The women overwhelmingly went for the ugly man wearing a Rolex over the handsome guy in the Burger King uniform, whether they were pairing up for the long haul or the short roll.

How does it work with women who are already married to a successful guy and are looking for some strange? Do they tend to go for another paunchy power player, or the ripped pool boy?

Women with a man with resources who are looking to cheat may go for hotties -- see Fisher's "sexy son hypothesis." She thus produces children who have her husband's resources but are physically better than he is.

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

Sorry to be all brief and Wiki, but I'm on deadline today.

It's interesting, though: In "Mayflower Madam," Sydney Biddle Barrows wrote (I can't find it right now), about long-term relationships (not verbatim): "I don't have anything against rich men - far from it - but I would never be comfortable knowing that someone had that much power over me."

She later married an attorney - and divorced him. He committed suicide in 2011. However, she married him in 1994, long after she became rich(?) from her bestselling book, so that may well have made a difference in her definition of "rich."

I am a freak. I am dating a very handsome actor who makes much less money than I do, is a good bit younger than I am, and at 5'8 is only 4 inches taller. I've dating many men who made less than I do (sometimes much less), several who hovered around my height, and at least one who was shorter than I am. I do need them to be witty, passionate about whatever it is they're doing, intelligent, and confident. But I honestly don't think I care about paychecks and height. Current guy is a hottie, but I've had some paunchy. older, not-so-pretty ones in there, too.

Basically, if they can make me spew coffee laughing, they've pretty much got me, and the rest is negotiable. Am I alone here?

You're not alone at all.

Also, I like to say: I don't just want someone who pays attention to me; I want someone I can be at least semi-crazy about.

But (aside from personal relationships) I admit that the problem with even the best comedians - Pryor, Carlin, etc. - is that you come to take their wit for granted and then they can't make you laugh anymore. Or not very often.

One thing that can't go stale, though, is someone who cares about reading and learning more every day - or at least every week. (I shudder to think what it would be like, as a kid, to grow up surrounded by schoolmates who can't relate to kids who read and make nasty fun of them. Keep in mind that that can happen in private schools too, since rich parents often don't do well at restricting their kids' screen time - or screens in the bedroom.)

What Henry Kissinger's Ladies Tell Us About What Men Want

I don't think anyone has ever suggested Kissinger was given to adultery. He's actually been married for 55 of the last 65 years and only considered a second marriage when his first wife married someone else after their divorce. He knew Nancy Maginnes for 10 years before they married and had to put in some effort (multiple proposals over a couple of years) to persuade her to marry him. She was 39 at the time and may not have had many suitors left; being beyond child-bearing age, she was less of an issue for his parents (who had admonished him about dating gentiles).

One of his friends at the time told his biographer that "nobody cared if Sherman Adams wore the vicuna coat", and that Kissinger was not actually hopping from bed to bed with the likes of Jill St. John et al.

"She was 39 at the time and may not have had many suitors left"

Good lord, what fucking century are you from? "Suitors"? I can just see her Great Aunt Hildegarde gently advising her: "Dear, I've noticed that I've only had to chaperone three visits with gentleman callers this month. It is time for you to marry someone in his 80s, lest you be an old maid."

Well, Gail, in the century I live in, it's not uncommon to encounter women who do not understand metaphor and have foul mouths. They also operate under the illusion that a middle-aged spinster has masses of options.

I knew a guy who shoes horses for a living and he gets all the hotties-- he looks like an animal. Women go bonkers.

Oh, and Henry the K was generally putting on act with all the ladies he'd show up with in public. Vernon Walters' biography mentions how K was really busy shuttling back and forth to Paris, on secret diplomatic missions.

"The women overwhelmingly went for the ugly man wearing a Rolex over the handsome guy in the Burger King uniform, whether they were pairing up for the long haul or the short roll."

I'm not surprised, but this isn't really a fair comparison. How many stable, normal, well adjusted adult men do you know who work in fast food? I'd be thinking drug addict or felon myself--and an unambitious one to boot.

It's comparable to putting a supermodel against a woman who weighs 400 lbs. Even if you couldn't care less about appearance, you'd still be turned off by the underlying mental health problems and resulting physical health issues of someone that heavy.

Now make the hot guy a starving artist or unemployed musician, and I bet the results will be a lot more even.

I found it - it's from Chapter 10.

First paragraph, page 217:

"...I was now in my early thirties and starting to think more practically about my future which would, I hoped, include marriage. As much as I loved my job, I had to acknowledge that the kind of man I was likely to fall in love with would never marry the owner of an escort service...

"... If I didn't want to remain single forever, I would sooner or later have to return to a more conventional line of work. In other words, it was time to think about resuming life as a regular person...

(she then goes on to describe her escort business expenses and her "modest" luxuries such as trendy clothes and leather handbags)

Page 219:

"One financial option I did not consider was to marry a rich man or look for a sugar daddy who would instantly solve all my financial worries. I don't have anything against rich men - far from it - but I could never feel secure knowing that someone else had that kind of control over me."

(Of course, the main reason that COULD have been an option, had she wanted, was that she is a blueblood.)

"Power is the ultimate aphrodisiac." Henry Kissinger

"Now make the hot guy a starving artist or unemployed musician, and I bet the results will be a lot more even."

Depends. He'd certainly have an appeal with a certain subset of women, but not an overall one. Women are really amendable when it comes to physical attraction. I wish I could get guys who lack confidence in their looks to understand that. You can convince women to find you attractive, you can't with men.

To really understand just how weak the pull of a hot guy is to a woman, well all you have to do is look at what kind of pull he'd have with gay men. Yup, that's quite a difference.

