How Women Wind Up Alone With a House Full of Cats
Early this year, the Boston Globe magazine started a feature called Dinner with Cupid. They’ll pay for a blind date, and they do the matchmaking based on interests, education, age, etc. A photo is required as part of the application, so I assume they’re trying to match up people of a similar level of attractiveness as well. Dinner with Cupid is often charming, and I look forward to reading it each week. I’m not alone — I’ve heard people talking about it around town, and it generates quite a few letters to the editor.
Recently, I’ve been aware that I approach the column with a slight sense of dread. In particular, I’m worried that the guy is going to be a peach, and the woman is going to be unjustifiably hard on him.
Let’s take this week’s date as a case in point:
First Impressions
Samantha: I liked his sense of style — nice black button-up. And I liked his blue eyes.
Michael: I thought she was very cute, definitely my type.
The Vibe
Michael: She had a beautiful smile and an infectious laugh, which I loved. A girl with a great sense of humor gets me every time.
Samantha: I liked his scruffy blond hair. His personality made him more attractive as well. We laughed at random things.
Thumbs Up or Down?
Samantha: When we got to my car, we gave each other the awkward “I don’t want to leave just yet” hug.
Michael: We exchanged numbers. I definitely had a great time.
Final Grade
Michael says: A
Samantha says: B+
WTF???
B+? Exactly why did she take off 10+ points? This sounds about as great as a blind date can be. I just don’t get it. Fast forward 15 years, she’ll be saying to their kids “I knew your father was a B+ the first time I laid eyes on him!”
Here’s another example:
What They’re Looking For
Janine:
Last Book Read: Stephenie Meyer’s Twilight.
Perfect Saturday: In bed till noon, gym, shopping, then partying.
Ideal mate: Looks like Brody Jenner.
Michael:
Last book read: Richard Russo’s Nobody’s Fool
Couldn’t live without: His pots and pans (he loves to cook).
Why he’s a catch: He’s intelligent, outgoing, and loves his mom.
First Impressions
Janine: I was about 15 minutes late. Give me a break, I couldn’t get a cab! I usually go for guys who are a little taller.
Michael: Janine looked great. She wore a black dress that accentuated her body amazingly. Paired with a pretty face, it was a knockout combination.
The Vibe
Michael: At one point, Janine began text-messaging someone. That was kind of offensive to me. She did say, “This is kind of rude, isn’t it?” I had to say, “Kind of, yeah.”
Janine: He was a little annoyed. I can’t help it. That’s why they call it a CrackBerry!
Thumbs Up or Down?
Michael: I enjoyed the evening completely. It usually takes me longer than the first date to get a “I like this person” kind of feeling. But if she’s willing, I’m willing.
Janine: I had fun, but his confidence was a bit of a turnoff.
Final Grade
Michael: A
Janine: C
She refused a second date. What an idiot. He is well rid of her. He outclassed her from the start, with his love of literature, cooking, and his mom. If this guy is not a catch, I don’t know who is!
I decided to dig a little deeper over the history of the program to see how each date went. Here’s what I found:
- 25 blind dates have been written up.
- On 10 of those dates, the parties gave each other the same grade. Five of those couples went for a second date. For these folks, the system worked perfectly.
- On 9 of those dates, the men rated the women higher. Five of those couples wanted to see each other again. Michael and Samantha are in this group.
- On 6 of those dates, the women rated the men higher, and three went on to arrange another meeting.
25 couples is a pretty small sample size, but there were 50% more dates where the women got a more generous grade than they gave. What could I learn from their comments?
I looked first at dates where the men rated their dates lower:
- “At first, it was closer to “I don’t know if this is going to work,” then it shifted over to “This person is pretty great.” She seemed really open to new experiences and has a good, lively energy.Although I’m not yet sure if the connection is romantic or platonic, she’s an awesome woman and I’d be happy to share more fun with her.”
(Second date was a go.)
- “She was really nice, and I think we had fun. I wasn’t feeling a smooch, so I went for the hug.”
(She wanted a second date, and his response was “I don’t see why not.”)
- “I had a couple of beers. I wasn’t that excited. I didn’t have high hopes. I wasn’t attracted to her right away. Too plain-Jane for me.”
(Ouch. This sounds like someone applied for him as a prank!)
Now what women said about the guys they rated lower:
“He said he’d enjoy seeing me again. I’d love to meet someone a little more outdoorsy and rugged. I didn’t laugh as much as I had hoped.”
(She says no chemistry, no second date.)
Sarah: “I noticed he had a bit of a round figure.”
Kirk: “Sarah’s cute and curvy.”
(Are you freaking kidding me? These two look like siblings – she is in no position to be criticizing him. Compare his positive attitude with her judgmental one. No second date.)
“I think we shared a similar sense of humor. I laughed a lot on the date. He was easy to talk to and laughed at my jokes. I may have gotten more comfortable with each drink. After Beer Works, we decided to go to a going-away party for a friend of his. I was excited to see how he interacted with his friends or in a group.”
(Another case where he said A!, she said B+. They went for the second date.)
I write a lot about how guys have a better deal all around in the hookup culture. Can any of you explain to me what is going on here? Here are guys willing to date and commit to the right person. And they’re getting shafted.
If women hold out, and hold out, and hold out some more, they are going to wind up with a house full of cats.
Girls, be honest, can you relate to these women? Guys, have you had this experience? Help me understand, please.
Related posts:
But the heart wants what the heart wants…
I especially love how little miss butterball has the audacity to point out the guy's extra weight.
This probably explains the power of the 'neg' in terms of game (though I am a mere reader, not a practitioner). I suppose he could have said: “That round, plump cheek thing actually works really well on you…”.
This type of entitlement needs to be severely dealt with (and your post is a good start toward that end). What is happening here is that each of these women is attempting to view the dating landscape as though they are the epicenter of it. While their own self-interest is important, they utterly FAIL to use any perspective in terms of the whole market.
And as for miss “I usually go for taller men”, she may be reasonably cute now, but she has the sort of MoDo features that make it easier for me to picture her future countenance astride a broomstick than a rich alpha male. Just sayin'.
Susan-
Still sure you want to assert that I'm not bitter? ;-p
I almost get the feeling that many of these women feel that the world has some sort of order-desk where a PERFECT man is going to be made available to them, provided they have the unwavering tenacity to hold out for him. (Chick-flick as life script)
A few years ago, while talking among some friends, a newcomer to the group dreamily commented that she was sure that Beck ( the musician) was her soul mate. She was 35, single mom, never married and average looks.
Instead of ignoring her, I would now say something like: “Maybe, too bad you're not likely his body-mate, it might have otherwise worked out.”
Or, the next time I hear some girl lament the lack of good men, I will simply say “There ARE good men, they just wind up with hotter girls than you.”
The 40s is all about revenge, woohoo!!!!
Correction – nose & chin girl was not the 'taller men' commenter. Reader error.
She still get the hit for the B+ comment. Impossible to please.
Maybe these guys all need to learn Game. lol
Joking aside, as much as you don't like them, the evo psych/pick-up guys have already provided a likely explanation. It appears to be female hypergamy in action. In other words, the women have a slight but unrelenting need to pair up with a guy who is objectively “better” than they are by some sort of perceived status measure (which can mean a lot of things), and this need is harder to satisfy in today's world where women have roughly comparable earning potential/status etc.
The numbers are actually a bit encouraging, and tend to show that the hypergamy effect is not as drastic as they make it out to be. But it sure seems to be there. And it's possible that the women in this survey are actually being more generous with their grades than they'd like to be so as not to look too bitchy in the newspaper.
So, when you say from time to time that the guys have the better deal in the pickup culture, perhaps this will help you understand why, in all probability, it's really only a subset of guys who do, whereas the majority are getting the short straw and the women all vie for a small pool of guys. The market inequality that you sometimes point out is caused by the very effect you illustrate so nicely in this post.
Just a thought
This is a typical American situation. In other countries, women would do whatever they could to keep these men.
Entitlement mixed with a huge lack of reality, result of heavy brainwashing during teenage years.
These women are afraid to open themselves with the guys simply because most have nothing to say. These were women who never had a good conversation with a boyfriend. For them, it is easy to prove that they are empowered by going to bed at will.
