Ladder Theory -- an accurate way to explain male/female relationships?

[wayne]

What do you all think about this theory: The Ladder Theory

My quick summary:

1. All men want is to have sex with women and that's really the only reason men are friends with women.
2. Women put men into one of two categories either "friends that will not get any" and "friends that have a potential to get some."

from this it postulates:
1. Some men are in the "friends only ladder" and are being used, but just don't know it, ladder theorists call this type "intellectual whores"
2. Its pretty much impossible to "jump ladders" i.e. go from the "friends only" category to the other"

etc. there is more to it but thats what I got out of it. When I read it (a couple years ago) it really made sense to me. I always think about it when I hear a girl say to a guy "were friends." And it made me realize how much of an IW (intellectual whore) I was being in some situations, and I pretty much immediately cut those relationships out of my life.

I think this theory -does- work, but most of its presumptions are on a lower consciousness level and therefor applies to those who operate in that realm, which, sadly, is most.

What do you all think?

[Rockchick26]

I am glad you posted this because i saw something like this (although not this exact one) but it was called the same thing. and i thought parts of it were true and not other parts. I cannot believe that 50% of women think money is the most important!! I dont know any woman who married or even dated a man just for his money. And a man with money is almost a turn off to me because they think theyre hot **** because of it,and conceitedness is the worst trait a man can have. I would NEVER marry a man for his money. I wouldnt even marry a man for his looks.

And i have guy friends that DO NOT want to have sex with me,because a few of them i've wanted to be with and they said they didnt like me that way. Almost every guy i've liked has said that LOL So i dont think this chart is accurate.

[votoshka]

I haven't actually read much from the link yet, but I have to say the theories mentioned get my hackles up.

It sort of implies (at least to me) that to men, women aren't worth anything but sex! We aren't worth spending time with just to have fun, to share interests with, to talk to or whatever.

And, errm, I'd have to say that most guys don't want to have sex with all women, and most guys don't want to have sex with me. Does that mean I'm not a worthwhile person to 99.9% of the male population?

One thing on the site he said was: "And why does everyone always say I'm bitter just because 99.999% of chicks are bitches?" This pretty much reinforces my feelings of his so-called theory

[fitx3]

Wow! I just read his theory and I have to say that looking back, all my guy "friends" really did want more than just friendship from me. I could sense it. I never had 2 ladders though, all men started out on one ladder and would get "kicked in the head" depending on whether I felt they weren't worthy of moving up on it. Then all men under the guy on the top would be asked to step off the ladder! That was entertaining reading though.

[Fullcrum]

This theory may or may not be true, but is irrelevant either way.

Irrelevant.

What would you wish to achieve with knowing such a theory?

[blazer1]

I dont know how old you all are but consider this:

Men can produce sperm constantly, we have plenty of it. Women have fewer eggs than sperm, and they cannot become impregnated everyday.

Therefore women are more selective on which sperm they choose to accept.

In the lower animal kingdom, the male species primary goal is to have sex with as many women as possible. Human kind is no different.

So when males are friends with females, YES we do want to have sex with them. BUT women, may or may not, they like to have friends and gossip!

And Yes, male friends are friends with each other because it MAY lead them to having sex with other females. Why do you suppose males would like to hang out with other 'cool' men? 'Cool' men have prettier women right?


I have figured women like three things in men:
1) physical strength
2) intellect
3) money.

And these attributes of attractiveness came in that same order.

When we were primal beings, physical strength was important to supply food and safety. Pro-survival - therefore attractive.

Intellect came about when we became self-realised, grew imaginations and the such.

Money is only a recent thing. Money simply means your likely hood of survival is increased proportionally to your cash. Again attractive because pro-survival.


When you sit down and really contemplate what we are ... it is quite sad and plain. But I feel its important to realise why we do what we do.

[Freelancer]

Originally Posted by blazer1

I dont know how old you all are but consider this:

Men can produce sperm constantly, we have plenty of it. Women have fewer eggs than sperm, and they cannot become impregnated everyday.

Therefore women are more selective on which sperm they choose to accept.

In the lower animal kingdom, the male species primary goal is to have sex with as many women as possible. Human kind is no different.

So when males are friends with females, YES we do want to have sex with them. BUT women, may or may not, they like to have friends and gossip!

