Board index › Coping in life › Love and Dating

Do boys/girls only care about matarial things a person has?

Page 3 of 4 [ 54 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

fluffysaurus
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Oct 2017
Gender: Female
Posts: 3,723
Location: England

22 Nov 2017, 10:07 am

Closet Genious wrote:
fluffysaurus wrote:
So women find men who can provide for them more attractive than men who can't, just as men find women who are younger (breeders) and good looking (healthy) more attractive, and none of this is anyone's fault because it's evolution.

So, anyone on this here not depressed now?


So now you have to be condescending about it. Jesus.

First you want to argue as if it's a ridiculous point, and now you inevitably agree that hypergamy is an obvious fact.. I never said it was anyone's fault btw, all I am saying is that for alot of men it can be quite depressing..

And even though I am a poor student currently, the path I've chosen guarantees a spot in the top 3% financially in my country.. So I'm not bitter because I am afraid I'll end up poor or something. I say this because people love to deflect everything men say by calling them poor losers.

I just think either you can love women, or you can understand them, you can't do both.


How was I condescending? I just pointed out that the point being made, that only wealthier men had a chance of breading was depressing for people on this site.

Where did I argue? where did I say it was ridiculous? where did I say that you thought it was someones fault? where did I suggest you were bitter?

You seem to have read things into what I put that are not there, let me clarify, I meant what I put.


_________________
climate change petition, please sign

Petition against Amazon selling 'make downs extinct' t-shirts. And other hate speech paraphernalia.


kraftiekortie
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 87,510
Location: Queens, NYC

22 Nov 2017, 10:37 am

I hope I didn’t upset you, Fluffysaurus. I’ve just had nice experiences with women who are not vain.



Closet Genious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Jan 2017
Age: 29
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,225
Location: Sweden

22 Nov 2017, 10:54 am

fluffysaurus wrote:
Closet Genious wrote:
fluffysaurus wrote:
So women find men who can provide for them more attractive than men who can't, just as men find women who are younger (breeders) and good looking (healthy) more attractive, and none of this is anyone's fault because it's evolution.

So, anyone on this here not depressed now?


So now you have to be condescending about it. Jesus.

First you want to argue as if it's a ridiculous point, and now you inevitably agree that hypergamy is an obvious fact.. I never said it was anyone's fault btw, all I am saying is that for alot of men it can be quite depressing..

And even though I am a poor student currently, the path I've chosen guarantees a spot in the top 3% financially in my country.. So I'm not bitter because I am afraid I'll end up poor or something. I say this because people love to deflect everything men say by calling them poor losers.

I just think either you can love women, or you can understand them, you can't do both.


How was I condescending? I just pointed out that the point being made, that only wealthier men had a chance of breading was depressing for people on this site.

Where did I argue? where did I say it was ridiculous? where did I say that you thought it was someones fault? where did I suggest you were bitter?

You seem to have read things into what I put that are not there, let me clarify, I meant what I put.


There's no way I'm gonna play this game with you.

Either you have a poor understanding of the subtleties of communication.

Or you're doing what I like to call "childish manipulation"(first be annoying, and then act as if you didn't do anything)

Either way, I really dislike the way you're communicating, I'll leave it at that.



Fireblossom
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 18 Jan 2017
Gender: Female
Posts: 3,569

22 Nov 2017, 11:01 am

Closet Genious wrote:
Either you have a poor understanding of the subtleties of communication.


Very likely, for that is a common feature for us autistic people, isn't it?



kraftiekortie
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 87,510
Location: Queens, NYC

22 Nov 2017, 11:17 am

I do like Fluffy. She’s very clever.



Embla
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

Joined: 4 Oct 2017
Gender: Female
Posts: 490

22 Nov 2017, 12:38 pm

When I got together with my boyfriend I was homeless (I mean literally sleeping on the streets). Neither of us owned any material values, nor are we particularly good looking (especially not me, 'cause you know.. Streets. It's not a charming look).
Two years later and we're still poor and ugly, living in a crappy caravan. No one wealthier has gotten in the way so far.

