Hypergamy. why 'good'men get left behind?

[basil67]

1 hour ago, Weezy1973 said:

In my view the growth in numbers of incels has less to do with hypergamy and more to do with women entering the workplace and not needing a man anymore. That is to say, in the past there were likely a certain percentage of men that were unattractive in practically every way, except they were dependable income earners. When women didn’t work, that would be enough of a reason to marry someone. 
 

Those, I believe are primarily the men that are getting “left behind”.  

I believe that there is a subset of men who've always been undateable for one reason or another, but prior to the internet, they were largely loners.  But now there's the internet, they can find each other and their voices.   For better or worse, the internet has amplified the voices of many who previously went unnoticed.  

[NuevoYorko]

20 hours ago, Dis said:

But if a wealthy guy gets a hot girl and that hot girl gets that wealthy guy...then isn't it a win for both of them?

 

Maybe it's not a PC concept...but it works for some people 

I suppose if a woman feels her most valuable quality is her physical appearance and a man doesn't mind being chosen for his bankroll it might be seen as a win.  Sounds dismally superficial to me. 

The woman would be at a disadvantage in this scenario, you know.   Men who are paying for hotness often won't hesitate to "trade in for a newer model" once the "best by" date has passed.  According to the wisdom of these boards,  a woman's "sexual market value" plummets around the age of 30, so she best get a solid prenup if she's going into one of these barter system relationships.  

  

 

[Dis]

2 hours ago, NuevoYorko said:

I suppose if a woman feels her most valuable quality is her physical appearance and a man doesn't mind being chosen for his bankroll it might be seen as a win.  Sounds dismally superficial to me. 

The woman would be at a disadvantage in this scenario, you know.   Men who are paying for hotness often won't hesitate to "trade in for a newer model" once the "best by" date has passed.  According to the wisdom of these boards,  a woman's "sexual market value" plummets around the age of 30, so she best get a solid prenup if she's going into one of these barter system relationships.  

  

 

Oh absolutely. Superficial and unfulfilling for most. 

 

Sounds awful and of course the woman would come out on the losing end but it's not great for the dude either...if he somehow lost his fortune the woman would be out too

 

 

Edited March 29, 2021 by Dis

[elaine567]

2 hours ago, NuevoYorko said:

The woman would be at a disadvantage in this scenario, you know.   Men who are paying for hotness often won't hesitate to "trade in for a newer model" once the "best by" date has passed. 

But if we believe all the rhetoric then she, as a woman, will have monkey branched onto another better man before he has time to do that... as after all she cannot control her biological urge...

[Trail Blazer]

6 hours ago, elaine567 said:

But if we believe all the rhetoric then she, as a woman, will have monkey branched onto another better man before he has time to do that... as after all she cannot control her biological urge...

I really do not think many people on this board believe that. 

Having said that, guys who earn low salaries, where they struggle to provide a sufficient income to support a family are most at risk of being "monkey branched."

Someone like Elon Musk is hardly going to be worried that Grimes is primed to leave him for Jeff Bezos just because he's worth a few billion more.

My personal view is that plenty of women are somewhat hypergamous by definition, to varying degrees, but that most women in the end are just looking to settle with "their" equal.

I do not believe that women are biologically programmed to monkey branch.  I think that's a made-up term used by guys to reconcile the hurt after women have left them.

 

Edited March 29, 2021 by Trail Blazer

[Weezy1973]

11 hours ago, basil67 said:

I believe that there is a subset of men who've always been undateable for one reason or another,

Probably, however I think women making an income has definitely given them more options. They don’t need to pick a guy just because he makes money. So ironically, it’s actually this reduction in hypergamy that is leaving some “good” men behind. 

[Uruktopi]

5 hours ago, Weezy1973 said:

Probably, however I think women making an income has definitely given them more options. They don’t need to pick a guy just because he makes money. So ironically, it’s actually this reduction in hypergamy that is leaving some “good” men behind. 

This would be quite true IF the only source of what is (here) called hypergamy was money (or, at least, money by itself).

Both men and women feel attracted by what (conciously or not) they value. Some of those "criteria" are not only individual but are loosely (and not strictly) based in evolutive and/or social trends. And may have SOME influence in the behaviour of large scale populations. But not necessarily in the same way for each one of us.

 Trends of that kind may apply different for also different groups of people, sometimes cultural ones. Just as an example, you will frecuantly see the "other sex" gravitating around the best dancers in some dancing interest groups.

Yes, some kind of "social status" hierarchies are part of the admirative side of sexual / romantic attraction.

