October 8, 2010

How To Be Powerful, And Why You Are Not


bikini.jpg

she has assumed the position


Which guy appears more powerful?  They guy with leaning back in a chair, feet up, hands behind his head?  Or the guy hunched forward, hands together in his lap?


power postures.jpg

Which guy do you think feels more powerful?



The study found that assuming the 2 power positions (vs. non-power) for 1 min each had three results:

1. Subjects rated themselves as more powerful (2.84 vs. 1.87 on a 1 to 4 scale)

2.  When offered a choice of keeping $2 versus betting it all on dice, 86% of the power group chose to gamble, vs. 60% of the non-power

3a. Their testosterone went up about 15% or down 10% from baseline, respectively:


power testosterone.jpg


3b. Power position also significantly lowered cortisol levels by about 15%, while adopting the low-power position had a limited, but upwards effect.  Cortisol is usually secreted during acute stress.


power cortisol.jpg

All this, from two minutes of a posture change.  True for men and women equally.

II.

In fact, the subjects weren't told to sit powerfully, they were told that they needed to sit like that to get a better EKG reading.  So power itself was not suggested to the subject.  It was merely the act of sitting in that way that made these changes.

This suggests that it was the posture itself that unconsciously(?) altered both self-perception and actual physiology.  So, sit up straight.

But it's logical that if that posture unconsciously affects self-perception-- i.e. it wasn't a mechanical effect of having your hands above your head-- then that posture itself serves as the cue.  So whether you see it, or position in it, it should have a similar effect.

So not only will sitting like that have an effect on you, but sitting like that will have an effect on whoever is looking at you.

It is a story best told about dating, and in reverse: if a woman sees you hunched over, she'll be biased towards assuming you're not "powerful", and you yourself will feel less powerful.

III.

This isn't anything new, it's long been known that forcing a physical maneuver can alter mood. Forced smiling can make you happier; clenching the fist makes men more aggressive and women feel less in control; method actors key off of physical movements to get their head in gear.  And yoga exists.

It should also be obvious that this shouldn't work.  How out of touch with our own bodies must we be if we can unconsciously change our mood by accidentally sitting a certain kind of way?  And so how much does it therefore suck to be a computer geek hunched over a keyboard 13 hours a day?  Time to do some push ups.  (I do 40 every hour, between midnight and 2am; take that, guy who hates my physical bravado but is ok with my sexism, raging alcoholism and piracy.)

Some readers will come back with a notion of a mind-body feedback loop, fine, no argument from me; but if these principles are so well known, why don't people do them more often?  Why, during a presentation, do some people still hunch over?  Why do guys still timidly try to talk to a woman, instead of at least faking confidence and assertiveness?  Or at least standing up straight?

IV.

Let's grant that the study is accurate.  So if you're a young lad, adopting a powerful position improves your chances of "reproductive success" because she sees you as more powerful, and you feel more powerful, and you have more testosterone angering the blood.  Check.

However:

  • if you consciously adopt a powerful state-- puff up your chest and say, "hey baby, nice stems", and it fails, you're going to look like an idiot.  Shame.
  • Your more natural, timid posture coupled with inevitable rejection is sad but not unexpected.  There is less shame. 

Similarly, even though an presentation's chances for success are greater if you speak with confidence and stand up straight, doing it that way and failing is a greater blow to your ego.

Notice that the rejection is the same in both cases, but it is felt more severely if you act confidently, posture accordingly.  There is more shame.

Thus, increasing your chances of failing is a defense against shame. 

V.

That shame is the result of faking it, of putting on an identity that isn't really you (I'm powerful) and having it exposed (rejected.)

The solution is to not fake it.  That doesn't mean not try, that means instead of sitting up straight before the presentation, sit up straight all the time.  At least train your body to naturally adopt what your mind is too nervous/self-conscious to do.

If this study is at all representative of the truth, it means that eventually you will physically change into the person your body is pretending to be.

---

http://twitter.com/thelastpsych












Comments

Interesting post!B... (Below threshold)

October 8, 2010 12:06 PM | Posted by Dolores: | Reply

Interesting post!

But I wonder what the effect of posing would do to how others perceive you. I mean, the study only looks at the impact on the poser, not at whether others will also perceive you as more powerful.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
Yes re 'act as if' or 'fake... (Below threshold)

October 8, 2010 12:17 PM | Posted by Lexi: | Reply

Yes re 'act as if' or 'fake it till you make it', but make sure it is consistent and who you want to be, as opposed to what you want to be seen as.

Interesting about balled up fists and women. There is only one situation that triggers that response for me regularly, and that is when I'm dressed to be invisible, or for work (conservatively) and someone catcalls me.

Some people have shame buried so deep they can't acknowledge it.

Anyway this piece seems like it could go on PUA boards related to inner game.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 11 (17 votes cast)
In this context, I find min... (Below threshold)

October 8, 2010 12:19 PM | Posted by Not me: | Reply

In this context, I find mindfulness exercises quite fascinating, especially the originally buddhist idea of erasing self-perceived identity by emphasizing the "non-self" part of the subjective experience and by deconstructing the processes leading to identity. At least such a training should decrease body language expressing submission. It leads to a state where you have less to hide, so less shame. But of course deception becomes more difficult, because it is difficult to do unconsciously. As a practitioner of the stuff, I feel it increases my popularity among women, although that could of course be grandiose self-deception! :)

Ironically, dialectical behavioral therapy is largely based on the same mindfulness concept, and is used to treat BPD, a problem with identity disturbances. So there's some kind of conceptual confusion here, with "self", "non-self", and identity.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 7 (9 votes cast)
"2. When offered a choice ... (Below threshold)

October 8, 2010 12:24 PM | Posted by orazor1324: | Reply

"2. When offered a choice of keeping $2 versus betting it all on dice, 86% of the power group chose to gamble, vs. 60% of the non-power"
...
"Similarly, even though an presentation's chances for success are greater if you speak with confidence and stand up straight, doing it that way and failing is a greater blow to your ego."

Shouldn't the effect of the former cancel out the latter? If I adopt a posture that increases my willingness to gamble, I would think that adopting that same posture should also make me less afraid of seeming fake and harming my ego, i.e. gambling with my image.

What's going on here?

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 12 (14 votes cast)
There seems to be a social ... (Below threshold)

October 8, 2010 12:50 PM | Posted, in reply to orazor1324's comment, by Not me: | Reply

There seems to be a social currency that is beyond faking, an automatic mechanism you cannot control. You can decide how much you bet, and you can bluff like being willing to bet a lot, but ultimately, if you loose, you pay.

