"women perfer men who are within their leagues,men just tend to choose the best in town"

[LightbulbSun]

I was gonna say, I think you'll find Bob Hope died several years ago.

 

Yeah, when I reread what I wrote, I was like, "Wait, isn't Bob Hope that other guy, that is dead?"

 

Then I went on a frantic search for the other Bob, because I couldn't remember his last name. Even though I loved and grew up watching The Bob Newhart Show, I just couldn't remember his name.

 

I finally found his name on a list of deadpan comedians.

 

Another thing to remember is that he met his wife on a blind date. So anything can happen with love. Here he was, 30 years old, living with his mother, never been on a date, and he just started dating. And he ended up married.

 

I look up to Bob Newhart and genuinely like him, so I hope my life goes down that path.

[kirk]

I've talked to some pretty shy guys and I cut them slack for various reasons including telling me a bit of personal information that I found endearing, doing something gentlemanly but unassuming (like I'm holding too many things and drop something, and he picks it up for me), and even just showing me that what I've talked about registered with him enough that he has a thoughtful remark to make. He doesn't have to be smooth or have any presentation gimmicks, or even radiate confidence. He just has to be willing to participate and appear to be open, not shut down.

 

Myself and people I know have never been in relationships because we don't match-up to other men. We don't lack confidence, and we're not drastically shy. Perhaps it's because your older and more sensible, but between the ages of 18-30, and from what I've seen, women only want very confident men or an "alpha male". Others imply don't get a chance.

 

Which is ironic, because later the same women moan about not finding a decent man when they've been casting them aside all this time.

[jonny15]

Do you know who Bob Hope is?

 

He's a comedian who used to be on tv. He didn't go on his first date, get a first kiss, or get a girlfriend till he was 30. He married the love of his life at 31 (if I'm remembering correctly, it's been a while since I read his autobiography), he also was still living at home when he met her (and had never moved out.)

 

He was also born in like 1902.

 

That is a completely different time.

 

People expected others to be a virgin till they were married.

 

They're in their 90's and still married, I believe.

 

LOL

[tiredofvampires]

I actually don't think we're disagreeing in any significant way, PTH. And if we are...I'm not sure where (in your view).

 

I don't think one necessarily needs a "niche"...by niche, I meant that you've found friends and groups where you tend to shine, and it's around these social circuits that you've found potential love interests, that's all. And you can be in multiple places with multiple types of people (which LBS will be if he's in various organizations, groups, etc, that all have different populations) and just keep expanding your scope that way. You're right -- you don't and shouldn't be locked into any one particular place or body to think of yourself as prepared to meet someone. It's just that having links with people you hang out with makes it easier.

 

I 100%, FULLY endorse what that guy has written from the "garbage reading" -- and I don't think it's garbage. But what he is saying is that he could drop a routine, a formula. That's what I was taking exception to about Galaxy's post -- it was all about a routine with a conceptualization of success as a conquest. And I, as a woman, know when that's happening. I know something REAL when I see it. You can't fake "being INTERESTED and INTERESTING in people anyway." The quote you posted is not a whole lot different from what I said, is it? That you first have to arrive at the situation bringing someone who has an inner base of faculties that defy books and rote methods and routine. And from there...it's just about letting women see those things in you. And even if you don't get a number from them, it doesn't detract from you or your feeling of worth because you have a life, you have substance anyway.

 

But yes, if you feel afraid to touch a woman's shoulder, and wonder at what point that will be appropriate, by all means: that's the stuff I think can be tweaked and given tips on. I didn't categorically write all that off, as you read. I'm just saying the other stuff he said is a whole lot more important. He is saying, "BE attractive as a man who someone would be privileged to get to know, not just a robot doing a polished job."

 

If it helped you, great. But as you said, I don't see that it gave you a routine to present and you're saying it didn't. Despite all the ways I think you've metamorphosed over time, I wouldn't say it was in switching up your "game" and making it something women couldn't say no to, or some such. I don't think you set out to "get the girl" or "learn the art of seduction" or even change your personality style (which is what I was rebutting in Galaxy's post), it gave you some lessons about etiquette and other non-verbal/verbal social pointers, but this was icing on the cake. It didn't make you an overnight dating success, as if you'd had a makeover. It's not unimportant to be socially fluent in such ways, but it won't turn LBS from a shy introvert to a "Don Juan" getting the "hottie" any more than it turned you from Tyler101 to the PTH of today.

 

I guess I'm not sure how what I've suggested is to advise stagnation. If you go out and meet people and show them what you've got (and LBS has a lot to offer if he gets past the social anxiety and he knows it), you can't stagnate. It would be impossible. He hasn't even made friends, talked to people at length, bonded with others, to be able to say, "I keep trying and trying, and no one will bite." Cross that bridge when you get to it -- but by the time you get to it, it might be crossed, because you've already broken free of the prison you're in.