I had a hot cousin that used to visit me at work. He had some ladies but guess who were obsessed with him? All the homos at my job, all the homos at the cafe we had lunch at, all the homos everywhere. The level he got ladies could not compare to the level he got homos.

That's how little women thought of his looks and how valued it was to homos: who called him dreamy.

We're talking at cross purposes, here. Women will ALWAYS go for the starving artist/sensitive musician types -- for sex -- but they'll want to MARRY the exec in the pinstripe suit even if he's a total dweeb.

Just like guys will will generally prefer the skinny girl over the fat one -- but the guys are less hypocritical about it and don't dress it up with self-serving psychobabble like women do with their choices. As the so-called manosphere puts it: alpha fux, beta bux describes female hypergamy perfectly.

Women will ALWAYS go for the starving artist/sensitive musician types -- for sex -- but they'll want to MARRY the exec in the pinstripe suit even if he's a total dweeb.

That's not what Amy said regarding the study she cited: "The women overwhelmingly went for the ugly man wearing a Rolex over the handsome guy in the Burger King uniform, whether they were pairing up for the long haul or the short roll." (Emphasis mine.)

Leaving aside a man's job and how he might dress, here's a great letter on what turns women on from "The Best of Dear Abby." (You have to scroll down to the second letter.) Since it's a reprint, I don't know just when it's from - maybe the 1970s.

http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1914&dat=19890823&id=R_UpAAAAIBAJ&sjid=L2UFAAAAIBAJ&pg=2813,4210475

(The Ann Landers column next to it isn't bad, either.)

Well I thoroughly enjoyed the letter in Ann Landers. That turned down list was eons ago before the guy posted his list of sex excuses from his SO to Reddit and the world had a cow over it. The world doesn't change. Technology does.

here's a great letter on what turns women on from "The Best of Dear Abby." (You have to scroll down to the second letter.) Since it's a reprint, I don't know just when it's from - maybe the 1970s.

It's dated 23 August 1989 and the writer is so full of it his eyes are brown.

The world doesn't change. Technology does.

That's the wife's list in 1989. The world hasn't changed. Women have options; men have obligations.

men have obligations.
_______________________________

Unless they're smart and careful enough to avoid GETTING obligations in the first place, as I mentioned in another thread. If you don't want a stay-at-home wife, don't DATE a wanna-be housewife - and make it clear to those women who don't seem like potential SAHWs just how unhappy you'll be if they try to pull a 180.

Which is not to say that you should expect her to enjoy housework or diapers any more than you do - or doing grueling car repairs any more than you do. Make sure you BOTH know how to multi-task - and that you both have about equal LEISURE time to spend together.

It's dated 23 August 1989 and the writer is so full of it his eyes are brown.

Posted by: Art Deco at October 8, 2014 3:44 PM
________________________________

You don't read too well, do you?

I said, it's a REPRINT. As it says at the top, the letters are from "The Best of Dear Abby," which was published in 1981. Anyone can infer that it was published before 1989, anyway.

Pay no attention to ArtDeco, lenora. He's living in 1891 and doesn't have much interest in anything that's happened since. He went a-courting once, sometime in the spring of 1878, and his comments are mainly based on that single sad experience.

...oops, I meant lenona, not lenora. Wish we could edit comments!

Thank you, both comments were kind.

Basically, if they can make me spew coffee laughing, they've pretty much got me, and the rest is negotiable. Am I alone here?

You're certainly not alone, Gail. It's not as if every woman needs a man who is taller than her or makes more money than her. But just because all women aren't this way doesn't mean that most women aren't this way. I think that women like you are definitely in the minority.

Ppen: Women are really amendable when it comes to physical attraction.

Perhaps that's true with some aspects of a man's physical appearance, but I'd say it's not true with height. Amy is a perfect example. She has said repeatedly that she would never date a man who is shorter than her, no matter how many other great qualities he has.

Rex: That's not what Amy said regarding the study she cited: "The women overwhelmingly went for the ugly man wearing a Rolex over the handsome guy in the Burger King uniform, whether they were pairing up for the long haul or the short roll."

I realize that was the conclusion of that particular study Amy cited, but I've read other studies which have come to a different conclusion: that women will go for the "ugly man" wearing a Rolex" for the long haul, but will pick a hot guy for a short roll. This, of course, is not true for all women. Some women, undoubtedly, need a high-status man even if it's just for a fling.

This is not "a different conclusion"; it's about short-term versus long-term mating.

Amy, in the study you mentioned "the women overwhelmingly went for the ugly man wearing a Rolex over the handsome guy in the Burger King uniform, whether they were pairing up for the long haul or the short roll."

In the studies I referred to, women will pick a hot guy for the short roll.

How are you not understanding the difference?

Ppen: You can convince women to find you attractive, you can't with men.

I'd agree with this a general rule but I think there may be a lot of exceptions, or more exceptions than you think. An experience of mine -- with the last woman I really fell for -- was one of those exceptions.

I met her on a blind date and was disappointed in her looks when she showed up. She was far from homely, but her looks didn't grab me in any way and I pretty much decided I wasn't going to ask her for a second date. But, she turned out to share my sense of humor and we had a lot of interests in common so by the end of the date I decided that I did want to see her again. And eventually she came to look very attractive to me.

On the other hand, she was like Amy when it came to height. She said that she needed to be with a guy who's taller than her (we were the same height: 5'10") It was a deal-breaker for her. The only way I was going to "convince" her to find me attractive was to magically grow at least 2-3 inches.