However, a real relationship needs some kind of openness and sincerity. What they do here is not game, at all. It is simply a way to downgrade the partner before he sees how shallow and stupid she is. And she knows, consciously or not, that she is not that good. This is plain egotistic insecurity.
American women know in their guts that a relationship will destroy their dream of being feminist superwomen. It is easy to keep the illusion while you are going to bars and have dozens of men hitting on you. But a relationship, open conversations with a man and, God forbid , motherhood, will expose all her weaknesses for the world (and herself) to see. They just dread real relationships.
What happens is that even without relationships, reality will prevail, and when they are in their 40s, they will be a living wreck, full of remorse and resentfulness.
I don't think American men have the upperhand today. Roissy and Tom Leykiss are not the average guy. 90% of American men are betas, and I think they are the best catch for a woman in the whole world (excluding white trash tattooed guys), because of the Protestant upbringing, work ethics, etc.
Roissy (thanks for introducing me to this nihilistic, cynical SOB), wrote a good post about the trajectory of entitled, slutty American women here:
http://roissy.wordpress.com/2008/05/20/overhear...
I only disagree with the 1350 SAT score. This is not the average. Most women are not that intelligent, or at least not as they think they are.
(after listening to a 40-ish woman complaining about her life to her gay friend)
Here we have, her brave front temporarily lowered, the typical tragic wail of the childless aging modern urban woman. And her tragedy enabler, the gay boyfriend who will never inject her with the dose of reality she desperately needs. She will continue aging, refusing to settle for a grateful beta who will be happy to have her sagging carcass as his tepid seed receptacle, never letting go of the pickiness she could afford when she was 20 years younger, and missing out on her chance at motherhood as she sips mimosas every Sunday afternoon at an overpriced trendy Dupont Circle eatery. At the bottom of the glass she will see her reflection crying back at her, and later that night she will pull the bedsheets close, the other side of the bed cold, and feel the suffocating weight of reality encircling her like shards of streetlamp lights slowly marching across her sickly gray bedroom walls. All those used condoms and triple penetrations and girls nights out will have done nothing to alleviate the crushing loneliness which has stolen her sense of invulnerability like a thief in the night.
Her fate is sealed:
fuck around with alpha cads –> delay marriage –> get too much education –> throw self into career –> earn lotsa money to spend on handbags –> feel empowered –> serially date and fuck as career and educational success distort her time horizon –> start to get serious about finding husband at age 29 –> slowly discover she is not worth as much on the open market despite business school degree and 1350 SATs –> get bitter –> sabotage her dating prospects with bitter resentment –> show up to dates with cat scratches and abrasive attitude –> die childless or burdened with a downs child and a lickspittle beta life partner.
I almost had a heart attack upon reading the title because my favorite complaint is: “I'm gonna die alone in a house full of cats”. (My best friend doesn't know whether to laugh at me or smack me in the head when I start with it). So, I read the post in like 10 seconds to see if there's was a way to avoid that terrible fate.
After reading those two examples, I completely agree with you. What the hell is wrong with those women? Of course, we don't know how the entire date was. But they didn't gave any solid reasons to why they didn't like the poor dudes. Especially #2 saying his confidence was a turn off. I just want to hit her right now. The guy cooks, loves his mom… of course his gonna be confident! For a sane, sensible woman he would be a catch. We don't have a picture, but they were probably matched by looks, like the other couples. To sad he was paired up with a woman who isn't ashamed to say that she likes Brody Jenner (I'm ashamed to just know who he is, and clarify that I don't find him attractive in any way).
It seems to me that these women go on the date trying really hard to find something to dislike. Or like Passer by said, they want someone better than themselves. Even more accuretely, someone better than the delusional idea they have of themselves, 'cause miss #2 doesn't sound like the brightest crayon in the box.
From my experience, the two guys I have loved the most made a terrible first impression. But I gave them a chance anyway and after date 2 they actually swept me off my feet. Chemistry doesn't have to be inmediate to be great in the long run, like you often say in the blog.
There's an old saying in my country and for some people I know, is very true: La que mucho escoge, con lo peor se queda (If you're too picky, you'll end up with the worst one).
And finally, about the girl that thought that the male version of herself was a little bit too heavy… one of my teachers is much bigger and older than him, but he's so damn smart that when he starts quoting Oscar Wilde I just want grab him and kiss him in the middle of the classroom, haha
Rick, I do think Chick Flick as Life Script is a good start toward explaining this. But even then, I don't get it. What strikes me most is that the women rave about the guys, then give them a B+. Where are the expectations coming from? How can a woman say, “He's adorable, funny, I didn't want to leave, therefore B+?” Who gets the A? What does he have that these guys don't?
I'm totally with you in this comment, even the Beck bit (Lost Cause is his best song, btw) until you say the 40s is about revenge! Bitter! Don't do it, don't give in to it. Bitterness poisons everything else. I have a feeling you're getting your revenge, no need to gloat, haha.
Passer By, excellent food for thought. First, let me say that completely against my will, I'm getting fond of a couple of these Game guys. It's the maternal instinct I think; I detect a sliver in vulnerability in a couple of them and I want to set them up with a nice girl so they can just stop all this nonsense.
As for evo psych, I'm a big believer, which is why I'm such a misfit. The feminists hate me, and so do the Game guys. I see the merits of Game, I just stop short of endorsing the tactics that depend on making a woman feel like crap to get her interested.
Hypergamy was the first explanation that occurred to me, but as you say, in today's world women have similar earning power and status. Are they not capable of making the required adjustment in their expectations? I met my husband in business school, and he seemed more than OK. I was not aiming for Secretary of the Treasury instead. We clicked on every level, including intellectually. I was happy he was willing to settle down with someone brainy, to be honest.
A few of these dates featured women as apparently more successful than the men. The guy who called his date a Plain Jane is a 25 year-old drummer. She's a 26 year-old law student. Hypergamy is a real instinct, but how dominant is it? One scientist I read today says that evo psych accounts for 5%, free will the other 95%. I don't know if that's true, but if women want to have love in their lives, they'd better smarten up.
I read something on one of the PUA sites to the effect that the people getting short shrift in the hookup culture are all the beta men, and the very attractive women. I've been mulling that over. I do think that beautiful women are getting ignored, and I've written about that. It's counterintuitive, and fascinating.
I've always been all about the beta. I am convinced that in modern society, the beta is better able to cope with smart, confident women, and better able to share a true egalitarian partnership. We'd don't need alphas anymore. Our sexual urges (that 5%?) may sway us, but free will should prevail.
These women? Idiots. The ones who gave the guys B+'s and got a second date are in good shape. If they can appreciate the worth of these men in time, they have a shot at real happiness. If not, they should buy stock in Purina.
Morning Glory, I love you. I don't know how you can love someone over the internet, but I do love you, you are wonderful. I think you're exactly right to say that some of these women are delusional. If they wind up alone, they will look back and wonder where they went wrong. If they have any self-awareness, they will change.
I LOVE the quote you shared. That is awesome! I confess I had somehow figured you for an Eastern European – I have no idea why, but now I see you speak Spanish! That throws me for a loop, haha, I have to recalibrate.
Ugh, I am furious with that rotund woman who criticized the guy. He saw her as sexy and appealing. Do you know how few guys would embrace her size? Is she holding out for Brad Pitt? I LOVE that you find your chubby but brilliant professor sexy. For women, there's sexy ugly, sexy fat, and many other varieties of sexy. Lots of good fantasy material, haha.
smartduck, you say a lot of interesting things here. I'm tempted to say that you're wrong, American women do indeed want real relationships, but I can't explain the women I've written about. I think they're crazy. But I don't think they're necessarily shallow and stupid. These women seem to have it together, at least on paper. They're attractive, yet obviously insecure. I wondered if they rated the guy lower in hopes of gaining an advantage over him. If so, that's sad.
As a Brazilian man, you have a different cultural perspective on all of this, which is quite interesting. I find it particularly interesting that you are pro- beta male, haha. As am I!
How frightening. Roissy's good at that. Here's where I disagree: “slowly discover she is not worth as much on the open market despite business school degree and 1350 SATs”. The women that Roissy is deriding are, by and large, not hanging out in bars hoping to hook up with him. They are already earning more than him. I grant you, the clock is ticking, and women who start looking for a relationship at 29 are very likely to be struggling with fertility issues at 39. I've seen it many times.
