Friday Picks for Weekend Reading

November 2, 2012 103 Comments

I. Science ♥’s debate at HUS, so keep it coming. Echo chambers make you stupid and ignorant:

“Those who talk about politics seduction and relationships with people they see [online] often, and whom they value, are likely to be exposed to the political arguments of their close contacts often,” the researchers write. Their evidence suggests this dynamic leads to increased political polarization, and ultimately weakens our ability to deliberate on and coherently discuss the issues of the day. 

II. Cads aren’t better looking, they’re just vain.

This study provides the first experimental evidence that dark personalities construct appearances that act as social lures—possibly facilitating their cunning social strategies.

It turns out that when you put them in sweats, slick their hair back, remove facial hair and wipe the smirks away, they’re no hotter than anyone else. (It holds for female sociopaths too.)

III. A former PUA asks whether his promiscuity has destroyed his husband potential. The answer? He hopes not, but it’s complicated. 

IV. A ladykiller shares his secrets. With women. Never tell a man when you’ll have sex with him. 

 

Filed in: Tidbits

About the Author:

  • Ted D

    ““Those who talk about politics seduction and relationships with people they see [online] often, and whom they value, are likely to be exposed to the political arguments of their close contacts often,” the researchers write. Their evidence suggests this dynamic leads to increased political polarization, and ultimately weakens our ability to deliberate on and coherently discuss the issues of the day. ”

    Which is partly why I tend to engage in debate with people that do NOT agree with my views. I actually like “seeing the other side” as it either proves or disproves my own internal beliefs. I’ve made many adjustments when it comes to sexuality by being here, but not all of those have gone to the “other” side.

  • Antitype

    “It turns out that when you put them in sweats, slick their hair back, remove facial hair and wipe the smirks away, they’re no hotter than anyone else. (It holds for female sociopaths too.)”

    So it’s official, clean shaven is less sexy than stubble in all cases?

    As far as slicked-back hair, do cads supposedly not have jobs? Cause putting your hair back with gel (nothing too shiny, ideally) is pretty much the only way corporate america will let a dude with medium or long hair come to work.

    And isn’t really neat, slicked back hair coming back in Hollywood these days?

    *shrugs*

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      So it’s official, clean shaven is less sexy than stubble in all cases?

      That wasn’t studied. The point is that all adornments were removed: hair, stylish clothing, makeup, glasses, facial hair, makeup. Every person was reduced to a natural, scrubbed, just out of the shower look. When that was done, people with Dark personality traits were not rated as more attractive than anyone else. However, they tend to put a great deal of effort into their appearance, so when you measure them against others once they’ve adorned themselves (adorn is the word the researchers used), they are rated as more attractive.

  • Ramble

    Science ?’s debate at HUS, so keep it coming. Echo chambers make you stupid and ignorant:

    Somehow this makes me think of all the times Susan has made sure that everyone knew that she does not feel comfortable talking about race.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      Somehow this makes me think of all the times Susan has made sure that everyone knew that she does not feel comfortable talking about race.

      Here are some other things we don’t debate at HUS:

      Rock climbing vs. helicopter skiing
      Islamic jihadists
      Obama vs. Romney
      Flourless chocolate cake or creme brulee?
      Vodka vs. gin
      Baseball vs. football
      Japanese cars vs. American cars
      Canines vs. felines

      OTOH, here are some things we do cover:

      Brazilian or landing strip?
      Spit or swallow
      Coffee shops vs. bookstores
      Frat rats. vs. athletes
      Restricted vs. unrestricted
      PUA vs. Relationship Game
      Emotional vs. sexual escalation
      Radfems vs. Sane women
      etc.

  • Ramble


    Islamic jihadists

    Susan, you are way too smart for that to be your reply.

    Don’t Marcotte this issue. Our beloved Anacaona has brought up this issue many times with respect to how it affected her views and approach to dating.

    The fact that you do not want to discuss it (much), and that this is your backyard, fine. That is fine. But, your views on this issue seem pretty in line with the likes of, well, Marcotte, and I am guessing that “echo chambering” plays a definite role in that.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Ramble

      Our beloved Anacaona has brought up this issue many times with respect to how it affected her views and approach to dating.

      I have never shied away from sharing data by race when it was relevant, and I’ve tolerated more than a little nonsense from Obsidian about swirling. In addition, people of a variety of races comment here, and have felt free to share their personal tastes re what they find attractive. Personally, I don’t see any use in focusing on what people do not find attractive.

      I see no reason to discuss race as it relates to IQ, immigration, or other government policies and handouts. I understand several readers here may be interested in that, and obviously there are blogs that focus on those issues. I don’t, but I promise not to publish any knitting tutorials either.

      If a topic is directly related to sex and relationships, it’s generally OK with me. I’ll allow OT threads as long as people are enjoying themselves and not disrespecting one another.

      Remember, I consider this my virtual living room, and I hold commenters to the same standards I would hold guests to in my home. In fact, I’d be delighted to have any of the regulars here in my home. This is a great group, despite the sometimes contentious debates.

  • Lokland

    “Vodka vs. gin”

    Vodka.
    No exceptions comrade.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      Vodka.
      No exceptions comrade.

      Oh, good, this could be fun going OT.

      I’m with you re vodka. My favorite spirit. In the summer, I do love a gin and tonic, with the juice of half a lime squeezed in.

  • INTJ

    @ Ramble

    Susan’s position towards discussing race has nothing to do with Marcotte, and it does not forbid the kind of discussion that Anacaona has brought up.

  • Ted D

    “Vodka.
    No exceptions comrade.”

    As a person of Polish lineage, I approve this remark!

  • Ion

    “Vodka vs. gin”

    Gin hands down.

    And the people who choose vodka are just uncomfortable with Gin being discussed. It’s conspiracy!!

    “Spit or swallow”

    We should discuss this more, do men care either way?

    “Canines vs. felines”

    Not getting into this one…I’ve seen conversations escalate pretty quickly on both sides.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      “Canines vs. felines”

      Not getting into this one…I’ve seen conversations escalate pretty quickly on both sides.

      Haha! Doghouse Diaries has a fantastic new comic about dogs. I especially like the Enthusiasm part.

      dd

  • Sassy6519

    @ Ramble

    Somehow this makes me think of all the times Susan has made sure that everyone knew that she does not feel comfortable talking about race.

