(I've always thought that it's possible men dominate society as a way to prevent female mate selection to become the defacto standard of social superiority... but anyway)
Perhaps in the wild. However, it has also been shown that certain traits - agreeableness (ie: F-ish), openness (N) and conscientiousness (J) are all predictors of both mate selection and relationship happiness ("FNJ" being positive and "TSP" being negative, roughly in that order - men put more emphasis on conscientiousness).But their taste of men have never changed. No matter how rich they are, they still want the dominating, aggressive, and adventurous men with an attitude. Casanova, Lord Byron, and Hemingway are examples of such men.
It's akin to saying that men like sleeping with a lot of women. The animal instinct remains, but the socialized impact differs significantly in the modern world. Preferences shift.
In asia, "30" use to be 25 or 20, depending on where you are talking about. This is entirely cultural in nature. Women tend to like money and power, all other things being equal. There is certainly no lack of young women looking to land the 'big fish'... they aren't looking for a typical "bread winner" either.Women want a bread winner only when they need stability, for themselves or their children. That's why women above 30 always try to get married, or dream of marriage. They know they will not be attractive anymore in a few years time and they need to get married to ensure their financial stability.
It's pretty hard to generalize "what women want". Different types want different things in different measurements. While biologically they do want certain gene traits, women are dominated by mental connections far far more than men. That results in other traits being important, if not more important than certain previous gene traits.
In absolute terms, what I can say is;Originally Posted by Jennifer
1) Most of these norms are not imposed by men but by social standards and by women.
2) Men are almost universally more forgiving of 'errant' things than women.
However, I think Toonia is also correct in that certain things (feet binding, etc) are also a result of social conventions, typically male dominated. However, it is also true that men have been put through the same things... it's only civilization that has removed a lot of it. Metrosexual is here now though, so I can't say that it won't be back... only that you get it in tribal societies a whole lot more.
I don't know how old she is... but the cause isn't that mysterious.It hurts to watch -- my daughter, who is slim and slight like most Asian women, and probably always will be no matter what she eats, already comments negatively about her weight... and I think she's already too skinny. I constantly reassure her that she's skinnier than many women and most would be happy to look just like her... but she persists in this thinking. I just don't understand. No one at home is talking about "being fat" -- not about her, not about anyone.
1 - Beauty is measured along a bell curve (which is very ^ shaped - very little tail towards (un)attractive).
2 - We intuitively measure ourselves along a bell curve
3 - Our own bell curve model is based upon biased sampling - what we see
4 - Mass media produces over 50% of our representation of human beauty
Hence, the bell curve is vastly shoved towards "beautiful" with the norm being vastly out of whack with reality. The end result is that nearly every women is insecure with their looks regardless of where they actually fit on the curve (with increasing amounts of exceptions based upon the individual