And Yes, male friends are friends with each other because it MAY lead them to having sex with other females. Why do you suppose males would like to hang out with other 'cool' men? 'Cool' men have prettier women right?


I have figured women like three things in men:
1) physical strength
2) intellect
3) money.

And these attributes of attractiveness came in that same order.

When we were primal beings, physical strength was important to supply food and safety. Pro-survival - therefore attractive.

Intellect came about when we became self-realised, grew imaginations and the such.

Money is only a recent thing. Money simply means your likely hood of survival is increased proportionally to your cash. Again attractive because pro-survival.


When you sit down and really contemplate what we are ... it is quite sad and plain. But I feel its important to realise why we do what we do.

hahah lol. Some people have ready ****ed up views of man-women.

I agree with the first part, sure men like to have sex with many women. Thats doesn't mean though that women don't particulairy care for sex lol. Just listen to them scream, I'd say women want it more then men.

The thing is women usually screen for personality NOT looks/money/intellect. If you want to come with the evolution argument fine.

Here we go lets launch right into it.

Suppose you are a male caveman.
You live in a cave (duh).
You hunt for food.
You have very little personal stuff around.
No money
No cars

Now what will determine your overal chance of survival?
Is it really physical strength?
Money?
Intellect?
Well money wasn't around back then, you can definitley scrap this of the list. On top of that in our current age a stand alone mother can survive (with trouble, you won't die though which is sadly the only thing that matters for evolution) without a father even. The ability to provide in terms of physical stuff is entirely unimportant these days.

Physical strength is up next, this is a strong contender for sure (or so it appears). I mean more strength means more food yes? More strength means other males will submit right?
Well yeah, partially. It can definitley help.

We have to ask though what effects women in particular more, the amount of food a male brings in or the social position in a tribe?
You see in those times most males lived in small tribes. In these tribes resources are shared, the males with the highest social status get the first pick blah blah. Picking order and everything.

At that point the most important thing for women becomes a males social status. With it the odds of survival for him and his children increases dramatically. After all if the father can get to the top socially speaking then the odds that the children have the same characteristics increases.

So whats needed to climb a social ladder?
I doubt that the biggest factor is money, good looks (no mirrors back then) or physical strength.

I'd argue a males personality determines there faith more then anything.

Suppose you have 3 caveman males sitting around a fire. How is a women supposed to know who's the top guy around?
They are all equally dirty.
Could it be how other caveman react to him?
Could it be the way he holds himself?
Could it be all the little subcommunications he puts out?

I'd say yes to all 3.

A man's attractiveness is mostly based on his personality. The way he acts influences the males around him. If he's the first to act in a unfamiliar situation and the rest follow his leads (he's the leader of the pack). If he has confidence in his ability. If he has authority amongst his fellow caveman/women. Then he's going to be attractive to females.



Meh women are a lot less swallow then us men. They go for depth, not looks, money or physical strength. The thing is that the guys with money, looks or physical strength often give themselves permission to behave like REAL men. Cause and effect gets mixed up. Nasty situation.

This should pretty much invalidate the entire ladder theory lol.


Now I'm of to sunny spain, you guys have fun tearing this post apart. Fullcrum, defend my position. I know you know what I mean lol.

[Tigerlilly]

Originally Posted by blazer1

I have figured women like three things in men:
1) physical strength
2) intellect
3) money.

Do we? Why didn't anyone tell me about that earlier???



As far as the ladder theory goes, I have a hard time believing that EVERY guy who ever was friends with me had a secret sex agenda. I find that idea rather funny. I mean, it happens, but EVERY guy?

[Rockchick26]

Originally Posted by Fullcrum

This theory may or may not be true, but is irrelevant either way.

Irrelevant.

What would you wish to achieve with knowing such a theory?

Well like anything else in life,the better you understand it,the easier it becomes to deal with/experience,whatever. I know if i knew how men were thinking,it would sure make dating them a lot easier!

[pianoperformer]

Originally Posted by Rockchick26

I know if i knew how men were thinking,it would sure make dating them a lot easier!

We wish we knew what you were thinking, too.

[Rockchick26]

Originally Posted by blazer1

I dont know how old you all are but consider this:

Men can produce sperm constantly, we have plenty of it. Women have fewer eggs than sperm, and they cannot become impregnated everyday.

