guy is asking me out on a date."
I don't think they are as rigid as some guys think, but they are there. They probably are a combination of class, looks, money, fame, power, personality, etc...
Oh. I have been hit on by guys I found completely, thoroughly unattractive.
I just let them down politely. Why should I be insulted that someone I find unattractive finds me attractive?
Eh. No biggie.
I'm friendly and approachable. Maybe that's why those guys felt like they could approach me.
__________________
When in doubt, check it out: FAQ
I get what you're saying, but I think it's more a sense of "this is my kind of person" vs. "this is not my kind of person" than trying to rank people on a hierarchical scale.
Exactly. We all know what we like. I don't think that equals leagues, though.
My issue with leagues is that they imply that some leagues, and by extension, some people... Are better than others. Just by virtue of surface characteristics like looks and money.
Nobody is BETTER. Just different.
__________________
When in doubt, check it out: FAQ
Exactly. We all know what we like. I don't think that equals leagues, though.
My issue with leagues is that they imply that some leagues, and by extension, some people... Are better than others. Just by virtue of surface characteristics like looks and money.
Nobody is BETTER. Just different.
Who said leagues are just about looks and money? Typically those are the the tings that attract people at first but a homebody that plays videogames all day is going to be a lot less attractive and have a lot fewer options than someone that goes out and actually interacts with people.
I'd call it logic. Thinking a group of people as elitist isn't a rich v. poor matter. Average people may think they're more tolerant, when they're actually carrying out the same kind of prejudice. An average person complaining about the rich is just as bad as the rich person complaining about the average.
As far as leagues are concerned, people create their own idea of leagues based on who they feel is attainable. Sometimes they're founded, and not at other times. An attractive woman may be attracted to an average guy with an outgoing personality; but an older fat, balding guy who's broke and cynical can't expect to win over a VS model with high expectations. Someone who you can reasonably meet the demands for, or vice versa, is in your league. Someone you likely wouldn't be able to meet the needs for or vice versa is out of your league (i.e. Having to change oneself, especially drastically, or if it's otherwise impossible to change to another's demands are two examples).
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
