[Excelsior]

Just some more mainstream confirmation of what we all know, courtesy of a (female) researcher at Notre Dame (I've bolded the most crucial parts):

Quote:

We’ve heard the clichés: “It was love at first sight,” “It’s inner beauty that truly matters,” and “Opposites attract.”

But what’s really at work in selecting a romantic or sexual partner?

University of Notre Dame Sociologist Elizabeth McClintock studies the impacts of physical attractiveness and age on mate selection and the effects of gender and income on relationships. Her research offers new insights into why and when Cupid’s arrow strikes.

In one of her studies, “Handsome Wants as Handsome Does,” published in Biodemography and Social Biology, McClintock examines the effects of physical attractiveness on young adults’ sexual and romantic outcomes (number of partners, relationship status, timing of sexual intercourse), revealing the gender differences in preferences.

“Couple formation is often conceptualized as a competitive, two-sided matching process in which individuals implicitly trade their assets for those of a mate, trying to find the most desirable partner and most rewarding relationship that they can get given their own assets,” McClintock says. “This market metaphor has primarily been applied to marriage markets and focused on the exchange of income or status for other desired resources such as physical attractiveness, but it is easily extended to explain partner selection in the young adult premarital dating market as well.”

McClintock’s study shows that just as good looks may be exchanged for status and financial resources, attractiveness may also be traded for control over the degree of commitment and progression of sexual activity.

Among her findings:

-Very physically attractive women are more likely to form exclusive relationships than to form purely sexual relationships; they are also less likely to have sexual intercourse within the first week of meeting a partner. Presumably, this difference arises because more physically attractive women use their greater power in the partner market to control outcomes within their relationships.

-For women, the number of sexual partners decreases with increasing physical attractiveness, whereas for men, the number of sexual partners increases with increasing physical attractiveness.

-For women, the number of reported sexual partners is tied to weight: Thinner women report fewer partners. Thinness is a dimension of attractiveness for women, so is consistent with the finding that more attractive women report fewer sexual partners.

Another of McClintock’s recent studies (not yet published), titled “Desirability, Matching, and the Illusion of Exchange in Partner Selection,” tests and rejects the “trophy wife” stereotype that women trade beauty for men’s status.

“Obviously, this happens sometimes,” she says, pointing to Donald Trump and Melania Knauss-Trump as an example.

“But prior research has suggested that it often occurs in everyday partner selection among ‘normal’ people … noting that the woman’s beauty and the man’s status (education, income) are positively correlated, that is, they tend to increase and decrease together.”

According to McClintock, prior research in this area has ignored two important factors:

“First, people with higher status are, on average, rated more physically attractive — perhaps because they are less likely to be overweight and more likely to afford braces and nice clothes and trips to the dermatologist, etc.,” she says.

“Secondly, the strongest force by far in partner selection is similarity — in education, race, religion and physical attractiveness.”

After taking these two factors into account, McClintock’s research shows that there is not, in fact, a general tendency for women to trade beauty for money.

“Indeed, I find little evidence of exchange, but I find very strong evidence of matching,” she says. “With some exceptions, the vast majority of couples select partners who are similar to themselves in both status and in attractiveness.”

As many of us suspected, larger women often whore themselves out more, likely as part of a strategy to use easy sex as a way to compensate for their less than ideal appearance and total unwillingness (or inability) to change it.

Sex-positive feminism, whose most visible advocates are often overweight and otherwise far from ideal physically, may very well just be an embodiment of this mating strategy: less attractive women using easy sex to try and put themselves on par with more attractive peers.

Their sensitivity to slut-shaming is also probably tied to this, since such shaming limits the effectiveness of this compensation strategy. In a society that limits casual sex, one cannot use said sex to compensate for their poor appearance. They need complete acceptance of casual intimacy in order to maximize their value. A more chaste vision of sexuality only benefits the more attractive women.

Many of us knew this, but here is some more solid confirmation from a reputable researcher.

The hamsters will need to be running on overtime to try and rationalize something this obvious and substantiated away. I'm not sure the little guys will be able to handle it...

