Guys Go For Looks, Girls Go For Status?

[rei]

very cool
i wonder if you would also say not only do you often feel attracted to artistic types, but are they often skinny (or even scrawny) too?

i don't know why, i love a guy who doesn't have a bunch of bulky muscles. very aesthetically pleasing, i think it has to do with androgyny.

[Parthon]

cylon loves being misunderstood by everyone.

I do have one point to bring up:

Men, even conscious ones, really are concerned with the gap between what a woman says she wants and what she responds to and the attraction to just status. Of course, the regular response is to immediately dismiss the concern and reply with a dozen examples of how it's not true, or how it doesn't apply to all women, which doesn't actually address the concern at all.

So many men, maybe even the majority, really have the concern that women are only after status or money. Even when the woman says they want honesty, sincerity, and trust, the seem to be mistaken and forget to add "as well, as long as they are rich."

I don't care if the concern is accurate or not, but it's a real concern, as a concern. How would a man go about getting rid of this concern, given that dismissing it's not an option and the concern seems to be continually proved right?

[Gracestars]

Originally Posted by rei

very cool
i wonder if you would also say not only do you often feel attracted to artistic types, but are they often skinny (or even scrawny) too?

i don't know why, i love a guy who doesn't have a bunch of bulky muscles. very aesthetically pleasing, i think it has to do with androgyny.

LOL. Yes! Love a skinny man. Although as I said, I'm learning to branch out a little, to see the beauty in a bit love handles too

And yeah, adnrogyny works too. I don't mind a slightly fem man.

And are they often a bit wounded, a bit damaged? Oh dear... haha.

[Gracestars]

Originally Posted by Parthon

cylon loves being misunderstood by everyone.

I do have one point to bring up:

Men, even conscious ones, really are concerned with the gap between what a woman says she wants and what she responds to and the attraction to just status. Of course, the regular response is to immediately dismiss the concern and reply with a dozen examples of how it's not true, or how it doesn't apply to all women, which doesn't actually address the concern at all.

So many men, maybe even the majority, really have the concern that women are only after status or money. Even when the woman says they want honesty, sincerity, and trust, the seem to be mistaken and forget to add "as well, as long as they are rich."

I don't care if the concern is accurate or not, but it's a real concern, as a concern. How would a man go about getting rid of this concern, given that dismissing it's not an option and the concern seems to be continually proved right?

I agree that it is often proved right, it's just hard for me to respond, as this definition of status is not generally something I find attractive, and a lot of my girlfriends are the same. If this does not suffice, you'll have to survey other women to get your answer.

[Michael Chui]

Originally Posted by Parthon

I don't care if the concern is accurate or not, but it's a real concern, as a concern. How would a man go about getting rid of this concern, given that dismissing it's not an option and the concern seems to be continually proved right?

This is a forum where lots of people believe in LoA, right? I'd suggest trying that. Yes, it's a concern, but if a man is going to ignore evidence to the contrary, then maybe mysticism would help.

Really: how do you deal with any concern?

[rei]

Originally Posted by Gracestars

LOL. Yes! Love a skinny man. Although as I said, I'm learning to branch out a little, to see the beauty in a bit love handles too

And yeah, adnrogyny works too. I don't mind a slightly fem man.

And are they often a bit wounded, a bit damaged? Oh dear... haha.

LOL that is funny... and i have been branching out too... i have my 'type' for aesthetics and chemistry, and then i branch out for anything that might involve commitment, and always hold out for someone all artistic and brooding-yet-optimistic (impossible?lol) for more than just the oohs and aahs of a spiritual connection.

lol at the wounded things... you know i can admit i am a recovering fixer. so of course my past mates were a bit wounded in one way or another. i have grown out of that to an extent, and will be doing enough helping clients help themselves in my professional world, so i'd rather not be with a 'project'.

BUT having said all of that, i am attracted to men who have strengthened their character and are not afraid to be themselves, so i guess at times that may have a bit of an emo vibe. oddly enough though, my taste in women (i'm bi at the very least) is entirely different - i am not generally attracted to damaged females.

