is there a such thing as leagues?

Page 1 of 3 [ 35 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

minervx
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 Apr 2011
Age: 28
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,159
Location: United States

02 Nov 2011, 8:45 am

my opinion is: yes, but they are not objectively categorized.

i dont consider leagues based on only one factor. the two most common factors that people solely judge a person's "league" on, in my view, are: social standing, and of course, beauty.

but i consider personality and intelligence equally important.

there are plenty of really attractive people with rotten personalities and low intelligence. there are also many people who are beautiful in and out, as well as ugly in and out, but my point is not to justify failure by assuming an attractive person is stupid or uninteresting, but my philosophy is "that person is attractive, but do they have a personality to match it".

i disagree with people who say there aren't leagues and that everyone is equal. because some people work on themselves, really apply themselves and others don't.



Aspie_SE10
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 14 Jan 2011
Age: 49
Gender: Male
Posts: 462

02 Nov 2011, 8:54 am

This is interesting. As a mathematical sort I'm afraid that I tend to see the world in mathematical, logical terms.

Regrettably, an objective model of leagues would fail as it could not be validated and as such could not be subject to peer-review: with this in mind the likely failure point would be number of variables.



Grisha
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Oct 2009
Age: 52
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,336
Location: LA-ish

02 Nov 2011, 9:04 am

Although I categorically reject the notion of a "heirarchy", I think it's pretty clear that people tend to gravitate towards others with the same general characteristics in terms of beauty, intelligence, income, race/ethnicity, etc. I even saw a study which added bodyweight to this list.

Of course, like everything else, there are exceptions but I certainly think that someone who tries to associate with a group against these natural tendencies is fighting an uphill battle...



hyperlexian
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jul 2010
Age: 47
Gender: Female
Posts: 21,997
Location: with bucephalus

02 Nov 2011, 12:25 pm

Quote:
is there a such thing as leagues?

yes, for the people who believe in it.

no, for the people who do not believe in it.

i think it's just an empty way of unnecessarily categorising people, so i haven't ever bothered with that. if i went for someone who sees me as below their league, then it mattered to them but i have no way of knowing if that was why they rejected me. ultimately it didn't matter to me as i went for them anyways.

on the flip side i dated someone who saw me as above his league for some reason known only to him (he was the only person who ever outright said an ything about it). he was taken aback that i would go for him. ultimately it didn't matter to me as i went for him too.

it's kind of a crapshoot. when i was single, i would rather be rejected by multiple people who i was interested in instead of obtaining a sure thing with someone i was not interested in. yet clearly, the people who i was interested in were all over the place with their supposed "league".

i guess i don't really get the point of slotting people like that, so it doesn't exist for me.


_________________
on a break, so if you need assistance please contact another moderator from this list:
http://www.wrongplanet.net/postt237032.html


HopefulRomantic
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 11 Aug 2010
Age: 55
Gender: Female
Posts: 399
Location: Atlanta, GA

02 Nov 2011, 12:26 pm

Grisha wrote:
Although I categorically reject the notion of a "heirarchy", I think it's pretty clear that people tend to gravitate towards others with the same general characteristics in terms of beauty, intelligence, income, race/ethnicity, etc. I even saw a study which added bodyweight to this list.

Of course, like everything else, there are exceptions but I certainly think that someone who tries to associate with a group against these natural tendencies is fighting an uphill battle...



Agreed.



LexF
Snowy Owl
Snowy Owl

User avatar

Joined: 23 Oct 2011
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 165
Location: Crown Point, IN

02 Nov 2011, 12:37 pm

I see it less as "leagues" and more as "self-determined parameter limitations."

The key being "self-determined."



DialAForAwesome
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Oct 2011
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,189
Location: That place with the thing

02 Nov 2011, 12:44 pm

Yes and no. I see times where it definitely seems to be the case, and others where it doesn't. The funny thing is when you see people of two supposed different "leagues" together then something happens and they break up. That type of thing makes it seem like the "leagues" thing may actually be true. But who knows for sure?