[vinman]

Good post. But there might be some fallout because she didn't tow the feminist line.

[Deluge]

Contrary to that study, I've always thought that hotter girls have slept with more guys and I think most guys here will agree with me. At the same time though I've also always thought that the better off a girl's background is the less slutty she is, but that those better off girls are also better looking (probably due to much lower obesity rates). I'm not sure how to reconcile all this Maybe better looking thin girls are more promiscuous than plain or ugly looking thin girls?

[Thomas the Rhymer]

I skimmed over the original research article. She conveniently ignores the possibility that the people doing the research were perhaps biased.

Here is the study:
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.10...011.615172

My concern is that the people going out to interview the subjects were subconsciously projecting. In other words, there was no control to prevent pedestalisation of 'beautiful' female subjects, or other forms of projection that would have interfered with the data collection. The other issue, would a beautiful slut really admit that sluttiness to the interviewer? These people were interviewed face-to-face, which means that a slut would have to admit sluttiness right in someone's face - someone who has a 'pure' image to maintain is not going to admit that.

Plus, this study only looks at a group of people that were teenagers in the 90's, in other words the results of this study apply to the pre-smartphone generation.

It's dangerous to draw conclusions from a study with so many potential holes.

[UnW]

Do notice some plain janes/average-slightly-below-average girls that are pump and dump queens get some nice validation at being fucked and chucked, since they got 40 mins of feeling desired.

[gamepadawan]

(02-16-2013 04:28 AM)UnW Wrote:  

Do notice some plain janes/average-slightly-below-average girls that are pump and dump queens get some nice validation at being fucked and chucked, since they got 40 mins of feeling desired.

Isn't is likely that most women are sluts, but that the fat or ugly ones are sluttier?

[scorpion]

(02-16-2013 01:18 AM)P Dog Wrote:  

Contrary to that study, I've always thought that hotter girls have slept with more guys and I think most guys here will agree with me. At the same time though I've also always thought that the better off a girl's background is the less slutty she is, but that those better off girls are also better looking (probably due to much lower obesity rates). I'm not sure how to reconcile all this Maybe better looking thin girls are more promiscuous than plain or ugly looking thin girls?

8s and 9s are much less slutty than most guys would initially think. To begin with, most guys have a skewed perspective, since the vast majority of 8s and 9s they see are either in porn or in some other highly sexualized form of media. This leads to the subconscious assumption that attractive women like that must be taking dick all the time.

In reality, 8s and 9s simply do not have to be slutty. They are hot enough to secure commitment from an alpha of their choosing with very little effort. A slutty 8 or 9 is a girl with underlying emotional problems. It would be like a guy who was a multi-millionaire but ate every meal at McDonalds because he was addicted to fast food. In both cases, there's some serious slumming going on.

The sluttiest girls in my experience are the 6s and 7s who put a lot of effort into their appearance and discover they can pass as 8s at night. Some of these get addicted to the attention, and they lack the innate confidence and knowledge of their SMV that legit 8s and 9s have that prevents them from opening their legs to every man that makes their vagina tingle. These are the girls with the highest notch counts.

And of course, fat and ugly women have to be ready to fuck all the time, since they're bringing nothing else to the table.

[Ryre]

This study actually challenges some game precepts. A lot of game--at least Heartiste/Roissy/Mystery style game--is built around imitating the behavior of high-status men. Techniques like social proof and aloofness are shortcuts to signal status. A fundamental idea of game is that status is an attraction trigger for women...and that you can push that trigger without actually having status, with the right behaviors.

This study suggests that, at least for pursuing very attractive women, you'd be better off improving your looks, with exercise, grooming, style, etc.

Any one study has to be taken with a big grain of salt, of course.

[cardguy]

Does this mean there is no point trying to get a one-night stand with a hot girl?

And does it mean most reported one-night stands with hot girls are likely to be BS?

[Samseau]

Self-reported sex partners = bullshit

That's the problem with all of these studies trying to show which girls are slutty, it's always self-reported. I don't trust these studies because women lie.

My personal experience? The younger and hotter she is, the more likely she'll fuck.

