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.
I went to a college that had a high female sex ratio. I lived in the dorms and had a wonderful time. I had no trouble meeting and dating girls. I do think the sex ratio made this all the easier. This was 25 years ago. In this era I don't think I woud have been so lucky because I'm short, have no bad boy appeal, and am not dominant.
The single most interesting thing about this article was the girl who said you had to accept geting cheated on if you wanted a boyfriend. This to me represents a HUGE cultural shift. Most women wouldn't have acceped this in earlier eras. I see this as an unintended consequence of women becoming more selective. Even as it is becoming the norm I don't think that most women like sharing men and getting cheated on. But when all women only date the 20% or so of men they still find acceptable the numbers make cheating and sharing a sure thing. The pool of acceptable men (alpha males) have huge power over women..they can cheat, use, and abuse women and totally get away with it...there will always be more women who want them...a lot more,,,so they have no incentive to treat any one particular woman well.
I'm middle aged and in a relationship so I am watching this all from the sidelines. I am fascinated on where this is all leading to. Do you think women will catch on to the fact that they collectively lose power when they all date the same men? Will they start giving beta males a chance because of this? Or will male cheating become so acceptable that polygamy becomes legal? I just don't see the motivation for an alpha male to get married to more than one woman when he can stay single and play the field or get married to one woman and constantly cheat while his adoring wife let's him get away with it.
what happens to the 80% of men fighting over the remaining 20% of women? have more wars to kill us off?
Im not sure either but for me i think most people "settle" for what they can actually get and what is the best person attianable to them in a way
There's a term for it in management called "satisficing": a combination of satisfying and sufficing. Choosing a partner isn't that much difference than choosing anything else. Say you go to a cafe, and you're really jonesing for minestrone soup, but they don't have any. So you pick something else--satisficing. French onion isn't exactly what you dreamed of, but it's good enough and it's warm and tasty and serves your needs. You can pick a partner who's good enough, but it doesn't mean you're settling, you're working with what you can get.
I'm sorry, if they don't have lentil and bacon, I'm out of there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by fleetiebelle
There's a term for it in management called "satisficing": a combination of satisfying and sufficing. Choosing a partner isn't that much difference than choosing anything else. Say you go to a cafe, and you're really jonesing for minestrone soup, but they don't have any. So you pick something else--satisficing. French onion isn't exactly what you dreamed of, but it's good enough and it's warm and good and serves your needs. You can pick a partner who's good enough, but it doesn't mean you're settling, you're working with what you can get.
And I thought I might analyse things too much. Do you really think a woman surrounded by men and getting a good one out of the bunch is thinking to herself, she really needs some more girl competition around? That is loony.
LOL
Did you even bother reading what I wrote? Where does it say that a woman would be wanting more competition? She wouldn't. But that doesn't mean she can't see what's going on. The guys are hitting on her basically because she's all there is to choose from. I doubt most people would want that to be the reason you picked them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by fleetiebelle
There's a term for it in management called "satisficing": a combination of satisfying and sufficing. Choosing a partner isn't that much difference than choosing anything else. Say you go to a cafe, and you're really jonesing for minestrone soup, but they don't have any. So you pick something else--satisficing. French onion isn't exactly what you dreamed of, but it's good enough and it's warm and tasty and serves your needs. You can pick a partner who's good enough, but it doesn't mean you're settling, you're working with what you can get.
The only problem with this analogy is that it assumes you have to pick something. But you have one other choice, which is to pick no one.
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.
That is loony.