Or so it seems. Controlling shame (payment) might be possible, but not by posturing.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 7 (7 votes cast)
orazor1324:It does... (Below threshold)

October 8, 2010 12:59 PM | Posted by Anonymous: | Reply

orazor1324:

It does, but not gambling with your image as much as having the perception that your image won't be rejected. That is the cyclical essence of power - the world bends to my will because I say it will. So, displaying a powerful image/persona is essentially acknowleding that you won't fail in others perceiving you as you wish to be seen. And it seems to work most of the time.

And if you do fail, then godbless us all for the narcissism to assume that it was the fault of other people.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 8 (8 votes cast)
Another option is to learn ... (Below threshold)

October 8, 2010 1:26 PM | Posted by Meat Robot: | Reply

Another option is to learn how to tolerate shame and thus neither anticipate nor fear rejection.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 10 (14 votes cast)
(I do 40 every hour, betwee... (Below threshold)

October 8, 2010 1:30 PM | Posted by Anonymous: | Reply

(I do 40 every hour, between midnight and 2am; take that, guy who hates my physical bravado but is ok with my sexism, raging alcoholism and piracy.)

Laughing out loud awesome. Makes you more ninja than pirate though...or a wayward protege of Jack Palance ('cause, you know, real men do one armed push ups to prove their virility). Either way, totally hilarious.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 6 (10 votes cast)
This is pretty much the bas... (Below threshold)

October 8, 2010 1:37 PM | Posted by Anonymous: | Reply

This is pretty much the basis of CBT, some forms of yoga and meditation, and...not to be forgotten...Anthony Robbins whole schtick. While all kinds of things influence our moods - from how we stand and sit, how much exercise we get, how much sun we get, what we eat, etc - we're much less likely to actually want to use mindfulness if we've got something we spend a lot of energy to avoid. When we become more aware of how we really feel and what our body is communicating to ourselves and others, we have to also face how we really feel. A lot of time, energy and money is put into avoiding how we truly feel in our culture. Why? Because we like to spend a lot of time avoiding who we really are so we can believe we're who we'd like to be. That's why behavior is a much better indicator of who someone really is than who they claim to be.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 8 (10 votes cast)
My point being - the reason... (Below threshold)

October 8, 2010 1:46 PM | Posted by Anonymous: | Reply

My point being - the reason why people avoid something this simple is because they're very invested in avoiding actually feeling what they feel. That's why someone like Anthony Robbins, who promotes behavior but no real underlying awareness, is popular (and also remarried to his second, young, cookie-cutter blond wife...dude's still acting being someone successful and needs the signifiers to affirm this to the world because his confidence is, well, still an act and not coming from an integral sense of self worth as a person, he's viewing himself and others as an object).

Mindfulness isn't "faking it until you make it" a la Robbins, it's actually being aware of how you feel so you can choose how you act instead of just automatically reacting and having no influence over outcome. But, yeah, we use our bodies to communicate with each other and it's a two way street - both in the sense of body/mind and also how other people's postures communicate to and influence us on usually unconscious levels...they're particularly going to be unconscious in people who have no real body awareness and don't really know how they feel).

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 11 (11 votes cast)
Another option is to lea... (Below threshold)

October 8, 2010 2:19 PM | Posted, in reply to Meat Robot's comment, by Reader: | Reply

Another option is to learn how to tolerate shame and thus neither anticipate nor fear rejection.
Or to take shame out of the equation entirely. Why is it shameful to be rejected (by a girl, a potential client, an unruly roulette wheel)? There's zero shame in being shot down.

On the rare occasions I'll enter a bar, I'm always amazed at how a flippant comment from a woman can castrate a man. She said no, and she was a bitch about it. So what, random male? Take it like a man instead of acting like it was a sucker punch. Maybe some other random vagina in the vicinity will see how well you took it and cozy up to commiserate about the She-Beast. At the very least, it avoids the town sad sack stigma.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 15 (21 votes cast)
In order to be successful, ... (Below threshold)

October 8, 2010 3:09 PM | Posted by Pat Delancey: | Reply

In order to be successful, one must project an image of success at all times.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: -3 (7 votes cast)
Are these power positions a... (Below threshold)

October 8, 2010 4:52 PM | Posted by wisegirl: | Reply

Are these power positions also effective for women or is the opposite true?

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: -1 (1 votes cast)
This has been a huge issue ... (Below threshold)

October 8, 2010 4:57 PM | Posted by Matt Green: | Reply

This has been a huge issue in dating for me, and I'm tired of it.

I don't want to posture. Actually, I don't want to feel like I *need* to posture. But if I don't, I will seem ambivalent to women who want "a strong male." It is tiring to maintain a constant mental pseudo-state of "yeah, gonna fuck something up" or whatever testosterone-inducing thoughts I should be ruminating on. I could definitely improve my thought life and am working on that, but I'm not going to think the right things just because I'm told I'll be more desirable for doing so.

I suppose this is the cultural fallout from believing manhood has everything to do with driving a bigger truck than your neighbor.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 1 (13 votes cast)
If you adopt powerful postu... (Below threshold)

October 8, 2010 5:42 PM | Posted by svr: | Reply

If you adopt powerful postures all the time, does the effect wear off? Is there anything in the study on that?

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 1 (3 votes cast)
I disagree with the idea th... (Below threshold)

October 8, 2010 7:30 PM | Posted by Parx: | Reply

I disagree with the idea that rejection from a posture of power brings more shame, etc. Just the opposite, I would think. When it's an act, only the character fails, not the actor. At least that is how I would sell it to my client.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 3 (9 votes cast)
If you don't want to date a... (Below threshold)

October 8, 2010 7:36 PM | Posted, in reply to Matt Green's comment, by Anonymous: | Reply

If you don't want to date a woman who is looking for an alpha male, why are you acting in such a way that would alienate women who are actually looking for someone who doesn't act that way?

there's biological impulse, but that's just one facet... there are plenty of girls who don't date alpha males.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 2 (14 votes cast)
Probably depends on how you... (Below threshold)

October 8, 2010 9:56 PM | Posted, in reply to Parx's comment, by Sean: | Reply

Probably depends on how you react to that rejection. If your reaction is to immediately deflate back to passiveness, it's probably going to hurt the ol' ego quite a bit more than if you can turn that rejection into a positive, or (and this is why it's so common) if you never attempt to assert that power in the first place.

It's a question of reaction and relativity.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 2 (2 votes cast)
We're not even talking abou... (Below threshold)

October 8, 2010 10:48 PM | Posted, in reply to Matt Green's comment, by Anonymous: | Reply

We're not even talking about you projecting a certain image (strong male), we're talking about you sitting up straight. We're talking about a purely physical action that happens to maybe have positive side effect on your psychology.