That´s part of being a sexual dimorphic species, not only phisically but with other manifestations. So not all but a lot of attraction is put in what differentiates genders, even if in a symbolic way.

But, of course, those like the Red Pill ones, that try to validate their nonsense by invoking scientific sources, need to distort what science parsimoniously says. They are a fraud.

By the way, just like those pseudoscientific philosophers that invoke Quantum Physycs as basis for some mystic explanation of almost everything.  They are also fraudulent.

Edited March 29, 2021 by Uruktopi

[Uruktopi]

6 minutes ago, Uruktopi said:

This would be quite true IF the only source of what is (here) called hypergamy was money (or, at least, money by itself).

Both men and women feel attracted by what (conciously or not) they value. Some of those "criteria" are not only individual but are loosely (and not strictly) based in evolutive and/or social trends. And may have SOME influence in the behaviour of large scale populations. But not necessarily in the same way for each one of us.

 Trends of that kind may apply different for also different groups of people, sometimes cultural ones. Just as an example, you will frecuantly see the "other sex" gravitating around the best dancers in some dancing interest groups.

Yes, some kind of "social status" hierarchies are part of the admirative side of sexual / romantic attraction.

That´s part of being a sexual dimorphic species, not only phisically but with other manifestations. So not all but a lot of attraction is put in what differentiates genders, even if in a symbolic way.

But, of course, those like the Red Pill ones, that try to validate their nonsense by invoking scientific sources, need to distort what science parsimoniously says. They are a fraud.

By the way, just like those pseudoscientific philosophers that invoke Quantum Physycs (of course valid for a certain scale of material facts) as basis for some mystic explanation of almost everything.  They are also fraudulent.

 

[Uruktopi]

It seems that I quoted myself. Sorry.

[mark clemson]

On 3/28/2021 at 7:31 AM, Gaeta said:

The real win in your love life is a partner that is loving, supportive, kind, committed, hard working, compatible in life style and life goal. 

Respectfully, while I totally see your point, that is only ONE view among many possible ones.

[Woggle]

These kinds of discussions just show how much of a trainwreck modern relationships have become. Male/female relationships have just completely collapsed and I don't see them being rebuilt into something better. Of course the ideal is real and genuine love but part of me understands wanting get what you can in life and making things benefit you. If things don't change course there are some dark days ahead and I understand why some people think looking for love is a suckers game. It's a game between men and women to see who can care less and it is next to impossible to have a healthy relationship in that kind of climate.

[Weezy1973]

2 hours ago, Uruktopi said:

That´s part of being a sexual dimorphic species, not only phisically but with other manifestations. So not all but a lot of attraction is put in what differentiates genders, even if in a symbolic way.

Right so when income was predominantly the role of the male, a “hypergamy” attraction for high earning men would make sense as it was “masculine”. But as women have gone into the workplace, it would be reasonable to expect that this attraction will fade over generations, as it will no longer be a differentiator. I think we’re in the middle of this shift now. Young millennial and Gen Z likely won’t attach earning power to men nearly as much as Gen X and baby boomers etc. did.

[basil67]

7 hours ago, Weezy1973 said:

Probably, however I think women making an income has definitely given them more options. They don’t need to pick a guy just because he makes money. So ironically, it’s actually this reduction in hypergamy that is leaving some “good” men behind. 

Yes, finding a man who could support her and giver her a family was important.  But I would suggest that the women who's only choice was to marry a man who had nothing going for them other than their income would herself been part of the unwanted.   Otherwise, she would have had different suitors come and go over time.

From what I've read here, modern men who are un-datable generally have higher standards than a woman who nobody else wants.  

 

Edited March 29, 2021 by basil67

[Weezy1973]

24 minutes ago, basil67 said:

But I would suggest that the women who's only choice was to marry a man who had nothing going for them other than their income would herself been part of the unwanted.  

Well, still “wanted” as they would have paired up with each other. But just like now there’s a matching phenomenon. It’s just the parameters have changed. 

 

26 minutes ago, basil67 said:

From what I've read here, modern men who are un-datable generally have higher standards than a woman who nobody else wants.  

I’d say it’s the same for each gender, but men complain about it more because in general they’re less social. So men are apt to not only be sexless, but also quite lonely. I personally only know women that have been unable to find a mate, or more realistically aren’t interested in the men that would date them.

[Woggle]

51 minutes ago, Weezy1973 said:

Right so when income was predominantly the role of the male, a “hypergamy” attraction for high earning men would make sense as it was “masculine”. But as women have gone into the workplace, it would be reasonable to expect that this attraction will fade over generations, as it will no longer be a differentiator. I think we’re in the middle of this shift now. Young millennial and Gen Z likely won’t attach earning power to men nearly as much as Gen X and baby boomers etc. did.