The woman Roissy “spies” on here is not representative. And I'm not sure why he calls her gay friend her Boyfriend. He's clearly just a pal. smartduck, don't waste your time on Roissy. He's like a car accident – it's gruesome, but it's hard to turn away. Still, do it. He has NOTHING positive to offer.
Hahaah, this is a hilarious blog post.
I think these women need to re-assess their market value. Especially if they don't look like Megan Fox.
i agree with Passer By, that the current day of pickup culture really mainly benefits the subset of “alpha” guys who have the fearlessness required for it. Your average beta will likely languish for a while, either until general life experience gives him some confidence, or he decides to learn some of the alpha's techniques.
As for the hypergamy aspect, it does seem to me that generally, women do want a man who has some aspect of dominance or of being “better” than them in some sense . If the aspect is being a confident, loyal and intelligent man, then that's probably a good thing. Unfortunately, from what I've seen, it often is more like being an effective cad.
As for the story in question. it's not that surprising. I think some women downplay their “suitor” to some degree, almost as a technique to avoid getting too involved too quickly, but it tends to happen more to “beta” guys (yes, I had that experience, but I was younger and stupider back then, and less confident).
Roissy is funny. I don't take him seriously at all and I think he deals with a particular subset of women. Many women dont go to clubs and would not fall for his tricks.
And let me rephrase: American women are smart, educationwise and streetwise. They just don't know themselves. As a foreigner who spent years in the States, it is easy to see the brainwashing the culture has put them through.
I also know many Christian American women, who are great wives.
I did wonder about whether these women were acting defensively. People do play a lot of mind games. It seems a stretch, though, to think they would deliberately sabotage a second date in an article the whole world may read.
And yes, some women do go for the effective cad. It's equally hard for me to imagine that explains this, though. I think it has something to do with expectations, and women being unrealistic. We're so used to shopping that it gets very difficult to finally make a choice. You keep wondering if you could have gotten a better deal elsewhere.
I agree about the culture, and its effect on women. Men are affected too. If the culture encourages women to put out for Alpha asshats, it also makes cads the winners in the battle for women.
A point I had never really considered:
It is often said (by liberated women) that so many men “can't handle a strong, independent woman.” Given the tendency for many (or most) women to desire to date and marry 'up', this seems incongruous; If they are really chasing alphas, then what is happening is that the alpha is not committing, or am I missing something? The alpha clearly IS 'handling' them. Yes/no?
It's the beaten Beta who would be happy with them, but who would get shot down if he asked that would have no problem with their 'strength' (at least until divorce court-ha).
And see? I am bitter. But I'm the fun, jovial, life-of-the-party bitter, not the sulking-in-the-corner kind.
And yes, I have just entered the Zone of Potential Revenge. My status as happy bitter guy instead of angry bitter guy improves the likelihood of successful emotional revenge sorties. Give me an “R”! Give me an “E”! Give me a “VENGE”!
Since you were so nice, Susan, I promise not to overdo it.
I think the articles from Roger Devlin are relevant for this discussion. Try http://dontmarry.wordpress.com/2009/03/24/artic... or Google his name. Also, I like http://www.henrymakow.com and his analysis of the feminist movement.
Thanks, Susan.
My comment about income and earning potential wasn't meant to imply that that was the be all and end all of mate status – it just strikes me as an additional complicating factor now. Mate status would involve a lot of things (social dominance, confidence, charisma, looks, etc.). Also, sometimes two people just connect, for whatever reason, regardless of perceived mate status (within limits). That's why I hesitate to apply these sorts of observations to any particular situation. Even the data sampling in your post is probably a bit small, but it's the best we have here. I think one real fault with some of these Game oriented blogs is that they find some study that shows a very slight but perceptible inclination toward some sort of behavior, and then they adamantly (and repeatedly) cite that for the proposition that it's true in almost all cases.
We should also keep in mind that these dates were not intended as “hook ups” but rather as possible introductions for long term relationships – from both parties' perspective (probably). So, in that case, I would guess that, for most women, the hypergamy impulse is substantially supressed – mathematical reality requires this. Some women, however, seem less able to shut it off, so they tend to end up never satisfied or with cats. Some here say it's a lack of understanding of their market value, which may be true, but that doesn't explain why it's more common in the women. The cause is probably hypergamy at work.
Getting back to the thrust of your blog, I would guess that the hypergamic impulse is much greater among young women in the college hook up scene. These are one off sexual encounters where the male has invested, and promises to invest, almost nothing in the relationship. Put yourself back 200,000 years, or whatever, and think about a female have such an encounter. In the reproductive sense, she is in pure seed gathering mode. So, it's very much in her reproductive interests to gather the highest quality seed she can get from a one off encounter. It stands to reason that, in that scenario, her attraction switches (for lack of a better term) will become very selective. Her hypergamic impulse would kick into overdrive. She can afford to be that selective because sooner or later the most alpha of the males will be happy to oblige with spin or two. So, it's in her genetic reproductive interest (as opposed to personal happiness) NOT to be attracted to anything but the best (again, keeping in mind that this is likely to be a very short term thing).
So, take a young woman now, who is likely wired pretty much the same way in terms sexual desire, and drop her into a society or subsociety (i.e., a college campus) in which the most common mating pattern is a one time hook up (I'm assuming this is true based on what you've said here and what guys are saying elsewhere on the net). It wouldn't be at all surprising if her old wiring kicks in and she becomes very attracted to a small subset of males and affirmatively NOT attracted to the other 70 or 80 percent (or whatever the number) with some room for negotiation at the margins. So, you could see how the hookup culture probably leads to this market inequality that you perceive, but is really a form of unwitting volunteer polygamy on the part of the women. Obviously, in the real world, it's never going to be so clear cut as to have some group of men getting all the action and the other 80 percent getting absolutely none, but you get the general idea.
This is obviously all speculation on my part – but from what I've read it's what young guys seem to be experiencing to some degree on campuses and in urban areas with lots of young professionals. And it makes some intuitive sense
Lastly, in terms of the 95%/5% thing you mentioned, I'm not sure what he (or she) meant by that. I don't think that attraction is usually a choice. What you do with that attraction obviously involves a lot of free will, but if we're just talking about attraction itself, I'd almost be inclined to reverse those numbers. Also, to do a good job of exercising free will to manage attractions, it might help to understand where the attraction is coming from. Otherwise, I suspect that the hind brain often tricks the frontal lobe into rationalizing why the attraction (or lack thereof) is a good thing.
I live in DC and we have a similar column called Date Lab. The one thing people say over and over again is that they don't feel the chemistry. I am not sure how you measure that right away. I always thought of a date as hey I am getting to know you a little better to see if I want to know you a little more.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/ar...
The latest one.
First of all, not once have I heard one of my friends say that want to “marry up” or that even financial status is a concern when picking a future mate (you know unless he was a bum on the street…).
I commented yesterday and my comment seems to have been lost in the internets. My main point was as follows: Guys can be jerks. Girls can be jerks. People are jerks. Particularly when they are interacting with each other in any kind of romantic fashion.
I went on 4 blind dates last month. And while two of the guys probably would grade the date as A, I'd probably grade them as C or B-. There would be no second dates. They were both nice guys, they were both guys looking for commitment and relationship, and we had a reasonable amount of stuff in common. So, what's my deal? Am I just the biggest bitch of all time? They bored me and I felt like I would never want to kiss either one of them.
I am not totally sticking up for these girls – If I gave a date a B+ and was a little put off by his confidence I'd DEFINITELY go for second date because maybe he was just nervous or whatever.
In summation, people are jerks. Guys can be douchebags for demeaning women and women can be idiots in not opening their eyes to see the great guys in front of them.
Decoybetty-
It is your right to dismiss based on immediate lack of “chemistry”.
I do think it is immature to assume that if chemistry is not immediate, it is impossible.
Some people take a few dates to reveal great things. I dated a girl I had no chemistry with three or four times, then started to feel real attraction for her.
Everyone seems to think they can apply a fast-food mentality to relationships.
What arrogance – to think you can know the other person or yourself well enough to make such assessments in such a time frame.
Why men must entertain women ? Are men Bozo the Clown ? Otherwise they are “boring”.