Therefore women are more selective on which sperm they choose to accept.

In the lower animal kingdom, the male species primary goal is to have sex with as many women as possible. Human kind is no different.

I totally agree with this,which is about the only thing i agree with in your post LOL

So when males are friends with females, YES we do want to have sex with them.

Well then explain why every single male friend i've ever had has wanted NOTHING to do with me,sexually? And someone else on here said the same thing. Are you saying that if you were friends with a disgusting woman who was so gross you could hardly look at her,that you'd still wanna have sex with her? Not saying i look like that,but come on,NOT every man would have sex with ANY woman he is friends with. Its a FACT. I am proof of it.

BUT women, may or may not, they like to have friends and gossip!

What does gossip have to do with any of this? And not all women like tlo gossip,i don't!

And Yes, male friends are friends with each other because it MAY lead them to having sex with other females. Why do you suppose males would like to hang out with other 'cool' men? 'Cool' men have prettier women right?

lmao This is ridiculous. If that were true then married men would have no need for male friends. All of my male friends had other male friends and they didnt share their women.

I have figured women like three things in men:
1) physical strength
2) intellect
3) money.

And these attributes of attractiveness came in that same order.

UGH!! I have next to zero interest in any of those! What i find myself attracted to in men is,1)looks (its the first thing you notice,you have to agree!) 2)personality and 3)common interests

[pianoperformer]

Blazer1, wait, so men only hang out with other men because of the women those men know?

Why doesn't anyone tell me these things. Here I thought it was because we had common interests. How naive of me.

Seriously, that's ridiculous.

[{aspiring_to_clarity}]

Surprise, surprise, I think the theory in the OP is kind of ridiculous. For one, I share Rockchick's experience of having male friends who definitely did not want to sleep with me. Two, even if some of them did I don't see why we can't be friends anyway. Please tell me why that should be so. I've been attracted to people before who did not reciprocate and we were still able to have a good friendship. Are you really saying men have nothing more than sex on the brain?

It seems that men like this don't have a very high opinion of women, but they seem to have a pretty low opinion of other men too. Tell me guys, am I really worthless to you if I won't "put out?" It would be nice to know.

I think the quote from the article that votoshka posted says pretty much all I need to know about the guy who posits this theory.

@ Freelancer - nice post (I bet you can't believe I just said that).

[Fullcrum]

I'd say the theory is false.

I'm a sex addict, in a funny way; any male friend of me knows that.

And yet I make friends with girls and often just want to be friends; no sex. I love the good feeling in the body that comes from a simple discussion. A fun discussion, or a deep intellectual one, or a spiritual one, or anything where there is an analysis of the minutiae of detail and the exchange of ideas. Same with guys - it's mutual bonding.

Some of the details with which you derive the theory might seem true, but in effect, they are pointless to focus on.

Rockchick, I already knew that through better understanding, we can better deal with a situation. This is not one of those cases. This is like analyzing the function of an earthworm to better feed hungry kids in Africa. It might have some effect, but it's not important to focus on. In a similar fashion that, when the fight-or-flight response is kicked off, nonessential functions like digestion are stopped, when dealing with this kind of stuff, non-essential thoughts will hamper whatever you are trying to achieve, rather than incrasing your understanding of the situation.

My position is something like what freelancer said, it's in the subcommunication and the energy. How do we know? Well, RSD turned us on, but basically experience. I believe that truth and understanding is important, but even if what you were saying is true, it is unimportant to focus on.

[blazer1]

Freelancer - read my post again ... you regurgitated some of the things i wrote using more words than necessary.

And to the girls ... intellect, physicality and money are fairy broad attributes ... what are you attracted to?

[Rockchick26]

Originally Posted by Fullcrum

Rockchick, I already knew that through better understanding, we can better deal with a situation. This is not one of those cases. This is like analyzing the function of an earthworm to better feed hungry kids in Africa. It might have some effect, but it's not important to focus on.

How can learning about men and women's relationships not be relevant for men and women in relationships ? LOL Its EXACTLY the same thing. The only thing that nullifies this for me is that this is someone's theory,not a fact. So therefore it doesnt hold water. but i am saying it would be nice to know for sure exactly what guys wanted from me and how they felt about me,and vice versa. Thats what this laddy theory is all about except that its just somebody's opinion.