People are getting confused about shame because Alone tried to know why, even though we all knew what the benefit of good posture are, we choose not to do it. He's not saying that the rational behind it is sound, just that it is the rational we're using.

"I'm not going to stand up straight because I don't want to project the image of a strong male and have that image rejected ie. people laughing at me." This is bullshit. Just stand up straight. It doesn't do anything but make you feel better.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 8 (8 votes cast)
What does that naked-woman ... (Below threshold)

October 9, 2010 2:43 AM | Posted by G. Abramowitz: | Reply

What does that naked-woman picture have to do with this essay? She's not even standing up straight (arched back, pelvis in anterior tilt). Her power comes not from posture, but brazenness.

Seriously, y'all, look into alignment practice. You've got to carry your weight around for a lifetime; make sure everything is stacked correctly, because you can't beat gravity. And there's no such thing as standing up "straight" (look at a skeleton from the side—no straight lines, except an imaginary vertical axis that touches the spine where it curves in). Think "lengthen."

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 2 (8 votes cast)
I'm with meat robot.<... (Below threshold)

October 9, 2010 4:42 AM | Posted, in reply to Meat Robot's comment, by Anonymous: | Reply

I'm with meat robot.

Learning how to tolerate situations that provoke shame, discomfort and to just accept it is what allows me to function. I'm pretty weird, socially defective and so I encounter situations that ordinarily provoke a feeling of shame/embarrassment semiregularly, I would say multiple times per day. Learning how to just feel that feeling of non-acceptance and oddness and be okay with it is what allows me to leave the house. I can accept that people do not like me, that I make them uncomfortable, we are all cordial to faces of course but I do not fit in and this is obvious and I know if others could choose they would prefer if I were not around. It's not that I am so self centered I think everyone is thinking about me and this is some kind of inverse self centered narcissism... but rather my odd social behavior, inability to have spontaneous well flowing conversations, my inability to know what to say when people talk, my constant social faux pas, all of this just makes people very very uncomfortable and so I logically understand they would rather if I were not around. It's just facts.

I am only ever comfortable when I am alone or dealing with people from a distance.

Given my disability, and the fact I never fit in and ought to feel shame/embarrassment/discomfort all the time, learning how to have no emotional reaction to the logical perception of signs that I do not fit in has been crucial to the functioning I have. When people get bully-ish with me, I have learned how not to care and to just ignore them, truly ignore them on an emotional level because I know it doesn't matter... it's something weak in them that causes them to be vicious to me.

Once in awhile I get sideswiped by emotional reaction to social failure (and then I feel profound embarrassment, shame, self loathing and such) but that is very rare now.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 13 (15 votes cast)
"Anyway this piece seems li... (Below threshold)

October 9, 2010 4:46 AM | Posted by Anonymous: | Reply

"Anyway this piece seems like it could go on PUA boards related to inner game."

so what. i think i can speak for half of humanity to say that it is my LIFE'S GOAL to be smothered under a pile of female flesh, specifically their pussies.

nothing else matters. the only thing that matters in this world is who you fuck. if you don't fuck anyone, you are as a dust mote. you are inconsequential. even gweneth paltrow had to suck cock on the casting couch to break into hollywood.

we'd (women) would like to think sex doesn't matter, but we (men) know that there is nothing more important than who you fuck.

try to get a job as someone who is ugly or someone who is old.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: -16 (22 votes cast)
trouble is... being more po... (Below threshold)

October 9, 2010 5:49 AM | Posted by Trei: | Reply

trouble is... being more powerful does NOT mean doing stupid things; like "hey baby, nice stems" ;-)

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 4 (4 votes cast)
I don't know men. Seem like... (Below threshold)

October 9, 2010 9:22 AM | Posted, in reply to Anonymous's comment, by Anonymous: | Reply

I don't know men. Seem like you've reduced every women ever to the way they can improve your social standing. Which means, by the way, that the really important thing is social standing, not who you fuck.

But, regardless, I hope you can see how evaluating everyone around you through the lense of your own personnal prestige won't produce anything good (who else but the crazies do you think you'll attract?).

I know of no women that, if I were to ask them, see themselves the way you just described. Also, go read near death of a salesmen. You're probably vulnerable to that.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 9 (11 votes cast)
Why, during a pres... (Below threshold)

October 9, 2010 1:01 PM | Posted by David: | Reply

Why, during a presentation, do some people still hunch over? Why do guys still timidly try to talk to a woman, instead of at least faking confidence and assertiveness? Or at least standing up straight?

Three words: habituation, muscle patterning.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 9 (9 votes cast)
Totally agree. I know the b... (Below threshold)

October 9, 2010 7:11 PM | Posted, in reply to David's comment, by Anonymous: | Reply

Totally agree. I know the benefits of standing up straight, but I often forget and therefore I will find myself hunched. When standing up straight for long periods, my back gets tired. This is not something my muscles are used to. It's something that takes effort (like 40 pushups an hour) and so as with anything it's something that people weigh, consciously or unconsciously.

There can also be an identity thing going on. "Nerd pride", etc. Although if there is for me it's too unconscious for me to recognize.

I don't quite buy the shame avoidance hypothesis.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (2 votes cast)
Re false framing: Its one t... (Below threshold)

October 9, 2010 10:49 PM | Posted by Sexy Pterodactyl at Wordpress: | Reply

Re false framing: Its one thing to sit up straight, speak clearly, hit the weights, etc (or to occasionally make badass references to push-ups*, rap music and rum-drinking?). It’s another to setup a complete false frame of who you are ("alphaness"). In some cases it appears to work because:

a) People are gullible (some manosphere commenters elsewhere thought MRA PUA alpha male Sexy Pterodactyl was serious)

b) People are polite (e.g. in cases of repeat social interactions, such as friends of family, etc – or just people who genuinely want to be nice)

c) The situation is such that it's in the observer's interest to go along (e.g. business presentations)

But outside of these, an altogether false frame will lead at least some to ridicule you.

http://sexypterodactyl.wordpress.com

*Not that there’s anything wrong with that, my typist lifts weights. And finds hip-hop remixes for me (see my alpha male PUA post "Revealed! Roissy and the PUAs' Perfidious Slut Matrix").

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: -2 (4 votes cast)
anon 4:46 - you sound menta... (Below threshold)

October 10, 2010 5:09 AM | Posted, in reply to Anonymous's comment, by Anonymous: | Reply

anon 4:46 - you sound mentally ill, and I am pretty certain you're not fucking anyone, other than prostitutes or your hand or date rapes.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 2 (8 votes cast)
>Why do guys still timidly ... (Below threshold)

October 10, 2010 5:32 AM | Posted by anon': | Reply

>Why do guys still timidly try to talk to a woman, instead of at least faking confidence and assertiveness?