[brendannz]

Originally Posted by cylon

They're leeches though, neither person in that relationship is probably feeling all that great. For every gold-digger there's someone who is fine with having their gold dug.

I should add that I think this guy was joking when he said that, he liked to joke around a lot, but maybe he was partially a gold-digger male, as well..

[brendannz]

[QUOTE=Rose of Cairo;440869]

Impossible. There is no picture of us online.

We're facebook friends remember? Although maybe that guy wasn't your boyfriend, not sure..

Mothering? Certainly not. Yes, I think he is a very mature and conscious person. Way more than I was at his age. Or I am the one who's childish. Anyway, I almost don't notice the age difference. Sometimes I just notice that in some things I have more experience. But that's not an issue.

That's interesting, was just curious, that's cool!

[brendannz]

Originally Posted by cylon

Allright what I said has devolved into simple household chores, which is not what I was saying. You don't make a man feel appreciated by JUST allowing him to open a jar lid.

I used to have these 2 chinese sisters living in the room downstairs from me, and they used to knock on my door to get me to open their jar lid, it was really weird.. lol

[Gracestars]

Originally Posted by rei

LOL that is funny... and i have been branching out too... i have my 'type' for aesthetics and chemistry, and then i branch out for anything that might involve commitment, and always hold out for someone all artistic and brooding-yet-optimistic (impossible?lol) for more than just the oohs and aahs of a spiritual connection.

lol at the wounded things... you know i can admit i am a recovering fixer. so of course my past mates were a bit wounded in one way or another. i have grown out of that to an extent, and will be doing enough helping clients help themselves in my professional world, so i'd rather not be with a 'project'.

BUT having said all of that, i am attracted to men who have strengthened their character and are not afraid to be themselves, so i guess at times that may have a bit of an emo vibe. oddly enough though, my taste in women (i'm bi at the very least) is entirely different - i am not generally attracted to damaged females.

That's really interesting, rei. My broke dreamer said to me oneday: "You want a man you can take care of spiritually and you want to be taken care of physically." I thought that was pretty insightful on his part. Having said that, part of the reason I am taking time out of social work is because I need a break from dealing with other people's problems. I'd like not to have to rescue anyone, but then maybe that's what I'm good at.

[brendannz]

Originally Posted by Parthon

Men, even conscious ones, really are concerned with the gap between what a woman says she wants and what she responds to and the attraction to just status. Of course, the regular response is to immediately dismiss the concern and reply with a dozen examples of how it's not true, or how it doesn't apply to all women, which doesn't actually address the concern at all.

So many men, maybe even the majority, really have the concern that women are only after status or money. Even when the woman says they want honesty, sincerity, and trust, the seem to be mistaken and forget to add "as well, as long as they are rich."

i've seen T-shirts saying "If you're rich I'm single" I'm sure it's just a joke, the equivilent of "sorry girls I only date models" so you can see where the mentality comes from.

I know of guys leaving their business card on a woman's windscreen. Creepy approach, but you can see he perceives what he does for a job, as his primary means of attraction. Something like that..

It's a matter of being comfortable with yourself vs your status or looks..

[rei]

Originally Posted by Gracestars

That's really interesting, rei. My broke dreamer said to me oneday: "You want a man you can take care of spiritually and you want to be taken care of physically." I thought that was pretty insightful on his part. Having said that, part of the reason I am taking time out of social work is because I need a break from dealing with other people's problems. I'd like not to have to rescue anyone, but then maybe that's what I'm good at.

i think what your spiritual hottie said is insightful as well. sounds very much like me and we seem to be coming from similar places...

maybe you are good at rescuing, and maybe you can use this time to focus on your own needs and wants and growth (to sort of rescue yourself, but that word is probably too strong)... many people in the 'helping professions' believe that type of thing is selfish, and that is not accurate. sometimes it's very hard for service-oriented people to focus on themselves... but those who do become better able to do the work with others, for many reasons.

i'd love to see one of your poems if you want to send a PM sometime

[cylon]

Originally Posted by Parthon

cylon loves being misunderstood by everyone.

