Is it worse for women?

[Giggly]

I think both men and women have pressure to impress the opposite gender just in different ways. Some of it is in all in our heads and some of it is legitimate.

[Jennifer]

Originally Posted by nolla

Here we come back to the make-up and plastics. So, it isn't all woman thing ("I want to look good for myself") but more like a silent competition of women to get the men? Again a big simplification, but... does most of the low self-esteem among women come from this feeling of not being "beautiful enough" compared to the others?

Sigh. Well, I cannot tell if that is it... but I know lots of times I'm very happy with myself -- until I get around someone else who I think is prettier, or has a nicer voice, or seems just "better" (i.e., more desirable/attractive overall) than me.

Then I feel like crap and have to consciously buck up and tell myself I'm fine as I am and fight the bad feelings. (i.e., I stop comparing to everyone else and just compare to myself... am I the best that *I* can be?)

I still don't know if it's about men. It's simply that my self-image takes a hit because I'm not as desirable as I realize someone might be. But like I said, that standard is highly unrealistic. It's like I have to "woo and win" myself over, not someone else per se.

[ptgatsby]

Originally Posted by Jennifer

Women tend to "passively pursue" males -- they purposefully put themselves out there and attempt to present themselves in a way that gets them noticed. But again this is generalization. It's funny that some people still frown upon women who actively pursue men. The last guy I talked to, it was funny -- when I pushed to meet with him (by suggesting places to go) and seemed too eager, he got really squidgy and I had to back way off before he felt comfortable getting together; it was like he needed to feel like he was the one doing the chasing.

That's not really unusual.

If you think that an alpha male can have as many women as he can protect (from other males )/resources can support, then the women that are left over are "inferior".

Think of it like a game. You have equal amounts of males and females. In order to have maximum reproductive success, the males want as many high-value females, while the females want the highest value male (they can get). Since males need to both 'support' and 'protect' (read: offspring and mate guarding), it costs them resources in the long run, so they can only "hold onto" so many females at a time. Granted, I'm ignoring the whole slew of tendencies for females to cheat in the system, males poaching others indirectly, etc.

Given that there are equal amounts, this means that some males go without mating - it is unlikely that this is ever the case for women. A male may want to trade up, as in get the maximum use of his resources, but in a choice between no mate and a mate, he'll always pick a mate.

By design, the males have to compete with each other for the females. The females, however, do not have to compete with each other directly. Their strategy is therefore to appeal to the traits the dominant males are seeking. By virtue of evolution, these traits are mostly related to the ability to have children. The resulting tendency is for them to want to appear young and fertile.

The males are less defined because there are mixed strategies, but in all cases, if a female is hunting a male, then she is inherently signalling her inability to have attracted a high-value male. By default, the implication is that all females are 'claimed' - not because it is true, but because that's the heurestics involved. A male would need to challenge and claim another male.

We've grown a lot since this would fully apply, but we still have tendencies like this.

Women, however, have it really bad because they automatically have to rate themselves against other women to determine their value. It's always been a problem for them, but the media does make it worse, to some degree. It means they believe themselves to be less attractive than their "real" competition. Similar effect with males, however, in that males tend to value their mates less after being exposed to "perfect" images. However, it isn't new.

In summary, the short of it is... marriage is the greatest thing for men since the beginning of time. Otherwise the majority of us wouldn't have secured a mate. That, and nature is strangely cruel to women - they all would pretty much get a mate, but have been programmed to feel like they need to be perfect (or better than, I suppose), just so that they want to upgrade/keep their mate.

[nolla]

ptgatsby, good comment! Gives certain dimension to the question... It really is a big thing that while a man can (theoretically) have dozen or more children a year, the same time woman can have one. So, women go for quality, while men go for quantity.

Originally Posted by Jennifer

I still don't know if it's about men. It's simply that my self-image takes a hit because I'm not as desirable as I realize someone might be.

For you to be desirable, you need someone to desire for you. So, that would be a man, wouldn't it? Maybe the passive man-hunting is so passive that it is hard to realize?

[ptgatsby]

Originally Posted by nolla

ptgatsby, good comment! Gives certain dimension to the question... It really is a big thing that while a man can (theoretically) have dozen or more children a year, the same time woman can have one. So, women go for quality, while men go for quantity.