Why can't women appreciate a timid man, in the same way as men can appreciate a timid woman? ;_;

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: -3 (5 votes cast)
Yeah - Beta females! :P... (Below threshold)

October 10, 2010 7:35 AM | Posted, in reply to Anonymous's comment, by Gil: | Reply

Yeah - Beta females! :P

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 4 (4 votes cast)
This article doesn't make o... (Below threshold)

October 10, 2010 7:46 AM | Posted by Gil: | Reply

This article doesn't make obvious sense. Depending on how you do it but if you engage in a dominating stance with a cavalier attitude then you risk getting in a power play, get fired or even an outright fight depending on how who the other person is.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (2 votes cast)
It's kind of odd to use bet... (Below threshold)

October 11, 2010 7:56 AM | Posted by Ben: | Reply

It's kind of odd to use betting practice as an indicator of 'power'. I haven't read the study (and probably won't), but it sounds like they used posture as a means of inducing feelings of power and then defined power with the achieved results. In other words, they defined the cause in the terms of the effect, which we social-science-talkin' guys would call a circular argument.

Fake it til you make it? You think? If a con-artist perfects his craft until he lies automatically without even noticing it, does that mean it's not a con? Perhaps instead of focusing on desired and perceived identities (e.g. of being a confident go-getter), it would be better to focus on the task at hand, do your damndest, and let the pride shine through. It might not lead to as much 'reproductive success', but your obituary will probably contain something more flattering than 'stood with the straight back and squared shoulders of a recruit afraid of his drill sergeant.'

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (4 votes cast)
A con artist, by definition... (Below threshold)

October 11, 2010 11:46 AM | Posted, in reply to Ben's comment, by Anonymous: | Reply

A con artist, by definition, is aware of what they're doing - that's why it's a confidence game. What con artists do (and how we can all be conned) is that they exploit our own unrealistic beliefs about ourselves or the world (much like advertising does). Someone with a NPD does a similar thing but their own beliefs are unrealistic - they're deluded and need people to buy into their delusion. It's a pretty fine distinction but an actual con artist knows he's selling an illusion and exploiting the other person (they don't believe they love them), someone with a NPD is trying to gain your confidence too but they're trying to convince you they're someone they're not because they need to believe it themselves.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 3 (5 votes cast)
Because timidity is not mas... (Below threshold)

October 12, 2010 2:28 AM | Posted, in reply to anon''s comment, by Anonymous: | Reply

Because timidity is not masculine and it is not an attractive quality in a man.

On the other hand, meekness and timidity can often augment feminity as it signifies youth and sexual naivete which is attractive to men for obvious reasons. A young, sexually naive woman is unlikely to be pregnant, and likely to be fertile. This is why "sweetness", that nebulous quality which is so attractive in a girl, is valued and sought after by men.

A bold, experienced, daring woman is often associated with wanton female sexuality, which of course is also attractive to men, but in a different way (i.e. an easy and exciting screw, a one night stand, a fling). It's sexy, but not as compelling as a "sweet/nice" and "timid" girl in terms of a partner or your ideal choice.

Men and women value different personality traits, just as they value different physical apperances.

Women are usually attracted to assertiveness/confidence/control/power (some sign of social success), intelligence/humor/talent (some sign of mental gift), and strength/physical fitness/height (some sign of physical health and reproductive competency as well).

Men are attracted to coyness, sweetness, some degree naivete (signs of youth and sexual inexperience), grace, education in arts and literature (signifies being aesthetic and refined, intelligent but yet passive and feminine), a youthful face with nice clear skin and full lips, narrow wasp waist and large hips (health and reproductive competency).


Men and women, unsurprisingly, are attracted to different things. The male imperative is to be attracted to young and naive/passive partners as these are the most likely to be both fertile and not pregnant. Females do not value this in men for obvious reasons, as the very young men and very passive men are usually not as fit as slightly older (but not old) and confident/assertive/socially successful men.

Sorry.

Timid, apathetic, unmotivated guys whining about being unsexy is absolutely no different than a 35 year old 200 pound woman whining about being unsexy. Sexy isn't a right. Some people are sexier than others. Accept it, BB.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: -3 (27 votes cast)
Re: the anon 7:36 respondin... (Below threshold)

October 12, 2010 2:43 AM | Posted, in reply to Anonymous's comment, by Anonymous: | Reply

Re: the anon 7:36 responding to matt green....


The thing is, guys who whine about chicks only being into barbarians are looking for the kind of girls who ONLY take physical power into account. In other words, dumb dumb dumb guidettes (as we would call them in jersey) with orange tans who hang out at the beach and are stupid as a sack of bricks. These girls are superficial and dress half-naked often. In california, in florida, in jersey, it's the same, slight difference in culture/ethnicity only.

So to those guys I say, good for you. You only seek out a dumb superficial girl, don't be surprised when she is looking for her male counterpart (a brainless barbarian without a job or any sort of skills other than going to the gym and being tall).
YOu're no better than she is, the only difference is she is capable of achieving her ideal partner whereas you fail miserably, demanding what you can't give back.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 10 (12 votes cast)
You really shouldn't assume... (Below threshold)

October 12, 2010 8:13 AM | Posted, in reply to Anonymous's comment, by Anonymous: | Reply

You really shouldn't assume that all men share your taste in sexually inexperienced, naive, young girls - though I'm sure it makes you feel better to tell yourself that it's "manly" and "natural" to lust after young girls as objects while disregarding them as people, it's not. Maturity requires seeing other people as people, it requires being realistic, and being "manly" requires maturity. Otherwise you're just a boy in an old body, not to mention quite possibly a pedophile.

Men much prefer women over girl children - trying to be someone's daddy is pretty creepy when you're also trying to fuck them. Incest, it's no less creepy than pedophilia. Sure there's a massive international trade in males from wealthy countries who travel abroad so they can have sex with children forced into sex slavery - it's a desire some men have, that doesn't make it healthy or an example of healthy sexuality. Guys into little girls, they've got issues with women in general. The guys who don't have issues with women and sex seem to, not surprisingly, like both women and sex with women. You'll notice that the pictures of women that Alone puts up here as examples of "sexy babe" are women, not little girls. Very mature, not sexually naive at all, women. The type that obviously scare some posters here (just as sexual knowledge in females seems to make them feel less "manly").