It comes down to the social environment of the girls. If her friends are looking for husbands, she'll look for one too. If her friends are whores, she'll be a whore too.

[Excelsior]

(02-16-2013 01:10 PM)cardguy Wrote:  

Does this mean there is no point trying to get a one-night stand with a hot girl?

No, it just means that it is less likely to be successful.

Quote:

And does it mean most reported one-night stands with hot girls are likely to be BS?

It simply means they're less likely to be accurate. We can't know for sure that "most" are BS-there are still plenty of slutty 8's and 9's running around out there.

All we know is that they're no that easy to find. If a guy claims that he found one, good for him, he may have done so. If a guy claims 30 notches in 3 months and says that half of them were in that 8 or 9 range, then there's probably something fishy going on.

(02-16-2013 02:53 AM)Thomas the Rhymer Wrote:  

I skimmed over the original research article. She conveniently ignores the possibility that the people doing the research were perhaps biased.

Here is the study:
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.10...011.615172

My concern is that the people going out to interview the subjects were subconsciously projecting. In other words, there was no control to prevent pedestalisation of 'beautiful' female subjects, or other forms of projection that would have interfered with the data collection. The other issue, would a beautiful slut really admit that sluttiness to the interviewer? These people were interviewed face-to-face, which means that a slut would have to admit sluttiness right in someone's face - someone who has a 'pure' image to maintain is not going to admit that.

Plus, this study only looks at a group of people that were teenagers in the 90's, in other words the results of this study apply to the pre-smartphone generation.

It's dangerous to draw conclusions from a study with so many potential holes.

Fair critiques. No study is perfect.

[Ensam]

It's just a study: interesting to think about but not fact or law by any means.

One thought I had is that if most 8s and 9s are partnering up then the 8s and 9s you run into at bars and clubs are more likely to be the ones who will be down for a SNL. You're probably not going to be gaming the 9 who met her dreamboat alpha in college and got married at 22. She's got 3 kids and is planning fundraisers. You're going to meet the 9 who likes being single and fucking random dudes.

[Basil Ransom]

(02-16-2013 02:21 PM)Ensam Wrote:  

It's just a study: interesting to think about but not fact or law by any means.

One thought I had is that if most 8s and 9s are partnering up then the 8s and 9s you run into at bars and clubs are more likely to be the ones who will be down for a SNL. You're probably not going to be gaming the 9 who met her dreamboat alpha in college and got married at 22. She's got 3 kids and is planning fundraisers. You're going to meet the 9 who likes being single and fucking random dudes.

Nope. That's just what 8s and 9s do for fun - they put on their heels and go to top shelf bars and clubs.

Interesting that 8s and 9s are slower to fuck. A big factor in their lower count is that a babe is a lot more likely to get repeat business, without even trying. Unless she really wants to fuck different dudes every time, something I rarely encounter, she will naturally have a lower count than the 6 who sleeps with the same men, because the men tire of fucking her faster. A man is much more amenable to seriously dating a hookup if she's hot

[Timoteo]

I guess we can quibble about notch counts, and how honest women are about them, but in principle, I understand this study. All it's really saying is that the higher a woman is on the scale, the more control she has to dictate the terms of sex. She doesn't HAVE to be slutty to get sex, and it's more on her terms. A 9 may very well like to go out every night and get different dick, but she doesn't have to put it out there like that. She can withhold from a guy and still get him to come back and try again. She can also score a more quality guy, and get him to wait if she wants. A chick lower on the scale can get it every night too, but a certain kind of man won't be approaching her, and if a quality guy DOES go slumming, she'd better not play games, because he'll chalk her up.

[Frontenac]

(02-16-2013 01:31 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

Self-reported sex partners = bullshit



It comes down to the social environment of the girls. If her friends are looking for husbands, she'll look for one too. If her friends are whores, she'll be a whore too.

Many are products of their environment who usually can't think for themselves. Insecurity demands that they must tow the line with whatever their friends are doing.

[renotime]

(02-16-2013 01:31 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

Self-reported sex partners = bullshit

That's the problem with all of these studies trying to show which girls are slutty, it's always self-reported. I don't trust these studies because women lie.