This is not a relationship between equals, it is manipulation and plain use of a human being. The same way some men use women as sex objects, some women use men as fun, excitement and narcissism objects.
This is key to understand why those women above are never satisfied. They are not looking for a partner, they are looking for a fantasy.
I'm interested in to what extent modern woman is beholden to those ancient impulses. Way back when, women were apparently so promiscuous that the shape of the penis evolved to “scrape” the semen of another male away from her cervix. And jealousy was the male response to that uncertainty.
As you say, women are pretty much wired the same way today. I agree that college is an environment where a very few guys get all the sex. Interestingly, researchers have found that when they ask male college students what percentage of the guys on campus had sex last weekend, they estimate 75-80%. The real number is 5-10%. On most college campuses those men are either varsity athletes or fraternity types. However, women do learn from their mistakes. A woman feels special when she is “chosen” for a hookup by a college quarterback. She does not feel so special when he pretends not to know her on campus three days later. College counseling centers are being overwhelmed with women who are depressed about the lack of relationships on college campuses.
Fifty years ago, an Alpha male in college derived status from having a pretty girlfriend. Today, the opposite is true. Having a girlfriend opens one up to peer ridicule. This has led to more “beta” males succeeding in the college environment as women choose relationships with betas over pump and dump with alphas. Yes, we are hard-wired to respond to certain types in certain ways. But we haven't lost our sense of reason. Burn me once, shame on you. Burn me twice, shame on me. So yes, attraction is powerful and involuntary. What you do with it is not. In the same way that I know that whiskey and hot fudge sundaes are not good for me, I know that a player will make me miserable. I have personally witnessed many young women swearing off players. There will always be women who try to convert the player. But increasingly, women are shunning man whores, and guys with a torrid sexual history are being rejected. Certain guys will always get laid, but not by the girls they could ever hope to bring home to mom.
smartduck, it's interesting that you think that American women are guilty of this, and not women from other countries. I've seen a lot on the Game sites about men wanting foreign wives. American women, many of whom are essentially Alphas in their own right, are either unattractive or intimidating to men. I suspect it's a combination of both.
Perhaps you're right, and these women are egotistical and insecure. I can't argue with the numbers, even though it's a small sample. I wrote about this because I've become aware of it slowly in recent months. When I sat down and analyzed the data, I was pretty horrified. These women need to come to Hooking Up Smart! Some of those women are not all that attractive, and have a lot of nerve criticizing their dates, in my opinion.
Re feminism and American women, I don't believe that we're afraid that relationships will interfere with our being superwomen. We're much more afraid that being superwomen will prevent us from finding men. Being a woman at Wharton was no picnic in terms of dating–all the Wharton guys were much more focused on Penn undergrads. One of my closest friends was the first female Managing Director at Merrill Lynch. She was busting balls on the trading floor well before she was 30. She has never met a guy who could dominate her. She's not a living wreck, but she's unusual. I do believe nearly all women want desperately to find a life partner.
Haha, Rick, if you find yourself holding all the cards, by all means enjoy it. But don't close yourself off to the possibility of finding a really great woman who is not to blame for being born in the era of feminism, and for being as vulnerable to hypergamous impulses as any other woman.
I don't think it's that alphas can't handle a strong, independent woman. Rather, they don't want to. If women are subject to the desire to mate with the Alpha to provide her offspring the best possible genes, then men are subject to the desire to seek mates who are physically beautiful, representing fertility. Men are not programmed to seek strength or independence or smarts in a woman.
Modern man may appreciate these qualities, however. I would argue that it's the beta male, open to egalitarian partnership, who is most open to mating with a strong “alpha” female in modern society. (Some think Barack Obama fits this profile.) It's a cliche that the most dominant Alpha males marry bimbos. Certainly the famous alphas seem to.
renu, I think you're right about chemistry. Both men and women expect total chemistry right out of the gate! It happens, but honestly, that's asking a lot. I had the hots for my husband the first time I saw him. He finally decided he liked me 11 months later. For a while, it pissed me off that it took him so long, but in the end, I knew he was in love, and I stopped questioning the way he got there. Sometimes it takes a while.
This Wash Post couple, though? I didn't think they seemed so compatible, and they agreed. At least they were on the same page!
Decoybetty, let me apologize if your comment got lost. Hmmm, things have been a little weird with DISQUS lately. I checked for your comment everywhere, but it's not even in my spam filter. Please do let me know again if this happens.
I agree, educated women are not looking to “marry up.” Women are just looking for a good man who they can love and respect. Most people marry someone of similar background – education, religion, etc. I don't see contemporary women falling victim to the hypergamous impulse of wanting to snare the Alpha.
OK, it sounds like you went out with a couple of guys who were definitely not what you were looking for. That's fine, because you found them boring. No woman should feel guilty for rejecting a boring guy. However, the cases I cited in this post were ones where the women raved and then gave the guy a B+. In both of those couples, a second date was already in the works when the article went to press. I just had the sense that the women were harder to please than the men. And the criticisms were very different. Men who were not “wowed” by their dates were generally willing to go on a second date if she was interested. In contrast, women were nixing second dates right and left. I just don't think that's good strategy!
I hate to say people are jerks, but you're right that guys demean women and women demean guys. Sigh.
First time commenter. smartduck, I agree with a lot of what you say. Particularly your comment about women afraid to expose themselves to the world and themselves. This could be true of men also, but women have such an unrealistic image of themselves they have more to fear. This attitude was not so common when I was young, I'm 49 now. I think so many young women see men as jerks or at best numb-skulls inferior to them.
rick, to be fair, I think it all depends. For most of history, marriages were arranged, and those people had sex and children, and I'm sure many of those couples had loving relationships. Chemistry, and love, can certainly develop over time.
However, Decoybetty is a catch. She is smart and funny and adorable. She has every right to go on blind dates and follow her instincts about the potential of any particular guy. She knows what she likes, and she knows how to spot it in a male. If she is particularly good at sizing up relationship potential on the first date, that is a skill, not a fault. She is young, she has options. She has every right to be choosy.
smartduck, you are depressing me! You are getting more and more jaded! Women don't need to be on a date with Jon Stewart to be entertained. Rather, we are looking for a sense of being on the same wavelength. For me, sense of humor is huge. If I can't laugh with a man, it's no deal.
A man may bore me and fascinate someone else. Or he may just be a boring guy, in which case he would be suited to a boring girl. I confess, in my own social circle, there are couples who are lovely, decent people who are so boring it boggles the mind. I owe them hospitality, but I can't bear the thought of sharing an evening with them. Some people click, and some don't. That's natural, and just the way it is. It's not about women being too choosy. I'm sure you don't want a relationship with a boring woman who has nothing to say, no original thoughts.
I never imagined I would say this over the internet… I love you, too. I bet we sound really cute… or crazy… or both, haha.
And I'm a lot closer and in a much warmer place than Eastern Europe: San Jose, Costa Rica.
I found your blog totally by chance. I used to read online Cosmo (yes, that's how LOST I was before HUS, haha! In my defense, I never found anything there that was remotely helpful in real life. And all the sex tips were ridiculous, some even dangerous, haha). There was a link to an article in another site about how women can't really have NSA sex. And someone in the comments section mentioned your blog.
And here's a quote that reminded me of you: “The greatest good you can do for another is not just share your riches, but to reveal to him, his own.” -Benjamin Disraeli
Susan -
While I was in college, there were a percentage of women there who looked for and found a similarly educated beta male (lots of us in engineering were beta males) as future spouses. Now it didn't seem that they were being mercenary or even actively looking, but they seemed to have put themselves in positions and situations where they were able to form friendships and, literally, pick among a large population of eligible and educated fellow students, all of similar intellectual background. These women didn't seem attacted to alphas, but they were looking for at least a peer. Maybe they weren't looking to “marry up”, but their future spouses were all at least their intellectual equal, if not more so.
Granted, this was a small sample size, maybe a dozen or so cases of my fellow fraternity brothers marrying their college interest, but pretty much all of them are still married, most with several kids at this point. Maybe it was something in the water of our campus house or something.
Unfortunately, the larger percentage of women at my school followed the more common scenarios, either solely interested in career or interested in alphas and short term hookups. Now, there's nothing wrong with the latter two options, but it seems, from reading your blog, that a lot of women seem to regret some of those choices at some point. It's like often people are shocked, really shocked, that making some decisions may have consequences, some which they may not like down the road.