If you're going to try to justify something using evolutionary biology, at least try to get it right instead of presenting total rubbish that isn't supported by any studies or science. The main things that have emerged as universal attractors are hip to waist ratio (it's not about skinny or fat, it's about shape), long limbs (recent study, but that could just as easily be enculturated) and someone looking like your parent (in terms of personal attractors). What you're proposing is about as accurate as saying that Darwin's "survival of the fittest" means people who lift weights or are sociopaths are the most fit (when it means the most fit in a particular environment, which in some cases is the shy guy...shy guys still exist and continue to breed for a reason if we're talking evolutionary biology here).

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 2 (16 votes cast)
Wow, anon 8:13, u mad?... (Below threshold)

October 13, 2010 12:56 AM | Posted, in reply to Anonymous's comment, by Anonymous: | Reply

Wow, anon 8:13, u mad?

First of all, why do you assume I"m male? I'm not a man.

My idea that men prefer young, "sweet" girls comes from several years on this planet observing human beings, both in the media and IRL.

From what I can see, MOST men are helpless but to be preoccupied with younger women 17-25. You seem to be assuming I am talking about children, I am talking about YOUNG WOMEN. The woman in the photo may or may not be 17-25 but is certain that she is doing everything she can to appear within this age bracket. It is shown in studies people, particularly women are on average most attractive before 24 years old and then gradually begin to appear less attractive every year thereafter. Speaking personally? I am 28 years old, and while I am hardly old I notice I'm not quite as cute as I was at 24, and I also notice I get somewhat less glances and attention from men than I did in my early 20s. I still get plenty of glances (I am only 28) but it is not as often and this is generally the trend of things until I'm 35 and then hey, no one cares anymore. That's sorta what happens to all women, right?

It's simply lying to yourself to say that a 30 year old woman is as cute as a 22 year old woman.
Accept reality, BB... if you're a woman especially you aren't that cute anymore if you're 35. And every year over 24 is a year you are getting less cute. Young women are much more attractive to men.

Second, yes, men DO prefer a "sweet" slightly naive girl. The girl next door is always more alluring than a ho. No guy wants a girl who's been around the block numerous times, unless of course we're talking about a purely sexual relationship or an exchange of goods/money for sexual service (prostitution, stripping). This is the foundation behind the most basic dating rules dispensed to women - do not engage in sex too quickly, he will think you are easy, you will cease to be attractive and he will lose interest in you as a prospective long term partner although he may consider you for further booty calls.

I know evolutionary arguments are not well received... but this is really so fucking obvious that I will ignore that rule and just state it out. There is basic evolutionary incentive here. Young women are more fertile, attractive women are typically healthy, and "sweet" women who are sexually coy and naive are typically not pregnant and so better prospective sexual targets than a woman with a big waist and a litter of children (who may be pregnant right now actually making sex biologically unproductive). If we assume sexual reproduction informs "typical" sexual drives (as it should) then it is obvious that men should prefer young, "sweet" women vs old and hard-living women. As a whole the male gender, masculinized brains evolved to be sexually preoccupied with signs of youth, femininity/beauty and coyness/naivete/"sweetness" in women.

Sorry if this blows your mind and makes you cry moar because you are a 42 year old divorced woman... but it's reality none the less.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 3 (27 votes cast)
Let's see if we can spot th... (Below threshold)

October 13, 2010 2:43 AM | Posted by Anonymous: | Reply

Let's see if we can spot the non-narcissistic solution from among the various proposals:

(a) "...instead of sitting up straight before the presentation, sit up straight all the time" (from TLP)

(b) "erasing self-perceived identity by emphasizing the "non-self" part of the subjective experience and by deconstructing the processes leading to identity" (from commenters 'Not me' and 'Reader')

(c) "...learn how to tolerate shame and thus neither anticipate nor fear rejection" (from commenter 'MeatRobot')

The only non-narcissistic solution is (c). Learn not to be ashamed or afraid of feeling some shame---that's power!

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 2 (6 votes cast)
Since the blog post briefly... (Below threshold)

October 13, 2010 3:10 AM | Posted by 13: | Reply

Since the blog post briefly addressed a problem of mine, I of course scoured the comments for that one nugget of wisdom that will change my life. Not finding it, I returned t self-pity rather than consider that it may just require a lot of work and nuance to get right.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 2 (2 votes cast)
First, and just sayin'- any... (Below threshold)

October 13, 2010 5:18 AM | Posted, in reply to Anonymous's comment, by Aikou: | Reply

First, and just sayin'- anyone who starts an argumentative post with a "u mad", I highly doubt has a lot of experience with people in this fabled RL thing. Intarwebz? Sure, but anything one learns there should be taken with about a mountain of salt, somewhat depending on the site/source. I only carry the cutest little salt-shaker in the shape of a parrot for TLP for example.

Now. Evolutionary psychology (or whatever one wants to call it when they want to blame/glorify genes and base instincts) is fine and has its uses. Thank *add your own personal deity or lack thereof here* we humans also have cognitive capabilities and can develop in surprising directions. Some, undoubtedly, will be content to rely on their evolution-fueled/media-induced impulses and hunt the young-looking females/successful-seeming men with abandon till the end of their (dating) days. For these it might be intriguingly important to make a point that 35+ women are not as cute as 20-year-olds. *shock* Well, others might think these older women have any number of qualities that the young ones haven't even begun to cultivate yet, some of those even positive. Yes yes, the most-men-like, most-women-prefer argument, evolutionary imperative etc. It is true that (seemingly) very few manage to graduate to the level of awareness where you can actually dissect and analyze certain signifiers and attractors and why they appeal to you (yours truly is nowhere near, but studying doggedly) and perhaps even begin to discard the ones that, no matter how compelling, are actually getting in the way of forming healthy relationships. And this sort of "informed dating" that hopefully ensues involves, I think, getting to know individuals, REALLY know them, not just dismissing or pursuing types that you "should prefer".

I realize I've gone rather far afield again, apologies. But I'd just like to point out that evolution is centered on survival, not happiness or even contentment. So yeah, go for the evolutionarily correct targets if you're so wired, but don't expect that alone to bring you fulfillment in life.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 11 (17 votes cast)
I don't think narcissism sh... (Below threshold)

October 13, 2010 6:30 AM | Posted, in reply to Anonymous's comment, by Steve: | Reply

I don't think narcissism should be avoided at all costs, dear anon. Sometimes, a little bit of healthy narcissisms makes you and your life better.