    Honestly, I don’t fault her.

    I personally like that HUS does not focus on race. It allows for a relatively more peaceful experience. Race can be a touchy subject in general. Talking about it has a way of alienating, offending, and upsetting people. All it takes is one incendiary comment to ruin an entire comments section. There are plenty of examples of this in this very blog’s past.

    Honestly Ramble, I’ve been curious as to why you have such an itchy trigger finger when it comes to discussing race. Does that topic interest you? Fine. Why not find another blog to discuss it on? I’m sure there are plenty of blogs out there that focus heavily/solely on racial dynamics/discussions. Why does it need to be discussed here?

  • Escoffier

    “Brazilian or landing strip?”

    Are those my only choices?

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      “Brazilian or landing strip?”

      Are those my only choices?

      Haha, not in my house, fortunately. My husband is strictly old school, because he is, well, old. There is a small but vocal minority of young men who like the natural look. I remember when Sasha Grey was on Entourage she was rocking a full natural look, and it was noted by the press as a potential new trend. In the 80s porn featured heart shapes.

      I suppose you could request anything – even a banana slug if you wanted.

  • Cooper

    ““Spit or swallow”
    We should discuss this more, do men care either way?”

    Aside the which we might find to have a much more enjoyable finish, I think this is the kind of thing that show how much *she cares.
    And I think it’s obviously which, of the two, says “I care” more.

  • Escoffier

    UC Santa Cruz mascot!

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      UC Santa Cruz mascot!

      Yup, just for you. The only reason I know that is because of the shirt Travolta wears in Pulp Fiction.

  • Escoffier

    Well, I didn’t go there, ahem.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      Well, I didn’t go there, ahem.

      Duh, you were a smart boy. Not that UCSC is easy to get into these days.

  • HanSolo

    @Esc.

    “Brazilian or landing strip?”

    Are those my only choices?

    Well, there is also Fangorn Forest.

    You could have a manicured bush.

    From there, there are all kinds of weird variations, like getting your initials shaved in.

  • Escoffier

    Ion, the specific outcome you ask about is less important than getting to the point where such a choice is necessary, if you know what I mean.

  • Ion

    LOL Susan at the Corky drawing! All of those illustrations are hilarious. It’s sad how addicted I am to cuteoverload.com, I was a cat person before I discovered that site, now I like them equally.

    Coop

    “I think this is the kind of thing that show how much *she cares.
    And I think it’s obviously which, of the two, says “I care” more.”

    I’ve heard the same from lots of men. Since casual has become so common, the special “incentives” men get in relationships (swallowing) don’t have the meaning they used to.

    I think its funny that women will do it occasionally, but do not want to be asked to do it (some even say that it’s “sexist” and offensive, like asking for facials).

    I suppose snowballing is a no go. I personally think it would be fun to try one day, but I’ve heard guys get skeeved out by their own juice, which I understand, kind of.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Ion

      One thing I hear women say a lot is that they hate, hate, hate, when a guy pushes on the back of their head.

  • http://photoncourier.blogspot.com david foster

    A dog’s diary and a cat’s diary:

    http://www.neptunuslex.com/2009/10/08/a-little-lighter/

  • Escoffier

    “I suppose snowballing is a no go”

    OMG, something actually worse than White Zin!

  • yareallypua

    “Echo chambers make you stupid and ignorant:”

    lol so quit banning my comments.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      “Echo chambers make you stupid and ignorant:”

      lol so quit banning my comments.

      I will if you quite trolling and pimping the PUA lifestyle.

  • Ion

    Escoffier

    “OMG, something actually worse than White Zin!”

    lol!

    Yeah…guessing it’d be bad to try it on a guy without explicitly asking beforehand. :-(

  • Escoffier

    And if he says “yes,” your gaydar should beep.

  • Ramble

    Personally, I don’t see any use in focusing on what people do not find attractive.

    That’s not true. You have most definitely focused, at times, on what people do not find attractive, but, that is not the point here.

    I see no reason to discuss race as it relates to IQ, immigration, or other government policies and handouts.

    Right, because things like Race and Immigration have NOT had a big impact on dating in places like the Southwest, or, your hometown, LA.

    I’ll allow OT threads as long as people are enjoying themselves and not disrespecting one another.

    Which is why I usually don’t bring this subject up.

    I consider this my virtual living room

    You’re right. And I will go back to radio silence on this.

    However, let me leave you with these two thoughts:

    1.) You live in, what is arguably, the most educated area in the country (per capita). Do you find that the people of Brookline are really open about talking about Race or are they more of an echo chamber?

    2.) Do you find it interesting at all that your thoughts on this matter are, likely, almost identical to those of Amanda Marcotte?

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    I prefer landing strips and I think swallowing is pretty hot, though, yes, less important than being in the position where the choice is necessary!

    Luckily, on politics, I am not in an echo chamber, and I arrive to some…odder views. It’s rather tough to support Roe V Wade despite my pro-choice stance, for instance.

  • Escoffier

    “It’s rather tough to support Roe V Wade despite my pro-choice stance, for instance.”

    I think this came out wrong.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    No, it came out right. I am pro-choice. I still think Roe V Wade was a bad decision.

    I also think that Affirmative Action in general is a good idea. When practiced by a government, I think it’s unconstitutional.

  • Ion

    Esco “And if he says “yes,” your gaydar should beep.”

    lol! It’d be your own sperm though.

    Maybe its seeing it in porn (guys masturbating on camera, and then finishing up by swallowing their own juice), which I find hot. This type of porn caters to a male audience, so you’re probably right.

    Susan

    “One thing I hear women say a lot is that they hate, hate, hate, when a guy pushes on the back of their head.”

    A guy pushing my head because he’s turned on I’m OK with. It’s attempting to hold my head there when I’m trying to back away so I don’t swallow that I’d have a problem with.

    Young women do offer up blow jobs like candy, and don’t include BJ in their N. So I wonder how many are swallowing (during casual? gross)

  • Sassy6519

    @ Ion

    I suppose snowballing is a no go. I personally think it would be fun to try one day, but I’ve heard guys get skeeved out by their own juice, which I understand, kind of.