And even the most interesting career isn't the same without someone to share the triumphs with. But I feel for the people you counsel…it's not easy out there.
I agree that everyone has a right to be choosy. I was, so I can't criticize on that front
For a certain age group, it may also be too early, in some cases, to really find a real relationship that could lead to marriage. However, it is important to realize that one needs to think about the future, and make wise decisions to make a “happy” future a more likely scenario than not…
If they are reading your advice, at least it's a sign of a humility of mind to listen to someone who's gone through some of this…
Just a few thoughts here. One of the Brit papers did this dinner dating bit better. I thought it might have been the Telegraph, but now I can't find it, as they canceled it awhile back.
What was so howling different about their (Brits) 'scoring', were the questions they asked. The first one? How were his/her table manners!? (Americans: Fail!) That's just so precious too. Then they had the temerity to ask Both participants then, 'What did you talk about?' (I know, utterly useless, right?) And if they enjoyed the conversation. Mostly? The pair often even agreed (broadly speaking) on what they discussed. Amazing. If translated for an American audience & context, most I suspect would fare poorly on the recall alone. Both women & men would stop listening if Betty/Ben were deemed 'boring' or there was 'no apparent spark!' But the Brits? Were Supposed to account for themselves as Adults. Obviously! What was discussed? Did he/she have decent manners? Did they seem interested in you? How did they appear? Then, 'Are you interested in another date?' Mostly of the ones I saw, they both mutually agreed to go for another try. Perhaps they were both paying closer attention, right? Quiz coming later?!
See that's the key to any good relationship, Not listening! (Ask any old married fart about this!)
But this is really funny: “Women are just looking for a good man who they can love and respect.” Well no, not at least 'right away'. And by that we mean say age 16 to 36 for many. Mostly those who are in their 20's are all about running after the 'hotness' (the guys too BTW). Casing down all the 'cute', the 'sexy', the 'cute, sexy & available' etc. It'll take many well into their 3rd decade until they 'wise up' (or get tired of the game) and actually start looking for a simple, kind ,decent bloke/gal who they might grow a bit old with. Until then there's the infamous Daba girls http://www.dabagirls.com/ and an internet filled with enough porn to keep you occupied for decades.
Still, plenty of folks met their intended/spouse/LTR on a 2nd or 3rd date when they finally did get a better sense of who they really were. That boring accountant is a thespian on the side. And a comedian. (No really, he's got good bookings too!) The wife can be deadly dull too, but she's also probably one of the smartest women I've ever met. So really? Boring is not well axe murdering in its negation of possibilities here. This is what people really don't get. Until their 40's say. And that houseful of cats (women) or roomies (men). But a good topic that's more complex than we imagine! Cheers & Good Luck, 'VJ'
Honestly? I can relate to these women. I mean, I’m well-educated, I’m a high earner (for my age), I try to be generous and polite, and I have a very stable ‘happy’ mood. Most people think I am very sexy and very attractive. Nevertheless, despite having a relatively large pool of potential mates, for the last two years I have failed to find someone to commit to a long-term relationship and I am aware that partially, this has been my own fault. Because I have a wide range of interests, I often become bored with simple, one-dimensional guys. I am aware that this is a mistake, because in the long run, I won’t really need that my faithful, loving husband knows three different languages, reads as much as I do or skydives. Those are completely unnecessary skills for a good father as well. I know this because I happen to have the best dad I could have imagined, and poor guy has a very predictable daily routine that sums up in a 9-5 job and exercising afterwards.
I feel like I’m at a match point, because I'm 25 years old, I am aware I’ve always been quite picky, but I really, really, really don’t want to end up alone in a house full of cats. I want to get married; I want to have biological children. But it’s the never ending question..To settle for a good-enough guy who treats us well but doesn’t blown us away or to wait for that butterflies-in-the-stomach romance that urges us to decide without a single doubt that we want to spend the rest of our lives with that other person?
I haven’t felt the latter with any of my recent ex-boyfriends. I do let them get a second date, a third, a fourth… I even call them my boyfriends, but I don’t fall in love with them. The last guy I dated actually proposed to me but I turned him down precisely because I wasn’t ‘in love’. While I don’t regret this decision –as of now- I wonder if I will later on. What if in 10 years I have no boyfriend on sight, and the clock is ticking faster and faster… Will I lament not getting married to this particular ‘good guy’?
However, I still reject the idea of committing to someone who I don’t feel absolutely smitten with. And what makes you fall in love? Is it the fulfilment of a list of requirements? I have fallen in love with a guy that had everything I’ve ever wanted in a man, the looks, the personality, and the brains. We had the most intense relationship and yet, we didn’t end up together. I also fell deeply in love with a guy who was the exact opposite; we were friends for a year and then became lovers. I was head-over-heels for him. We didn’t wind up together either. Now, I don’t care about requirements anymore; but I do want to marry for love, not convenience – in the sense of taking better advantage of my youth …you know, not waisting the pretty.
Morning glory, that's about the nicest thing anyone has ever said to me. Thank you so much. (eyes filling up here).
Costa Rica? OMG you lucky woman! Haha, you must give those Latin American men a real run for their money! You don't exactly fit the stereotype, you know? You go, girl!!!!
Yes, yes, yes! Those women in college who found love and happiness with betas? They are sooooo much better off than the women who succumbed to the lure of the alpha. Your description of how they got together would fit the vast majority of stable married couples in my own community.
Some of the women who couldn't resist the bad boys in college are undoubtedly still stuck in that trap. A quick look in the Self-Help section at any bookstore proves that they're out there, and they're spending money on books. However, many smart women learn after a few bad experiences, and open themselves up to different experiences. The common claim that women marry Alphas, divorce them, and then look for Betas to help them raise their young does not hold up in modern society. Perhaps that's the way we behaved 100,000 years ago, but I can't think of a single example. My own experience doesn't prove anything, but if it were so common, we'd be seeing it more in the real world.
I like what you said about friendships, I think that's key. A beta male may not feel dangerous and exciting, but the vast majority of happily married couples didn't start out with love-at-first-sight. For women, attraction is a complicated mix of factors, and a shy, smart engineer with a dry sense of humor and interesting things to say is going to be fine if he has the requisite social skills. It's incumbent on both men and women to develop themselves to the point where they can deliver that.
jfr, I just want to interject here quickly and thank you for commenting. I'm glad to have you join the conversation!
Hi, VJ, two quick thoughts: Americans have a lot to answer for. The whole hookup scene is full-blown here and we're exporting it like crazy. We seem entirely programmed for self-indulgence and short-term gratification. I've been trying to research this, we'll see what I can come up with. I suspect the Brits are better at this, though England is now the country that has more one-night stands per capita than any other nation. So, maybe not.
I agree with the point you're making, but not the age. The vast majority of women wise up before 36. You might not know it by watching Oprah and other talk shows, but if a woman gets into her 30s before figuring out she's better off with a dad than a cad, she's hopeless. A friend and I were recently discussing a mutual friend who hasn't met “the right guy.” And my friend said, “Well, I'll tell you my view on that. You meet the right guy if you want to meet the right guy.” I think there's something to that.
Melissa, every woman struggles with this question. In my favorite novel, Pride and Prejudice, Elizabeth states early on that she is determined that she will only marry for love. And she's willing to be a spinster if she doesn't find love. I admire her balls, (so to speak)!
You are only 25. I know from what you've shared before that you are doing everything I would recommend. You do give guys a shot, you're very open to meeting new people. You have a lot going for you, it's waaaayyyy to early for you to be talking about settling. I think you can have it all, with the right person at the right time. As long as you don't waste the pretty with douchebags, ahem.
I think the show just illustrates the general contempt modern society has for beta males. I have come across some interesting articles that demonstrate this:
http://tinyurl.com/legzk2
http://tinyurl.com/yfhucg9
In the first article, the general contempt of men is plain to see. And as one commenter said, the fact that 15% of men are unknowingly raising someone else's child in this age of birth control hints at a much higher rate of infidelity. So if a woman is willing to run around on a man she adores, and lie to him about it so coldheartedly, would it not make since that she would only rate him as a B+? If you under-rate your guy, then it is easier to justify to yourself any bad behavior towards him. After all, he isn't perfect either, is he?