Removing the fear of shame seems like something an asshole would do. Shame is there for a reason.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 1 (3 votes cast)
"It's simply lying to yours... (Below threshold)

October 13, 2010 9:06 AM | Posted, in reply to Anonymous's comment, by Anonymous: | Reply

"It's simply lying to yourself to say that a 30 year old woman is as cute as a 22 year old woman."

That's so silly and really very sad for you (you seem so desperate about aging). You seem to have learned what you believe to be biology or evolutionary psychology from pop psych books like The Game. Now, for something completely different...a bit of evidence that's not from a book designed to play upon the fears of single people (who would do better to work on their integrity then their "game").

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/08/100823185415.htm

"So if not the context of sexual involvement, what is behind the lower quality scores for relationships initiated as hookups? Paik points to selection: Certain people are prone to finding relationships unrewarding, and those individuals are more likely to form hookups.

"The question is whether it's the type of relationship that causes lower quality or whether it's the people," he said. "The finding is that it's something about the people."

In other words, it's not evolution's or aging's fault you're single or men are choosing women other than you, it's you. There may be another reason men don't want to date you or stick around after they've slept with you or don't want to sleep with you in the first place that has nothing to do with "game". (And you may well be choosing poorly, or even more sadly, waiting to be chosen.) What you don't seem to understand is that it's the desperation of immature women who think they're near their past due date, such as yourself, that makes men less attracted to you. Needy desperation, not so hot and always easy to read, particularly if you're posing as a femme enfant in an attempt to manipulate a man. It sounds like you live in a creepy world that doesn't value people as people - how sad for you. It makes you easy to use/manipulate because your insecurities are so obvious and, well, you're so obviously manipulated and lacking in integrity of self already. You're projecting your own fears about your own value - which seems to be measured by male attention - onto the world.

What you don't seem to understand is that men aren't all the same - they're people with a wide variety of tastes, desires, neurosis and sexual preferences. Hey, some men aren't even interested in sleeping with women at all. Some men only like mature women. Some men only like teenagers or children. They're people, they have quirks and aren't all the same. In the real world, attractive 30 and 40 years olds do just fine if they're not desperately trying to trap a husband/father object. (TLP has written about his kind of desperation and narcissism before - I'd suggest going back through his archives.) Hell, my mother was still being hit on by men younger than her in her 60s.

The other thing you don't understand is that there are people who know how to beautiful and people who don't. And it often has more to do with what you communicate and how that makes you look than the purely physically aesthetic. To tie this into TLP's post, a fair amount of people perceiving someone as attractive and being attracted to them has to do with signifiers...that's why so many women get big fake boobs, fake tans and bleach blond extensions, that's often a case of signifiers run amok...narcissists tend to date signifiers, the rest of us get into relationships with people).

Attractive women in their 30s and even 40s (and even 50s and 60s) get lots of attention from men so it's a bit silly of you to attribute your getting less attention to being in your late twenties. You sound very resentful of other women and rather scornful of men (and as if you put a lot of energy into trying, unsuccessfully, to manipulate them), not to mention incredibly insecure - it's not surprising you believe people want to be around naive young girls rather than you, it's a way to avoid dealing with the reality that there are other reasons than your age that you're not appealing to others. Invest in fixing yourself up into a person with some integrity and you'll find that people in general will find you more attractive and men will be interested in being involved with you. Real people like real people - keep acting how you are and you'll only ever attract (and more importantly notice) the people who reinforce your beliefs that you have no value other than your youth. Clearly, if you're buying self help books like
The Game, you know you need to change something in your behavior and are making some kind of attempt.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 11 (17 votes cast)
Well I have to say I disagr... (Below threshold)

October 13, 2010 10:06 AM | Posted, in reply to Anonymous's comment, by Anonymous: | Reply

Well I have to say I disagree with you Anon, and I'm a man, so I know what I'm talking about. I dated an older (mid 30's) woman through part of college, and I think she was and is very hot. I've also dated young naive women, and they are extremely cute and very fun to tease about nonsense, but I like sex a lot, and I like women who are securely and openly sexual.

I also never judge women to be easy if they have sex quickly (with me at least). I just assume I'm awesome and they can't resist, and I'm happy I had sex.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 6 (14 votes cast)
To anonymous on October 12 ... (Below threshold)

October 13, 2010 10:32 AM | Posted, in reply to Anonymous's comment, by Jack Coupal: | Reply

To anonymous on October 12 @ 02:43,

(It's hard keeping track of all the anonymous people (person?) on this site.)

dumb dumb dumb guidettes is pronounced gwee-dettes' in jersey?

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: -1 (1 votes cast)
"But I'd just like to point... (Below threshold)

October 13, 2010 10:57 AM | Posted by Anonymous: | Reply

"But I'd just like to point out that evolution is centered on survival, not happiness or even contentment. So yeah, go for the evolutionarily correct targets if you're so wired, but don't expect that alone to bring you fulfillment in life."

Evolution is centred on survival of the species, not you or me as an individual - the belief we're the centre of some grand narrative is a bit of a byproduct of our neurobiology (narratives, they help us navigate the world, amongst other functions). And even that's kind of off the mark because evolution isn't "centred" on anything. Evolution is haphazard and not some linear narrative with an end point. Our brains, for instance, are kluges. If they were designed, it would be by McGuyver and not a world class engineer. Sure they work...sort of, sometimes, for some people. Often they don't work very well - it's why we have psychiatrists. Schizophrenia is a great example of what happens when the narrative, pattern seeking, meaning related function of our brain/mind goes awry.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (6 votes cast)
"My idea that men prefer yo... (Below threshold)

October 13, 2010 11:17 AM | Posted, in reply to Anonymous's comment, by Anonymous: | Reply

"My idea that men prefer young, "sweet" girls comes from several years on this planet observing human beings, both in the media and IRL."

Yes, it's very clear your ideas of the real world and your values are being formed by the media and that you're attempting to recreate what you see in the media in real life. Kind of sad really because the real world is really much richer, more complex and way more interesting than what advertisers are selling you. But, hey, I guess it's easier to blame evolution for people finding you unattractive than to look at the real reasons. I'm sorry that nobody seems to have really cared about who you are and your sense of self is all about what you look like/are in someone else's eyes.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 5 (13 votes cast)
Integrity makes one powerfu... (Below threshold)

October 13, 2010 12:23 PM | Posted by Anonymous: | Reply

Integrity makes one powerful - not because it gives one power over and the ability to control others but because it involves knowing ourselves, which allows us to anticipate and control our ourselves, and because our words and actions align so we don't self sabotage.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 6 (6 votes cast)
"It's simply lying to yours... (Below threshold)

October 13, 2010 1:53 PM | Posted by GT: | Reply

"It's simply lying to yourself to say that a 30 year old woman is as cute as a 22 year old woman."

