Why Attractive Women and Wealthy Men Stay Single?

[yogacat]

Alright guys and gals. My mind is a bit all over the place 😇

But I came across this video....

Do you think that overtime attractive women who realize that being simply a pretty face isn't what men primarily want and who develop other qualities like emotional skills and intelligence make for better long-term relationship partners?

I feel that they can since in the end people want someone who they can naturally associate with, and emotional and interpersonal skills are two of the best ways of achieving that.  

This woman in the video is arguing that pretty women have difficulty doing this due to how how men and women view them. Her argument is that pretty women have trouble connecting due to how men see them as well as juggling the acceptably of other women.

 

[Batya33]

I know and know of many women who are very attractive looking and never presumed that was enough to attract a potential husband or long term partner. A date or a fling -yes it's easier to be thin and pretty if that's what you want. I was never hot like that but I was cute and pretty/attractive and I never ever presumed that was enough or nearly enough.  And women who feel that way obviously don't have much respect for men.  And likely lack close platonic male friends or they'd never have that "men only think with their private parts" attitude

I think we all can work on our social skills, our personal growth whether we're looking for a romantic relationship or not or whether we are single. I think if a woman thinks her looks are enough and then is not finding a long term partner who suits her (and maybe she will -some people just really want arm candy first and foremost and they get their emotional needs met elsehwere) she's not going to try to "work" on her emotional skills.  If she has them -meaning if she has any close friendships -she might choose to start treating men like human beings and being a friend as part of dating.

There are women who are shallow and judge other women based on looks just like there are men who do this. Oh well.  A woman is not going to go for that, going to associate with those sorts of people or care a bit about "acceptance" in that way if she has values and standards that don't prioritize that.  

Didn't watch the video.  Not a fan of these stereotypical notions.  Especially because they're offensive to men and - also because I'm raising a teenage boy.  He doesn't value looks in that way, to that extreme.

I also don't like the sterotype about wealthy men.  Some people prize and prioritize wealth and some don't.  For me financial stability was a must and a strong work ethic,  I brought my financial independence and strong work ethic with me so I didn't need wealthy and wealthy wasn't a priority.  Also many women like me want to know where the wealth came from.  That matters too.

[catfeeder]

1 hour ago, yogacat said:

Do you think that overtime attractive women who realize that being simply a pretty face isn't what men primarily want and who develop other qualities like emotional skills and intelligence make for better long-term relationship partners?

Great topic. I believe that the women who learn social, emotional and other skills, not to appeal to men, but because they want to attain these skills for themselves, often make for the best long term partners. They aren't catering to a marketplace, because their self worth is internal and authentic. They're not trying to appeal to the masses, because desiring a larger pool of bad matches makes no sense. Women who are self focused and trust that their only 'mating' strategy appeals to a quantity of one man--who is right for her--won't waste their time and energy spinning to satisfy irrelevant 'popular' expectations.

I like how this interview raised a big difference between innate beauty versus 'hotness'. It's disingenuous for anyone to pretend that the nip-slip just 'happens' to poor unaware creatures who are certainly not trying to seek 'that' kind of attention. (Uhm...I went through a 'hot' phase. I never went down that road of exposure, but I knew exactly what I was doing.)

I don't believe that any woman is incapable of screening out the kind of brutish or unethical mates that this video implies 'must' be cast upon her as though she's too enculturated to recognize that she has plenty of other options. While I've mostly considered myself to be attractive, many of my friends are strikingly beautiful. While they've suffered their share of slings and arrows, those have admittedly been no more so than those suffered by anyone else for a variety of reasons. So I'd use care not to get pulled into theories espoused by SM videos that are designed, simply enough, to be 'popular' enough to earn revenue. 

[Batya33]

I can't watch the video right now and Catfeeder is right -great topic in general as far as is there any way to evaluate why certain women and men who have stereotypically attractive qualities are single -assuming they do not wish to be single.  