So, no. It's not all about material things, or good looks as mentioned above. Material wealth is of course very practical, but if that was all that mattered, there would only be wealthy couples in the world. Something we know is not the case.



The_Face_of_Boo
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Jun 2010
Age: 41
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 32,890
Location: Beirut, Lebanon.

22 Nov 2017, 1:01 pm

Embla wrote:
When I got together with my boyfriend I was homeless (I mean literally sleeping on the streets). Neither of us owned any material values, nor are we particularly good looking (especially not me, 'cause you know.. Streets. It's not a charming look).
Two years later and we're still poor and ugly, living in a crappy caravan. No one wealthier has gotten in the way so far.

So, no. It's not all about material things, or good looks as mentioned above. Material wealth is of course very practical, but if that was all that mattered, there would only be wealthy couples in the world. Something we know is not the case.


-Pause- before you continue your nice love story.

Was he homeless too?



fluffysaurus
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Oct 2017
Gender: Female
Posts: 3,723
Location: England

22 Nov 2017, 1:11 pm

kraftiekortie wrote:
I hope I didn’t upset you, Fluffysaurus. I’ve just had nice experiences with women who are not vain.


Hello, the oink was aimed at The_Face_Of_Boo, he called me a piggy. :D


_________________
climate change petition, please sign

Petition against Amazon selling 'make downs extinct' t-shirts. And other hate speech paraphernalia.


fluffysaurus
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Oct 2017
Gender: Female
Posts: 3,723
Location: England

22 Nov 2017, 1:22 pm

Fireblossom wrote:
Closet Genious wrote:
Either you have a poor understanding of the subtleties of communication.


Very likely, for that is a common feature for us autistic people, isn't it?


:D Thank you, because for a Minuit I thought I'd wandered onto a different site.


_________________
climate change petition, please sign

Petition against Amazon selling 'make downs extinct' t-shirts. And other hate speech paraphernalia.


fluffysaurus
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Oct 2017
Gender: Female
Posts: 3,723
Location: England

22 Nov 2017, 1:46 pm

Closet Genious wrote:
fluffysaurus wrote:
Closet Genious wrote:
fluffysaurus wrote:
So women find men who can provide for them more attractive than men who can't, just as men find women who are younger (breeders) and good looking (healthy) more attractive, and none of this is anyone's fault because it's evolution.

So, anyone on this here not depressed now?


So now you have to be condescending about it. Jesus.

First you want to argue as if it's a ridiculous point, and now you inevitably agree that hypergamy is an obvious fact.. I never said it was anyone's fault btw, all I am saying is that for alot of men it can be quite depressing..

And even though I am a poor student currently, the path I've chosen guarantees a spot in the top 3% financially in my country.. So I'm not bitter because I am afraid I'll end up poor or something. I say this because people love to deflect everything men say by calling them poor losers.

I just think either you can love women, or you can understand them, you can't do both.


How was I condescending? I just pointed out that the point being made, that only wealthier men had a chance of breading was depressing for people on this site.

Where did I argue? where did I say it was ridiculous? where did I say that you thought it was someones fault? where did I suggest you were bitter?

You seem to have read things into what I put that are not there, let me clarify, I meant what I put.


There's no way I'm gonna play this game with you.

Either you have a poor understanding of the subtleties of communication.

Or you're doing what I like to call "childish manipulation"(first be annoying, and then act as if you didn't do anything)

Either way, I really dislike the way you're communicating, I'll leave it at that.


I have no idea why you have chosen to read my comments this way.


_________________
climate change petition, please sign

Petition against Amazon selling 'make downs extinct' t-shirts. And other hate speech paraphernalia.


fluffysaurus
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Oct 2017
Gender: Female
Posts: 3,723
Location: England

22 Nov 2017, 1:50 pm

kraftiekortie wrote:
I do like Fluffy. She’s very clever.



