4 ms·

The generally chaste girls are the same way, they still go for the strong guy over the "nice" guy. Girls that have been taught all their life to go for the nic

The generally chaste girls are the same way, they still go for the strong guy over the "nice" guy. Girls that have been taught all their life to go for the nice guy, still find themselves attracted to the bad boy. The evolutionary/genetic explanation seems to fit my observations the best. I actually think men get some blame for the "girls falling for aholes" problem. I think too many quality men listened to their mothers and school teachers, who said the key is to be a nice guy. The assholes never listened, and learned on the street to win girls via strength. Thus only the assholes act strong and get the girl, while the nerds lose out. The solution is that the good men need to grow a backbone. Then women will be able to find men who they are both attracted to and are good partners.

banned_man 18y ago
There's a difference between being physically strong, having a backbone as you put it, and being a badboy. There are extremely muscular men who are very nice people, and there's also a huge middle ground (into which most men fall) between being a boorish badboy and a spineless pansy. If a woman has a preference for muscular men, or skinny hipsters, or even fat men, that's fine. We all have our physical preferences. And the fact that women want to date men with enough spine to have meaningful character is a good thing. However, women who are attracted to loud, boorish, and stupid badboys are utter garbage. The attraction to badboys is not aesthetic; many badboys are out of shape and ugly. I think the appeal of the badboy is that it provides release from the pressure that is put on women to "marry up". It's not looked down upon for a man to marry a woman less ambitious and intelligent than he is, as long as she's good on her own merits (e.g. if he's a Wall Street quant with a 155 IQ, and she's in a lifestyle career and has a 130 IQ, that's fine, because she's still a smart woman who can hold her own in intelligent conversation). Women, however, are expected to marry men with at least the same level of earning potential and intelligence, because of a lingering concern with gender roles and the expectation that the man will be equal or dominant. This obviously places a lot of pressure on high-power women. The appeal of the badboy is that, although he's virtually never intelligent or ambitious, he's dominant on account of his sheer arrogance and narcissism, but at the same time worthless enough that he can be flippantly discarded. This enables the woman to enter a relationship where she takes a submissive role, but one that has an "off switch"; she can leave without pain, since it's unlikely that she'll form an emotional attachment to such a useless and defective man. [*Edited for clarity @ 12:26]
deleted 18y ago
[deleted]
HSO 18y ago
"they still go for the strong guy over the "nice" guy" The antonym to strong is weak, not nice. I think people often forget that girls, particularly sane and intelligent ones, do not reject the prototypical "nice guy" because he is nice but because he is a pushover. That is, weak. You can be strong and nice. In fact, I think the strongest ones usually are "nice" or considerate because they can afford to, whereas at least where I'm moving, being an asshole or abrasive is a sign of weakness.
- bokonist 18y ago
  I agree. I put the word nice in quotes, because I meant a specific type of "nice" guy - the nice, weak guy who wonders why the girls do not like him.
- joetrumpet 18y ago
  He didn't mean antonym, which is why he mentioned at the end girls could then find both a nice and strong guy. In other words, it's less likely for nice guys to have the trait, but not impossible: they don't have it because they didn't attempt it since they simply listened to girls who didn't know (or weren't willing to admit) what they wanted. In my experience, girls do want first and foremost an alpha male, and being a nice guy on top of that makes it even better. It's just not a necessity so the jerks can succeed without that quality, whereas the nice guys can't succeed without "dominance."
  - banned_man 18y ago
    So your argument is that women don't have shitty, infantile tastes so much as shitty, infantile priorities, then?
    - rdouble 18y ago
      So your argument is that women don't have shitty, infantile tastes so much as shitty, infantile priorities, then? I guess now we know what time_management's new nickname is...
    - joetrumpet 18y ago

banned_man 18y ago

There's a difference between being physically strong, having a backbone as you put it, and being a badboy. There are extremely muscular men who are very nice people, and there's also a huge middle ground (into which most men fall) between being a boorish badboy and a spineless pansy. If a woman has a preference for muscular men, or skinny hipsters, or even fat men, that's fine. We all have our physical preferences. And the fact that women want to date men with enough spine to have meaningful character is a good thing. However, women who are attracted to loud, boorish, and stupid badboys are utter garbage. The attraction to badboys is not aesthetic; many badboys are out of shape and ugly. I think the appeal of the badboy is that it provides release from the pressure that is put on women to "marry up". It's not looked down upon for a man to marry a woman less ambitious and intelligent than he is, as long as she's good on her own merits (e.g. if he's a Wall Street quant with a 155 IQ, and she's in a lifestyle career and has a 130 IQ, that's fine, because she's still a smart woman who can hold her own in intelligent conversation). Women, however, are expected to marry men with at least the same level of earning potential and intelligence, because of a lingering concern with gender roles and the expectation that the man will be equal or dominant. This obviously places a lot of pressure on high-power women. The appeal of the badboy is that, although he's virtually never intelligent or ambitious, he's dominant on account of his sheer arrogance and narcissism, but at the same time worthless enough that he can be flippantly discarded. This enables the woman to enter a relationship where she takes a submissive role, but one that has an "off switch"; she can leave without pain, since it's unlikely that she'll form an emotional attachment to such a useless and defective man. [*Edited for clarity @ 12:26]

deleted 18y ago

[deleted]

HSO 18y ago

"they still go for the strong guy over the "nice" guy" The antonym to strong is weak, not nice. I think people often forget that girls, particularly sane and intelligent ones, do not reject the prototypical "nice guy" because he is nice but because he is a pushover. That is, weak. You can be strong and nice. In fact, I think the strongest ones usually are "nice" or considerate because they can afford to, whereas at least where I'm moving, being an asshole or abrasive is a sign of weakness.

bokonist 18y ago
I agree. I put the word nice in quotes, because I meant a specific type of "nice" guy - the nice, weak guy who wonders why the girls do not like him.
joetrumpet 18y ago
He didn't mean antonym, which is why he mentioned at the end girls could then find both a nice and strong guy. In other words, it's less likely for nice guys to have the trait, but not impossible: they don't have it because they didn't attempt it since they simply listened to girls who didn't know (or weren't willing to admit) what they wanted. In my experience, girls do want first and foremost an alpha male, and being a nice guy on top of that makes it even better. It's just not a necessity so the jerks can succeed without that quality, whereas the nice guys can't succeed without "dominance."
- banned_man 18y ago
  So your argument is that women don't have shitty, infantile tastes so much as shitty, infantile priorities, then?
  - rdouble 18y ago
    So your argument is that women don't have shitty, infantile tastes so much as shitty, infantile priorities, then? I guess now we know what time_management's new nickname is...
  - joetrumpet 18y ago