I did know when I was dating to work on shedding my Work Hat when I interacted socially especially for dating purposes.  I remained assertive, spunky, wasn't afraid at all to show my "smarts" -the opposite - but for sure being a bit softer more "feminine" than I was comfortable being in the workplace and in the male-dominated intense competitive industry in which I chose to work and grow professionally. 

[ShySoul]

4 hours ago, yogacat said:

Her argument is that pretty women have trouble connecting due to how men see them as well as juggling the acceptably of other women.

I'll put aside the idea of even being able to classify people as pretty, hot, plain, or any other level of attractiveness when it's all subjective.

I'd argue that everyone has trouble connecting. The "beautiful people" have to worry about stereotypes (the dumb blond, that they are stuck up just because of their looks, etc.). They have to deal with a percentage of people who will focus solely on how they look and not be willing to see what lies inside. The plain or unattractive person worries that they aren't good enough and will be passed over because of how they look. They worry about stereotypes as well (the geek, the one who ends up as just a friend). 

Problem comes with how people tend to form their opinions of themselves from external sources. As long as we're seeking validation from some imaginary societal standard, we'll never feel good enough. The goalpost will always change as something else or someone new comes along to be what we aspire towards. We'll always be comparing ourselves to something else and thinking about what's missing or what we're not.

On the other hand, true beauty and confidence comes from within. We're all beautiful and attractive in our own way. When you accept and embrace yourself for who you are, you can be ready for a real relationship founded on qualities that matter so much more then appearance - intelligence, compassion, honesty and trust, etc. This applies for men and women.

2 hours ago, catfeeder said:

I believe that the women who learn social, emotional and other skills, not to appeal to men, but because they want to attain these skills for themselves, often make for the best long term partners.

Agreed. You need to first love yourself and work on being the person you want to be. You shouldn't do or be anything - be it emotional or physical - for others. Do it for you first.

[itsallgrand]

I don't find her argument very solid. I think some people due to a combination of personality traits/values/etc. have a tendency to take more stock in looks and filter things more through that lense. I think a lot girls and women, stunners and more regular , have the experiences especially young of coming across boorish men hustling hard at you. It's offered up on a plate early and if you don't have a sense of self or you already lean towards viewing men and women in transactional ways, you are more likely to get sucked into thinking that's the way things work end of and better use your beauty as your main asset. And how beautiful or hot you are is actually irrelevant from my observations on whether you take this turn or choose to see men and women in a more balanced way. 

[yogacat]

I found it interesting that she said hot or beautiful women don't get an insight into the average man I agree. Because they're generally so attractive that men will do or try anything to just get their attention and that's not a real connection. That can cloud the woman's reality.

They don't get insight into how people who aren't obsessed with them might love, react or think. 

I still don't know if I agree that hot women get MORE jealous. But I do get how if they start with a sky high self esteem, then watch it change over time as their value shifts from beauty to something that is deep and real and grounded, even a more rational woman could fall prey to the vibes of insecurity and wanting to cling on to that identity and everything that has secured them the life they live.

Nice woman. She has empathy, clarity and directness that's refreshing 🌹

The beauty industry is designed to make money on insecurity it's not based on the amount of actual beauty.

I have seen many of women that maybe aren't Victoria secret model's, but look beautiful to me. 

[Batya33]

23 minutes ago, yogacat said:

I found it interesting that she said hot or beautiful women don't get an insight into the average man I agree. Because they're generally so attractive that men will do or try anything to just get their attention and that's not a real connection. That can cloud the woman's reality.

They don't get insight into how people who aren't obsessed with them might love, react or think. 

I still don't know if I agree that hot women get MORE jealous. But I do get how if they start with a sky high self esteem, then watch it change over time as their value shifts from beauty to something that is deep and real and grounded, even a more rational woman could fall prey to the vibes of insecurity and wanting to cling on to that identity and everything that has secured them the life they live.

