Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Relationships
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 08-17-2017, 05:12 PM
 
Location: State of Transition
102,057 posts, read 106,854,652 times
Reputation: 115795

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by ReturnOfTheMack2017 View Post
You seem angry, Ruth? Is it because some things ring true, in the video? 80/20 rule is a fact and it is observed in many areas of human life, from business to personal relationships. Its just a ratio that tends to repeat itself quite often or perhaps its used in a symbolic, less exact way. Female Hypergamy is alive and well, its just that in many cases, the government has taken mans role, which in big part is a major reason for western civilization crumbling. If you disagree with me, maybe you can explain how it works that women, earn less than half of all income, but spend 70-80% of all moneys spent? What type of magic would that take, for it to make any sense?
Haha, no, I just hate vapid cr@p, and her voice was shrill and annoying. I didn't even get to the 80/20 rule part of it. RE: women spending more money, from what I understand, they do most of the shopping for the family household; bedding & bath stuff, other household supplies, as well as groceries and most clothing for the family. Why do you ask; is that an issue? It's not like the women are running off with the joint savings/checking/card account, and going nuts buying for themselves.

So, about the bolded paragraph, is your OP a disguised rant about "welfare queens"? Let's stick to one topic per thread, ok? You could start a new thread on the bolded topic in the Economics forum, maybe. Or maybe under "Philosophy", to cover the crumbling of Western Civilization part.

You haven't posted here before, have you, Mackie? Your hyperbole is beginning to sound familiar.

Last edited by Ruth4Truth; 08-17-2017 at 05:23 PM..

 
Old 08-17-2017, 05:14 PM
 
Location: Phoenix, AZ
20,205 posts, read 14,430,848 times
Reputation: 39028
Quote:
Originally Posted by BellaLind View Post
Where is the science behind the 80/20 rule? Is there any logic and actual measurement of it or it just based on feelings and arbitrarily made up because it sounds catchy?
I seem to recall (Mack, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong here?) that OK Cupid did some sort of a study where women were asked to rate men's photos, and rated 80% of them as below average in attractiveness or something?

But then the data showed that women still messaged men that they considered below average, or responded to more than 20% of messages, or.... I don't even know anymore.

The whole premise was that women find 20% of men attractive.

My response to what I initially read, was that if I was asked to rate men by photo alone, I would rate very few of them as attractive. But that's because almost always, I'm not really that attracted by someone's looks. I liked OLD in that I could read profiles and if a guy actually had something interesting to say, THEN I'd get in touch with him. The only reason pics ever got my attention was when they told a story I wanted to hear, like showing a guy playing bass (I like bass players, strong hands) or making art, or with a cat. For some reason I like it when men like cats. But see, none of that is about their looks. It is a clue to things about them, that are interesting. That was always what I was after.

So my question was...if the study was about rating photos, then does it actually speak to hypergamy, or does it speak more to women having other elements they consider to be important, not just looks?
 
Old 08-17-2017, 05:18 PM
 
Location: State of Transition
102,057 posts, read 106,854,652 times
Reputation: 115795
Quote:
Originally Posted by BellaLind View Post
Where is the science behind the 80/20 rule? Is there any logic and actual measurement of it or it just based on feelings and arbitrarily made up because it sounds catchy?
It's an urban legend.
 
Old 08-17-2017, 05:19 PM
 
5,722 posts, read 5,769,996 times
Reputation: 4381
80/20 rule definitely applies to OLD but that's because there's more men on the sites than women. If there's 500 men in a room but only 150 women then those 150 women will filter out most of the men.

It doesn't mean most of the men are bad, it simply means you're dealing with a venue that's better for women. What you want is a venue where there's only 150 men, but 500 women, but you'll never find it because men go where the women are.

So about the best you can hope for even in RL is 50/50... but if you're savvy you can stumble on to some social situations where there's more single women than men.
 
Old 08-17-2017, 05:19 PM
 
Location: State of Transition
102,057 posts, read 106,854,652 times
Reputation: 115795
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sonic_Spork View Post
I seem to recall (Mack, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong here?) that OK Cupid did some sort of a study where women were asked to rate men's photos, and rated 80% of them as below average in attractiveness or something?

But then the data showed that women still messaged men that they considered below average, or responded to more than 20% of messages, or.... I don't even know anymore.

The whole premise was that women find 20% of men attractive.

My response to what I initially read, was that if I was asked to rate men by photo alone, I would rate very few of them as attractive. But that's because almost always, I'm not really that attracted by someone's looks. I liked OLD in that I could read profiles and if a guy actually had something interesting to say, THEN I'd get in touch with him. The only reason pics ever got my attention was when they told a story I wanted to hear, like showing a guy playing bass (I like bass players, strong hands) or making art, or with a cat. For some reason I like it when men like cats. But see, none of that is about their looks. It is a clue to things about them, that are interesting. That was always what I was after.

So my question was...if the study was about rating photos, then does it actually speak to hypergamy, or does it speak more to women having other elements they consider to be important, not just looks?
But that was about physical attractiveness, which is what OLD causes people to focus on. Overall attractiveness is a completely different ballgame.
 
Old 08-17-2017, 05:23 PM
 
Location: State of Transition
102,057 posts, read 106,854,652 times
Reputation: 115795

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SEllHMWkXEU
 
Old 08-17-2017, 05:26 PM
 
Location: Phoenix, AZ
20,205 posts, read 14,430,848 times
Reputation: 39028
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruth4Truth View Post
But that was about physical attractiveness, which is what OLD causes people to focus on. Overall attractiveness is a completely different ballgame.
OLD did not cause me to focus on physical attractiveness. I read profiles. Lots and lots of them. Also, OKC's percentage matching algorithm has to do with questions answered aligning, does it not? That certainly does not judge photos and "match" people based on some arbitrary idea of attractiveness.

When it comes to physical appearance, I have two settings. "Nope" and "Good enough." A nope is someone who is just so ugly...especially if they look dirty or have like a couple of rotten teeth left in an otherwise toothless smile, something really bad. Or someone whose fashion choices show me that they would be an impossible match for me (I will pass on anybody sporting Insane Clown Posse swag, thanks.)

But if the match % was high enough, I would go read their stuff, and of the two (text content, pics) assuming neither one was a complete "nope"...the text content carried more weight. I'm far more flexible on looks than I am on personality.
 
Old 08-17-2017, 05:27 PM
 
Location: Avignon, France
11,091 posts, read 7,832,916 times
Reputation: 28771
80/20 rule....
80 % of the guys I meet are ok, 20 % are sketchy at best.
Unless it's on here... then it's reversed.
 
Old 08-17-2017, 05:37 PM
 
Location: Jacksonville
2,822 posts, read 1,912,892 times
Reputation: 3074
Excellent thread! Would read again!
not
 
Old 08-17-2017, 05:41 PM
 
10,337 posts, read 5,816,270 times
Reputation: 17879
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sydney123 View Post
80/20 rule....
80 % of the guys I meet are ok, 20 % are sketchy at best.
Unless it's on here... then it's reversed.
It's Opposite World
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.


Closed Thread


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Relationships

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top