    I haven’t known a single man that has been interested in snowballing. In my experience, the most that they will do is kiss me after I go down on them, and even that can skeeve them out sometimes.

    I wouldn’t even know how to bring that idea up with a guy without making him want to run.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    Is that something a lot girls are fantasizing about?

    Because I have honestly NEVER heard of this before.

  • Ion

    ADBG

    “I also think that Affirmative Action in general is a good idea. ”

    I’d agree, if it were practiced equally across the board. Every place I’ve worked there’s been a bunch of incompetent and discriminatory women (who only hire other women “that they’d get along with”, and not who’s qualified), hardly any minorities of either gender unless they’re janitors/receptionists, I’m assuming no veterans, and I’ve definitely never worked with a handicapped person.

    I personally think there should be a cap on the amount of women a company can hire. One of the main areas of inequality in an office environment is that lower-level office jobs like “administrative assistant” hire only women, so it gives men limited opportunities to work their way up after they graduate with a non-skilled degree. I’m not sure how this can be fixed.

  • Ion

    Sassy

    “I wouldn’t even know how to bring that idea up with a guy without making him want to run.”

    Yep, to me, it sucks because its something you can’t bring up, and something that risks too much to try on a whim.

    Oh well, I’ll just fantasize about it occasionally and get over it lol

  • Sassy6519

    @ A Definite Beta Guy

    Is that something a lot girls are fantasizing about?

    Because I have honestly NEVER heard of this before.

    They may be, but I’m not sure how prevalent it is. I personally don’t have an interest in snowballing, but that isn’t saying much because of my penchant for other proclivities.

    I’m pretty sure that there are people who fantasize about almost anything under the sun.

  • http://uncabob.blogspot.com/ Bob Wallace

    Ah, Cads. I’ve dealt with them. They’re one of the reasons I think this Alpha/Beta stuff is nonsense.

    One Cad in particular I have known for years is good-looking, charming, appears to be confident, and makes a lot of money. He told me he’s had sex with about 100 women.

    He is one of the most insecure and cowardly men I have met. Even his friends think that of him. He just covers it up with charm.

    So is he an Alpha? If he’s not an Alpha, then what is an Alpha?

    I read an article penned by one of the “leaders” of the Manosphere. It was about a Christian girl whose drug-addict husband backslid. The writer said the guy was an Alpha. No, he’s not. He’s a drug-addicted loser.

    In my life I have never met an Alpha. I’ve met several blowhards who pretended they were, but everyone saw through them and laughed at them.

    By the way, Alpha and Beta are staples of romance fiction written by and for females. In other words, they don’t exist in reality.

    In many ways the Manosphere is adolescent and in some ways childish.

  • INTJ

    @ Bastiat Blogger

    By the way, Alpha and Beta are staples of romance fiction written by and for females. In other words, they don’t exist in reality.

    Hence why there is a simple definition of Alpha. Alpha males are those who’re perceived by females as Alphas from romance fictions.

  • http://www.4stargazer.wordpress.com Anacaona

    @Ramble
    Interestingly enough I don’t consider my tales of Dominican dating hell about race (We Dominicans don’t seen to wanted as part of any race, not that I blame them) but more about the other side of gender domination. I started to share them when I read too many stories about how if male sexuality was as unleashed as female one was it would be a lot better for men and women alike. Not fucking no it won’t. I really want the unfairness towards men to end in USA but I don’t want them to end up like men in my country. I want a better deal for both genders, in the future, YMMV.

  • Sai

    The fourth is my favorite. Don’t write checks you may not be able to cash and all that…

  • INTJ

    @ Anacaona

    We need to throw the American women and the Dominican men together and watch them unleash their sexuality on each other. :D

  • Strauss

    @Bob Wallace

    There are some men that are more succesful with girls. These are the alpha guys, and they exist in reality.

    We may not like that often they are dark-triad guys and amoral assholes, but that’s another story.

  • Assanova

    I find the study about looks hard to believe, especially since I don’t have access to the full article (not paying $25, and my University doesn’t have access). What exactly is that article implying? That everyone looks the same, and the only difference is how you dress?

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Assanova

      What exactly is that article implying? That everyone looks the same, and the only difference is how you dress?

      The article is suggesting that people who “do the most with what they’ve got” are perceived as more attractive. Not surprisingly, narcissists are the most likely people to do this. The women are much more likely to wear makeup at all times, for example. They wear revealing clothes that show off their figures blatantly. They may spend a great deal of time arranging their hair in the morning. Next to people less obsessed with their own looks, they are rated as more attractive. When you put all the women in gray sweats with makeup scrubbed off and their hair pulled back in a ponytail, the differential disappears. Conclusion: Narcissists are more attractive than other people in their adorned or “dressed up” state, but not otherwise.

      Until now, a lot of research has suggested that people with Dark Triad traits are indeed more attractive or symmetrical. This is the first study to look at manufactured appeal vs. natural appeal. For a real life example of what this experiment may have looked like, consider this pic of Katy Perry taken by Russell Brand one morning:

      kp

  • Assanova

    Just read the second link. To me it sounds like “people who posess the dark triad, know how to dress better” and not “the dark triad makes people more physically attractive in the genetic sense ( i.e. facial symmetry, muscles, and height)”.

  • J

    Flourless chocolate cake or creme brulee?

    OMG, can’t we all just get along?!

  • modernguy

    Every person was reduced to a natural, scrubbed, just out of the shower look. When that was done, people with Dark personality traits were not rated as more attractive than anyone else. However, they tend to put a great deal of effort into their appearance, so when you measure them against others once they’ve adorned themselves (adorn is the word the researchers used), they are rated as more attractive.

    Girls loooove the douche.

  • Mike C

    The article is suggesting that people who “do the most with what they’ve got” are perceived as more attractive.

    Susan,

    This isn’t surprising to me at all. I think I’ve mentioned a great number of times that there are all sorts of things a person can do to boost their physical attractiveness. Like most things, there is a spectrum between “I don’t give a shit about my appearance” and being obsessed with it.

  • Mike C

    Just to add to my last comment….my fiancee has done makeup for a number of photo shoots. Even many models don’t look all that stunning before the hair and makeup people “work their magic”.

    Like a meal at a top-tier restaurant, a good chunk of the “attractiveness” comes from the surroundings and presentation, and not just the food quality in isolation.