Nice woman. She has empathy, clarity and directness that's refreshing 🌹

The beauty industry is designed to make money on insecurity it's not based on the amount of actual beauty.

I have seen many of women that maybe aren't Victoria secret model's, but look beautiful to me. 

No.  Men who value looks and arm candy will act obsessed with a woman who is objectively hot and will seek out objective hotness.  Same exact with women.  It's not gender specific at all.

A man who is looking for a committed relationship might value looks above all else -and that's fine -he wants a partner mostly for the arm candy/ trophy aspects and it takes all kinds -he will find the cover for his pot.  But to paint all men that way or even generally -no way.  Most of the men I know and knew of -I had many close platonic male friendships, less so now -valued finding a life partner where they had stuff in common, compatible values and goals, could laugh together and build a life together.  For sure chemistry and physical attraction was essential but not that the woman looked hot or would be considered beautiful or attractive by anyone but him.  

Also even if a person is attracted to another person across a crowded room based primarily on looks first, very often if it's going to be a match the person puts the focus on looks aside -and early on -as he gets to know her as a person -for that real and meaningful connection as you put it.  If the person wants to get to kow the other person -for a potential relationship.  I can see where there won't be a meaningful connection if the primary purpose in continuing to interact is the person's looks and the main goal is to hook up.  Not to get to know the person as a person while also hooking up.  

I know of many women who are absolutely beautiful by objective standards and who don't use that gift to the extent you describe so they never have to come back to reality once their looks fade.  

I guess I like men in general and I have for close to 50 years -I don't presume men are lead by their private parts, presumably obsess over a woman because of how she looks, or feel that if they are wealthy they'll "get" more women interested in them -and that this is a positive in their lives.  I've had close platonic male friends my whole life. I still do and I feel a bit protective when the stale old cliches and stererotypes that paint men in such a shallow and hunter/gatherer light are trotted out - it's not male bashing -yet -but it's kind of unfair IMO.

[ShySoul]

Ok, did a bit of searching and found some questionable things regarding this woman, including rather she actually has the qualifications she claims.

 https://www.reddit.com/r/UniversityOfLondonCS/comments/16yllmw/does_this_internet_self_proclaimed_psychologist/

She advises men that its "better to shoot within your range. Find a woman you are naturally able to lead rather then forcing you to follow your leadership." Maybe it shouldn't be about anyone leading? Maybe it's equal?

She seems to be okay with the idea of child marriage because there someone has invested in her at 16, but against the idea of American teens fooling around or having sex.  https://www.reddit.com/r/exmuslim/comments/17kt8ny/sadia_khan_a_muslim_pakistani_relationship_coach/

She's also drawn comparisons between the harmful effects of "red pilling" for men with feminism being harmful for women.

I'm sure there are some good ideas mixed in their and that you could find things to help you out. But a broken clock is right twice a day. Seems like shes a grifter repeating things that people want to hear with some questionable (and probably purposefully controversial) content.

 

[yogacat]

57 minutes ago, ShySoul said:

Ok, did a bit of searching and found some questionable things regarding this woman, including rather she actually has the qualifications she claims.

 https://www.reddit.com/r/UniversityOfLondonCS/comments/16yllmw/does_this_internet_self_proclaimed_psychologist/

She advises men that its "better to shoot within your range. Find a woman you are naturally able to lead rather then forcing you to follow your leadership." Maybe it shouldn't be about anyone leading? Maybe it's equal?

She seems to be okay with the idea of child marriage because there someone has invested in her at 16, but against the idea of American teens fooling around or having sex.  https://www.reddit.com/r/exmuslim/comments/17kt8ny/sadia_khan_a_muslim_pakistani_relationship_coach/

She's also drawn comparisons between the harmful effects of "red pilling" for men with feminism being harmful for women.

I'm sure there are some good ideas mixed in their and that you could find things to help you out. But a broken clock is right twice a day. Seems like shes a grifter repeating things that people want to hear with some questionable (and probably purposefully controversial) content.

