The Science of One-Night Stands

Post Reply New Topic

Nope, the articles dont say guys would have a one nighter with almost anyone, but with a wider range than women would. Instead of just 9-10 for women men might do 7-10. Thats not an everything.[/quote]



"Much lower standards" isn't all that far away from "would have them with almost any woman." Your witness.

I'll agree. Given the anonymity or even just the opportunity a lot of guys I know would probably have sex with a lot of the girls they encounter in bars, clubs etc. including ones they feel that are less attractive by them (say by 1-3 numbers on the 10 scale).

"Much lower standards" isn't all that far away from "would have them with almost any woman." Your witness.[/quote]

Much lower compared to what? You dont expect a 5 to catch a 10 do you? You obviously fail to even understand what you read so dont even bother arguing until you can

Yup.

Compared to women. That's what it says in the article.


Hard to say. the idea of labelling individuals as 5's and 10's rather breaks down when one considers the effects of compatibility and behaviour on the outcome. But I've had relationships with women who were beautiful in the conventional sense of the word, and I'm not really what you'd call handsome, from most angles, yet they were there for me.


Sorry, I didn't realise it was your thread.

as someone said in another thread
"May I suggest that the better-looking prospects have more to choose from and are thus less likely to approach anyone. The less attractive are, for lack of a better term, more "desperate" and more likely to approach people to get some lovin'."
im sure any guy that can get away with 10s will not settle for anything but.

yes, i had heard the same thing, and it was borne out by personal experience. when i was looking for FWB on OKC and other sites (my closest analogue), i had a much larger and more diverse group of men who were interested in me (wider age range, etc) than when i later changed my focus to LTR dating. it was a stark contrast, and i didn't expect it because i hadn't researched the phenomenon yet. the volume of messages i received fell by about 90%, and the demographics were entirely different (and narrower).

it was different here on WP for example, but on OKC this was the contrast...

men interested in FWB:

-age range 18 to 70
-mostly single/never-married/no children
-every type of physique
-jobs ranging from to Best Buy clerk to rap artist with private jet (guess which one was successful? HINT: i am not a golddigger)
-some faces that had facial proportions like male models or famous people (stereotypically goodlooking, maybe)
-willing to drive up to 7 hours to be together

men interested in LTR:

-age range 40+
-mostly divorced, often with children
-mostly average body types or overweight
-blue collar and white collar jobs
-average faces (i think)
-located close to me

there was nothing wrong with the men in the second group, but i didn't understand how men's preferences might change according to what they are looking for, which consequently affected my dating pool. the men i met up with from the first group weren't picked for reasons of status or anything (one guy stated outright that he did not understand why i was with him considering he is lower status than me ). it was weird to me because i didn't ever sleep with someone who was NOT suitable for an LTR, but many of the men evidently did.

this experience brought home the fact that when men are engaging on casual sex, they are probably not doing it with 10s in their own age group.

Forget about the status, are you saying that you too only picked the most good-looking when you were seeking for FWBs?

do you mean the most goodlooking according to popular culture? no. the last fellow i was with had muscular dystrophy, premature balding, and one of his front teeth was dead.

Understand something about promiscuous people, men or women.

If they sleep with a ton of people, unless you are really ugly, chances are that they've done much worse than you.

There was some study in the news last year showing that lesbian and bisexual women are more amenable to offers of casual sex (from women) than heterosexual women are from men. It was suggested that it might be an issue with presumed competence. Men always get their cookies. Women looking for something casual are looking for signs that you can do the work. lol. Some of that will be based on qualities that also might seem shallow.

Some of the male conversations I've been privvy to in my time would make H-Lex s**t a fist.

The handfull of times ive had sex i did no get my cookies. But she always did.

Or claimed she did anyway.. in the end that's all you really have to go on, her word...

To me, honestly, any one who would agree to have sex with someone within 2 sentences is an idiot. That's why there are venereal diseases.. Thanks.. But yes, all most all of my friends would go home with the most homely looking woman if they thought they would get some and never have to see her again. I've never been in the situation.. but honestly sex isn't important enough to me to settle for some one I don't find attractive or would consider suitable for a long term relationship.

umm no, if you knew anything about female physique youd know what an orgasm should be like. If not, then you almost deserve being faked

Meh.