Now I'm going to be afraid to comment near you and expose what an idiot I am. :D


_________________
climate change petition, please sign

Petition against Amazon selling 'make downs extinct' t-shirts. And other hate speech paraphernalia.


The_Face_of_Boo
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Jun 2010
Age: 41
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 32,890
Location: Beirut, Lebanon.

22 Nov 2017, 2:52 pm

fluffysaurus wrote:
Closet Genious wrote:
fluffysaurus wrote:
Closet Genious wrote:
fluffysaurus wrote:
So women find men who can provide for them more attractive than men who can't, just as men find women who are younger (breeders) and good looking (healthy) more attractive, and none of this is anyone's fault because it's evolution.

So, anyone on this here not depressed now?


So now you have to be condescending about it. Jesus.

First you want to argue as if it's a ridiculous point, and now you inevitably agree that hypergamy is an obvious fact.. I never said it was anyone's fault btw, all I am saying is that for alot of men it can be quite depressing..

And even though I am a poor student currently, the path I've chosen guarantees a spot in the top 3% financially in my country.. So I'm not bitter because I am afraid I'll end up poor or something. I say this because people love to deflect everything men say by calling them poor losers.

I just think either you can love women, or you can understand them, you can't do both.


How was I condescending? I just pointed out that the point being made, that only wealthier men had a chance of breading was depressing for people on this site.

Where did I argue? where did I say it was ridiculous? where did I say that you thought it was someones fault? where did I suggest you were bitter?

You seem to have read things into what I put that are not there, let me clarify, I meant what I put.


There's no way I'm gonna play this game with you.

Either you have a poor understanding of the subtleties of communication.

Or you're doing what I like to call "childish manipulation"(first be annoying, and then act as if you didn't do anything)

Either way, I really dislike the way you're communicating, I'll leave it at that.


I have no idea why you have chosen to read my comments this way.



Maybe because you are a piggy! :pig:

That's pigism maybe.



XFilesGeek
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Jul 2010
Age: 40
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 6,031
Location: The Oort Cloud

22 Nov 2017, 4:05 pm

Closet Genious wrote:
XFilesGeek wrote:
Closet Genious wrote:
XFilesGeek wrote:
The_Face_of_Boo wrote:
Closet Genious wrote:
The_Face_of_Boo wrote:
Closet Genious wrote:
Cloakedwand72 wrote:
Closet Genious wrote:
But relationships have always been like that.


Why is that?



Historically, men have had 50% of having 0 children, or 50% of having 2 children. Women have had 100% of having 1 child.



Source?


https://tierneylab.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/08/20/is-there-anything-good-about-men-and-other-tricky-questions/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=2

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/09/040920063537.htm

https://psmag.com/environment/17-to-1-reproductive-success#.xen7f2esb



i have seen this one before:

Quote:
"It is a pattern that's built up over time. The norm through human evolution is for more women to have children than men," said Jason Wilder, a postdoctoral fellow in UA's Arizona Research Laboratories and lead author on the research articles. "There are men around who aren't able to have children, because they are being outcompeted by more successful males."

Co-author Michael Hammer, a research scientist in UA's Arizona Research Laboratories, said, "We may think of ourselves as a monogamous species, but we're coming from an evolutionary history that's probably slightly polygamous. If we're shifting toward monogamy, it's so recent it hasn't left an imprint on our genome."


and yet people here deny there’s an alpha-thing in humans lol.


Probably because when most people say "alpha" they're using it in an outlandish, cartoon-y version of what "alpha" actually is.

Secondly, as has already been demonstrated, it doesn't matter if "alphas" actually exist in human society because the people who want to believe it are going to invent it into existence.

So a fat guy who works at McDonald's has a girlfriend?

"Well, he has really white teeth, so, he's an alpha and it's hypergamy."