I know the majority of women are not this way, but there is a general contempt of men displayed in mainstream society. And, sadly, in my opinion men are the ones responsible for this.
Women often refer to their men as immature. Or childlike. Or sometimes like pets. And men let them. Often men actively encourage this behavior. Examples: I greatly respected my Father. And, in his defense, he was in very poor health the past 15 years or so. But even before his diabetes started breaking him down 30 years ago, he encouraged Mom to take care of him. She cooked his meals, cleaned up his messes, and kissed his boo-boos. He was, in effect, another kid. Albeit one who was good a fixing things and bringing in the bacon. My best friend is exactly the same way. He is taken care of by his wife. This sort of thing leads to the perception of men being children. I have never seen a man taking care of a woman in the way women take care of men.
Which is probably why I am still single. I cannot stand being taken care of. When a wife refers to her husband as her 'eldest child' I get very offended. When a girlfriend tries it with me it turns me off. I am just too independent, I suppose.
So I guess what I am saying is; until men are willing to take care of themselves and insist on being equal partners in a relationship women will continue to take 'stress breaks' with other men, lie to their own men 'for their own good', and treat them like children. In other words, they will continue to rate even the best men as B+.
Melissa is asking the eternal question here. Do I have enough time to find that 'one' who'll not only give me my much vaunted 'butterflies' but who just 'wows' me in every other way? No one can know this. But it can a particularly complex question. Do you really know what you want & desire in a mate? When & why? Do you want children 'right away' or have the capacity to enjoy your partner more for yourself before the arrival of children which tend to disrupt & disorder much of everything? What constellation of characteristics should the bloke display? What does he need to look like for your 'bells to ring?' Tall, dark & handsome & 'then some'? Where do you run into these types? When typically? At school or beyond? (Seldom in bars actually).
And why is it with the help of new technology putting anyone in theoretical 'hailing distance' of a social network that would rival many small nations just a few short decades ago, why is it claimed that 'it's so difficult to meet people!' This is nonsense! It's evidently hard to find people who 'please you' upon meeting them. (Although Melissa seems to have gone quite a bit further than simple dates with her BF's). This can get better with age, but only if reality and some 'common sense' begin to intrude upon deeply cherished fantasies. Plenty of people fall in love w/o being 'bowled over' by their intended spouse. Plenty of women & men found themselves married to 'good enough' spouses in the past, and most survived the experience relatively intact & none the worse for wear. (Yes, plenty of this came about due to a lack of adequate birth control & much more stringent social controls stressed by the community).
I know several women who had the same desires too. One spurned the advances of 2 men who she knew were deeply in love with her. She's yes, still single (and mostly happy with that) at 40 something. She may even eventually marry, but now she too has now spent the better part of 2 decades 'dating'. (Becoming Increasingly & more strangely common!) And many more go on to have LTR with a series of 'wrong' guys that would easily work up to a full marriage if the time wasted on them were strung all together! That's what really is amazing to consider. Many of these same gals if they said 'Yes!' to the first reasonable, viable & decent offer that came along in their 20's (a pretty common occurrence for anyone over the age of 60-70 say), at the very worse would be in exactly the same position as those who refused all comers. Except they'd likely have the eternal gift of lovely children, be able to share a lifetime of experiences & more realistic expectations of humanity to boot!
I cannot see the tremendous advantage to anyone to have plenty of lovely, healthy, well educated women waiting out most of their 20's just to find someone 'that makes their heart sing' at the cusp of 30 something and at the supreme cost of their future happiness with possible children or a much shorter time spent with their spouses. Demographically today? You're likely to be spending more time alone & single than married. And there's only one basic cause for this, and that's women's decision (mostly for the good reasons of completing their educations) to delay marriage & date longer & a wider variety of men for the 'experience'. In the end? Not everything can be done on the hurry up schedule of finally coming to decide 'what it is you want' and what it is you're seeking in a mate' & finally 'what's marginally acceptable' for you.
Women & men have been finally allowed this tremendous freedom of 'terrible choice', and happily go on to make plenty of them. I know women who've been chasing the 'band'/band members/sexy guitar gods for the decade of their 20's and then go on to find all the guys who want to settle down & become daddies, 'just boring!' And then After 40 suddenly decide they wanted to have kids after all & a conventional home life. As the Doc said to the Post Op Tranny, sorry Judy/Jude we're can't put that situation back! Sorry that ship has sailed. Now you can be a delightful & fully satisfied mother to adoptive kids (please do this before the 45-50 state enforced cut off!) or a wonderful step mom to a new brood. But no, sorry, you really can't have it all. The hard decisions you make today will necessarily limit your choices in the future. That's life. The wondrous successful Yummy daddies of your youth will be the slightly bruised or broken dads of their 40's wanting a 2nd try at love. And mostly? They'll do just fine for most purposes. Ditto for the 2nd chance mommies that litter the blogs.
That's the thing. No one can predict the future. We really don't know your chances. No one can much. You can prepare well, and still just a few 'wrong/bad/ turns later you're in the state/Federal pen sharing a cell with Bernie. Or (much more likely) in an abusive/going nowhere relationship with that dreamy, studly 'alpha' male of your fantasies. And he's never going to leave his wife, or pay child support for your secret love child. And Murray's calling for the story. And it's looking pretty sorry. Even for the Harvard grads. Don't waste the pretty. It's an invaluable resource, as is your fertility, health and yes, sanity. No one was ever meant to actually date most of their adult life. That's just too damn tragic to contemplate. And yet it seems to be happening now! Cheers & Good Luck, 'VJ'
OK, VJ makes a fair point here. The pretty, which is to say, the fertility, phase has an expiration date. Many women in their 30s cry foul when men their age are going for 22 year-olds. That's life, and that will never change. Still, it's a bit early for you to be throwing in the towel! You've got some things going on, but I would agree that it's not productive, regardless of your age, to be wasting time in a dead end relationship. But you already know that.
Screwtape, those links are very interesting. One thing I don't understand is why cheating is related to paternity. Why on earth wouldn't a cheating woman wear a condom? I can't imagine that many would relish the raised eyebrows that occur when your kid comes out looking like your boss. 8-15% of children born are from an affair? That's staggering. The second link is a little less shocking because it defines cheating as kissing. I agree that kissing is cheating, but let's face it, it's not on the same scale.
I totally agree that men are often held in contempt by society. I'll share a personal story here. When my son went to kindergarten, he was regularly disciplined for being impulsive, having ants in his pants, etc. He was severely punished for hitting another boy over the head with an empty plastic lunchbox during an argument. The standard that 6 year-old boys were held to was one appropriate for girls. The teacher regularly implied that our son was abnormal, disturbed in some way. I despised that kindergarten teacher, and was very unhappy when my daughter was assigned to her a couple of years later. Guess what? She adored my daughter. When the class had a particularly argumentative day, my daughter suggested that everyone make a harmony mural together (barf, haha). The teacher called me to gush over what a wonderful child I was raising. Show me a boy who resolves conflict with a harmony mural, and I'll show you a boy who can't take care of himself on the playground. Later, my daughter initiated and organized a charitable homemade ornament sale to benefit the homeless, and the teacher got the Boston Globe in to cover it. Fifteen years later, the school still holds that sale every year.
Girls and boys are very different. Women and men are very different, by nature. That's a good thing, in my opinion. It's not fair to punish and shame boys for behaving naturally. In the end, we pulled our son out of public school and sent him to an all-boys private school where they got two recess periods and lots of sports. He thrived there, because no one was making value judgments about him. His maleness was celebrated. Obviously, that solution is not available to most people in most places. We need to celebrate boys, and later men, for their intrinsic qualities.
As for infantilizing men, who does that? A very controlling woman. I do think men like being fussed over, and I also think women love it when their men act boyish sometimes. But that's not the same as being weak, which is what you are describing. Some good points here, though. This is an important topic.
Absolutely, Susana, there must be some fun in every relationship. What I mean here is the Cosmo mag fantasy of being raptured by a fascinating and thrilling movie star-like guy. There is always the expectation that this guy is around the corner, and staying with the beta will close the door for him. The media, the friends, they all say Mr Big will come.
