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.
Boston has 150k+ college students and more like 300k in the metro. More than half of those are women. Where else in the country are you going to find a major city with that density of 20 year old women? And they’re generally intelligent and have a bright future, compared to the land of trailer trash Barbie. With that upper middle class demographic, most will continue to look attractive for decades where cigarette smoking and hard drinking trailer trash Barbie will weigh 250 and have 3 kids by 3 fathers.
Hyperbole but I think I make my point.
That 300K figure is for the entire state of Massachusetts. We need to break this out by individual jurisdictions.
This is all childless women between the ages of 18-25 who have at the very minimum enrolled in college for at least a semester at some point in their lives. Numbers come from U.S. Census' IPUMS Microdata database.
Manhattan - 58,944
Central Los Angeles - 37,606
Austin - 30,667
Boston - 30,304
Seattle - 29,476
San Francisco - 26,111
Washington, DC - 22,713
Lake View/Lincoln Park, Chicago - 13,788
Miami - 12,284
Arlington, VA - 9,228
Near North Side/Loop/Near South Side, Chicago - 7,989
Center City, Phila - 7,046
Somerville, MA - 6,128
Bushwick - 5,751
Cambridge, MA - 5,715
Long Island City - 5,165
Newton/Brookline - 4,883
Greenpoint/Williamsburg - 4,762
Crown Heights - 4,528
Bedford-Stuyvesant - 4,316
Ft. Greene - 3,348
Central LA (which has about the same population as SF) actually has more 18-25 year old childless women who have enrolled in college for at least one semester than Boston/Cambridge. That's not even including South LA (USC), Pasadena or Westwood.
Manhattan has more women who fit the same criteria within its 22 sq. miles than Boston and SF have within their combined 95 sq. miles.
I’m doing the normal thing and assuming the supermajority of them aren’t trying to be celebrities.
I don't think they are necessarily trying to be celebrities, but I do think they want a taste of or proximity to a celebrity lifestyle.
I mean, put yourself in the shoes of an extremely attractive (8+) 23 year-old woman. You may have gone to State U where you had a "regular" boyfriend who was part of a frat and was likely well above average in height, looks, social status and charisma. Your friends tag you on Instagram, and the picture ends up on a Jayson Tatum's explorer page, and he likes the photo. The next thing you know, you are receiving DMs from C-list celebrities and professional athletes. You are also receiving a lot of attention from local celebrities (think DJs and promoters with large IG followings).
It takes a very exceptional woman to not get drawn into that at such a young age. Those women do exist, but most women, if offered the opportunity to fly on private jets, will fly on private jets. If given the choice between spending time with a handsome guy with all types of connections in the entertainment industry, and a GS-14 in the federal government, they are going to spend time with the handsome guy with entertainment connections. Regular guys with good jobs are a dime a dozen.
Better nightlife
Jobs in fashion and media
More glamor
More celebrities
Wealthier men
More high status/famous men
Bikini weather (Miami/SoCal)
It’s plenty of very wealthy men, glamor, celebrities in DC and Boston. Plenty. You’re saying “more” but how important it accessible is it if there’s way more people in general? Anything you want in NYC you’re gonna find in Boston and probably DC. Boston and DC are extremely wealthy, plenty wealthy men, casinos, penthouses, athletes, clubs (this isn’t a struggle for attractive women), yachts etc etc. as for jobs in fashion and media Boston has media and fashion jobs too you’re talking like it’s Kansas City or something. It’s a major city with an international populace and ooodles of wealth. And it’s core is very posh all around. Indeeed Boston has a higher concentration of millionaires than does New York City https://www.marketwatch.com/story/th...le-11625247163
… there is also a higher concentration of billionaires as far as I can tell- 10 in Boston 99 in NYC.
