Women only find 20% of men attractive, meanwhile men only find women attractive from ages 16-25 (less than 20% of all women). Isn't it safe to say both genders are shallow and picky?

atlantic68 · 2014-09-23T21:12:28+00:00

tons of guys would fuck tons of older ladies. lots would even prefer it

bhormaci · 2014-09-23T21:09:30+00:00

This is misleading, the 80/20 rule refers to sexual encounters, and for sex men are definitely attracted to a wide variety of women of all ages...it's when you start to involve commitment into the equation where their view (quite rightly) narrows.

"Shallow" has a negative connotation...the whole idea of TRP is that sexual strategy is amoral...women aren't "wrong" for only wanting to have sex with the top 20% of men, any more than men are "wrong" for wanting to have sex with a wider variety of women than they are willing to commit to.

SpaceWhiskey · 2014-09-23T20:58:46+00:00

My surprise about this whole issue is that there are guys out there who are shocked that women are capable of being as shallow as they are.

drok007 · 2014-09-23T22:13:16+00:00

This seems like a negative way to view it. Instead of shallow and picky, why not say selective? Hypergamy isn't a bad thing, TRP believes it's a natural tendency. Same thing could be said about wanting to be with youthful energetic people.

exit_sandman · 2014-09-23T22:02:29+00:00

You're observations are mostly astute and you would actually be hard-pressed to find a redpiller who disagrees with your assessment about the position of TRP on thos.

Two caveats, however.

as opposed to most men, women find themselves in that "desired group" at one point in their lives. Now of course that's a generalization because not every woman is in that desired group; not every woman falls out of that group once she approaches 30, and not every woman is less appealing over the age of 25 than under it because some actually do get more interesting with age. But the bottom line is that most women at least experience the feeling of being desireable, i.e. of being sexually privileged, and, considering that at that age it's the men who bear the brunt of romancing and dating efforts, of being romantically privileged as well (unless they try to date up from their current SMV).
men who fell for the modern narrative that they can and should be desired for "who they are" are frustrated when this turns out to be blatantly false and all their "inner values" count for shit. It wouldn't be so annoying if especially women wouldn't be telling a totally different story, but actually were lucid and honest about what leads to success and what doesn't.

But if women are getting offers from the top 20% of men, why are they "scum" for doing that as well? Wouldn't anyone take a great offer if they can get it?

They aren't scum for desiring high quality males, their problem is rather that they don't go for genuine offers for commitment; but rather try to punch above their weight in the hope that they can make these guys commit because they're overtly optimistic about their actual chances with them. And when they get dumped, they repeat that cycle until they realize they're growing too old for this, and then settle for a less exciting/attractive/etc. guy who they'll never really appreciate because he can't measure up in her eyes to "the ones that got away".

through_a_ways · 2014-09-23T23:56:28+00:00

If we're playing the game of "who has it harder in mating, women or men?", it's quite obviously apparent that the answer is men, not only in the human species, but also in other animal and plant species.

Energy and probabilities are numbers, and there's no such thing as a free biological lunch. Males always (with a scant few possibly exceptional species) have the harder job in procuring a mate.

Now, there's absolutely nothing wrong with that, and there's also nothing wrong in trying to change that, though I would seriously doubt that one could ever come close to overriding something as complex and old (1.2 billion+ years) as the fundamentals of sexual reproduction, let alone the repercussions of doing so. Our current understanding of biology is far too primitive to even pretend that this is possible within our lifetimes.

Sexual strategy (and life in general) is amoral, and the only law anyone has ever consistently abode by is that of nature.

fiat_lux_ · 2014-09-23T22:50:12+00:00

I've made the same point in the past.

Summarizing another thought I had: If rp tenets are correct in that women's SMV plunges after the years of fertility at around 30-35, and men's don't... then I posit that the market would adjust to this fact, contributing greatly to the under-35 women's pickiness in the dating market.

So it ends up being "fair" in a way.

Villaintine · 2014-09-24T00:09:51+00:00

Don't agree with the premise, but can agree both sexes in general have shallow preferences- just with different specifics.

Aerobus · 2014-09-24T01:11:59+00:00

Also, I know most guys on this sub are under 25 so it's not unusual at all for them to be attracted to women in their teens and 20s, but the general RP theory is that all men, be they 20 or 70, are repulsed by women over 30. Correct me if I'm wrong.

You are wrong. We are not repulsed by women over 30. We are simply attracted to them less, and if they are fat, were not attractive to begin with, act masculine, there's a possibility (but not guarantee) that we will not be attracted to them.

Men do not find only women from ages 16-25 attractive. The claims made on TRP, which are not factually incorrect, is that 16-25 is the most attractive age group for women because of their fertility.

There are plenty of 26 year olds who are attractive. There are some models in their 40s and 50s who are attractive. They are rare however. Generally speaking, the younger the woman is, the more likely she is to be attractive. That does not imply that only women from 16-25 years of age are attractive. IF that claim were true, then MILFs wouldn't be popular. On the darker side, if that claim were to be true, pedophilia wouldn't exist either.

