How attraction works. part II (very long)

[LilJuan]

This info is good, alot of it, if not all of it is Darwinism, and contempary Darwinism. Robert Wright has a good book called, The Moral Animal were there is an extremely good section on monogamy and pologomy.

 

[Inspector Clouseau]

but women are much more complicated. they have a much more complicated mate selection strategy, and this is why so many women "get" how men work. but yet so many men fail to "get" how women work. their mate selecting process is very complicated.

Baloney. Women understanding men, and men not grasping the female, has nothing to do with "their mate selection process". What crap. Yes, I am very well versed in anthropology.

No need to look into the female mind, because there is nothing there.

Woman is entirely influenced by her environment; her value systems molded by the environment and emotions. Her environment constitutes her ego.

Given one environement, she will have a certain set of values. Change the environment, change the woman. Take a girl and put her into the party scene, she will adopt values of the party girl. Take that same girl, plop her into academica, she adopts values of the bookworm. Add some age to her and plop her into role of a single mom, she will adopt the values of the mother. Give her a marriage and she adopts everything of which is her husband.

Guys find confusion when applying logic to Woman. There is no logic to emotion. I understand the female mind, and I understand it because I refuse to enter it.

It has been said women's emotions are like the weather, ever changing. You can study the weather and find patterns of reason; cold fronts, warm fronts, jet stream, high pressure, low pressure, etc. Yet no matter how compelling the reasons for a certain day to be a sunny, it rains; no matter how certain it shall rain, it doesn't. You find patterns, but then you see there is no pattern at all. Scientists have been studying hurricanes for ages, yet we still can not determine where a storm will go in the long-term, left with only guessimates of its next move.

Woman is the weather. There is no logic, for all the patterns there is no pattern. The spoon doesn't exist.

[This message has been edited by Inspector Clouseau (edited 10-15-2002).]

 

[Chubbs Peterson]

Elite Womanizer,

First let me say that I haven't read the whole post mainly because it is so long. But the reason I stopped reading it was for very subjective statements like...

"we are are genetically programmed to like beutiful women. who have large tits, a nice curvey ass, plump lips, narrow nose, and the other features"

This statement seems to come from a generally Americanized, generally Anglo-American point of view, which doesn't explain the attractiveness factor as it applies to other cultures/nationalities and groups.

So therefore I question it.

BECAUSE.. (WARNING! STEREOTYPES AHEAD!)

...Black women generally don't have large breasts. GENERALLY SPEAKING, Large breasts aren't the primary sexual preoccupation within the African American community, unlike the white American community. And in sub-Saharan Africa, most people have broad noses.

...Many, if not most white women have small flatter rear ends. They also tend to have very thin lips. Particularly those with roots from the more nothern parts of Europe...

...Asian women (and particularly those who actually live in Asia) GENERALLY are NOT very curvy and have small breasts, as well as flat noses...

...Aboriginal people generally have wide noses as well...

...Until recently in Brazil— the largest country in South America and full of all different types of races- small breasts were deemed more attractive than large breasts....

Blah blah blah...

All these cultures have their own standards of beauty which do not prescribe to the traits that you listed.

So wouldn't these examples REFUTE your statement that we, as male humans, are "genetically programmed" to respond to "large tits, a nice curvey ass, plump lips, narrow nose..." The only part I can agree with is that we males respond to beautiful women. What is considered "beautiful" of course varies from place to place.

If the critera you listed were GLOBALLY true, then Pamela Anderson would be considered the only attractive woman in the world.

I'm NOT trying to pick a fight with you, I just think that your logic needs some more thought and across the board consideration.




[This message has been edited by Chubbs Peterson (edited 10-15-2002).]

 

[Jay-X]

i disagree with this post... what do blond hair and blue/green eyes have to do with fertility? plus, when i was younger i used to prefer small tits over big tits...

 

[donovan]

I think you guys should back off alittle and discuss this without resorting to AFC "fvck you bitrot, etc" he's expressing what he wants. I doubt you know much professionally Elite. Although you made great points. And I totally agree with everything you're saying. I doubt you did ground roots research into these conclusions. I believe it would be more along the lines of DYD.

Anyways, the above post talked about genetic selection. eg. Asian men like.... this is partially true. Although I believe most people are individual but alot follow the same pattern for selection. Their environments are slightly different. And most women change to their environment's wants. Notice how many girls are turning 18, that have outstanding bodies? Beautiful skin, its almost that the body seems to gravitate towards what males will find beautiful. Who knows, maybe more fat girls back in the middle ages... I heard thats what they liked back then....

Anyways, lets keep it cleaner, and less personal attacks please! You guys sound like some AFCs. Remember real PUA's don't try and get ahead by bringing people down. They show their status by their actions..

 

[Desdinova]

Jay-X, why the hell did you bump this old post? Why oh why couldn't you let this thread fade into nothing?

I doubt you know much professionally Elite. Although you made great points. And I totally agree with everything you're saying

EW was banned three years ago. However, it still seems like yesterday when he was trolling the forums

 

[Holland]

Great post. Can't wait to read Part III

 

[Desdinova]

Great post. Can't wait to read Part III

Goddammit! There will never be a Part III. Never ever. Look at the date and the "Banned" title under EW's name.

Someone please close this thread.

 

[Holland]

that's sad. Another great poster gone.

and it is a fvcking fact that genes are being degraded becuase of technology. Technology is taking evolutionary pressures off the human species.It's allowing people who should not be alive today, be alive. Thus these peoples genes are being added to our gene pool, and degrading it.

Realising that makes me think. We're the hell are we going to. Eventually, our genes will become weaker and weaker and we get more and more dependand on technology. :woo:
It's fate.



Why close this thread, it's a great thread. Way better then all the ****ty "Help, I'm such a Loser!" threads.

 

[Desdinova]

Do a search on Elite Womanizer's posts. He was an a55hole. You'll also come across his multiple accounts.

 

[Visceral]

Anybody can know how attraction works ... it's simple science.

This site is about getting attraction to work - being attractive and attracted - getting your instincts going again and getting rid of anything that stops you from successfully acting on them.

For most of human history, men didn't know anything about the biology, psychology, and sociology behind human sexuality and they still managed to fvck like rabbits!

Whoever said "Knowledge is power" took the will to use it for granted. It's that will that we here must find and cultivate, not more of the same dry facts.

 

[Holland]

Mmmm yeah. Did a search yeah. Most of it focused on the biology, and most of it I already knew.
Still interesting to know, but actually knowing how to trigger the attraction right now is much more important.

 

[The-Sultan]

I thought i read it all, excellent original post. Didnt repeat anything. I learnt so much, hmm, nice post.