_________________
I don't trust anyone because I'm cynical.
I'm cynical because I don't trust anyone.


The_Face_of_Boo
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Jun 2010
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 28,692
Location: Beirut, Lebanon.

02 Nov 2011, 1:33 pm

The leagues thing exist in all species, why wouldn't it exist in humans? And it exist in all society's aspects: friendship, work, classes ....why wouldn't it exist in relationships?

Those who deny the leagues thing are simply delusional idealists and out of touch with reality.



Grisha
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Oct 2009
Age: 52
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,336
Location: LA-ish

02 Nov 2011, 2:08 pm

The_Face_of_Boo wrote:
The leagues thing exist in all species, why wouldn't it exist in humans? And it exist in all society's aspects: friendship, work, classes ....why wouldn't it exist in relationships?

Those who deny the leagues thing are simply delusional idealists and out of touch with reality.


You are absolutely right, but the term "league" in my view implies a heirarchy which I believe has no rational basis for existence.

In other words, there is no "higher" or "lower", only "different"...



The_Face_of_Boo
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Jun 2010
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 28,692
Location: Beirut, Lebanon.

02 Nov 2011, 2:30 pm

Grisha wrote:
The_Face_of_Boo wrote:
The leagues thing exist in all species, why wouldn't it exist in humans? And it exist in all society's aspects: friendship, work, classes ....why wouldn't it exist in relationships?

Those who deny the leagues thing are simply delusional idealists and out of touch with reality.


You are absolutely right, but the term "league" in my view implies a heirarchy which I believe has no rational basis for existence.

In other words, there is no "higher" or "lower", only "different"...


lol as if hierarchy doesn't exist in a lot of other species. even in bonobos there's some form of hierarchy.



Surfman
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 1 Aug 2010
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,938
Location: Homeward bound

02 Nov 2011, 2:30 pm

Love conquers all

Should a mother/father have favourite children?

While drunk a friend shagged this heinous girl he met at a bar

Lowering ones standards could be a great thing for uptight aspies... focused in a black and white way on how one should love and who

I'm everyones type :oops:


a good attitude can break down someone's: 'only emos into Slash are for me' type thinking

mostly its just if someone sees you with them..... :wink: that the league thing applys

go backpacking around the world and kids just get drunk and shag anyone because nobody knows their mother



seoulgamer
Raven
Raven

User avatar

Joined: 16 Sep 2011
Age: 28
Gender: Male
Posts: 115
Location: Republic of Ireland

02 Nov 2011, 2:33 pm

Individual people with highly desirable characteristics (beauty, charismatic personality, status) may be more picky about the standards they expect of a mate. However, it would not be possible to create an objective hierarchy, as was already stated. Too difficult to obtain reliable information and account for variables in taste.

Either way, if someone appears to be "out of your league" then it's a reason not to get too optimistic, but not a reason not to try. If you'll dismiss others on the grounds that you're not good enough for them, then everyone would be "out of your league".


_________________
Let's find that exit they call paradise...


Grisha
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Oct 2009
Age: 52
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,336
Location: LA-ish

02 Nov 2011, 2:42 pm

The_Face_of_Boo wrote:
Grisha wrote:
The_Face_of_Boo wrote:
The leagues thing exist in all species, why wouldn't it exist in humans? And it exist in all society's aspects: friendship, work, classes ....why wouldn't it exist in relationships?

Those who deny the leagues thing are simply delusional idealists and out of touch with reality.


You are absolutely right, but the term "league" in my view implies a heirarchy which I believe has no rational basis for existence.

In other words, there is no "higher" or "lower", only "different"...


lol as if hierarchy doesn't exist in a lot of other species. even in bonobos there's some form of hierarchy.


The only thing that counts in nature is the number of viable offspring that survive to reproduce themselves. In bonobo society, the "alphas" have the "right" to produce the most offspring.