 

I guess I'm just going on personal experience too, with various men. I've dated men who were quite artful (my ex), very romantic, seductive even apart from actual seductive "technique." And I've met men who were quiet wallflowers who seemed uneasy to talk to me, but once they were talking I thought they were nice and intelligent and REAL. And neither of these types of guys was being judged on performance or presentation in the sense that I was thinking, "Show me you can meet a standard." I should qualify that and say I DO have some standards, but they are not based on how deftly he's "showing his wares", unless he's doing some grossly malfunctional stuff like I mentioned earlier. I was simply tuning into what they talked about, what their interests were, their vibe. And a hand on the shoulder would be nice, or not critical, but it didn't sway me one way or the other. It was still about the substance.

 

I would encourage LBS to read and learn from any source he can get his hands on though, provided it's not a cookbook on "routines" or promoting the idea that he should shoot to "get" "hot chicks" anywhere he shows up, no matter what the situation. If it's the quality of what you excerpted here, I endorse that.

 

I'm not sure that he knows the good stuff from the garbage though -- he'd have to have reading recommended. There's so much out there.

 

I think the biggest thing that men teaching men has going for it is the CRED. If a man can say, "I did this and it worked for me", one of those statements is worth a thousand women saying, "If you do this, it'll work for lots of people like me." Because a man is the one you want to emulate and success stories should be coming from the person who has been there, done it, and returned to tell you how it was achieved. That does make sense.

 

I'm just saying there's a place for it all and everyone to instruct with different pieces of the puzzle. And certainly, LBS has gotten that thousand-woman quota here.

[theartofruin]

whoops- wrong thread!

[tiredofvampires]

Just wanted to add -- since my edit time's up --

 

Men teach by example. Women teach by reporting the needs/desires of the constituency, or market demand, first-hand. Not just socially, but even more importantly, emotionally.

 

That would be the key difference, and both are valid for different reasons. And I think the men who have the most success are the ones who have had such intimate relations with women (emotionally -- and doesn't even have to be only romantically), they understand (and I'll add, respect) what women's hearts want almost as well as women. These kinds of guys go way beyond just understanding attraction.

[resilient7]

huh?,,.......

[SinfullySweet]

These girls like very pretty men. Well put together, smell nice, great skin. I know I'm stereotyping here, so forgive me. But by and large the only men in this small mountain town that put that much effort into their appearance are in the gay community. Almost everyone else just wears flip flops and t-shirts (women too).

 

That would be my type, which is why I'm rarely interested in anyone I've tried dating basketball short wearing, flip flop sporting, football players and such... I stay interested for all of a week. My ex is the only guy I've ever really been into, but he also is one of the few guys who always smells nice, looks nice, has great skin, loves shopping and fine dining, but can still work on cars and fix things around the house. Too bad he's a sociopath and cheater!

[LightbulbSun]

Looking at a video of myself presenting a speech in class today, I came to this realization.

 

I am, at best, average looking. I'm cute, in a nerdy way, but I'm certainly nothing special. Therefore, I need to stop having such high standards...because I'm fat and average looking. I need to be looking for someone who's equal in terms of attractiveness, not someone who's 'thin and beautiful', because I'm setting myself up for failure.

 

I also noticed something as well; I came off as very uncomfortable. To the point where I made my audience uncomfortable at times. If I can't even get up and talk about things that interest me, I certainly can't talk about things that interest me with a girl one on one...until I get over my anxieties and manage to break free of that issue.

 

I honestly believe I can do it. Believe it or not, I was very social in high school. I was a member of several clubs, the band, the drama classes, the concert choir, all sorts of student activities. If I can just get back into that mindset of not giving a crap what people say or think about me, including women, maybe I'd be respected more? After all, who is more respected...the outgoing jerk or the quiet loner? Not saying I have to become a jerk, but at least I can become more outgoing...and stop trivializing dating, to the point where I beat myself up over being a XX year old virgin, or that a particular girl didn't like the way I looked today, or stuff like that.

 

You know what it all boils down to? Insecurity. I need someone to verify who I am, otherwise I'm invisible. However, I'm not invisible...I'm an accomplished musician, I'm an intelligent person, and people generally do like me once they get to know me. Therefore, I need to stop declaring myself as invisible unless people give me attention...especially women. Because a woman cannot save me, only I can save myself, and the way to save myself is to realize that I actually exist and that I can be happy on my own. Only, and only then can I find myself healthy and ready to be in a relationship.

 

I mentioned in a separate thread that I'm quitting porn...then I went back on it. Honestly, I think quitting porn is the best option possible, because it will stop me from putting women up on pedestals, and rating them. Earlier on today, there was a thread on the porn forum, where a guy was getting off to Susan Boyle (you all know who she is), and it turned into a flame war. I felt really sick after reading that, because Susan Boyle is a person, a lovely person actually, and if one guy finds her attractive enough to post her picture, it shouldn't turn into a 'no, she's f'ing hideous' kind of thing. Because beauty is subjective, and not everyone will find the same people attractive.

 

Okay, I've written a lot, and I'm ranting now (and I surely hope that I didn't say anything I regret, because I can't edit this), but I'm basically going to revamp my lifestyle. No more high expectations, no more putting women up on pedestals. And no more feeling sorry for myself...that has been going on for far too long already.

[Fudgie]

Yay! This is awesome LBS. you're right it is the insecurity that holds you back.