Ultimately, it's a belief rooted in emotion, not logic, and I've learned long ago that debating emotion-based belief with logic never works.


I've learned that too.

http://web.simmons.edu/~turnerg/MCC/Matechoice2PDF.pdf

I have yet to see any evidence to disprove hypergamy.


Probably because you'll always find a way to define a woman's actions as "hypergamy" no matter what the case may actually be.

"Yeah, she's dating a fat guy who works at McDonald's, but his teeth are really white, so it's hypergamy."

It's an emotionally comforting framework from which to view your failure to attract women; therefore, it's unlikely you'd ever accept any evidence to the contrary.


I could say the same to you. You are too locked in to consider any evidence, no matter how convincing.

I think it's laughably arrogant to say your own beliefs are purely rooted in logic. Especially since there is no evidence to disprove hypergamy, while there is some to prove it. And also just look around in the world we live in. Where are all the rich women marrying poor men? There should be loads of them if hypergamy didn't exist right? Purely a construction of emotion my ass.


It wouldn't matter.

Even if there were a bunch of rich women marrying poor men, you would find a reason to twist it into "hypergamy" anyway, which you've already admitted to.

And I'll consider anything within the realm of probability, but being convinced is a completely different matter.


_________________
"If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced."

-XFG (no longer a moderator)


Embla
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

Joined: 4 Oct 2017
Gender: Female
Posts: 490

22 Nov 2017, 5:37 pm

The_Face_of_Boo wrote:
Embla wrote:
When I got together with my boyfriend I was homeless (I mean literally sleeping on the streets). Neither of us owned any material values, nor are we particularly good looking (especially not me, 'cause you know.. Streets. It's not a charming look).
Two years later and we're still poor and ugly, living in a crappy caravan. No one wealthier has gotten in the way so far.

So, no. It's not all about material things, or good looks as mentioned above. Material wealth is of course very practical, but if that was all that mattered, there would only be wealthy couples in the world. Something we know is not the case.


-Pause- before you continue your nice love story.

Was he homeless too?


No, he was renting a room from someone but had to move out soon. That's why we both ended up in the caravan.

Worst love story ever.



The_Face_of_Boo
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Jun 2010
Age: 41
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 32,890
Location: Beirut, Lebanon.

22 Nov 2017, 6:55 pm

Embla wrote:
The_Face_of_Boo wrote:
Embla wrote:
When I got together with my boyfriend I was homeless (I mean literally sleeping on the streets). Neither of us owned any material values, nor are we particularly good looking (especially not me, 'cause you know.. Streets. It's not a charming look).
Two years later and we're still poor and ugly, living in a crappy caravan. No one wealthier has gotten in the way so far.

So, no. It's not all about material things, or good looks as mentioned above. Material wealth is of course very practical, but if that was all that mattered, there would only be wealthy couples in the world. Something we know is not the case.


-Pause- before you continue your nice love story.

Was he homeless too?


No, he was renting a room from someone but had to move out soon. That's why we both ended up in the caravan.

Worst love story ever.


But living in caravan isn’t homelessness - and can’t be for free either. Someone was paying.

How could you afford living in caravan? Or was it thanks to your bf that you could live in a caravan?

The whole point Closet is making is that women usually date up - meaning they usually pick a man of a better status who will improve their living situation.

If you were a homeless woman, and you dated a non-homeless man who can pay rent, then that’s dating up: because his financial/living situation was better than yours back then no matter how poor he was. Your situation imporved from homelessness to non-homelessness.

So I don’t understand how your story disapproves what he was saying... still sounds to me a typical woman dating up story, did I miss something?



kraftiekortie
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 87,510
Location: Queens, NYC

22 Nov 2017, 7:01 pm

I hope where you live has enough heat. It gets cold in Denmark.

You're an intelligent person. I bet he's quite bright, too. I bet you have nice conversations with each other.