My personal experience? The younger and hotter she is, the more likely she'll fuck.

It comes down to the social environment of the girls. If her friends are looking for husbands, she'll look for one too. If her friends are whores, she'll be a whore too.

Agreed. Survey tested data is useless b/c people are self conscious and will lie.

Ask a fat person what they ate this week and how often they exercised and they will lie.

[babelfish669]

Let's consider two types of sluts: the hot slut and the ugly fat slut. The hot slut has one husband, a boyfriend, and unlimited number of guys she can sleep with, with minimal work. The ugly fat slut has an equally repulsive boyfriend and has to go out and find drunk guys to have sex with her.

The same guys will happily bang the hot slut over and over, while when the ugly fat slut wants to get laid she almost has to find a new "victim." If both are having sex at the regular pace, the ugly fat slut will have a greater number of partners.

The thing I'd be most skeptical about is what the study considered "attractive."

[gamepadawan]

Women will also keep long term fuck buddies in order to keep notch counts low or they won't count certain times for whatever hamstery reasons. "He only went in my but, so that doesn't count."

[UnW]

(02-16-2013 09:38 AM)scorpion Wrote:  

(02-16-2013 01:18 AM)P Dog Wrote:  

Contrary to that study, I've always thought that hotter girls have slept with more guys and I think most guys here will agree with me. At the same time though I've also always thought that the better off a girl's background is the less slutty she is, but that those better off girls are also better looking (probably due to much lower obesity rates). I'm not sure how to reconcile all this Maybe better looking thin girls are more promiscuous than plain or ugly looking thin girls?

8s and 9s are much less slutty than most guys would initially think. To begin with, most guys have a skewed perspective, since the vast majority of 8s and 9s they see are either in porn or in some other highly sexualized form of media. This leads to the subconscious assumption that attractive women like that must be taking dick all the time.

In reality, 8s and 9s simply do not have to be slutty. They are hot enough to secure commitment from an alpha of their choosing with very little effort. A slutty 8 or 9 is a girl with underlying emotional problems. It would be like a guy who was a multi-millionaire but ate every meal at McDonalds because he was addicted to fast food. In both cases, there's some serious slumming going on.

The sluttiest girls in my experience are the 6s and 7s who put a lot of effort into their appearance and discover they can pass as 8s at night. Some of these get addicted to the attention, and they lack the innate confidence and knowledge of their SMV that legit 8s and 9s have that prevents them from opening their legs to every man that makes their vagina tingle. These are the girls with the highest notch counts.

And of course, fat and ugly women have to be ready to fuck all the time, since they're bringing nothing else to the table.

That's well put, I've noticed similar too.

[germanico]

Hotter girls dont need to sleep with as many guys as an ugly one. She has more options, so its easier for her to select and keep the better one. She knows that sleeping around will reduce her options, so she wont be as tempted to do it.

[mental]

In my experience, hot girls fuck more than uglier/fatter girls. The difference is hot girls don't want anyone to know because of social status. They are pretty good at rationalizating what is and what isn't slutty - if you approach a hot girl and bang, she will rationalize it like "it just happened", that's not slutty at all, and you're not her "sexual partner", while the uglier girls want guys to notice them and so they put on an act so they seem easy in hopes of getting some alpha cock. Combined with my knowledge of how much girls lie, I call that study bullshit.

[Bad Hussar]

(02-16-2013 12:24 AM)Athlone McGinnis Wrote:  

Sex-positive feminism, whose most visible advocates are often overweight and otherwise far from ideal physically, may very well just be an embodiment of this mating strategy: less attractive women using easy sex to try and put themselves on par with more attractive peers.

Interesting research quoted.

In my experience "sex-positive feminist" is really just another term for bisexual. I've met a few girls who claimed this title and I honestly think that all of them also claimed to be bisexuals. Most were a bit more masculine than the average girls, as are most actual real-life bisexual women, but don't remember any of them being fat. Most fat feminists place themselves in the more traditional (hetero) sex-, and man-, negative lesbian branch of feminism.