If you want to apply that same logic to human society, the "alphas" would be developing societies with the highest fertility rates. Everyone knows that those with the "highest" socioeconomic status in human society produce the fewest offspring overall - making them the "lowest"

So I suppose your basis for heirarchy is the vague notion of "status" or "wealth"?



The_Face_of_Boo
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Jun 2010
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 28,692
Location: Beirut, Lebanon.

02 Nov 2011, 2:56 pm

Grisha wrote:
The_Face_of_Boo wrote:
Grisha wrote:
The_Face_of_Boo wrote:
The leagues thing exist in all species, why wouldn't it exist in humans? And it exist in all society's aspects: friendship, work, classes ....why wouldn't it exist in relationships?

Those who deny the leagues thing are simply delusional idealists and out of touch with reality.


You are absolutely right, but the term "league" in my view implies a heirarchy which I believe has no rational basis for existence.

In other words, there is no "higher" or "lower", only "different"...


lol as if hierarchy doesn't exist in a lot of other species. even in bonobos there's some form of hierarchy.


The only thing that counts in nature is the number of viable offspring that survive to reproduce themselves. In bonobo society, the "alphas" have the "right" to produce the most offspring.

If you want to apply that same logic to human society, the "alphas" would be developing societies with the highest fertility rates. Everyone knows that those with the "highest" socioeconomic status in human society produce the fewest offspring overall - making them the "lowest"

So I suppose your basis for heirarchy is the vague notion of "status" or "wealth"?


You can't tell how many mistresses / one night-stands those "highest" socioeconomic humans usually have ;), surely much more than the lowest ones, but the birth pills changed everything.

And no, leagues is more complex than just status and wealth, look, intelligence, education , attractivness... are all about the leagues thing.


She/he's out of my league is an expression used when someone is out of the class of people you are expected to date. This includes an individual who is too attractive (or too wealthy, or too educated, or too genius...) for you, or a person who is too unattractive (or....or...) for you.


The best advice that can be given to any girl or guy seeking a relationship here is to determine to which league they belong, that's a very important starting point.



Janissy
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 May 2009
Age: 52
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,508
Location: x

02 Nov 2011, 3:23 pm

Grisha wrote:
[If you want to apply that same logic to human society, the "alphas" would be developing societies with the highest fertility rates. Everyone knows that those with the "highest" socioeconomic status in human society produce the fewest offspring overall - making them the "lowest"

So I suppose your basis for heirarchy is the vague notion of "status" or "wealth"?


"Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth"
-God


It is a human peculiarity that reproduction is controlled most rigidly in those of highest status and this is their genetic undoing. They don't inherit the earth. Royalty of some societies undid themselves by keeping the gene pool too small (I think the Egyptian pharoes even did brother/sister unions, such a bad idea). Of course they could undo that genetic damage by having international marriages to forge alliances (good idea). But then too many children made for some terrible fights over inheritance, sometimes involving murder. Meanwhile the peasants had loads of kids- many of whom died. Even so, I bet the DNA of the people who literally built the pyramids is more broadly scattered across the planet than the DNA of the people who commissioned those pyramids.

There are exceptions. I've heard Genghis Khan is singlehandedly responsible for an over-representation of modern Asian DNA, compared to others alive at that time. And I bet there are rock stars who have more children than they even know about because of groupies who wanted an enduring souvenier. But for the most part, being higher up the status ladder has correlated with having less of your DNA go forward into the future.

Back to the OP. Are leagues real? In a sense they are. There are some people who seem for whatever reason have a disproportionally large number of people who want to be with them. I can't make an objective list of qualities. I can only say that if somebody has a much larger number of people chasing after them than the number of people chasing after you, then they are out of your league by conventional measures. If a woman walks into the room and all heads swivel to see her but no heads swivel when you walk in, then that is a measure. But it's not a firm measure. They might just have swiveled because they all know her and have been awaiting her arrival (it's her birthday party, for example).