It seems to me that most hot women in the US are stuck up.

Post Reply New Topic

It was specific to a subset and the question of why aren't they on here. If you work at a call center as well you'll typically remember you're worst callers, people will gossip on that, and there is a lot of completely unneeded information that you get when you're on the phone with people - particularly if they're dealing with people in the background. Could his guess be correct? In some cases it wouldn't surprise me. Could it be overinflated a bit? Absolutely. The tendency of gold diggers to be computer geeks or particularly want much to do with this place does seem low by default though, its a much different system of psychology and outlook on life.

The thing that I realize that I even have a tendency to do - and I really try to stop myself - when women talk about 'nice guys' or 'jerks', I get it my all to not take it as an attack on all guys, for what ever instinctual reason it takes effort, but I realize that I'm not going to understand what they really mean if I let my mind go that way. Just like that I think we all need to be careful if we want to be able to sort out what people are saying and what they aren't and, really, if you ever see me go off on a female poster and you think I took something and personalized it too much - let me know.

yeah, well... the way i react also depends on what else people say on the forums. if they are normally respectful or at least not hateful, i ignore the occasional ranting or generalizations. but if i keep running into the same things from the same posters... i eventually don't ignore it anymore. i also go back and read peple's past posts before i post a reply. if there is a certain trend of a particular attitude, i will say something to them when they make a comment that i find unacceptable.

it is never okay to take entire groups of people and generalize about them, even if it is in reference to a smaller subset. that goes for hipsters, emos, blacks, muslims, americans, rich ladies, hot women, whatever.

Funny @hale_bopp.

To address a question posed earlier by @sallamandrina, here are a few statistics:

Women comprise 46% of the U.S. workforce;

75% of women eligible to work in the U.S. labor market do so.

So much for the gold-digger theory - equal numbers of men and women make up the U.S. workforce.

As to the "hot women are stuck up theory" (and no, I can't believe this discussion is happening again), here ya go: 64.1% of adult women age 20 or older in the U.S. are either overweight or obese. So doing the math on that, that leaves only 35.9% who are average weight - which I'm assuming is a prerequisite for "hotness." Of that 35.9% only a percentage of those women are in the 20 - 35 age range, and an even smaller percentage in the 20 - 35 age range would be considered "hot." There you have it, folks - young, "hot" women are much rarer than you think, and therefore competition for them is much greater than probably anyone believes. I guess they can have their pick of partners. Of course, those statistics also prove that most of the women you're going to encounter may be a little larger than Paris Hilton, and she may actually be quite attractive....and she may even be nice.

So, I hope board members on the other side of the oceans realize that the media doesn't accurately represent what the U.S. population is really like in terms of looks, ambitions, every day life, or pretty much anything. A lot of the views expressed on this board certainly don't do that.

I think the choice of stereotyping 'hot women' was the most annoying part of this thread, perhaps the highlight being that some things were said that made me wonder if it is possible for other cultures to have less of a mosh between genders (I haven't seen it but will be crossing the globe in a month - it'll be interesting to see if I note any differences then). It might sound strange but, I worry about buzz words and just how much power we give them in general also - hard to tell whether it does more good in keeping them out or creating a vicious circle by creating more of a sense of malintent than what's out there.

1 of triple post

Last edited by Bethie on 02 Dec 2010, 12:41 am, edited 1 time in total.

2 of triple post

Last edited by Bethie on 02 Dec 2010, 12:41 am, edited 1 time in total.

Oh yes, boys, that must be why you don't have success with the women you want-
because there's something wrong with THEIR character.

I doubt "hot" women are "snootier" than others-
it must wear on them, however,
to continuously have to ward off shallow men who only show interest in them because they're "hot".

Well, I think pretty much every woman who posted in this thread would agree with you, @techstep. It's incredibly annoying to read generalization after generalization about women in this forum that are intended to reduce women to commoditized stereotypes: hot, vapid, vicious, gold-digging whores who only want to use, abuse and discard the men they take for marks. Now even members on the other side of the world are reading this stuff and think that's actually what American women are like. Sorry - not even close.

rule 1: AS entitles you to any woman
rule 2: there is no rule 2
rule 3; no poofters
rule 4; women are always wrong
rule 5; no poofters
and rule 6; no poofters

@Kilroy, I believe you forgot Rule #7: absolutely no poofters.

I hope women aren't offended at me saying women like Pam Anderson are vapid or snobby. I personally don't care about women like that anyway - no physical attraction whatsoever. I'm just saying that for the benefit of the guys on this thread who have dreams about getting a woman like that.

And for hot/beautiful/whatever you want to call it women in general...they are in no way all shallow. Like I've said, if anything most of them are less visual than men. My main point is that if you are a below average and awkward man, that it's probably not going to happen. You can get a woman's attention by being the cute/awkward/shy guy...and you can get a woman's attention by being not-so-great looking but have a really social, outgoing, upbeat personality...but having universally sub-par looks and low self-esteem/awkwardness on top of it is the kiss of death...and their only standards should be that the girl likes them. That's why I don't have any problem with Toad or Nick. They just want companionship, not someone with big boobs to watch South Park with.

...seriously?

Devolving into posting pics of women and rating their body parts and features was one thing,
but now you're LITERALLY asserting that snobby has a "look"?

It's tempting to judge someone you've barely had any contact with (if at all), but let's not.

my bad! that's very important

(I always thought Pamela Anderson seemed rather nice, generally people who care a lot about animals are decent people, sometimes misguided but have a genuine care for something living)

I agree. She seems to have a wonderful heart, regardless of how some bozo makes up personality traits based on pictures.

anyone can look like a douchebag in a picture
anyone can look like an ass hole in a picture
anyone can look like a whore
etc
point, pictures prove nothing about personality