  • INTJ

    Well Katy Perry might not be the best example. She looks like a mannequin with makeup on.

  • http://www.4stargazer.wordpress.com Anacaona

    We need to throw the American women and the Dominican men together and watch them unleash their sexuality on each other.

    That would be a reality show I would actually watch. A match made in hell would be a good name for it :p

  • Mick

    Since Susan Walsh is a Massachusetts resident, I’d like to know her personal view on Mitt Romney’s governance of the state.

    This will in no way affect my voting or lack thereof, but he is a pedastalizer;

    “To Mitt, the special one in the house was Ann, with her wide smile, piercing eyes, and steadying domestic presence. And woe was the boy who forgot it. Tagg said there was one rule that was simply not breakable: “We were not allowed to say anything negative about my mother, talk back to her, do anything that would not be respectful of her.” On Mother’s Day, their home would be fragrant with lilacs, Ann’s favorite flowers. Tagg didn’t get it back then, but he came to understand. From the beginning, Mitt had put Ann on a pedestal and kept her there. “When they were dating,” Tagg said, “he felt like she was way better than him and he was really lucky to have this catch. He really genuinely still feels that way.” What makes his parents’ relationship work, he said, is their distinct characters: Mitt is driven first by reason, while Ann operates more on emotion. “She helps him see there’s stuff beyond the logic; he helps her see that there’s more than just instinct and feeling,” Tagg said. Mitt and Ann’s relationship would grow and change as their family entered the public eye. But she has remained his chief counselor and confidante, the one person who can lead Mitt to a final decision. Though she did not necessarily offer detailed input on every business deal, friends said, she weighed in on just about everything else. “Mitt’s not going to do something that they don’t feel good about together,” said Mitt’s sister Jane. Tagg said they called their mom “the great Mitt stabilizer.” Ann would later be mocked for her claim that she and Mitt had never had an argument during their marriage, which sounded preposterous to the ears of many married mortals. Tagg said it’s not that his parents never disagree. “I know there are things that she says that he doesn’t agree with sometimes, and I see him kind of bite his tongue. But I know that they go and discuss it in private. He doesn’t ever contradict my mother in public.” Friends of the Romneys’ back up that account, saying they cannot recall Mitt ever raising his voice toward Ann. Nowhere was Ann’s special status more evident than on long family car trips. Mitt imposed strict rules: they would stop only for gas, and that was the only chance to get food or use the restroom. With one exception, Tagg explained. “As soon as my mom says, ‘I think I need to go to the bathroom,’ he pulls over instantly and doesn’t complain. ‘Anything for you, Ann.’”

    http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/2012/02/mitt-romney-201202

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Mick

      Why did you ask about Romney’s governance of the state and then focus on his marriage?

      As to the former, I’ve stated quite explicitly that I don’t do that sort of politics here.

      As for his marriage, it seems to me to be a model of love and harmony. Mitt Romney is perhaps the ideal mix of alpha and beta traits from a relationship perspective. He clearly respect his wife’s judgment, and assuming she has counseled him thus far, he is wise to do so, though he is clearly the head of the household.

  • Todd

    @Anacona, as a (Black) American guy who has dated a Dominican woman in college, I find your description apt. It was, shall I say, interesting. :) Also, most Black people I run into (at least in and around my NY area) consider Dominicans Black. There’s a whole complicated dialogue around that, but I’m avoiding starting racial flame wars. :)

    Regarding article II, that’s would explain why I tend to be turned off by people who clean up nice. After all, if I can’t look at you in your fresh-out-of-bed look when the goal is to, ya know, get you TO bed, that’s a problem. Of course, it’s fun to dress up nice and clean up well, but my standard of attractiveness is whether I’ll still be able to get it up when you just got out of bed in your sweats or comfy night clothes. I’ve gotten some good surprises from that over the years, and it’s never really steered me wrong.

  • Todd

    And can I say that Katy Perry w/o makeup looks a lot like a clean-shaven Russell Brand in that pic? I honestly thought it was him until I re-read the caption. Also, I hate that she’s marketed as curvy while the likes of, say Maliah Michel and Rosa Acosta are ignored by the mainstream. Now THOSE are curvy women. :)

  • JP

    Here’s a fun psychological thingy.

    “Human beings are naturally motivated to assert their values; to think their values are best; and to be intolerant of people with opposite values.

    Here is how Oxford University professor George Ramsay described self- hugging.

    The same difference of feeling and dullness of imagination in men explain what often has been observed, that one half of mankind pass their lives in wondering at the pursuits of the other. Not being able either to feel or to fancy the pleasure derived from the other sources than their own, they consider the rest of the world as little better than fools, who follow empty baubles. They hug themselves as the only wise, while in truth they are only narrow-minded.”

    http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/who-we-are/201211/freud-was-self-hugger

  • JP

    @Todd:

    ” After all, if I can’t look at you in your fresh-out-of-bed look when the goal is to, ya know, get you TO bed, that’s a problem. Of course, it’s fun to dress up nice and clean up well, but my standard of attractiveness is whether I’ll still be able to get it up when you just got out of bed in your sweats or comfy night clothes. I’ve gotten some good surprises from that over the years, and it’s never really steered me wrong.”

    This is what leads me to the question:

    “How in the world do older couples stand the physical appearance of each other?”

    And nobody can ever give me a good answer.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      “How in the world do older couples stand the physical appearance of each other?”

      And nobody can ever give me a good answer.

      Two ways:

      1. When I look at my husband I see him at 27, the age at which I fell for him.

      2. His crow’s feet and gray temples remind me that we have been together a very long time, which warms my heart.

      I’m not sure how it works for men.

  • Todd

    I think it’s 2 things. One, they do remember what they looked like at one point. Two, it takes a long time to look old. What looks like a complete mess from our perspective is someone who’s aged gracefully from their POV. 4o+ years every day together makes the aging process look a LOT slower.

  • http://photoncourier.blogspot.com david foster

    JP…interested piece on self-hugging…thanks!