 

I don't think we're debating whether she's qualified to treat mental illness (she could very well be) as a Psychologist.

We're debating the stance that she seems to be promoting in the linked video, i.e. that girls/women need to focus less on their appearance, accept their appearance and develop their personalities instead.

[Batya33]

4 minutes ago, yogacat said:

I don't think we're debating whether she's qualified to treat mental illness (she could very well be) as a Psychologist.

We're debating the stance that she seems to be promoting in the linked video, i.e. that girls/women need to focus less on their appearance, accept their appearance and develop their personalities instead.

People in general shouldn't be overly focused on their appearance and to me "develop your personality" is way too vague and abstract.  I wouldn't say that to a person - I would if the person asked point out a specific thing the person could do to enhance personal growth or how they interact with the world.  It's nothing new under the sun that people who are overly focused on their outer appearances often aren't as happy or fulfilled as they can be.

[yogacat]

4 minutes ago, Batya33 said:

It's nothing new under the sun that people who are overly focused on their outer appearances often aren't as happy or fulfilled as they can be.

Are you sure about that?

Look at Jane Fonda. She is 80+ years old - and is still all about fitness.

I guarantee you that she is somewhat focused on her appearance.

Yet, she is one of the most inspiring and charismatic personalities of our time. She has used her platform to advocate for important causes and has made a positive impact on the world. So while yes, being overly focused on appearance can sometimes hinder personal growth, it's not always the case.

I think you can both take care of your appearance and focus on personal growth and development at the same time.

It's about finding a balance and being comfortable in your own skin.

[catfeeder]

1 hour ago, yogacat said:

I found it interesting that she said hot or beautiful women don't get an insight into the average man I agree. Because they're generally so attractive that men will do or try anything to just get their attention and that's not a real connection. That can cloud the woman's reality.

They don't get insight into how people who aren't obsessed with them might love, react or think. 

I agree that this is what she said, but I find the premise sadly one dimensional. It comes off as some blanket apology to all men who feel slighted by beautiful women and must understand that these poor beauties have been victimized all their lives by the douchy men who jump in front of the line to service her. And these women just have no choice in the matter. They've been so conditioned to have already written off all of the average guys in the world as too tongue tied to even converse with her, so she's left to her own fragility to land in the arms of men who act like idiots.

This is simply untrue of the experience of every beautiful woman I know, and if it were not so ridiculous it would be offensive. And worse, the jealousy statements imply that these poor beauties are so conditioned to view the world as limited to only idiot guys, so they can simply never trust that their men won't act like idiots around other woman.

No offense to you--I get that you didn't write this script. But it's just ... lacking.

[itsallgrand]

50 minutes ago, catfeeder said:

I agree that this is what she said, but I find the premise sadly one dimensional. It comes off as some blanket apology to all men who feel slighted by beautiful women and must understand that these poor beauties have been victimized all their lives by the douchy men who jump in front of the line to service her. And these women just have no choice in the matter. They've been so conditioned to have already written off all of the average guys in the world as too tongue tied to even converse with her, so she's left to her own fragility to land in the arms of men who act like idiots.

This is simply untrue of the experience of every beautiful woman I know, and if it were not so ridiculous it would be offensive. And worse, the jealousy statements imply that these poor beauties are so conditioned to view the world as limited to only idiot guys, so they can simply never trust that their men won't act like idiots around other woman.

No offense to you--I get that you didn't write this script. But it's just ... lacking.

Yes!

And that this approach from women is linked to hotness or beauty. It has nothing to do with that at all.  It's just a toxic way to approach it all around. 