Young woman, cougar, who cares? It's all good to me. Bring them all on, I think they are ALL HAWT!!!!!

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (6 votes cast)
The best and easiest way to... (Below threshold)

October 13, 2010 1:55 PM | Posted, in reply to Dolores's comment, by Nando: | Reply

The best and easiest way to acquire power is to be born into a wealthy and powerful family. Too many Americans think that if they work hard and have a positive attitude, good things WILL happen. Not so. For instance, too many acquire law degrees from diploma mills - when there are simply too many lawyers for the number of available positions.

http://thirdtierreality.blogspot.com/

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: -6 (8 votes cast)
Isn't it funny when you sta... (Below threshold)

October 13, 2010 3:44 PM | Posted by Iris: | Reply

Isn't it funny when you start reading comments from the bottom up and the conversation has somehow gone from postures to cougars?

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
I think I'll start posturin... (Below threshold)

October 13, 2010 3:55 PM | Posted, in reply to Iris's comment, by Lexi: | Reply

I think I'll start posturing as a cougar. RAWR!

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 5 (5 votes cast)
Steve, you misread what I s... (Below threshold)

October 13, 2010 6:06 PM | Posted, in reply to Steve's comment, by Anon October 13 2:43 AM: | Reply

Steve, you misread what I said (or tried to say).

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Now I know how alone feels ... (Below threshold)

October 14, 2010 1:05 AM | Posted by Anonymous: | Reply

Now I know how alone feels because I can NOT be-WEAVE how crazy these comments have become in response to my post.

Dudes and dudettes I'm sorry but you are all so full of shit it's comming out of your freakin' ears. It cannot be argued that men are more attracted to young women. IT IS BEYOND DEBATE, it's like trying to argue that the sky is not blue. You look like a fucking fool.

Why do you assume I internalize and personalize this, simply because I am a woman? Why does everyone jump tot conclusions that I am freaked about aging or that I feel ugly and need validation and other rubbish? I am simply logical and I live in the real world, as opposed to some fake oprah feel good world where we lie to ourselves and tell ourselves 40 year old women are just as sexy as 21 year olds. I don't deal with bullshit, I'm a logical type of person for the most part.

I just turned 28. I am now attractive, men look at me all the time, stare at me from cars, as I walk down the block, etc...as Katy Perry might say "boys crane their necks, just to sneak a lil sneak-peeeeak...". :) Why? Because I"m 28 yrs old, with a tiny 24' waist, 35' hips and blonde hair. That's the basic recipe for at least moderately cute. It means nothing at all, other than that men look at me a lot.
However, one day I will be 40 and no longer attractive. I will stop being sexually attractive to most men, at the very least it will be true that I will be significantly less attractive than I am now. Fact. Of. Life. I'm not freaked about it, it's just nature and how things go. I care about this as much as I care about the prospect of death - fact of life, albeit not exactly pleasant to contemplate.

Well, you know, people also make up fairy tales to protect them emotionally from death (i.e. god, religion)... so I shouldn't be surprised they make up fairy tales to protect themselves from the emotional impact of aging as well. I am not religious at all, or emotionally delusional about the reality of aging.

To be honest? I find it absolutely pathetic how much you guys and gals are lying to yourselves because you will cry moar about the fact we are mortal and will age and die. To the guys claiming they don't prefer youth: you're full of shit. To the women: you are lying to yourselves.

Just my 2 cents, 3 or 40 dollars or more.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: -7 (21 votes cast)
Anonymous - Haha, I love ho... (Below threshold)

October 14, 2010 1:21 AM | Posted, in reply to Anonymous's comment, by Anonymous: | Reply

Anonymous - Haha, I love how you try to compare yourself to Alone...priceless! Particularly when you're providing such a wonderful example of what he writes about. You believe that 40 year old women don't get hit on but that's simply a belief you hold that's based in your own fear of aging - you apparently confuse reality for tv so you're hardly an expert on reality. What you don't understand is that a lot of those men who catcall you on the street do it to girls you probably consider "ugly" or women you consider past their use by date. Kind of funny that you're almost 30 and you still think it's because you're so especially hot...and believe you know so much about men and reality.

What the mainstream media promotes as hot or reality isn't reality. Yes, I know you believe it is but that's why it's so funny that you're comparing yourself to Alone.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 2 (14 votes cast)
Again, because you seem slo... (Below threshold)

October 14, 2010 1:43 AM | Posted, in reply to Anonymous's comment, by Anonymous: | Reply

Again, because you seem slow on the uptake.

1) Unlike you and others on this blog, I am capable of independent thought, I am capable of objectively evaluation what I read and do not seek out an all-knowing being to program my thoughts. Therefore, I do not view alone as a diety and argue him on the regular. Comparing myself to alone was not self flattery in the slightest. All I meant was "hey, now I know how it feels when people say crazy fucking shit in response to your postings... massive WTF on my end"

2) My REFUSAL to cow-tow your delusional old woman idea that 40+ year old women are still sexually attractive has little to do with the media. It has to do with reality. The real world. The world you opt out of in favor of Oprah Winfrey and her feel good guru bullshit parade. Sure sometimes 40+ year old women are sexually attractive but that's very rare, and for the most part, they are not. And yes, all women get attention, but women who are 40+ get it far more rarely. Why are you so adverse to reality? Is it that tough being old? I mean, I can't even BELIEVE you are trying to argue this. How ridiculous. You must be in some serious denial about being an old person. The fact you insist on calling me old when I am clearly not even remotely old is more than enough evidence that you are butthurt beyond comprehension. I'm giving you an e-pat on the shoulder, cheer up okay? Don't worry be happy :)

3) I do not think I am especially hot, you re-re. Again, because you are slow, I will repeat myself: being a female in her 20s, with my proportions, is the basic recipe for moderately attractive. At no time did I say I was extremely attractive, in fact I specifically used the word "Moderately", which means "threshhold of some slight significance". Moderate is the opposite of extreme you fucking idiot.
The fact men pay me attention doesn't mean anything. It isn't special. I'm not at all "especially hot"... any more than raw meat is "especially delicious" to a shark. The shark is programmed to sense blood and go insane, it's just nature. The shark is biologically programmed to gravitate to respond, regardless of whether it is filet mignon or not. Similarly, men are programmed to pay attention to a relatively young woman with a 24 inch waist and 35 inch hips. I'm a rational person, it doesn't mean anything. I prefer being attractive vs being unattractive, the way anyone prefers something beneficial to something problematic (and being unattractive is problematic and makes life more complicated)... but it's not a big deal at all, and I don't think I'm omg so great or so hot at *all*. Because I"m not.