I don't love it, half the people don't believe I mean what I say, and the other half think I'm really saying something else.

It is the wonder of me. I can't say I don't enjoy seeing people's reactions though.

[cylon]

Originally Posted by Parthon

Men, even conscious ones, really are concerned with the gap between what a woman says she wants and what she responds to and the attraction to just status. Of course, the regular response is to immediately dismiss the concern and reply with a dozen examples of how it's not true, or how it doesn't apply to all women, which doesn't actually address the concern at all.

I think something most people have in common is they want the same things... at a basic level. "The best of everything". No one wants someone who they perceive has serious flaws.

They come up with an idealized list of qualities they want in someone, but not realizing that some of those qualities are mutually exclusive.

[brendannz]

Not sure if anybody checked out the song. It's one of the crappier songs by this band, but I've seen the band 5 times, they're awesome.

Other songs worth checking out by them;

Stuck Between Stations,
Constructive Summer,
Your Little Hoodrat Friend,
Killer Parties,
Party Pit.

[marinik]

Originally Posted by James81

I never said that women don't know what they want. I just said that women don't understand what they respond to. Those are two separate things.

And I don't think that that has anything to do with levels of consciousness.

OMG! Go back to school! You have obviously no experience with real women.

[Michael Chui]

Originally Posted by cylon

No one wants someone who they perceive has serious flaws.

My intuition has been that people want someone who understands them, often by way of sharing flaws, and who is just a little bit incomprehensible to them. It is amazing how often disbelief goes hand in hand with young love, both positively and negatively.

A person who has themselves self-percieved serious flaws is a lot more willing to accept someone else with serious flaws.

[cylon]

Originally Posted by Michael Chui

A person who has themselves self-percieved serious flaws is a lot more willing to accept someone else with serious flaws.

That is very true. I'm not sure that's necessarily a good thing though.

[MidasGirl]

I think men who realize women do know what they want, and that women do understand what they want, are in happy loving and satisfied relationships. Cuz if you think they don't, you're gonna keep trying to give them what you think they want. And that never worked for anybody. "The five love languages" is a good book to help you love people the way they best respond to, not the way you want to love them. Works for both men and women.

I don't know about other women, but I respond best to authentic charm. = charisma, power, confidence, strong take charge energy, and a certain masculine sweetness I can't quite describe. Men with these traits just happen to also have some form of high societal status most of the time, and sometimes money.

[cylon]

Originally Posted by marinik

OMG! Go back to school! You have obviously no experience with real women.

One could say that opinion is the result of experience with real women.

[Michael Chui]

Originally Posted by cylon

That is very true. I'm not sure that's necessarily a good thing though.

Oh, definitely not. I was explaining why certain people attract, and why certain relationships last (and I don't mean they're the same thing, btw).

I'm not comfortable making a recommendation about relationships for people with self-perceived serious flaws. The most I would suggest is that they shouldn't look for one. What should a person who believes they're damaged goods do? My opinion would be for them to fix themselves first. That would be the whole, "Love yourself first," bit.

To go back a bit further in the conversation, I would also say that people don't come up with a list of qualities they want in someone else; they come up with a list they want in themselves, and then they go hunting for the perfect version of themselves.

I imagine you would disagree with that on the grounds of the gender gap, but I would instead suggest describing a quality in gender neutral terms and seeing if my statement still works. To go back to Victorian times, a gentleman might seek a lady with the nobility he seeks in himself, which manifests itself completely differently because of the gender gap: a noble male is expected to wear trousers, whereas a noble female is expected to be in a gown, but they are both descriptions of nobility.

I think it happens less as a person becomes less insecure, which commutes to an ease with themselves. They've already got most of the qualities they want, so they have fewer requirements to unconsciously demand; they're more flexible about who they can love; and they're more interested in and joyful about the differences that are there, even if those differences are perceived as flaws.

Originally Posted by MidasGirl

"The five love languages" is a good book to help you love people the way they best respond to, not the way you want to love them. Works for both men and women.