When I was in my 20s I had a friend who was preoccupied with her looks, other people's looks, her perception of how men reacted to her looks to a great extent. She'd make comments all the time about other women's looks, she'd do it to me sometimes too, "oh you are so lucky bc xyz" " oh all the guys see you first because x". She was pretty, but in her mind she was hotness personified. And she took everything through that perception, to the point of driving some guys away. But if you asked her, they were just intimidated. She'd say things like "all the pretty girls use x moisturizer". And that meant, if you didn't use that moisturizer, you wouldn't be pretty.

This lady is selling the same kind of appeal to insecurities of people to push an idea/viewpoint/concept as fact. But it's not a fact that hot women are all like this. Not being drawn to insecurity doesn't mean you aren't pretty. Choosing to see men as some block of moral free clods doesn't make you pretty. It simply means these particular women are overly focused on what their looks can get them and so they see things through that mode of thinking.

In other words, she's created a problem that doesn't exist to give a solution.  Are you pretty enough to have this problem? Lol. 

 

[ShySoul]

1 hour ago, yogacat said:

I don't think we're debating whether she's qualified to treat mental illness (she could very well be) as a Psychologist.

I think it's important to examine the credibilty of the source of the debate. It gives you a better understanding of what her intentions might have been in making this and what her true beliefs are. It can also help to detect if what's being side may contain some biases that sway what's there. In some cases (not necessarily here), it can also reveal if what's being side is just a flat out lie. I doubt most of us would take the person seriously if they wrote for the National Enquirer.

1 hour ago, catfeeder said:

It comes off as some blanket apology to all men who feel slighted by beautiful women and must understand that these poor beauties have been victimized all their lives by the douchy men who jump in front of the line to service her.

From the clips I saw, that seems to be her brand. It's repeating tropes of masculine and feminine sterotypes that ignore the complexity of human interactions. There was a strong hint of bias towards males. I think she's good at doublespeak. The things she says sounds reasonable and there's a kernal of truth you can get out of it for some people. But it's based on logic that may not hold up under examination and surely doesn't apply to most or all people.

[MissCanuck]

Meh, she just sounds like any other Youtuber who likes the sound of her own voice. 

[Kwothe28]

There is a "woman who you would have sex" and "woman who you would marry". Attractive women are usually just the first. And not the second as they usually dont have the properties of somebody who would be a good partner. Because they dont need to develop them as they coast along by being attractive. Life is easier when you are attractive. People treat you better, heck even treat you preferably when it comes to stuff like jobs. But that means you dont need to adapt. You dont need to learn skills as what you have(beauty) is more than enough to cruise along in life.

Which does makes it difficult when it comes to dating. Any man would have them in the sense of wanting sex with them. But that creates a false idea that some of those men are willing to marry them. What is worst, the pool of the guys they want them to marry is wealthy men. Who would rather marry either somebody who is also rich or somebody who at least have some properties and skills they want like maybe actually doing something instead of spending their fortune. Or just taking care of a household and kids if they want some instead of going out every other day in clubs. And even that beauty is not that unique when those rich guys can go to Dubai(or in USA case, Miami or LA) and get a dozen of them like her. So it creates a vacuum where those women think they have what it takes because society does treat them very good. But they remain clueless about how that rich guy escaped them. And sadly they dont adapt. 

[yogacat]

8 hours ago, ShySoul said:

I think it's important to examine the credibilty of the source of the debate. It gives you a better understanding of what her intentions might have been in making this and what her true beliefs are. It can also help to detect if what's being side may contain some biases that sway what's there. In some cases (not necessarily here), it can also reveal if what's being side is just a flat out lie. I doubt most of us would take the person seriously if they wrote for the National Enquirer.

From the clips I saw, that seems to be her brand. It's repeating tropes of masculine and feminine sterotypes that ignore the complexity of human interactions. There was a strong hint of bias towards males. I think she's good at doublespeak. The things she says sounds reasonable and there's a kernal of truth you can get out of it for some people. But it's based on logic that may not hold up under examination and surely doesn't apply to most or all people.