  • http://bastiatblogger.blogspot.com/ Bastiat Blogger

    I’m sure this one is making its rounds:

    http://www.springerlink.com/content/vg7322727mgl1875/fulltext.html?MUD=MP

    Baumeister’s latest on sexual economics theory. The conclusions probably will not be surprising. I found one section particularly provocative:

    “Meanwhile, the implications of the recent social changes for marriage could fill a book. Sexual economics theory has pointed to a wealth of data depicting marriage as a transaction in which the male contributes status and resources while the woman contributes sex (Baumeister and Vohs 2004). How will that play out in the coming decades? The female contribution of sex to the marriage is evanescent: As women age, they lose their sexual appeal much faster than men lose their status and resources, and some alarming evidence even indicates that wives rather quickly lose their desire for sex (Arndt 2009). To sustain a marriage across multiple decades, many husbands must accommodate to the reality of having to contribute work and other resources to a wife whose contribution of sex dwindles sharply in both quantity and quality—and who also may disapprove sharply of him seeking satisfaction in alternative outlets such as prostitution, pornography, and extramarital dalliance.

    “We speculate that today’s young men may be exceptionally ill prepared for a lifetime of sexual starvation that is the lot of many modern husbands. The traditional view that a wife should sexually satisfy her husband regardless of her own lack of desire has been eroded if not demolished by feminist ideology that has encouraged wives to expect husbands to wait patiently until the wife actually desires sex, with the result that marriage is a prolonged episode of sexual starvation for the husband. (A memorable anecdote from Arndt’s 2009 diary study on marital sexuality involved a couple in which the wife refused sex so often that the husband finally said that they would not have sex again until the wife initiated it. When Arndt interviewed them nine years later, he was still waiting.) Today’s young men spend their young adulthood having abundant sex with multiple partners, and that seems to us to be an exceptionally poor preparation for a lifetime of sexual starvation.”

  • http://www.4stargazer.wordpress.com Anacaona

    @Anacona, as a (Black) American guy who has dated a Dominican woman in college, I find your description apt. It was, shall I say, interesting. Also, most Black people I run into (at least in and around my NY area) consider Dominicans Black. There’s a whole complicated dialogue around that, but I’m avoiding starting racial flame wars.

    I live in the west coast, there is not a lot of Dominicans here maybe that explains why every time I refer to myself as black I’m corrected by black and Latinos, Whites and Asians seem to take it at face value though. is really confusing….

  • HanSolo

    @Bastiat Blogger

    I read that article and it has a lot of good points–mainly that men will adapt to whatever the SMP dictates.

    Weaknesses were that it’s description of men getting lots of sex should be understood as high-value males getting lots of sex. Apex fallacy. It ignores the difficulties that low-value males are having and the effect of hypergamy.

    I think that you can understand a lot of male behavior when you view it through the lens of men doing what it takes to get sex. The low-value males don’t try as hard for career any more because it doesn’t help them get a wife anyways and they’re not getting much sex otherwise either so they withdraw into video games, porn, etc. High SMV males don’t need a career either if they want sex so no need to work hard. NAMALT but enough are that it’s changing the achievement landscape.

    I think one of the central tenants of the SMP is that men respond to what women want. By delaying marriage, women have put a lot of the medium to lower value males in a sexual desert during their early 20’s. Even if these lower 20’s males have an N of 3 or 4, that still won’t equate to frequent sex if it’s just a ONS or short fling every 6 or 12 months.

  • J

    This is what leads me to the question: “How in the world do older couples stand the physical appearance of each other?” And nobody can ever give me a good answer.

    LMAO. JP, when you’ve spent decades loving someone else, well, you just do.

  • Mike C

    Came across this….interesting stuff on looks especially some effort versus nothing. Pay particular attention to the 2 different pics of Scarlett Johansson and in one she is actually sporting the sweatpants plus slicked back hair and some glasses. I think it isn’t too much of an overstatement to say pretty much no one looks good unless there is some effort put into the actual presentation.

    http://www.therulesrevisited.com/2011/10/you-can-control-how-attractive-you-are.html?m=1

  • http://www.4stargazer.wordpress.com Anacaona

    Came across this….interesting stuff on looks especially some effort versus nothing. Pay particular attention to the 2 different pics of Scarlett Johansson and in one she is actually sporting the sweatpants plus slicked back hair and some glasses. I think it isn’t too much of an overstatement to say pretty much no one looks good unless there is some effort put into the actual presentation.

    As a restricted girl this was a key element I had to add that was missing. The love/hate relationship “smart” women have with beauty is part of the reason I would guess most of my type don’t take the effort to look better, not just to look sexually attractive by throwing the same top Kim Kardashian wore in her latest photoshot and a miniskirt but to spent considerable amount of time in finding the right hair color, make up, colors, wardrobe and learn to act feminine to become visible to a bigger pool of men. This is the girl game that is probably harder to swallow for the Beta female, YMMV.

  • Mike C

    and learn to act feminine to become visible to a bigger pool of men. This is the girl game that is probably harder to swallow for the Beta female, YMMV.

    I’m sure you are right. Probably just as hard to swallow as it is for beta (delta?) men to swallow that they have to learn and integrate some personality attributes of higher ranking sociosexual men.

    Of course, for the beta women who accept this fact, and do the necessary work, they have a massive strategic advantage. They may already have a lot of the really good personality attributes so adding physical beauty to the equation makes them the “total package”.

  • INTJ

    @ Mike C

    That post actually has examples of good use of presentation. Normally, the before vs. after pictures tend to be a crapshoot for me.

    Still, some nitpicks: I don’t know on what planet the Carrie Underwood on the left is a 7 (while the Jenna Fisher after pic is a 7.5?). While both Carrie Underwoods are extremely good looking, if I had the choice (hey a guy can dream) I’d definitely pick the one on the left. She looks much more wholesome. Also, the last picture is interesting. While one on the right looks slightly better, she seems like she’d be somewhat snobbish. The one on the left looks much more friendly. Again, I’d pick the version on the left over the one on the right.

  • INTJ

    @ Anacaona

    As a restricted girl this was a key element I had to add that was missing. The love/hate relationship “smart” women have with beauty is part of the reason I would guess most of my type don’t take the effort to look better, not just to look sexually attractive by throwing the same top Kim Kardashian wore in her latest photoshot and a miniskirt but to spent considerable amount of time in finding the right hair color, make up, colors, wardrobe and learn to act feminine to become visible to a bigger pool of men. This is the girl game that is probably harder to swallow for the Beta female, YMMV.