I also recommend this book.

[vartann]

women are attracted by men who stand out of the crowd
if you are an uber-******* you ll attract lots of women who love bastards
if you are an uber-intellectual you ll attract lots of women who love Culture

as simple as that


pace e salute

[cylon]

Originally Posted by Michael Chui

What should a person who believes they're damaged goods do? My opinion would be for them to fix themselves first. That would be the whole, "Love yourself first," bit.

I agree.

Originally Posted by Michael Chui

I imagine you would disagree with that on the grounds of the gender gap, but I would instead suggest describing a quality in gender neutral terms and seeing if my statement still works.

I don't think we're really disagreeing here. I said most people think of qualities they would like to have in another person... if in reality those are qualities they'd like to have themselves the end result seems to be the same. And I didn't say gender made a difference there.

Men and women are both humans, we have very similar desires. I just think those desires are expressed in unique ways, based on gender.

[Michael Chui]

Originally Posted by cylon

I agree.

To be quite honest, I was hoping you--or anyone--would have a better idea.

Originally Posted by cylon

I don't think we're really disagreeing here.

I know. I was anticipating that you'd disagree on grounds that I didn't think were relevant, so I decided to just run that down preemptively. Rhetorical skill I've never fully understood and am trying to use. I know that we still disagree on the gender thing, but talking about that always seems thoroughly toxic and unproductive.

[PerDev]

Dont you consider

Attraction (is align with TLP)
Positive
Intelligent
Creativity
Loving/Caring

Originally Posted by brendannz

Hey guys and girls,

Here's this song by the Hold Steady called Girls Like Status, that says "Guys Go For Looks, Girls Go For Status"

Here's the song, for fun;
YouTube - The Hold Steady - Girls Like Status [live]

Do you guys and girls think it's true?

[cylon]

Originally Posted by Michael Chui

To be quite honest, I was hoping you--or anyone--would have a better idea.



I know. I was anticipating that you'd disagree on grounds that I didn't think were relevant, so I decided to just run that down preemptively. Rhetorical skill I've never fully understood and am trying to use. I know that we still disagree on the gender thing, but talking about that always seems thoroughly toxic and unproductive.

Michael, you may want to consider asking questions in a slightly less brusk manner. I think you might be more pleased with your responses.

[Holistic Star]

Originally Posted by Parthon

cylon loves being misunderstood by everyone.

I do have one point to bring up:

Men, even conscious ones, really are concerned with the gap between what a woman says she wants and what she responds to and the attraction to just status. Of course, the regular response is to immediately dismiss the concern and reply with a dozen examples of how it's not true, or how it doesn't apply to all women, which doesn't actually address the concern at all.

So many men, maybe even the majority, really have the concern that women are only after status or money. Even when the woman says they want honesty, sincerity, and trust, the seem to be mistaken and forget to add "as well, as long as they are rich."

I don't care if the concern is accurate or not, but it's a real concern, as a concern. How would a man go about getting rid of this concern, given that dismissing it's not an option and the concern seems to be continually proved right?

When I was a teenager my dad gave me some advice about dating that has stuck with me forever. At the time I was of the opinion that anyone with money was a fake / phoney / shallow / insincere etc so I was dragging home a series of homeless guys and drop-outs that I was dating because in my mind they were 'more real'.

Anyway, what my dad said was, 'Never marry for money. But don't marry where there isn't any either.'

At the time I didn't listen, but a few years later after 3 years with a guy where we were broke and I mean really broke all the time and he refused to work and spent all the money I earned on fags and booze and gambled the rest away, then berated me for being materialistic when i worried about paying the rent on our damp, mouldy one room flat, I finally got what my dad meant.

Lack of prospects makes things miserable. When you are cold and hungry and worried about having a roof over your head life is hard.

So I listened to my dad. I didn't marry for money, but I didn't marry someone who wanted to live his life on benefits either.

[Rose of Cairo]

Originally Posted by Parthon

Men, even conscious ones, really are concerned with the gap between what a woman says she wants and what she responds to and the attraction to just status. (...)