Of course. I agree that one must be critical of the source of the debate. But I do think a person can still debate an opinion, regardless of the source. I think it's important to look at the argument itself and assess its logic and evidence, rather than dismissing it based solely on the source. Sometimes even questionable sources can still have valid points to make.

I think her initial premise in the video is that the combination of a woman's appearance and society's reaction to it can lead to a unique set of experiences and challenges. For example, she posits that because very attractive women are often used to being pursued by men, they may become suspicious or mistrustful of potential partners because they have seen the lengths some men will go to when trying to attract or impress them. 

Now, one may disagree with her argument and provide counterpoints or alternative perspectives. That's the essence of healthy debate. But I don't think dismissing her argument solely because of her profession as a model or the fact that she has shared her opinions on a dating advice channel is a fair or productive way to engage in a debate. It's important to consider the content of someone's argument and critically assess it, rather than dismiss it based on preconceived notions or biases about the source.

And I do agree with you that the focus on traditional masculine and feminine stereotypes can be limiting and exclude the complexity of human interactions.

She also argues that women need to be aware of their own biases and stereotypes toward attractive women, and consider how those may affect their relationships and interactions with them. She talks about the "reality distortion field" that can surround attractive women, and how that may lead others to underestimate their intelligence or assume negative things about their character.

According to one study, individuals may have a lower chance of being recruited if they are interviewed by someone of the same gender who perceives them as more physically attractive than themselves.

Don't hate me because I'm beautiful: Anti-attractiveness bias in organizational evaluation and decision making - ScienceDirect

I think that's a pretty fair and valid argument.

[Batya33]

10 hours ago, yogacat said:

Are you sure about that?

Look at Jane Fonda. She is 80+ years old - and is still all about fitness.

I guarantee you that she is somewhat focused on her appearance.

Yet, she is one of the most inspiring and charismatic personalities of our time. She has used her platform to advocate for important causes and has made a positive impact on the world. So while yes, being overly focused on appearance can sometimes hinder personal growth, it's not always the case.

I think you can both take care of your appearance and focus on personal growth and development at the same time.

It's about finding a balance and being comfortable in your own skin.

IMO she is focused on her appearance because of physical fitness -as am I -that is different.  Apples and oranges.  I am so grateful for her focus on fitness -I did her videos as a teenager and they kickstarted my fitness regimen in 1982.  I've only taken a break since then for part of my pregnancy.  I part company with certain of her political views but that aspect -for sure.  I am focused on my appearance meaning the aspects that are affected by physical fitness- my posture, weight, my skin -meaning part of my fitness regimen is hydration and I love the side effect of all that water on my skin quality and look.  

I think being overly focused on what you look like especially what you look like to others is often inconsistent with personal growth especially those aspects of personal growth that involve time commitments -being overly focused on personal appearance especially for a woman and especially for a woman who is active on and intrigued by SM means hours and $$$$ spent on skin care, elective surgeries, hair products, clothing, accessories and on and on - there are only so many hours in a day.  And a lot of that means self-absorption in a way that is inconsistent with personal growth.  Yes of course a balance as you wrote/

I never said "always" and I am not here to be right -I gave my opinion and I typically find these stereotypes about pretty women focusing on their looks to "get" a man and wealthy men thinking their wealth is enough of a pull.  Ick, at least to me.  I absolutely relied on what I looked like as part of the way I attracted men.  I was careful with my hair, makeup and clothing choices, and I also cared about what my date/boyfriend/ looked like. As a balance. 

Obviously part of physical attraction and chemistry-with rare exceptions -is visual.  And my looks came into play because I was realistic -I was not glamorous looking or beautiful looking so I didn't focus attention -with exceptions-on men who were objectively hot who all the girls wanted.  When I did -mixed results for sure and mostly a waste of time. 

As far as personal growth -tons of focus just like all of my close friends and many of my acquaintances - from my education, activities, work, my religion and I always focused heavily on personal growth -I still do.  

