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.
As a young woman, I would imagine that I know a little more about what we want than a man does. I also don't claim to know what every woman wants or every man. I don't believe that my standards are lower just because I am young. Also, I make a lot more than the entry level salary that was mentioned on this thread. I hang out with young women in a similar income bracket, and we don't need a man to buy us anything or take us anywhere. We look for more in a man than his income, car, or other material possessions.
Based on my readings and interactions on the net, and the net only, this fact apparently is tail spinning a segment of the male population. In the day-to-day, tho, ladies such as yourself probably don't have to worry about it. You might as well reside in a different dimension as these guys. That was my experience in my 20s. It was easy with awesome men and experiences.
There is one truth that I've repeatedly said on this forum, and that is that you can be an alpha male without being the "bad boy", but you can't be a "bad boy" without being an alpha male. The later is the path of least resistance, but they are also the weaker of the alpha males, generally speaking.
No arguments from me, although I still don't buy into the alpha/beta designations. They just seem too pigeonholed to me, and people can be complicated. Bajan talked about a girl who responded to indifference and aloofness, but who was not a stereotypical loser.
If alpha and beta merely indicate a person's attractiveness to the opposite sex, that's still subjective. There is no one man whom all women universally desire, no single specimen; same with men.
Hey doc, you might want to back off stating that as a fact seeing as how that would ultimately be up to the person doing the rating, don't ya think?
Which is precisely my point. BajanYankee acts like all men think like him. They don't.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bosco55David
You'll have to forgive Doctor Denny, he has a serious inferiority complex towards alpha males and attempts to compensate with his psuedo-intellectualism and pop psychology threads.
You'll have to forgive Bosco55David. He's one of these insecure men who can only feel good about himself by attacking other men who don't buy into his silly ideas. Anything that goes over his head he'll dismiss as "pseudo-intellectualism and pop psychology".
There is no one man whom all women universally desire, no single specimen; same with men.
Again, you're taking it to the extreme. Does every single woman on Planet Earth find Paul Walker attractive? No. Do a whole bunch of women find Paul Walker attractive? Yes. Are there more hot women that find Paul Walker attractive than Denny Crane? Without question. Does that make Paul Walker more "alpha" than Denny Crane? Absolutely. You don't have to attract every single person to be considered attractive. But I guess you could find the 25 guys or so who find Scarlett Johansson to be "okay" to try to prove your point, even though you will find millions who would kill, maim, and slaughter for a chance to caress her silky skin.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JustJulia
I agree with all of this. I don't think that anybody ever says that no woman is ever attracted to men who treat her badly; obviously some are. What I don't agree with is when guys say that all women are attracted to jerks and swagger, because we're not. Choosing a string of abusive boyfriends is more likely to be the result of daddy issues, not some involuntary tingling because bad boys are so irresistible.
Yet another example of you taking it to the extreme. I never said that ALL women are attracted to jerks and swagger. But there are many women that are. And oftentimes, it has nothing to do with "daddy issues," and everything to do with a visceral reaction women have to powerful men.
It's funny that when a man falls for an attractive woman who's a "mean girl," the assumption is that he's shallow and superficial and ruled by his [beep]. Rarely do you hear anyone say that he has mommy issues, or that he has low self-esteem, or that he doesn't know his value. For the most part, we all accept that he's with the hot girl who's a b**** because, well, she's hot.
But when a woman falls for a thug, a killer, a cad, or a "badboy," the assumption is that she lacks self-worth, she has self-esteem issues, or better yet, she's trapped. Rarely does anyone say that those types of guys turn her on. We can't help what and who we like, and since women are attracted to male power in all of its forms, there are always going to be women who literally run after guys that society considers to be "bad."* Women are often ruled by their nether regions as much if not more than men.
*Hence, women who run after convicted killers. You don't really see this phenomenon in men. You could argue that they run after killers because they "don't know any better" and they lack self-esteem, but plenty of men also lack self-esteem and yet you don't see men writing letters to female inmates. Unless, of course, you want to argue that more women have more self-esteem issues than men, a claim that is not verifiable in the least, and which I find to be dubious. The other argument would be that those women are just crazy, but again, there are a lot of crazy men, and those men aren't writing letters to female inmates in significant numbers. Why is that?
Last edited by BajanYankee; 06-08-2011 at 08:27 AM..
I don't know ... the way I see all this is that the "alpha-" and "beta-" terms originated solely to describe behavioral characteristics of animals = pack behavior, courting, pecking-order stuff. Co-opting the phrase to apply it to humans, although common practice from back in the 70's (? - not documented - just a personal opinion based on memories of a slew of alpha and beta books at the time), just brings us down to the level of pack animals.
I thought the majority of posters here thought that Man is above the animals, yet they take great relish in using those terms ...
Me, I have no problems with it since I've always believed that Man is nothing more than an animal with a great press agent.
I don't know ... the way I see all this is that the "alpha-" and "beta-" terms originated solely to describe behavioral characteristics of animals = pack behavior, courting, pecking-order stuff. Co-opting the phrase to apply it to humans, although common practice from back in the 70's (? - not documented - just a personal opinion based on memories of a slew of alpha and beta books at the time), just brings us down to the level of pack animals.
I thought the majority of posters here thought that Man is above the animals, yet they take great relish in using those terms ...
Me, I have no problems with it since I've always believed that Man is nothing more than an animal with a great press agent.
Well, people still are animals. Just because we're at the top of the food chain does not exempt us from the laws of nature.
-People defecate and urinate just like animals
-People feel compelled to procreate just like animals
-People have an instinct for self-preservation just like animals
-People sense fear just like animals
-People submit to dominance just like animals
-People want to belong just like animals
We are obviously higher consciousness beings than animals, but we still have animalistic desires, instincts, and tendencies.
