If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
Essential support for under 25s
Essential support for under 25s
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
My arguments are based on my experiances (bitter or better) and my observations. I'm not trying to lay the blame on anyone and I'm not making this a personal argument.
Don't get me wrong, so would I, but that really wouldn't benefit anyone at all. I might as well talk to the floor.
Alright I can see how that got misinterperated. Let me explain. Let's say society was downgraded to the point of everyone having to scrounge for food, but there was one person left that had tonnes of food and supplies; a man (heterosexual for the sake of the argument).
Now if someone wanted food or supplies, who would be able to get these easier?
A woman of course.
I really didn't mean to offend, or cause myself to be misjudged by that comment. What I'm saying through that is women will always have their bodies, and can therefore, get what they want. Ask a sociologist or Anna Nicole Smith.
I thought you were just on the wrong lines at the beginning, but as soon as you said TV was a good example, I thought you were joking. If you weren't joking, I'm very sorry and I think you need a bit of help upstairs. The reason TV and films have the more objectively good looking people is because they're there for 2 things- as eye candy, and on fewer occasions their ability to act. The fact that they are on TV doesn't mean you would have more or less chance with them unless they're even more shallow than the industry they work in.
Seriously, the world isn't as bad as you seem to think. And if you think that someone is out of your league (subjectively, of course), then all that reflects is your insecurities. And just to cover first impressions- I don't think looks are so important in first impressions either, because after 30 seconds of talking to someone, you can learn a lot about them and any shallow impressions based on looks alone will probably be shattered in that time.
No no, I'm not saying anything degrating. I guess I could explain it better in person, for I had a Sociology class and we were talking about the survival of the fittest at the lowest level.
Basically if a man is poor and living on the street he can't make money as easily as a woman in the same condition. She always has a resource.
Ladon_J, I respect your opinion, as I do the rest of you. I am coming from a point of view from my experience and the people I'm around. That's what I'm basing my conclusion on.
I didn't really know that this 'league' consisted of a number rating system. Perhaps we have different definitions and those are colliding and are spurring the argument. The league I am thinking of is people who have high-maintenance standards, mid-maintenance standards, and low-maintenance standards; like a caste system. I know it's not impossible for them to intermingle, I just believe (through my own experiences and efforts) that it's a fairly rare occurance.
I'd say so.
People are attracted to similar people, that much is true. It's rare you see a council estate girl going out with a royal; it's rare you see a thick person going out with a university-educated barrister or doctor. For instance.
People are attracted to people with similar educational and social statuses as themselves. It's only a "league" if you think that one social status is inherently superior to another.
Damn you kermit! You stole my bloody argument away from me
My anti misogynistic stance has been nicked by someone with what looks like a headline from the Sun as an avatar!
What a strange world.
Anyway, Junker, the whole 'man/woman on the street/pauper but the woman has her body as a resource' argument (catchy title eh?) has no bearing on the discussion. It has no relevancy to 'leagues.'
Its just opinion and taste ... that is all that is behind attraction. Some people like the one and some the other. Some people will be attractive to a wider range of people and will find it easier to pull/get a partner than others. At the end of the day you can't tell by looking at someone or judging how attractive you find them to be whether or not they'll find you attractive!
'Leagues' exist in some ways. I know that my previous ex, I believed to be considerably out of my league, but it was more thinking that my conversation wouldn't be able to hold him or that I wasn't attractive enough, but on actually being with him, I found he'd thought the same as me.
I think I understand where Junker's coming from but it went too basic - I mean to break it down at the end of the day as survival of the fittest and us being able to use prostitution...strays a tad from the level of the topic...!
It's been scientifically proven that facial symmetry according to the golden ration is seen as most attractive. Also, a hip to waist ratio (for women) of 0.7.
sounds like something u would say to me arrr