Alpha players prey upon this fantasy, since they emulate well the first stages of this ideal relationship (minus the dumping part). Many women simply want more to have fun than to find reality. See the examples above: all girls said the guys were boring, not violent, or rude, or uneducated. Boring. This is too much for a regular guy to handle. And the exchange is far from fair, since she isn't expected to be charming, all she is expected to do is to give up sex.
Only when girls give up this fantasy, will they be right about complaining about the dangers and evil of alphas.
Oh, don't even get me started on Mr. Big! I can't argue with you on this – I'm the one who pointed this unfairness out, after all. I wonder about the two couples who did have second dates, and how the guys felt when they saw that the women had judged them lacking. When that guy said the woman was too much of a Plain Jane for him, I felt terrible for her. This feature publishes full names, and sometimes pics. People could at least use some tact!
In real estate, a common saying is “your first offer is your best offer”.
Waiting for the fantasy is tempting. But look around and see how that has played out for most women.
How many women do you know that turned down the sweet “boring” beta, only to be swept away by the exciting bad boy who actually has a heart of gold and will commit to them.
The empirical data is there. I know very few women who live in that rapturous state. And of those who do, it never seems to last. The first real serious wave of disappointment is just now beginning to reach the shoreline. Expect a lot more noise on this in the near future.
I think there should be an article on how men wind up alone with a house full of porn and weights and a beer gut.
That is an easy question. After men become disillusioned with the ridiculously high expectations placed on them by even average women (as shown in the above examples), they simply give up trying to meet those expectations.
more on overlooked boy inequieites in education
http://www.whyboysfail.com
Yup, I agree. The skills that served the alpha so well 100,000 years ago, e.g. spear throwing, brute strength, are no longer required for survival. Physical prowess is sport/entertainment, nothing more. There are consultants whose entire business is helping alpha males to get along better with others, especially in the work place. They are born leaders, but no one can stand to work with them. And I doubt they're much fun around the house, either.
As for when to accept an offer? Check out this interesting article:
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-scienti...
It's been mathematically proven that women should reject the first 37% of potential lifetime mates, and then take the next good offer. It's easier to manage the number in Iowa than in NYC, or Boston for that matter. Since women are the ones selecting, perhaps women in cities, with thousands of potential dates, are having difficulty processing their options. Interesting, anyway.
Haha, Kate, I love your funny comments! You always get straight to the point, and you're always right on target! Good point. I daresay there are more of those than women with 20 cats.
Well, one could hardly blame them. It must indeed get very discouraging when you're a man doing everything you're supposed to do, and your efforts are met with “that's not good enough.” Perhaps this explains why we're in trouble with our birth rate (once you remove recent immigrants).
Yes! This is a great blog, I have a lot of respect for Richard Whitmire. I've quoted him before re hookup culture. He weighs in on this article:
The Child Man
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/...
I believe this is key in understanding the American man today.
I'm writing a “How To” book on that right now, though it also involves video games , awesome A/V equipment and an indoor batting cage and driving range. It's gonna be a best seller. “Chapter Six: Realdoll.com”
Le sigh, another lost comment…
Rick – You're right! It is arrogance! It's confidence in my gut instincts gleaned over one too many fake relationships where I've let things develop in hopes that I'll feel what I am supposed to feel when I meet a sweet guy only to find months later I haven't been feeling it.
I don't assume chemistry can't develop, I know it can.
But let's roll with your food analogy, I love cookies and bread and all things made from flour and yet they make me really sick (I am a celiac) and until 2005 I used to still indulge occasionally but now I know how much better my life is without them. I rarely eat junk food and fast food and I like to bake from scratch. I am a vegetarian and have food allergies up the wazoo. In other words, I like my men and relationships like I like my food – grown with love, local, organic, and not impregnanted with toxins. Yes, I am a picky eater but that has it's bonuses I am creative in the kitchen and not afraid to try different combinations of the foods I love and are good for me – I have a healthy well balanced diet because I know what ingredients make me happy and what ingredients make me sick
Yay, another X chromosome, haha! I LOVE the food analogy. I wish there was a Whole Foods full of organic, local guys not impregnated with toxins! Talk about an Omnivore's Dilemma…
I absolutely refute the notion that a woman should go on a second date with a man if the first date didn't arouse her interest in any way. Lots of times women don't feel the chemistry, but enjoy the company and agree to see where it goes.
That is not the point I'm making here! I am not criticizing these women for not liking their dates. I object to them raving about their dates, and then scoring them low. I also object to the way the women prioritized physical faults, while the men had more class than that across the board. And the woman who was late and texting was just plain rude. The sample size was pretty small, it's just that in reading this column over the course of 10 months I really did notice that the women were very tough customers. I didn't fault, or write about, any women who tactfully declined another date. That's life.
P.S. Decoy Betty, have I lost two of your comments, or just one? a;lkdfja;ldkjfa;dlkfj I am so sorry, i've got to get to the bottom of this!
Hmmm…this doesn't surprise me all that much, especially in Boston. All the women I know are incredibly educated and fun, and are looking for their match in those capacities. In Boston, we definitely have more of a tendency to date based on resumes first, and personality second.
The rating difference surprised me a little because I think men are usually more superficial and take more time to get into someone than women. But, especially given that these stats would be published in the newspaper, there might have been an attempt from these women to not come off as super gung-ho and therefore somehow “desperate.”
In regard to the lady who said she didn't like the man's “round” figure: an overweight woman on a documentary about dating I saw once said something to the effect of “people assume that because I'm fat, that I'm attracted to fat men. I'm not. Just like most fat men aren't attracted to their physical equals. Why should my pants size be the measure of the mate I'm 'allowed' to pursue?” People here keep pointing out that physical attraction is mostly chemical, at least initially. So, I think it's a bit harsh to say “well, she's no prize–she should (in effect) take what she can get.” Most of the men I'm generally attracted to weigh about 50 lbs less than me (I like my boys lanky). I don't rule the other ones out completely, but I'm not physically attracted to them unless their personality makes them more attractive to me over time. Does that mean I'll be an old maid? Or must I not reject people physically similar to me? All the recent studies have shown that the happiest and most faithful marriages are generally those in which the female's perceived value is higher than the male's, such that he feels “lucky to have her.” So I don't take a lot of stock in the similar-levels-of-attractiveness schtick.
What's interesting to me is that my pool of female peers are all looking for a good beta male–a stable, educated, mature, good provider. And they will sacrifice actual chemistry to get one. My BFF who will be working on her Ph.D next year came to visit recently from her rural VA home and made sure to set-up a blind date here in advance since the talent pool is so much better (she's a brilliant Black female–she has an even tougher time dating). She went out with the tiniest, most awkward MIT grad student with a seriously impressive resume. And I don't mean conventional, nerdy awkward. I mean “I'm-90%-positive-you're-gay” awkward. Did they have a lot to talk about? Absolutely. Is there any romantic chemistry at all? Nope, not for her. Is she in any way attracted to him? Definitely not. But, he is an MIT grad student and literally the only guy she's ever been on a date with who actually graduated from college. So, she'll be keeping him around. Not out of desperation, out of a sense of “I certainly deserve to be connected to someone like that.” And I cannot blame her. Nobody wants to settle. And women like us are deathly afraid of marrying some Neanderthal who won't get off the couch and can barely spell. In many parts of the country, that Neanderthal is the only guy left after all the decent ones have been snatched up.
Hey, LAC, nice to “see” you again! I agree that we can't control (nor should we try) the reality of who people are attracted to. In this post, I was trying to get at what struck me as odd about the Dinner with Cupid articles. The first thing was that the women who really, really liked their dates still scored lower than the men did. Perhaps, as you say, they didn't want to seem too eager. The other was that some of the feedback was tactless. If you're going to say a guy is too round for you, when you are not perfect yourself, you are inviting pushback. She could have said she didn't feel a spark rather than criticize his weight. I can only assume she humiliated him by sharing that in the Boston Globe! If she was a supermodel, I would still feel exactly the same way about her remark. I also thought the woman was rude who said, “I thought I would laugh more.” Like the guy has to do stand-up to get her attention. Again, she could have said he was interesting but she didn't see it going anywhere. There's nothing wrong with not wanting a second date, but there is no need to be cruel. I think her remark was selfish, and it too invites pushback. She's no beauty queen, does she have a hilarious and entertaining personality to compensate?