[Fullcrum]

Well, if you want my take, as a male:

The first thing we notice generally is a girl's looks and her energy. Looks are quite predominant for us on first approach but energy attracts us, too. I know a couple women who are heavy but are attractive. Something just draws me to them; I think it's their positive outlook on life and the "go-getter", a person who knows what they want and can get it. I believe that the vast majority of men notice looks first; it's something I notice in the people around me. Nothing wrong with that - looks can be improved, bodies can be made fit, etc.

If I'm gonna spend a lot of time with ya I enjoy deep discussions on intellectual things, as well as random horsing around. That's probably more personal to me than all men in general as I just enjoy that stuff in general and your sex really doesn't matter.

In chemistry terms I like bubbly women who are attractive. Does that answer your question?

[Spartan]

Unless a woman only considers being friends with men that she finds physically attractive, obviously she will have some friends that she doesn't want to have sex with. The same goes for men.

The ladder theory says men specifically discriminate friendship based on physical attraction, whereas women don't. Is this true? I think not, since I myself have been friends with women that I wasn't physically attracted to.

So unless I was somehow deluding myself that these women were my friends, I don't see how the ladder theory can be true?

[blazer1]

Originally Posted by pianoperformer

Blazer1, wait, so men only hang out with other men because of the women those men know?

Why doesn't anyone tell me these things. Here I thought it was because we had common interests. How naive of me.

Seriously, that's ridiculous.

Because you kind of offended me, calling my thoughts ridiculous, my ego is urged to respond to you.

I think you need to take a good and hard look at yourself, and the things you do, and question WHY you do the things you do.

Isn't the primary purpose in life to reproduce? (there's a helpful hint).

[Fullcrum]

Money don't do sh*t for attracting girls.

Your argument is logical enough, but simply proven false through experience. Same with physical strength, and looks, and all that other social stuff.

If you want a biological reason why I make friends with "cool" guys (and I have other "non-cool" friends, too) is because they are fun, and when we are fun together we build endorphins due to laughing and enjoying ourselves, and since it creates good feelings in the body, there is a mutual desire to spend time together. Hence friends. It's little to do with the logical motive of having sex with their girl friends (not girlfriends), and definitely not a core motivation.

What lead you to conclusions like these? Just curious. I would take a long hard look at yourself to fine out how you reached these thoughts.

Oh wait, taking a long hard look at yourself is evolutionarily selected against, as it just wastes mental energy when you could be hunting for food or having sex. My bad.

[Dannyboy1]

Originally Posted by Rockchick26

I am glad you posted this because i saw something like this (although not this exact one) but it was called the same thing. and i thought parts of it were true and not other parts. I cannot believe that 50% of women think money is the most important!! I dont know any woman who married or even dated a man just for his money. And a man with money is almost a turn off to me because they think theyre hot **** because of it,and conceitedness is the worst trait a man can have. I would NEVER marry a man for his money. I wouldnt even marry a man for his looks.

And i have guy friends that DO NOT want to have sex with me,because a few of them i've wanted to be with and they said they didnt like me that way. Almost every guy i've liked has said that LOL So i dont think this chart is accurate.

I agree about the men wanting only sex is wrong. That's a juvenile way to think and not true with a real man. I do believe the money thing, though. When I was totally broke, I had women who dated me because they liked me, but eventually, they would decide I wasn't going to be Donald Trump and changed their mind. Women want security and they think that if a guy has no money, he's too immature to be marriage material.

[Dannyboy1]

Originally Posted by wayne

What do you all think about this theory: The Ladder Theory

My quick summary:

1. All men want is to have sex with women and that's really the only reason men are friends with women.
2. Women put men into one of two categories either "friends that will not get any" and "friends that have a potential to get some."

from this it postulates:
1. Some men are in the "friends only ladder" and are being used, but just don't know it, ladder theorists call this type "intellectual whores"
2. Its pretty much impossible to "jump ladders" i.e. go from the "friends only" category to the other"

etc. there is more to it but thats what I got out of it. When I read it (a couple years ago) it really made sense to me. I always think about it when I hear a girl say to a guy "were friends." And it made me realize how much of an IW (intellectual whore) I was being in some situations, and I pretty much immediately cut those relationships out of my life.