Fashion and media is the most legit reason everything else just defaults to economies of scale. I don’t get how you can site more of this and more of that but discount the fact that there’s more people entirely and many more who don’t fit this mold. There’s millions of women in NYC I’d be surprised if more than 8,000 are searching for this lane
Additionally, it’s just weird to assume most attractive women are chasing the lifestyle that youre outlining above: realistically I think that’s a slim minority which explains why many of the cities and states listed here are further away from those things than Boston or DC.
That 300K figure is for the entire state of Massachusetts. We need to break this out by individual jurisdictions.
This is all childless women between the ages of 18-25 who have at the very minimum enrolled in college for at least a semester at some point in their lives. Numbers come from U.S. Census' IPUMS Microdata database.
Manhattan - 58,944
Central Los Angeles - 37,606
Austin - 30,667
Boston - 30,304
Seattle - 29,476
San Francisco - 26,111
Washington, DC - 22,713
Lake View/Lincoln Park, Chicago - 13,788
Miami - 12,284
Arlington, VA - 9,228
Near North Side/Loop/Near South Side, Chicago - 7,989
Center City, Phila - 7,046
Somerville, MA - 6,128
Bushwick - 5,751
Cambridge, MA - 5,715
Long Island City - 5,165
Newton/Brookline - 4,883
Greenpoint/Williamsburg - 4,762
Crown Heights - 4,528
Bedford-Stuyvesant - 4,316
Ft. Greene - 3,348
Central LA (which has about the same population as SF) actually has more 18-25 year old childless women who have enrolled in college for at least one semester than Boston/Cambridge. That's not even including South LA (USC), Pasadena or Westwood.
Manhattan has more women who fit the same criteria within its 22 sq. miles than Boston and SF have within their combined 95 sq. miles.
yes but Manhattan has 2x as many people as Boston, per capita matters. The land area is irrelevant as most of the Uber wealthy in Boston live in a 5 square mile area.
It’s plenty of very wealthy men, glamor, celebrities in DC and Boston. Plenty. You’re saying “more” but how important it accessible is it if there’s way more people in general?
I don't understand this thinking. You know you can go on dating apps and filter by race, education, children, height, etc., right? It's not like you have to randomly walk around the city to find these people. They seek out and find each other, even in a city of 9 million.
Also, who are these scores of celebrities that call Boston and DC home? And there is nothing glamorous about Boston. It is not London, NYC, Paris, etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BostonBornMassMade
you want in NYC you’re gonna find in Boston and probably DC.
No. There is no Def Jam, Estee Lauder, Cosmo, Sony, Universal, Viacom, Tom Ford, etc. in DC or Boston. And there is none of the social scene that comes along with this type of industry.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BostonBornMassMade
Boston has media and fashion jobs too you’re talking like it’s Kansas City or something.
What is a major fashion house or recording company based out of Boston?
Quote:
Originally Posted by BostonBornMassMade
Additionally, it’s just weird to assume most attractive women are chasing the lifestyle that youre outlining above: realistically I think that’s a slim minority which explains why many of the cities and states listed here are further away from those things than Boston or DC.
I didn't say "attractive." That could technically be any woman between a 5 and a 7. I said "extremely" attractive. That means the small minority of women that might be considered an 8 or higher. Those women are rare and there are few of them in Boston or DC.
Last edited by BajanYankee; 01-18-2022 at 11:57 PM..
Manhattan - 58,944
Central Los Angeles - 37,606 Austin - 30,667
Boston - 30,304
Seattle - 29,476
San Francisco - 26,111
Washington, DC - 22,713
Lake View/Lincoln Park, Chicago - 13,788
Miami - 12,284
Arlington, VA - 9,228
Near North Side/Loop/Near South Side, Chicago - 7,989
Center City, Phila - 7,046
Somerville, MA - 6,128
Bushwick - 5,751
Cambridge, MA - 5,715
Long Island City - 5,165
Newton/Brookline - 4,883
Greenpoint/Williamsburg - 4,762
Crown Heights - 4,528
Bedford-Stuyvesant - 4,316
Ft. Greene - 3,348
Central LA (which has about the same population as SF) actually has more 18-25 year old childless women
The 11th ranked city in population ranks 3rd on this list. Tracks for me. This tells you that per capita, Austin is crazy high in this category. The quality there is insane, too. The women there are feminine, and beautiful.