    That’s interesting. I’ve always felt that at least for girls outside the ideal body fat range, it’s a better long term investment to spend that time exercising to lose weight instead of constantly dressing up. It would be interesting to try to quantify the present discounted value of the two approaches.

  • Mike C

    While both Carrie Underwoods are extremely good looking, if I had the choice (hey a guy can dream) I’d definitely pick the one on the left. She looks much more wholesome.

    Interesting….I’d pick her on the right not even a doubt, but I’ve always add a thing for the wavy Farrah Fawcett hairstyle. Waves, ringlets, and ponytails just really get me going :) Thw “wholesome” comment is interesting. What I’ve been able to conclude from comments is that essentially “wholesome” is a question of how much makeup is applied to the face. I think this is one thing where male preferences can vary significantly. I’ve thought about this, and I think it is connected to “mate guarding”. The less made up a woman is and the less time she is made up on average the less male attention she is likely to attract. So a “wholesome” look might be the sweet spot of attractive for one’s SO, but not presenting an image likely to garner a lot of outside male attention. I’m speculating a bit, but I suspect the strength of preference for how made up is fairly correlated with where a guy sits on the alpha/beta spectrum.

    Random point. I”ll admit I find the physical appearance stuff and varied preferences just fascinating. I’m particularly interested in who prefers what and why. I was in the car with my fiancee today for a fairly long drive, and I brought up some of the discussion here, and I asked her again her preference of Shemar Moore versus the guy who plays Dr. Spencer Reed. She said Shemar Moore not even close. Her close to exact words were that Shemar Moore was “hot” while Spencer Reed was a “good-looking guy” that she’d be willing to go out with. I said give me numbers, and she said 9 versus 6.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      The less made up a woman is and the less time she is made up on average the less male attention she is likely to attract. So a “wholesome” look might be the sweet spot of attractive for one’s SO, but not presenting an image likely to garner a lot of outside male attention.

      In general, more makeup implies more unrestricted sexuality. That is why it garners more male attention, especially from unrestricted guys. And that is also why female celebrities in relationships, or who want to be left alone, deliberately go out to Starbucks with zero makeup, glasses, etc. Reese Witherspoon is another actress who frequently does this. I know very attractive women who make a point of going out without makeup when they just want to get stuff done.

      I’ve shared this story before, but the most attractive young woman I know had two LTRs in college with extremely handsome guys. She met one while moving in to her dorm – sweaty and zero makeup. She met the other one in a rainstorm wearing no makeup. She could not figure out why they liked her, but they preferred a natural beauty to a made up look.

  • INTJ

    @ Mike C

    That “mate guarding” theory would make sense. Though it should be noted that the heavily madeup look was mostly only available to the upper class historically, and probably did not exist prehistorically. So I’m not sure if evolution has had time to adopt a mate-guarding view towards makeup.

    However, when I think about it and try to eek out the maximum possible lookswise, my dream girl would normally look like the Carrie Underwood on the left, since that’s what I find more attractive, but would dress up more when we go out and look like the pic on the right because that’s what’s considered hot, and thus I’ll get the status boost from being seen with a hot girl. :D Of course, that would kinda defeat the purpose of the “mate guarding” functionality.

  • szopen

    @susan walsh

    “I’m not sure how it works for men.”

    You already know my answer: it’s pretty much the same.

    @all
    cads vs dads:
    http://www.evoandproud.blogspot.com/2012/11/are-cads-outbreeding-dads.html

  • szopen

    aaaah and forgot to add the warning: evoandproud is hbd blog, and especially commenters may sometimes be … hm… not exactly politically correct.

  • Maggie

    “To sustain a marriage across multiple decades, many husbands must accommodate to the reality of having to contribute work and other resources to a wife whose contribution of sex dwindles sharply in both quantity and quality”

    Really, you are not doomed to have this. The quality and quantity of sex does now have to “dwindle sharply.” My husband and I are about to celebrate our 30th. I can honestly say he is as attractive to me now as the day we got married. I expect I will find him attractive until the day I die.

    Oh and yes, I bring a lot more to our marriage than just sex.

    +

  • http://asinusspinasmasticans.wordpress.com Mule Chewing Briars

    There are dozens of reasons aging wives are cherished. True, you still see glimpses of the 30-something hardbody, but that gets less frequent as you approach True Old Age.

    The very deep reason is that your Stories have intertwined to such a degree that they have become the same Story, and if you’ve done your homework, you know how to satisfy each other physically in ways that strangers would have no clue about.

    I read very little in the PUA scatosphere about love. Roissy, back when he was still Roissy in DC, wrote some heart-bending prose about love, but he’s since expunged it from his website. I guess [α]s are supposed to be all erection and no affection, but life isn’t worth a bucket of donkey piss without love.

    And married love is far more about pardon than it is about passion, but passion is still there, as is loyalty, friendship, and self-sacrifice. In the Orthodox Church, weddings are performed with nuptial crowns. Convert that I am, I assumed the tradition was meant to crown the king and queen of the new household. The retired priest at my left elbow remarked that the crowns were the crowns of martyrdom.

    “Marriage or monkhood are the only two options the Church allows,” he said. “Most people would make lousy monks, but something has to be done to get people to think about somebody besides themselves, so marriage was instituted to teach our race somethingabout self-denial.”

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Mule

      There are dozens of reasons aging wives are cherished. True, you still see glimpses of the 30-something hardbody, but that gets less frequent as you approach True Old Age.

      The very deep reason is that your Stories have intertwined to such a degree that they have become the same Story, and if you’ve done your homework, you know how to satisfy each other physically in ways that strangers would have no clue about.

      I read very little in the PUA scatosphere about love. Roissy, back when he was still Roissy in DC, wrote some heart-bending prose about love, but he’s since expunged it from his website. I guess [α]s are supposed to be all erection and no affection, but life isn’t worth a bucket of donkey piss without love.

      And married love is far more about pardon than it is about passion, but passion is still there, as is loyalty, friendship, and self-sacrifice

      That is lovely. You are such a good writer, Mule, and so poetic. Whenever you share something like this it is a real treat.

  • JP

    @J: “LMAO. JP, when you’ve spent decades loving someone else, well, you just do.”