I think this theory -does- work, but most of its presumptions are on a lower consciousness level and therefor applies to those who operate in that realm, which, sadly, is most.

What do you all think?

Not the men only want sex thing. That sound more like a boy in high school. Women who have guy friends who like them more than friends are rampant. When this type of women let's the friend buy them stuff and do things for them all the time and tell themselves it's okay because the friend wants to do it are idiots, plain and simple. They are users and disgusting human beings. Deep down they know it's wrong, but they love the attention. It's a disfunctional relationship and all they do is take take take. That being said, the guy in this situation is an idiot and should cut the relationship off. It's never going to happen, no matter how much you believe it. Move on with your life without the parasite. Obviously, I've been through this. Luckly, I wised up and moved on. The right woman is the one you don't have to constantly prove yourself to. One that loves you for everything you are and do. Like my wife. She's an angel.

[{aspiring_to_clarity}]

Originally Posted by Dannyboy1

I agree about the men wanting only sex is wrong. That's a juvenile way to think and not true with a real man. I do believe the money thing, though. When I was totally broke, I had women who dated me because they liked me, but eventually, they would decide I wasn't going to be Donald Trump and changed their mind. Women want security and they think that if a guy has no money, he's too immature to be marriage material.

I would say that is partly true. I know I don't want to support a grown man for the rest of my life*. However, it doesn't mean I am looking for Donald Trump either. I don't think that I need a guy to provide me with security since I've done that pretty well for myself. I just want him to be amenable to hard work and supporting himself as well as contributing to a shared household.

*This is not to say that I would have a problem with a stay-at-home-dad situation if he's actually taking good care of the kids and the house.

[Dannyboy1]

Originally Posted by {aspiring_to_clarity}

I would say that is partly true. I know I don't want to support a grown man for the rest of my life*. However, it doesn't mean I am looking for Donald Trump either. I don't think that I need a guy to provide me with security since I've done that pretty well for myself. I just want him to be amenable to hard work and supporting himself as well as contributing to a shared household.

*This is not to say that I would have a problem with a stay-at-home-dad situation if he's actually taking good care of the kids and the house.

you are more enlightened than many women. I do think the statistic is accurate, though. Many women have drawn a line about finances with men because they feel pressure to find a husband.

[{aspiring_to_clarity}]

Originally Posted by Dannyboy1

you are more enlightened than many women. I do think the statistic is accurate, though. Many women have drawn a line about finances with men because they feel pressure to find a husband.

I think many women feel it's a status symbol. That wealth equates to desirablity. They have also maybe been brought up with the belief that the man is the provider and so if he's not providing he's not a man. For me, both of my parents had to work to provide what they wanted for themselves and us children.

I think it all comes down to what you want. There are a lot of guys who want a stay at home wife/mom and for them I think it's very important to realize what that entails as far as their contribution and to work very diligently. For others, they want someone who will work and contribute equally, and it would probably be easier if they don't try to date someone who wants a provider/security.

[Fullcrum]

You don't need money to get girls.

Marriage might be a different thing, I cannot speak from experience. I think this is what you guys are talking about now.

But I can tell you money is basically useless with having girlfriends in general.

[{aspiring_to_clarity}]

Originally Posted by Fullcrum

You don't need money to get girls.

Marriage might be a different thing, I cannot speak from experience. I think this is what you guys are talking about now.

But I can tell you money is basically useless with having girlfriends in general.

I think there are a lot of girls for whom money is necessary to even date them. And yes, a living together or married arrangement is a whole other story.

I don't think it's one way or the other -- some are looking for money and some aren't. Some don't know what they want at all.

[Dannyboy1]

Originally Posted by Fullcrum

You don't need money to get girls.

Marriage might be a different thing, I cannot speak from experience. I think this is what you guys are talking about now.

But I can tell you money is basically useless with having girlfriends in general.

Are we talking one night stands or girlfriends? Because with girlfriends, money is definitely an asset. Very few women will pay for you all the time.

[{aspiring_to_clarity}]

Originally Posted by Dannyboy1

Very few women will pay for you all the time.

And rightly so.

Note: this goes both ways.

[Fullcrum]

ONS - definitely not.

Girlfriends - It can, but I've heard of women leaving millionaires to live with poorer boyfriends because they give them a better experience emotionally.

I think that's what I'm getting at.