Seattle is the 18th ranked city in population and ranks 5th - a very high and surprising result. Not sure anyone mentioned Seattle - perhaps the quality isn't matching the quantity.
I don't understand this thinking. You know you can go on dating apps and filter by race, education, children, height, etc., right? It's not like you have to randomly walk around the city to find these people. They seek out and find each other, even in a city of 9 million.
Also, who are these scores of celebrities that call Boston and DC home? And there is nothing glamorous about Boston. It is not London, NYC, Paris, etc.
No. There is no Def Jam, Estee Lauder, Cosmo, Sony, Universal, Viacom, Tom Ford, etc. in DC or Boston. And there is none of the social scene that comes along with this type of industry.
What is a major fashion house or recording company based out of Boston?
I didn't say "attractive." That could technically be any woman between a 5 and a 7. I said "extremely" attractive. That means the small minority of women that might be considered an 8 or higher. Those women are rare and there are few of them in Boston or DC.
5 to 7 isnt really attractive in my book but just kind normal.
I guess you have to be where the celebrities live- not that theyre in NYC full time. The internet and cars exist, neither city is far from NYC. and literally, I was honestly just reading this article by chance a second ago and..
"Bean was a mother of two living and working in Boston trying to help the father of her children with an active drug addiction which later led her down a path of fiscal ruin, Bean said.
Bean does not blame anyone for her actions, but many life circumstances played a part in why she committed fraud, she said.
May 2021- Ayana Bean of Brockton poses in luxe Boston office space after receiving news of being on one of Amazon's bestsellers lists for her self-published book "A Year And A Day: Memoirs of a Regular Girl."
With the money, Bean could feed her family while leveling up in the music business and becoming a liaison for big names in the industry, including Def Jam, Sony, Eone formerly Koch Records, and Interscope, she said."
Yet she lives in Brockton, MA. And she is conventionally attractive.
There are connections into the music and fashion industry (maybe not top fashion houses) to be had in Boston and probably DC. But many less Again, I think you think it's a lot more podunk than it is if you think there is nothing glamorous about Boston- that very far from the truth- you don't get that expensive without a high degree of glamor I just don't think you're really familiar. But for attractive women looking to get into music and fashion NYC is a better option. Albeit I see celebrities from NYC in Boston with a high degree of frequency, and it is a quick trip to there NYC or Back...
Also is it realistic to think the only women working in the fashion or music industry are 9s when that far from the truth. And again what's the actual number? I saw something like 2500 as models.actresses/singers on your earlier post. Right?
Also is it realistic to think the only women working in the fashion or music industry are 9s when that far from the truth. And again what's the actual number? I saw something like 2500 as models.actresses/singers on your earlier post. Right?
That's not what I said. The point wasn't that "the only women working in the fashion or music industry are 9s." The point was that industries that vet people for looks are going to have a higher proportion of attractive people than industries that do not. In other words, if you were to randomly select from the population of women in Los Angeles that report their occupation as "model," you are going to find more 8s and 9s in that group than you would among a random selection of women in Boston who report an occupation of "accountant."
And those numbers are likely a massive undercount anyway as they don't capture the scores of women who move to NY or LA that don't get steady enough work in the industry and have to resort to more "regular" jobs. Then you have to factor in the people who don't necessarily want to be in the industry, but want access to the scene. A lot of women move to LA/NY/Miami for that reason alone.
The big difference between NY and LA is that young, attractive women will simply up and move there with hardly any money to chase a dream. Nobody is moving to Boston or DC to chase a dream. You are moving there for school or a job. Period.
Last edited by BajanYankee; 01-19-2022 at 08:32 AM..
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.