    However, generally the longer you are with someone the more bored you become with them.

    For instance, in the beginning, everything is fun and exciting because it’s new and exciting.

    And the further you get from that, the less interesting it becomes because the early infatuation stage wears off.

    I always wondered what happened to married couples. Then I experienced the wearing off of the two year excitement period and all of a sudden, it because apparent.

    You can’t actually sustain the fun stage of the relationship (the reason that you got married in the first place) because it’s a short term three month to two year period.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @JP

      However, generally the longer you are with someone the more bored you become with them…You can’t actually sustain the fun stage of the relationship (the reason that you got married in the first place) because it’s a short term three month to two year period.

      Ouch. That has not been my experience. I urge you to address this in your own life. A lifetime of married boredom sounds intolerable.

  • Ion

    “She said Shemar Moore not even close. Her close to exact words were that Shemar Moore was “hot” while Spencer Reed was a “good-looking guy” that she’d be willing to go out with. I said give me numbers, and she said 9 versus 6.”

    Interesting. I wonder if Spencer Reed would’ve had a fighting chance if he weren’t so “lanky”, and were muscular like Shemar Moore was, or vice versa (if Shemar Moore had a lanky body type and Spencer Reed was athletic).

    A fairer comparison for me would be Shemar Moore vs Eric Dane (two athletic pretty boys), or Gerard Butler vs. Isaiah Washington, who are both not as pretty.

  • Ted D

    “However, generally the longer you are with someone the more bored you become with them.”

    I can entertain myself for countless hours simply contemplating the universe.

    Now if you mean sexually bored that is a different issue, but one I also don’t seem to suffer from. When it comes to sex, as long as my needs are met, I have NO desire to seek other outlets. To be blunt, all the “extra effort” I put into it at this point is more about making things exciting for my wife, but I also derive a great deal of pleasure out of knowing I rock her world. I really don’t need much excitement, but I’m willing to provide it for her, because I like to make her happy, and it gives me a sense of control and power in our sexual relationship. Having gone so long without any sense of power when it comes to sex, I’m very much enjoying it now.

  • Ion

    INTJ

    ” She looks much more wholesome. Also, the last picture is interesting. While one on the right looks slightly better, she seems like she’d be somewhat snobbish. The one on the left looks much more friendly. Again, I’d pick the version on the left over the one on the right.”

    I get what you’re saying exactly. Over-the-top femininity is definitely unapproachable. It’s about striking a balance, and many beta girls don’t get this fine line. They assume by dress up that they have to change into “that type of girl” (Johanson in the done up pic).

    Beta women do need coaching on this area to strike an even balance of looking approachable and feminine vs. heavy makeup, tight clothing, extensions, etc., that Scarlet Johanson is wearing in the second pic (which would draw drooling men, and alpha cads but few LTR-oriented men).

  • JP

    @Ted:

    “I can entertain myself for countless hours simply contemplating the universe.

    Now if you mean sexually bored that is a different issue, but one I also don’t seem to suffer from. When it comes to sex, as long as my needs are met, I have NO desire to seek other outlets. To be blunt, all the “extra effort” I put into it at this point is more about making things exciting for my wife, but I also derive a great deal of pleasure out of knowing I rock her world.”

    Which leads me back to my original question as to how older couples can stand interacting with each other.

  • Ted D

    “Which leads me back to my original question as to how older couples can stand interacting with each other.”

    Hopefully I’ll have more to tell you in 20 years. :P

    What is there NOT to stand? If she makes me happy, and I make her happy, what is there to be bored about? Maybe I just have very basic needs or something, but I just don’t see it as a problem. I get my needs met, I’m satisfied and content. My problem is that I get TOO content and shit starts to slide. So for me, putting in that “extra effort” keeps my head in the right place: that is, I remind myself that just because *I* am OK with the same old same, doesn’t mean she is. If I want her to remain happily with me, then I have to accept that I might need to do a little more work than necessary for MY OWN happiness.

    Is that so bad? I don’t think so. It is a small price to pay for what I get in return. and like I said, it really does give me the sense that I’m in the drivers seat. For all I know this may be exactly what some guys call “leading the relationship”. All I know is it seems to work for us. And I can’t even complain about the extra “work”, since it leads to a rather stimulating sex life.

    I can’t tell if you’re going the sex route or just the “having to look at the same person every morning for decades” path here, so perhaps I’m not even on the right subject. But in terms of actually “dealing” with my wife every day, well that’s simple. We are great friends, we get along well, and we talk a whole lot. Sometimes she does most of the talking, and sometimes I do. But, we still engage in conversation every single day about something. And no, it isn’t always about the kids, the car repairs, or that we are almost out of laundry soap. Those conversations happen as well. But we also spend time gabbing about everything and anything that comes up.

  • Escoffier

    Much prefer sweat-pants Scarlett to glammed up Scarlett.

  • JP

    @Susan:

    “Ouch. That has not been my experience. I urge you to address this in your own life. A lifetime of married boredom sounds intolerable.”

    I generally get bored with life.

    I have nearly no interest in my career.

    However, it’s life, so you have to be productive, no matter how boring and uninteresting it is.

  • http://www.4stargazer.wordpress.com Anacaona

    That “mate guarding” theory would make sense. Though it should be noted that the heavily madeup look was mostly only available to the upper class historically, and probably did not exist prehistorically. So I’m not sure if evolution has had time to adopt a mate-guarding view towards makeup.
    Make up and stylist is designed to mimic and exaggerate fertility markers and make you look more symmetric so it would still work. Had you ever meet a woman that looked really beautiful but you couldn’t tell if she was wearing make up or not? Very few women have this natural trait, red lips, clear skin, a crown of eyelashes that makes her eyes alluring and sensual…but the effect of make up is to make us all closer to that ideal as possible, even males.

    “Which leads me back to my original question as to how older couples can stand interacting with each other.”

    I don’t remember the last time I had been bored whether alone or with hubby, hubby doesn’t either…Maybe people with tendency to getting bored gets bored with a their mates? I mean keeping one self entertained is not hard, unless your idea of fun is “excitement brought from outside” , YMMV.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Anacaona

      Had you ever meet a woman that looked really beautiful but you couldn’t tell if she was wearing make up or not?