[lerira]

LOL I agree. My bf is in the same league of attractiveness as I, and he is also on the same financial path, amongst other things. Unfortunately I wouldn't date a man that was less attractive than I, or that made less than me, that had no goals, and that had a weird personality.

 

A little vain, do you not think?

[skyblue1]

I go for the very attractive men that turn out to be awful men. Maybe i should slightly lower my standards. What do you think?

[Fudgie]

I go for the very attractive men that turn out to be awful men. Maybe i should slightly lower my standards. What do you think?

 

Not all "attractive" men are awful. Maybe you should be looking at what sort of traits you like in a man and be on the look out for "warning signs" from a guy that he's a jerk. Perhaps you're really into aggressive "alpha males"? Well, there are a lot of jerk alpha males who aren't going to treat you right. You need to look into stuff like that.

[skyblue1]

Not all "attractive" men are awful. Maybe you should be looking at what sort of traits you like in a man and be on the look out for "warning signs" from a guy that he's a jerk. Perhaps you're really into aggressive "alpha males"? Well, there are a lot of jerk alpha males who aren't going to treat you right. You need to look into stuff like that.

 

I like the very confident men. Red flags i see but ignore sometimes just incase it gets better hehe but it never does. Very hot men are mostly up for fun and games. You can say that maybe i do like the alpha men, which isn't a good thing at all

[oldenoughtoknow]

You know what it all boils down to? Insecurity. I need someone to verify who I am, otherwise I'm invisible. However, I'm not invisible...I'm an accomplished musician, I'm an intelligent person, and people generally do like me once they get to know me. Therefore, I need to stop declaring myself as invisible unless people give me attention...especially women. Because a woman cannot save me, only I can save myself, and the way to save myself is to realize that I actually exist and that I can be happy on my own. Only, and only then can I find myself healthy and ready to be in a relationship.

 

That's it, LBS. You've got it.

 

In the vein of this thread, I guess if you're talking purely about physical attributes, then yes, women tend to stay in their league and men shoot for it all. Men are more physically attracted to a mate, a pretty face, a good body. While women are more emotionally attracted, a guy who looks confident and has direction in his life.

 

If you were to make the OP's statement from an emotional intelligence point of view, it would be phrased in the complete opposite. Emotionally, women would stay in their league or shoot for the moon, and the men would stay in their league or probably not care at all.

[Lonewing]

Women prefer men in their leagues, but often assume to be in a higher league than they actually are. Hence, the problem!

[Sparkly Eyes]

Women prefer men in their leagues, but often assume to be in a higher league than they actually are. Hence, the problem!

 

It depends on the woman. I would definitely say tho that generally women are less confident in their looks than men.

[newwave]

I would say women think they are in a lower league, whereas men think more highly. I've known average looking guys who thought they were hot and hot women who thought they were below average.

[LightbulbSun]

I might have misread his comment, but I think he was saying that women tend to shoot higher than their league, hence the problem. Where men settle and go lower.

 

It's not always that way, and there are more attractive women than attractive men. So if ALL women aim for those in their looks league, there are going to be a lot of lonely women out there.

[tiredofvampires]

This whole thing about "aiming" for a "league" is driving me up the wall.

 

People should AIM to find someone compatible with them, and then if both find eachother hot in this process, end of story.

[Cognitive_Canine]

I might have misread his comment, but I think he was saying that women tend to shoot higher than their league, hence the problem. Where men settle and go lower.

 

It's not always that way, and there are more attractive women than attractive men. So if ALL women aim for those in their looks league, there are going to be a lot of lonely women out there.

 

Why do you say this?

 

Remember that you are a man who is attracted to women...therefore you're a bit biased when determining the attractiveness of men and women.

[newwave]

Also, another thing is what's attractive to one person is ugly to another. I find Brad Pitt extremely unattractive. The type I like (nerds) are generally not considered "hot". I can't stand alpha males or big muscular men.

[Lonewing]

This whole thing about "aiming" for a "league" is driving me up the wall.

 

People should AIM to find someone compatible with them, and then if both find eachother hot in this process, end of story.

 

Well, social status is kind of part of "leauges"...and there is a certain compatibility to be said about having similar backgrounds.

[LightbulbSun]

If people stopped putting people into 'leagues', and started treating everyone as 'people', the world would be a better place.

[Lonewing]

Leagues are created by disparities in resource piles, a condition created by the efforts of your parents and parent-parents and all those who came before them. Some parents didn't work so hard, and leave nothing, while others work for ever and still make nothing. And some do little and amount to millions. But the result is, the next generation is borne upon that wealth.

 

The easiest way to transcend the wealth pile is to be born beautiful. It's prostituion at it's base, but the reality is...well, find me one girl who won't marry a guy for a million bucks, and bet I can get her to crack when I say ten million...every person can be bought. The reality is, pretty people are indeed a natural resourse and thus why they have such high demand and high value. This disparity in looks is what creates the Leagues, as Leagues simply sort people by the quality of their physical features. This may be baseless and entirely tasteless for a modern empathizer, but the reality is...well, who [or rahter, WHAT!] do you see in fashion magazines, makeup commercials, modeling shoots and in the movies?