It's a major part of it, for sure

The things to keep in mind is that men can play a mixed strategy - they can be strong or rich or popular or high status (or... or...). They can also be romantic, dependable, agressive... all sorts of traits. Women find all of these things attractive for that reason.

Women, however, have a much narrower strategy. It's not absolute - as you say about a good household runner - but it is much stronger. That strategy works on whatever males are more interested in, which tends to be age and fertility.

The above, of course, relates to the big picture/game theory of mate selection, in other words, the way we likely evolved. Modern culture really blurs the lines now.

[nolla]

Originally Posted by ptgatsby

It's a major part of it, for sure

The things to keep in mind is that men can play a mixed strategy - they can be strong or rich or popular or high status (or... or...). They can also be romantic, dependable, agressive... all sorts of traits. Women find all of these things attractive for that reason.

Women, however, have a much narrower strategy. It's not absolute - as you say about a good household runner - but it is much stronger. That strategy works on whatever males are more interested in, which tends to be age and fertility.

I guess it's mostly about which of the trends is more popular. Other than that, some research show that a type of women prefer non-dominant males. This is explained through the parenting role of father. The dominant male doesn't have a whole lot of time to take care of the puppies since he's out there spreading seed...

Originally Posted by ptgatsby

The above, of course, relates to the big picture/game theory of mate selection, in other words, the way we likely evolved. Modern culture really blurs the lines now.

I can imagine very dramatic scenes in a stone-age tribe of 10 males and 10 females... The dominant male can't watch over the harem all the time. There probably was a lot of the "mixed strategy".

[Anja]

"I learned the truth at seventeen
That love is meant for beauty queens
And high school girls with clear-skinned smiles
Who married young and then retired."

"The valentines I never knew
The Friday night charades of youth
Were meant for one more beautiful
At seventeen I learned the truth."

Janis Ian, circa 1967

I understand that plastic surgeons evaluate candidates for surgery to insure than their motivation is a healthy one. I'm certainly not sure how they go about that or what makes them qualified to act as psych folks. And I have my doubts about turning down a great deal of money by many of them.

My main concern for it would be physical health reasons.

I've never been exactly sure who I "dress" for. Certainly as a teen I dressed for male attention.

I like fun clothes and enjoy wearing them. Even more so I enjoy a comment or compliment.

Guess it would depend on the occasion and the people I was going to be with.

In my teens I would have loved to change nearly everything about my face. I suspect I've grown into it.

And the little crow's feet and signs of age aren't bothering me. Yet, anyway. I rather fancy having a bit of grey in my hair to "prove" that I have survived the many challenges of life. And some laugh wrinkles to prove that I have laughed many times.

My children are gone now
No excuse for more grey
I think it's the spouse now
Who makes me that way.

I like it! I love it!
Earned every bit of it.
A clever disguise
To make me look wise.

And if anyone thinks
That I hadn't a care
Though my life as I lived it -
Just look at my hair!

[ptgatsby]

Originally Posted by nolla

I guess it's mostly about which of the trends is more popular. Other than that, some research show that a type of women prefer non-dominant males. This is explained through the parenting role of father. The dominant male doesn't have a whole lot of time to take care of the puppies since he's out there spreading seed...

Excellent point - that's pretty much it.

A child's chance of survival and ability to have children can be well supported by good genes, lots of resources, dedicated parents... And it can be hurt by the lack of all of those two. So, in the end, males get to try a few different ways of doing things, and women are influenced in different ways.

I can imagine very dramatic scenes in a stone-age tribe of 10 males and 10 females... The dominant male can't watch over the harem all the time. There probably was a lot of the "mixed strategy".

Then you have the huge harems held by those that are rich, etc. And the Kahn types, which make up measurable % of males in an area (and the world - I think 0.5% of men are his descendents!)

And the methods change. Young males, for example, are attention seekers. Physically competing over females, for example. But older males tend to use status and wealth, instead. Women can mate with either and have the same level of success, roughly, but men can't use both strategies at the same time, unless they are at the very top of each strategy.

(As you can tell, I love this subject Sorry for the rambling)

[Anja]

More of Janis's song:

"The rich-relation beauty queen marries into what she needs."

[Mondo]

I am amazed by how many intelligent, beautiful young women get involved with the superficiality of sorority life and let guys judge them so easily and let them determine what they do with themselves. It's a damn shame!

It's amazing that women and men alike seem to fall in love with those who will treat them the worst. It seems so counter-intuitive.