      I was thinking about makeup today. I like Bobbi Brown, which is generally aimed at women who want to look their best while having no detectable makeup on. The shades are neutrals and nudes, and the focus is on even, clear skin, full lashes, and warm lips.

      In contrast a company like MAC will feature a lot of bright glittery shades that are meant to call attention to a very dramatic effect.

      I think women’s tastes vary by age, what role they are playing (work makeup is more muted that nightclub makeup), and what effect they wish to achieve.

      I find it odd that Andrew of RR would say that women are much hotter when they’re dressed for the red carpet compared to their Starbucks run. They are the same women, with the same degree of natural beauty either way. This makes me wonder if the claim that most women have an overinflated opinion of their own SMV comes from female 6s slathering on heavy makeup to signal sexual availability and desirability, which gets them a lot of male attention. I’ve read more than a few tales of men online complaining that when they saw their hookup in the morning light they almost had a heart attack.

      Here are pics with and without of the only supermodel I know IRL. Cameron Russell without:

      cr

      cr3

      With minimal:

      cr2

      Fully made up:

      cr4

      cr5

  • Escoffier

    She looks progressively worse as you scroll down, last pic is hideous. First two are stunning.

  • JP

    In today’s “Tom Wolfe Historical Factoid”, we learn that the real Bonfire of the Vanities also included the destruction of cosmetics.

    “Bonfire of the Vanities (Italian: Falò delle vanità) refers to the burning of objects that are deemed to be occasions of sin. The most infamous one took place on 7 February 1497, when supporters of the Dominican priest Girolamo Savonarola collected and publicly burned thousands of objects like cosmetics, art, and books in Florence, Italy, on the Mardi Gras festival.[1] Such bonfires were not invented by Savonarola, however. They were a common accompaniment to the outdoor sermons of San Bernardino di Siena in the first half of the century.

    The focus of this destruction was nominally on objects that might tempt one to sin, including vanity items such as mirrors, cosmetics, fine dresses, paintings, playing cards, and even musical instruments. Other targets included books that were deemed to be immoral, such as works by Boccaccio, and manuscripts of secular songs, as well as artworks, including paintings and sculpture.”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bonfire_of_the_Vanities

  • Sai

    @Mule Chewing Briars
    I read somewhere about the “king and queen of the household.” Thanks for sharing the true meaning. XD
    When did you join the Orthodox Church?

    @JP
    T-they burned books? Art? Musical instruments!? All at once!?
    Let me grab my time machine and my nail bat.

  • J

    However, generally the longer you are with someone the more bored you become with them. For instance, in the beginning, everything is fun and exciting because it’s new and exciting. And the further you get from that, the less interesting it becomes because the early infatuation stage wears off

    That’s limerance, not love. Yes, the dopamine rush does wear off. If there’s more than limerance going on, attachment should develop at that point. People should also look for spouses that they feel respect and friendship for in adition to limerance. That serves as a basis for attachement.

    FWIW, I’ve been with my DH for 25 years, and I’m not bored with him.

    You can’t actually sustain the fun stage of the relationship (the reason that you got married in the first place) because it’s a short term three month to two year period.

    We continue to have fun together, but there’s more than fun at this point.

  • J

    She looks progressively worse as you scroll down, last pic is hideous. First two are stunning.

    Her runway makeup is what is often called “editorial” in the fashion trade; that’s a synonym for ugly.

  • INTJ

    @ Susan

    My reaction to the Cameron Russell pics in order:

    Without:
    1) Ooh she’s really pretty.
    2) Meh (the way her hair is hanging reminds me of a mop for some reason).

    Minimal:
    3) Rather hot. But I’d choose 1) over this one.

    Fully made up:
    4) Rather pretty in a classy way. Preferable to 3) but not to 1).
    5) Ewww.

  • szopen

    Cameron Russell:
    1) Really, really pretty. Maybe not gorgeous, but this is the peaceful, calm-ocean beauty kind I like so much
    3) Really pretty, though here she does not look so confident and ocean-like :)

    2) I don’t know. I am not saying she’s ugly, but I’d simply not notice her in crowd.
    4) I don’t know, the photo is too low resolution to really make my mind
    5) Ugly. Really, really ugly.

  • JP

    @J:

    “That’s limerance, not love. Yes, the dopamine rush does wear off. If there’s more than limerance going on, attachment should develop at that point. People should also look for spouses that they feel respect and friendship for in adition to limerance. That serves as a basis for attachement.”

    My point is more that the dopamine high is always going to be more enjoyable than the actual relationship.

    Getting into a relationship and the initial stages of a relationship are new and exciting, whereas day to day life is much duller.

    To use an example, it’s the difference between getting a job and doing a job day to day (or getting into college vs. being in college). Getting the job = excitement. Actually doing the job = much less excitement.

  • http://asinusspinasmasticans.wordpress.com Mule Chewing Briars

    @Sai

    I was received into the Orthodox Church in 2007

    Re: Miss Russell –

    The makeup job on the bottom photo was obviously engineered to enhance the clothes. No, I am not gay for noticing this. I also noticed she has a generous B cup which for a tall thin girl is the genetic jackpot.

  • Ted D

    JP – “My point is more that the dopamine high is always going to be more enjoyable than the actual relationship.”

    I couldn’t disagree more. I actually hate those early first few months of a new relationship. All the unsettled bits, all the insecurities, all the “unknown” variables… I spend the first few months of a new relationship is a rather crappy state of mind. I very much long for an desire the period after when things settle down and routine can be established.

    “Getting into a relationship and the initial stages of a relationship are new and exciting, whereas day to day life is much duller.”

    Sure, but I for one look forward to the “much duller” part of life. I don’t like excitement. I don’t like the “unknown”. I don’t like chaos. Give me a solid and stable routine and allow me time to persue some personal interests and I’m as happy as I’ll ever be.

    I think some people are just VERY keyed to excitement and adventure (heavy dopamine desire) and other people are the exact opposite like I am: prefer to have a nice, easy, mellow life experience with the occasional high or low moments. (hopefully not too high or too low, and not very often at that.) I dislike feeling “excited”, “anxious”, or even over happy because those strong emotions make it difficult for me to simply do what I must do, which is usually follow my routine. Strong emotions to me are a distraction, whether they are positive or negative emotions is irrelevant.