I've never seen proof that we are higher consciousnesses. In fact, many times quite the opposite ...
You completely contradicted yourself. You say that you've "never seen proof that we are higher consciousness," but then you say that people can "ignore and sublimate their fear." That sounds like higher consciousness to me. I doubt too many gazelles say, "Man, I'm afraid of that lion, but I'm going to put my fear aside and strut this savannah like I own it because I refuse to live in fear!"
Again, you're taking it to the extreme. Does every single woman on Planet Earth find Paul Walker attractive? No. Do a whole bunch of women find Paul Walker attractive? Yes. Are there more hot women that find Paul Walker attractive than Denny Crane? Without question. Does that make Paul Walker more "alpha" than Denny Crane? Absolutely. You don't have to attract every single person to be considered attractive. But I guess you could find the 25 guys or so who find Scarlett Johansson to be "okay" to try to prove your point, even though you will find millions who would kill, maim, and slaughter for a chance to caress her silky skin.
All I said was that attractiveness is subjective. For example, I find picking on other people to be unattractive. If I witnessed Paul Walker doing that, I'd be turned off.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BajanYankee
Yet another example of you taking it to the extreme. I never said that ALL women are attracted to jerks and swagger. But there are many women that are. And oftentimes, it has nothing to do with "daddy issues," and everything to do with a visceral reaction women have to powerful men.
I'm not sure why you react to moderate statements like "attractiveness is subjective" and "people have different tastes" as extreme. I remembered a conversation we had a while back, where we debated a statement you made:
Quote:
Originally Posted by JustJulia
Both, I guess, because my impression of Game is that it overlooks the obvious. There is no magic formula for being able to attract any woman, which is what statements like, "When a man has 'game,' you won't even know it. Whether he possesses it naturally or acquired it through practice is of absolutely no consequence or concern to you. All that you know is that he always seems to say and do the right things to make you smile" seem to indicate. You're telling me that no matter what I look like, no matter what caliber of man I am used to dating, no matter what my interests or beliefs or morals are, a man who practices Game will be able to charm and attract me. I disagree with that idea. I've seen videos of PUAs at work and think they're douches. I don't think you are a douche, but I'm not sold on the No True Scotsman defense.
Again, my very first statement in the thread:
If you are not stating that Game works on all women, then we agree.
My stance is and has always been something I said later in that conversation:
Quote:
Originally Posted by JustJulia
There is no simple formula that works on everyone.
If you see that as extreme ... well, okay. I don't know what to do about that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BajanYankee
It's funny that when a man falls for an attractive woman who's a "mean girl," the assumption is that (1) he's shallow and superficial and ruled by his [beep] or (2) he's attracted to b******. Rarely do you hear anyone say that he has mommy issues, or that he has low self-esteem, or that he doesn't know his value. For the most part, we all accept that he's with the hot girl who's a b**** because, well, she's hot.
But when a woman falls for a thug, a killer, a cad, or a "badboy," the assumption is that she lacks self-worth, she has self-esteem issues, or better yet, she's trapped. Rarely does anyone say that those types of guys turn her on.
Interesting perspective about the mommy issues--that's true, people don't seem to say that about men. I do hear and see comments about men who are doormats to b*tchy women, but not about men who are with them and simply ignore the attitude. I have heard women say they like men who "don't put up with their sh**," but I don't understand women who act like that or the men who like them. I do understand that men will overlook quite a bit if the woman is hot or the sex is good, but I don't understand why those men don't simply find women who are hot/sexy and NOT b*tches. Perhaps they enjoy the drama.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BajanYankee
We can't help what and who we like, and since women are attracted to male power in all of its forms, there are always going to be women who literally run after guys that society considers to be "bad."* Women are often ruled by their nether regions as much if not more than men.
I agree with your comment about the attractiveness of power, as long as you are not saying that any form of power is attractive to any woman. That goes back to what I said about Game: there is no simple formula that works on everyone. You mentioned Jay-Z ... he does not interest me at all. I'd be interested in talking to him and hearing stories about his life, but sexually? No, he's not my type.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BajanYankee
*Hence, women who run after convicted killers. You don't really see this phenomenon in men. You could argue that they run after killers because they "don't know any better" and they lack self-esteem, but plenty of men also lack self-esteem and yet you don't see men writing letters to female inmates. Unless, of course, you want to argue that more women have more self-esteem issues than men, a claim that is not verifiable in the least, and which I find to be dubious. The other argument would be that those women are just crazy, but again, there are a lot of crazy men, and those men aren't writing letters to female inmates in significant numbers. Why is that?
The short answer is that crazy men act on their craziness in other ways. You don't really see the phenomenon of women shooting up schools or post office, or crashing airplanes into things. We are talking about a very small segment of society ... you know, the extremes.
You completely contradicted yourself. You say that you've "never seen proof that we are higher consciousness," but then you say that people can "ignore and sublimate their fear." That sounds like higher consciousness to me. I doubt too many gazelles say, "Man, I'm afraid of that lion, but I'm going to put my fear aside and strut this savannah like I own it because I refuse to live in fear!"
Enlightenment comes in many forms.
Just because I haven't seen it doesn't mean it isn't possible - it's the dream that keeps me going.
As for friend gazelle - although they might not go through what to us seems a logical, conscious decision-making and rationalization process, instinct fills in the gaps. If the gazelle's young are threatened or has its back against the proverbial wall, I believe instinct will bring out the courage and eliminate the fear.
It's like training for facing a person with a gun - you can't indulge your "human" mind because it's been improperly conditioned for that occasion. You need to go "animal".
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.