Overall, I have the sense that women tend to be harsher judges, or at least these women did. Maybe this group just has bad manners. By the way, there was one writeup – you may have seen it – a couple that has been married for 20 years submitted a Dinner with Cupid writeup of their first date in college. She ended by saying she didn't think she wanted a second date, haha. Obviously, he won her over in the end.
Finally, I think you are really onto something with regard to women seeking beta males. I am doing a lot of research on this right now, and may use your comment in a post! I commend your friend for recognizing the friendship value of the MIT guy, and for appreciating his mind and what he has to offer. She is the polar opposite of the women I've described in this post!
I hear such mixed things about whether Boston is a good singles city, but one thing's for sure. Very few Neanderthals.
Susan,
I agree, some of those people were just rude, which surprises me because, as women, I feel like we're constantly trying to find “nice” ways to reject men. Especially if you know your statements are going to be printed. Makes me wonder if he was rude to her at some point… Or, she's just mean.
Well I'm from the Midwest, and have moved slowly East over the past 10 yrs. I can tell you that for single, educated, intelligent young women Boston is the best place ever to date. Before moving here, I literally hadn't gone on a date since college–like 4 yrs. Why? No one to date. When I moved here, I was getting asked out several times a week by people with graduate degrees. There are just tons of single educated people here (and certainly tons of beta males). Another old friend of mine who moved here recently from New York says that she “falls in love 8 times a day” here and that of all the places she's lived, Boston has the most attractive men (obviously we're more into the bookish types).
Oh, and btw, I decided to form a monogamous relationship with that artist, the consummate sensitive beta male. He grew on me over time, and I just stopped being able to come up with reasons to keep saying “no.” We'll see how it turns out in the long run.
I am so happy for you! I was wondering about Beta Artist, but didn't want to pry. I hope you won't stop coming to my blog now just b/c you're in a relationship
Also, I am really excited to hear about Boston being a great singles city. If you don't mind my asking, where do you meet great Betas with graduate degrees? The bar scene, online dating, something else? I know a great many young women in Boston who are in college, but will be desperate to meet new men soon.
Susan,
I certainly won't stop visiting. I read these sorts of media for the same reason I read Savage Love: intellectual curiosity. We could all use advice from time to time.
When I first moved to Boston (from rural PA) to start grad school, a classmate of mine convinced me to sign up for Match.com. He was having a lot of success with it (like 5 dates a week success) without really doing any work. I had some luck there (you may recall that failed romance with the math teacher, and a few other dates with engineers, etc.), and I met the Beta Artist and a couple other scientists, teachers, and other professionals on OkCupid as did my BFF the MIT student (that site is REALLY good for young intellectuals, and it's free). I also got asked out pretty much everywhere around town–on the T, gay nights at The Roxy (straight guys have now figured out where the girls go to party and have infiltrated), Trader Joe's, etc. And I am a pretty average-looking bookwormy-type chick.
Every female friend of mine who has come to visit me has been hit on several times by pretty educated men when we've gone out. Just a few weeks ago some really funny guy who was sitting next to us at a concert at The House of Blues randomly bought us drinks–that shit NEVER happened to me in the Midwest. Our cute waiter at the Cheesecake Factory in Cambridge chatted me up for 30 minutes straight the other week–in front of my bf no less. Plus, the people being so friendly and nice here makes it super easy to flirt and approach, which is important for me because I am generally pretty shy when it comes to making the first move.
If you're into beta males (gay or straight), Boston is the place to be. All the friends I have who have visited me here fell in love with the city and all want to move here.
Social comments and analytics for this post…
This post was mentioned on Twitter by Vintage Antique: How Women Wind Up Alone With a House Full of Cats http://bte.tc/syh #RTW…
LAC, that is awesome feedback about the Boston scene, thanks! Gay nights at the Roxy – who knew? I am so glad you like Boston, and have found it a great place to meet people. I didn't grow up here, but have lived here since 1986 and love it, it's a great city. My kids are so loyal to Boston it amazes me – both of them regularly threatening to get a tattoo of the Boston skyline :-/
This is so interesting. I'm from NY and the woman I'm attracted to is also attracted to me, but is scared of something. Me being in the health care profession realized after a few months that she has some deep rooted issues. She had two cats. One died and shortly thereafter the other. She has also mentioned her father several times, but has not gone deeper into it. Well detective Vincent was on the case and after putting the puzzle together I came up with: “she had two cats and one died, the other died because it was lonely it missed its soul mate so to speak.” It told me right off the bat that she is emotionally distant and uncaring, but that she wants a relationship and that there are obstacles in her way. Now mind you as an experienced man, I let her make most of the moves and when I bit (asked her out 3 times over the course of several weeks) I was rejected. Initially I went through the rejection phase, but also realized that it has nothing to do with me. I'm mean she flirts, gets me to notice her, separates herself from her friends so that I can approach her, so when I move forward she pulls back. After 6 weeks of this nonsense, I decided to cut her off politely as in ” you know what I understand” and walked away. So a house full of cats means that woman are distant and like to get close only when the cat pulls away. GUYS ACT LIKE A CAT and if she doesn't come chasing don't take it personal its not us. Any who after two weeks of me distancing myself, she started acting weird like wanting to get me to notice her and almost literaly running away mind you she 40 years old acting like this. At some point she must have realized that I'm not about the bu%%$h!- and left her alone. In this way she is allowed to relax and explore whatever feelings, if any she has towards me. One thing is certain, the way she avoiding me at the gym is a clear indication that her emotions are engaged. Additionally, here is the clincher. I believe I have the answer but I will open it up to the community. She has never mentioned a boyfriend, a husband and guy shes dating-no men whatsoever. If she didn't want anything to do with me she could have lied about having any of the above, or something like “I'm a lesbian.” I would never know the truth and would move on to someone else. What would be the rational behind her not saying anything?
[...] How Women Wind Up Alone With a House Full of Cats | Hooking Up Smart [...]
ok after going on a date this weekend, I have to say, that these women are probably not giving us the brutal truth about these men. By holding back on all the weird things these guys did, they are trying to spare their feelings, but it comes off sounding vey fuzzy wuzzy and unclear.
It's hard to explain. My date would probably giver our date a 10. But then he talked about himself all the time, wasn't particularly gentlemanly and came off as being super judgemental. Plus he had this offputting facial expression, and i didn't like his hair or his clothes.
His body was great, really fit, but his face…no…
So what's a girl to do?
I'm all for having my bed to myself until I find someone who I'm compatible with. Even if it's my cat.
Hi Kate, thanks for returning with an update. You may a good point here. It's certainly possible that some of these guys were worse than they seem. As it happens, I just read this week's Dinner with Cupid, and it was just like your date. The guy was all about it, and the woman felt no spark. But they did print a couple of things she thought were odd, like how he grilled her with many questions about how she could possibly not like strawberries. Not exactly scintillating dinner conversation!
I totally admire and respect you for not settling. Cats and dogs make quite reasonable stand-ins.
[...] I would argue that it’s the beta male, open to egalitarian partnership, who is most open to mating with a strong “alpha” female in modern society. (Some think Barack Obama fits this profile .) It’s a cliche that the most dominant Alpha …… Plus he had this offputting facial expression, and i didn’t like his hair or his clothes. His body was great, really fit, but his face…no… So what’s a girl to do? I’m all for having my bed to myself until I find someone who I’m …Continue Reading [...]
My question is – why does Michael want to see Janine again when she was so clearly rude (texting someone else while on a date is rude) and is reading books written for teenagers?
I would adore this guy but he wouldn't give me a second glance because I don't look like Janine.
Nat, thanks so much for commenting. I agree 100%. Janine was incredibly rude, and Michael needs to stop thinking about how hot she is and start thinking about what will bring him happiness. Janine isn't it. She's awful in this story, but he's shallow. He needs to have some self-respect and acknowledge that she is not a potential mate.
Nat, thanks so much for commenting. I agree 100%. Janine was incredibly rude, and Michael needs to stop thinking about how hot she is and start thinking about what will bring him happiness. Janine isn't it. She's awful in this story, but he's shallow. He needs to have some self-respect and acknowledge that she is not a potential mate.
hiii