I agree with your notion that men and women are picky in different regards--men more picky with commitment, women more picky with sex. The only thing I disagree with you though is that men are more easily willing to lower their standards/compromise because we have a feminist, blue pill society teaching them to cater to women's needs. However, women won't do this because they deciding to only have sex with top 20% men is considered empowering.

fiat_lux_ · 2014-09-23T21:44:46+00:00

IF your ears are LOW SET and your MAXILLA is recessed, Forget it, buddy boy. That is a SDS (sexual death sentence). If you are under 6'0", balding, or over 30, same thing.

You Face = Your Fate.

Dawk19 · 2014-09-23T22:10:07+00:00

I agree both are shallow but I feel like people are scared to even suggest one side might be more shallow than the other because feelings might be hurt. Like if shallowness could measured in points I doubt that both would be the same total. And I can't really say which is more shallow since my view would be unbelievably skewed with me being incel/foreveralone.

5th_Law_of_Robotics · 2014-09-24T13:00:32+00:00

I read once upon a time (don't have the source anymore) that men and women are both equally inclined to value physical appearance in a potential mate it's just that men tend to have a somewhat narrower range of what they consider attractive whereas for women it's more diverse. This gives the impression that men are more shallow since what men find attractive tends to be more easily identified.

Not sure if it's true but anecdotally it seems legitimate.

garlicextract · 2014-09-25T22:28:15+00:00

Your premise is incorrect, men find women of all ages attractive, did you not see the picture of the 67 year old actress on the front page?

And women are shallow when it comes to height, as much or more than men are when women are fat.

awesomesalsa · 2014-10-07T19:13:18+00:00

I'm not sure ~~any~~ many RPers would say that women over 25/30 are inherently unattractive. Personally I know quite a few women even in their 40s whom I'd fuck the shit out of. But fertility starts taking a nosedive around 30, and certainly women of that age tend to have certain traits (and lack others) that set them apart from 23 year olds.

M_rafay · 2014-09-23T22:16:55+00:00

BUTT.HOLES.

God I'm bored! Oh man maybe I'll go over to TRP and beat everyone up. And then have sex with them. Angry, rage-fueled fucking and punching. That's what they get for being so stupid!

AUUUGH.

Where did this statistic come from? That women like 20% of men? We should take a closer look at that study. I'll go find it...

...I can't find it. At least not from any reliable source. Found it mentioned on a lot of shitty blogs...a lot of them. I'm kind of getting the impression that this study is full of shit. A lot of studies that propose to "figure out the laws of attraction" tend to be.

But let's just say that women find 20% of men physically attractive.

How do you think this study was conducted? I'm guessing a bunch of women were shown pictures of male strangers. Men they otherwise knew nothing about. They had nothing to go on but his face.

Let's stop right there: judging strangers on their attractiveness is very different from judging people one does know. I know that I wasn't physically attracted to an ex when I first met him, then I got to know him and was crazy about him. One's level of attraction can change over time and this study doesn't sound like it really addresses that.

Secondly, how do we know these women found the same 20% of men attractive? We're assuming all these women have the exact same taste in men. This is kind of why I want to check out this study.

And finally, how exactly is it shallow that a person only finds 20% of a certain population attractive? If she found 80% of the same population attractive, would that somehow make her not shallow? Why?

If you gave me a bunch of men's faces and asked me to label which ones I thought were attractive, I probably wouldn't select the man I fell deeply in love with. He only became attractive to me once I got to know him, and how would I know that we would have that connection by staring at a photo of his face? This study sounds pretty damn shallow, not women.

[deleted] · 2014-09-24T00:11:12+00:00

Yes, when it comes to dating both genders are shallow.

However, BP'ers tend to reject and deny this, saying "not all women are like that!" and whatnot... unless it comes to men, in which case it's okay to make generalizations like "all men are dogs", etc.

RP'ers generally are more at ease with the realization that men and women are shallow when it comes to the dating market. They realize that they are shallow due to survival instincts which are inherent in humans since the days when we were all living in caves, and that "shallowness" was crucial to humanity's survival and existence for thousands of years.

[deleted] · 2014-09-24T01:19:51+00:00

16-25 is an exaggerated window. It's more like 16-28 (+5 years for good genes or good physical fitness).

Also, 80% of women aren't really getting offers from the top 20% but they still might hook up with them for some ONS action. It's a much smaller percentage that actually lock down a top 20% man.

DaThrowaway808 · 2014-09-23T21:25:19+00:00

If women had no negative effects with age on child birth then I would enter LTRs with older women with no discrimination. It is purely biological, at least for me, to factor in age. If the woman was successful enough in her career and was able to freeze her eggs and also able to pay for the costs associated with inserting my sperm into her eggs then I would also be open to it. Of the population of women, what do you think are the chances that I'd meet such a woman?

Comments