I don't care if the concern is accurate or not, but it's a real concern, as a concern. How would a man go about getting rid of this concern, given that dismissing it's not an option and the concern seems to be continually proved right?

Hmmm.... you get to see what you believe in. So if you firmly believe it, of course you'll get it continually proven right. One solution would be to change your focus and let go of the belief.

I don't know what else to tell you, since as far as I see about myself and the girls around me, this is NOT proven right. So this is a bit alien to me.

Are you sure it's "just status" they're attracted to? Or is it the qualities behind the status?

Something else comes to mind: when we are asked what we want in men, what we say generally is only the sine qua non conditions, I mean, the conditions that if they weren't there, nothing would be possible. For example, some girls will say "nice guy, treats me well, handsome, good father and enough money to support a family". I would say "has a message and expresses it, has values and lives by them, takes 100% responsibility, etc.".

Maybe we only talk about the things that we pay special attention to. Does it mean that these are the only criteria? No! It's just that those other, unspoken things, that happen more on the energetic/subconscious level, well... that's so difficult to explain!

Did I enter a relationship with my boyfriend because he has a message, values, takes responsibility, etc? No! It takes a lot more to be attracted to a man. But how to explain it? I cannot say to you "It is this particular energy that he has and that I find so incredibly charming and cute, the way he touches me, the frequency of his emails and the greetings he uses, and what I feel when I look at him, you know...". Well, I can say that, but it won't be very informative to you.

When guys (mistakenly!) believe that what they are told are the only criteria, then I get that they could get confused. Like, hey, I have all that, why don't you want me?! But the thing is, it's not the only criteria, it's usually just the potential red flags. If you have all of the required characteristics, it just means you passed selection level I. But there's still selection level II.

Maybe that's on this level II that high-status men are more attractive. I believe it's because of their qualities behind the status, not the status itself. It's difficult to analyze though, because it happens at the level of lots of subtle details.

I mean, let's be honest. It's the same with men! When men say that they want a "kind, sweet, attractive and smart girl that they can laugh with", does it mean they'd take ANY kind, sweet, attractive and smart girl that they can laugh with? No! Different kind, sweet, attractive and smart girls that they can laugh with will make them feel differently. They will want some of them. And for some others, they will NOT feel attracted to them, even if on paper the girl is exactly what they're looking for. What makes the difference, will they talk about that? No. Maybe it's too subtle to be described. Or maybe they don't even know it themselves. Aahhh, men don't know what they really respond to!

[Rose of Cairo]

Originally Posted by Holistic Star

At the time I didn't listen, but a few years later after 3 years with a guy where we were broke and I mean really broke all the time and he refused to work and spent all the money I earned on fags and booze and gambled the rest away, then berated me for being materialistic when i worried about paying the rent on our damp, mouldy one room flat, I finally got what my dad meant.

But it's not the brokenness itself that made you leave. It was the qualities (if I can call it like that!) of the guy. One of their manifestations was the lack of money. Other manifestations were probably big relationship issues. This had nothing to do with status or not status!

This reminds me that I forgot to mention selection level 0. A guy who's broke or has no status sometimes is broke or has no status because he's unable to take responsibility for himself, or unable to create any value, or he has a scarcity mindset, or low self-esteem, or he thinks he is a loser, or he lacks self-confidence, etc. Do we want to be in a relationship with such guys? Duh, no! This is just a recipe for lots of future relationship trouble.

Is it about the money or status? Duh, no! It's because of the qualities of the guys behind it. The presence or absence of money or status is just a physical manifestation of it. There will be others as well, and we don't want those!

Do we talk about this? Well, no. That's "duh".

[Coffeesmurf]

Actually, come to think about it - social status has definitely been a factor in my own search for a partner these past months. My ex-girlfriend didn't have a job (she had been awarded disability) and this time around I've consciously looked for someone with a certain degree of education and a good job - the benefit of online dating being that you can check these things out beforehand

Not because I want to be supported Just because I want someone who's capable of taking care of themselves and with the monetary means to join me in exotic travels and other activities.