[Batya33]

1 hour ago, yogacat said:

initial premise in the video is that the combination of a woman's appearance and society's reaction to it can lead to a unique set of experiences and challenges.

This is true of all people who focus on some notion of "society" and go even further to pay mind to how "society" "reacts".  Those people who choose to focus on broad generalizations about society often use that as an excuse for poor choices  - couldn't help it/societal pressures to do X and Y.  Those people who choose that mindset in whatever area of their lives will have challenges almost all self-created.  With exceptions -there are some extremist communities where kids don't know any different and unless they choose to leave their focus is often narrow and they buy into how their society reacts to their choices (obviously in certain of these societies women are the most impacted).  There are cults. 

And sure there are people who are so focused on social media they live their lives keeping up with the Joneses and tracking how many likes they get for certain behaviors.

JMHO - In general people are not sheep, in general people may be mindful of overarching societal norms -mindful but not inordinately influenced to the extent you mention in your thread.  I took the long way around especially with my marriage/mom goals  and at every twist and turn there were those who found it important to remind me of labels and societal norms.  And there were so many who cheered me on and facilitated my beating to my own drum -not just with romantic relationships -with my education and career choices.  

I love how Catfeeder and Itsallgrand put it. 

[mylolita]

10 hours ago, ShySoul said:

I think it's important to examine the credibilty of the source of the debate. It gives you a better understanding of what her intentions might have been in making this and what her true beliefs are. It can also help to detect if what's being side may contain some biases that sway what's there. In some cases (not necessarily here), it can also reveal if what's being side is just a flat out lie. I doubt most of us would take the person seriously if they wrote for the National Enquirer.

From the clips I saw, that seems to be her brand. It's repeating tropes of masculine and feminine sterotypes that ignore the complexity of human interactions. There was a strong hint of bias towards males. I think she's good at doublespeak. The things she says sounds reasonable and there's a kernal of truth you can get out of it for some people. But it's based on logic that may not hold up under examination and surely doesn't apply to most or all people.

Sorry to judge as well, but it is quite an interesting point to consider that she is also divorced and gives a lot of relationship advice. There is a slight whiff of irony there. 
 

These people are often put forward as experts in their fields, deep thinkers, philosophers of new and fresh thought, but their personal lives often seem a little shambolic!

 

It reminds me of another Podcast I really like to watch snippets of. He’s a young British guy who has plenty of support and guests who promote marriage and family and traditional values yet he himself is in his early 30s and not engaged, not married. It also seems a little… hypocritical?

 

It doesn’t mean to discredit everything Sadia says but, something to keep in the back of your mind. Like you @ShySoul I try and do my quick bit of research on the professional giving the talk after I’ve took in what they’ve said! 
 

x

[mylolita]

Apologies to go slightly off topic here @yogacat! 
 

As I am getting older (ancient, 34 year old 🥲🥂) I have realised beautiful people are quite dime a dozen. There are a lot. We think they are scarce but there are plenty of attractive people out there, men and women. They may not be top model material, but especially in affluent cities or fashionable places or even unlikely outdoorsy places, attractive people will strike you quite often and from time to time. 
 

It’s true that attractive physical appearance opens plenty of doors in every aspect of life - to deny that would be to deny reality. But it can only take you so far, depending, of course, on how “far” and “fulfilled” you want to go! 
 

Personally, I think the general gist of why rich men stay single and beautiful women stay single is - choice! They have too much choice. And they think the grass is always greener. Spoilt for choice! And more temptation to have to resist to stay in their relationships! 
 

Rich men tend to be much busier and work a lot more hours than a normal 9-5 employed man. This gives relationships less time and more opportunity to fall to pieces. Limited time as a couple, more temptation as he is wealthy (women will desire that and throw themselves at him) and less time at home meaning, more time to succumb to temptation! 
 