This might not be PC but from some women I have seen they actually get hot over a man who can out alpha her. They spend all day being strong and independent and they want to be able to drop that for a bit in their love life.

[Angelle]

22 minutes ago, Weezy1973 said:

Well, still “wanted” as they would have paired up with each other. But just like now there’s a matching phenomenon. It’s just the parameters have changed. 

 

I’d say it’s the same for each gender, but men complain about it more because in general they’re less social. So men are apt to not only be sexless, but also quite lonely. I personally only know women that have been unable to find a mate, or more realistically aren’t interested in the men that would date them.

I've been there, and it was because the men had their own issues. 

[Angelle]

1 hour ago, Woggle said:

These kinds of discussions just show how much of a trainwreck modern relationships have become. Male/female relationships have just completely collapsed and I don't see them being rebuilt into something better. Of course the ideal is real and genuine love but part of me understands wanting get what you can in life and making things benefit you. If things don't change course there are some dark days ahead and I understand why some people think looking for love is a suckers game. It's a game between men and women to see who can care less and it is next to impossible to have a healthy relationship in that kind of climate.

I don't think they're any more of a train wreck than in the past, when women couldn't leave, without facing backlash from their own families, a lot of the time, let alone from anyone else. 

[basil67]

43 minutes ago, Woggle said:

This might not be PC but from some women I have seen they actually get hot over a man who can out alpha her. They spend all day being strong and independent and they want to be able to drop that for a bit in their love life.

Yes, I've seen some women who want to 'rest in their femininity'.  It's a wanky phrase (I nearly snorted tea out my nose the first time I read it), but I'm guessing this is what it means.  

Edited March 29, 2021 by basil67

[Uruktopi]

My friends, I´m no longer posting in this thread / topic.

Thank you all.

[mark clemson]

3 hours ago, Woggle said:

This might not be PC but from some women I have seen they actually get hot over a man who can out alpha her. They spend all day being strong and independent and they want to be able to drop that for a bit in their love life.

The "alpha female" who wants an "even more alpha" male is apparently common enough to be considered a cliche, so yes, that's apparently out there. My own sister actually fits this bill rather well as she is a corporate director and her husband is a high level finance guy who reports directly to the CFO. She also dated e.g. the captain of the HS football team, etc, in her time. And yes it fits the hypergamy (or at least male out-earning) mold.

Interestingly and FWIW, the high-earner corporate leader who is also a sexual submissive and who likes, e.g. being dominated by women is apparently ALSO common enough to be a cliche, so that is out there too apparently. No idea if this is my sister's deal as I've never asked about any "bedroom stuff" they may/may not do (and have no intention to).

[Woggle]

[redacted] I believe that many women are attracted to masculine strength. It is a subconscious thing. [redacted] A man who can be honorable and honest while still projecting that strength has struck the perfect balance. Hypergamy is just an expression of this. My wife says that what she loves about me is that I will go to ends of the earth for the people I love and care about but if somehow crosses or tries to hurt me or anybody I care about god help them. 

[redacted]

Edited March 30, 2021 by a LoveShack.org Moderator
gender wars

[basil67]

There's a lot in this thread which isn't hypergamy.   It's not marrying a guy who simply earns more. It's not marrying a strong guy, a masculine guy, it's not about being old fashioned or modern - rather, the dictionary definition is a woman who marries in a way which improves her place in society.   

Regarding income, if she's from the wrong side of the tracks, marries a guy from the nice side of town who's had the best of everything and is welcomed in sophisticated society , it's hypergamy.   But if he's from the same side of the tracks as her and has become successful through hard work, while he may be able to share a beer with the elite, he will never actually be one of the elite.   She may love and marry him, but it's not hypergamy because her social situation does not change.   

With regards to former discussion of what her "level" is, with respect to hypergamy, the level refers to her social class.  Is she a farm girl/trailer trash/working class/high society

 

hypergamy (Collins) any marriage with a partner of higher social status

hypergamy (dictionary.com) Hypergamy is the practice of marrying above one’s social status or class (i.e., “marrying up”).

hypergamy (Oxford.com) The action of marrying or forming a sexual relationship with a person of a superior sociological or educational background

hypergamy (yourdictionary.com)  marriage to someone of higher social standing.   An example of a hypergamous marriage is when a farmer's daughter marries a businessman and moves to the city.

 

Edited March 30, 2021 by basil67

[Wiseman2]

Wait, wait, wait. Just re-read the topic title. So if you weren't left behind you're bad? 😱😟

[6ix]

Closed due to excessive off-topic posting.