Beautiful women have more suitors and more options. Often they do not settle down straight away because of the idea there will always be someone there or someone better round the corner. This is a massive generalisation of course, but you can see how maybe ultra beautiful women may have more doubts about a man she is with when she knows she can realistically “do better” if she dropped the current one! 
 

Also, being told you are beautiful, gorgeous, sensational - can add to a very inflated ego. Maybe once they are in relationships, these women are used to a carousel of compliments and attention and when a long term relationship settles into a comfortable ease, where this may decline, she may be more likely to read this as disinterest and also end the relationship, for the next admirer who is waiting there in the car, with the watch, and the dinner, and the compliments?! 
 

I’m speculating here. Of course, not all beautiful people are contrived and self obsessed and not all rich men are workaholic cheaters! 
 

Some interesting points raised by her anyway! 
 

I once read something somewhere that said, the average, normal person will never know what it is to have to resist constant, thrown at your feet temptation, and to deal with the attention being exceptionally wealthy or exceptionally good looking grants you. It has it’s own pit falls.

 

People can be a victim of their own success - whether that success is being very beautiful, or wealthy - there are pros and cons to both. There is a trade off for everything in this life, or so it seems! 
 

x

[Batya33]

For me GIGS was also about "the dream of someone else" as opposed to "oh well I have all these men clamoring for me" -I mean given my goals to those men who wanted families I was kinda washed up by my late 30s especially for those men who understandably didn't want to try to conceive right away after getting married (and thank goodness we tried before!).  I think GIGS is far more of a mindset than reality - just like settling is more of a mindset than reality- people settle even though you can point out -but look -you're so attractive/wealthy/young -you can do better! It's -internal.  

When I became the right person to find the right person and I was so lucky I found him -again- I knew absolutely based on reality I "could" meet someone :  handsomer/"even" more perfect for me - I mean technically isn't that true? But I didn't care.  At all.  I'd found my person.

I've been around several men over the years since I got back together with my husband who I clicked with where I knew they were attractive looking, who I had fun conversations with- I even had a radio crush for a few years on the host of my favorite morning radio show (still listen/crush faded lol -never met or spoke to him but he recently interviewed my husband lol).  I have close platonic male friends.  But.  I never have been tempted to explore any such "options" - because I love and am committed to my husband.  It's an internal thing.  I probably do have options of men who would want to date me/find me attractive.  But - not on my radar.  

 

[mylolita]

I will have to step back and listen to other women on how it is to be astonishingly beautiful as I am simply a strange, antique, kooky looking thang and fortunately/unfortunately I don’t have the first hand experience of going through life with people throwing me modelling contracts and billionaires trying to clamber for me 🥹

 

Of course, I settled too young for all that so the billionaires had to move onto the next beauty - alas…not today billionaires, not today ✋🥲 

 

x

[Single Guy Needs Help]

I think there is some degree of truth in the video.  I consider myself a nice guy that doesn't engage in boorish behavior, but I didn't engage with the super attractive as I didn't have the confidence to.  I kind of wrote them off as an option they were too attractive to ever be interested in plain old me.  Also, to be honest my brain kind of worked in stereotypical ways as well.  I thought they must be dumb, or they must be vain or could you ever trust a girl like that she'd have so many opportunities.

Super attractive girls intimidated me but then again most everyone did to some degree or other.  I mean there could be another video for the difficulties of being the nerdish, super brain girl.  When I was in high school and university I had some major crushes on those types, some were attractive physically, others were not but they had trouble getting dates mostly because people such as myself had low self-esteem and didn't think I was worthy whereas other guys just have to feel superior all the time so they won't even consider someone smarter than them.  I really hate that: Why are guys like that?  Why can't we (men) just accept playing a secondary role, what is so wrong about being inferior?  I guess the poor male ego can't handle it and that is the sad fact.

I hate how a lot of men act and behave, even though I am one.  I mean it is all based on sex role stereotypes and some warped myth of how things are supposed to be.  Hopefully that is changing with the next generation but sadly I'm not so sure.