Ugh, most ridiculous argument. I can't even. I cash in my chips, you old women and delusional ones fight amongst yourselves.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: -5 (17 votes cast)
Dudette, so far you've done... (Below threshold)

October 14, 2010 2:03 AM | Posted by Anonymous: | Reply

Dudette, so far you've done nothing other than reveal your own fear of aging and rather desperate belief that your youth makes you hawt. But, hey, I get the impression you're not big on real relationships with real people, male or female. Better trap yourself a man before you get all old since youth is all you have to offer. Have you started botox treatments yet? That way you can make sure nobody ever sees the real you.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: -2 (10 votes cast)
Demi Moore or Courtney Cox ... (Below threshold)

October 14, 2010 2:32 AM | Posted, in reply to Anonymous's comment, by Lexi: | Reply

Demi Moore or Courtney Cox at 40 = hot. They are are not in the middle of the curve. They are at like the tiny end of the right side. If a woman at 40 looks younger than she is, she's still hot, but the key is looking younger, as in not looking 40.

And you're right most women around looking 40 go invisible on the sexuality meter, if they dress like a normal human being (I think it would be hard to ignore my people of walmart example below, but not 'cause the average bear would want to hit that).

I see the invisible thing all the time with my friends that are older, who are still attractive/fit for their age, but obviously older. It makes me enjoy a door held open for me even more now, some guys of course will still do it, but not as many will fall on themselves to do it. (still hate the catcalls, but those have more to do with harassment than whether or not I'm attractive)

I'm 32, and physically, I was definitely hotter at 22. No question. (most people think I look mid 20's though, even people in their mid twenties).

So yeah, I basically think you are right. If all a guy knows about a woman is how she looks, they are more likely going to go for the ones that look/are younger. And I imagine, there will always be a pull toward a younger woman, even if his wife is hot for her age and has a lot of other attractive qualities. (That I think is the other problem, people are conflating instantly sexually attractive with generally attractive.)

That said, if you are carrying a mug, that has sentimental value to you, and it is full of hot water. Your evolutionary reaction is to drop the mug if you spill the hot water on your hand. If your ability to bypass your genetically determined reaction, has been determined to be superior to that of a monkey, you can make the choice to hold onto the mug. Very fast cost benefit analysis.

As I'm sure you know, some men may forgo some hotness of youth, for the benefits that come from being a little older and wiser. yeah, some may cringe when they see the hot 22 yearold and make the choice to stay with their amazing, known entity, shared history, but less physically hot wife . . . but it is often cost benefit analysis, but probably not overtly so. Sometimes, they follow their shark loins and leave.

That said, I'm glad, that men thinking I'm hot isn't all there is to a satisfying life. It is preferable, and I'd rather be attractive than not . . . but it is fact of life for now that we get older. I'm also lucky that I'm not afraid of being unhitched.

Of course, if the life extensionists and people that are trying to end aging have their say about it because they really don't want to die (yay for them!) then hey, good for me, 'cause then I can (hopefully) go back to looking 22, even when I'm 102, best of both worlds. That'd be super awesome. And currently still a fantasy.

People of Walmart: http://www.peopleofwalmart.com/?p=22502

What I think may be an above average woman at 4 different CGI age points: http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=1pe447&s=4 The first is the most sexually attractive.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 1 (9 votes cast)
I am blotting my eyes right... (Below threshold)

October 14, 2010 2:34 AM | Posted by Anonymous: | Reply

I am blotting my eyes right now because I am crying for your projected self loathing. At no point did I express any of the things you keep stubbornly accusing me of... your insistence on these accusations (of fear of aging, botoxing myself etc) only illuminates your own fears and vulnerabilities. Or perhaps illuminates some sort of frustration on your own end. I don't know, but I think if I saw you and you saw me, you would be the ridiculous one. I'm not botoxed, I'm not some superficial high maintenance useless empty bitch you seem to be describing me as. I know I am not this, but I strongly suspect you are either an old bitter woman or a frustrated man, as I cannot imagine any happy person being as miserable to an anonymous stranger as you are being.

I never said anything about relationships or emotional connection to people, the conversation was exclusively and solely about sexual attraction. Why are you bringing irrelevancies and making canyon size leaps of logic here? This is a discussion about visceral sexual attraction. You are arguing men do not prefer youth. I am saying you are a fucking moron. End discussion.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: -9 (13 votes cast)
There is no great "emotiona... (Below threshold)

October 14, 2010 3:00 AM | Posted by Anonymous: | Reply

There is no great "emotional impact of aging" if you're not afraid of aging and don't believe youth is your source of self worth and power (or attractiveness). Doesn't mean you can't enjoy male attention, it's just not what one's self worth is dependent upon - enjoying and needing are very different things. There are a lot of men of all ages that like women who know who they are and are comfortable with their sexuality and bodies - that's what you don't seem to understand. Just as there are a lot of men who prefer naive young women because they're easy to manipulate. Not all men are the same. Nor are all women the same. And some people have relationships with other people, they're not just amassing objects of narcissistic desire.

Clearly you've never actually dealt with death in any real way, otherwise you'd understand that getting older is something to celebrate. Sure there are benefits to youth but there are also all kinds of benefits to maturity - not the least of which is still being alive. I like getting older, it's actually pretty great (at this point anyway).

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 2 (10 votes cast)
why yes, yes it is pronounc... (Below threshold)

October 14, 2010 3:12 AM | Posted, in reply to Jack Coupal's comment, by Anonymous: | Reply

why yes, yes it is pronounced that way.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 1 (3 votes cast)
"Clearly you've never actua... (Below threshold)

October 14, 2010 3:26 AM | Posted by Lexi: | Reply

"Clearly you've never actually dealt with death in any real way, otherwise you'd understand that getting older is something to celebrate."

I'm not sure how the two are relevant to each other? All the ways I've dealt with other people's deaths, or impending deaths make me less excited about getting older because it means an even higher probability of death, once I'm past the age of 5.

Dealing with death as a reason to celebrate the fact that I am alive right now sure, but I don't follow how dealing with death makes a person want to celebrate ever increasingly higher probabilities of death, which if not by sudden impact from bus, can be pretty meh, from what I've witnessed there can be a lot of grief for what you are losing as you are losing it, like the ability to not shit yourself, or the ability to remember things, to digest and use all the nutrients from your food, loss of ability to recover. Granted some of these things aren't related to aging specifically, but aging in combination with the ways we treated our bodies when we were younger and how the biochemistry we created in the past (food, go-to moods) affects the expressions of our genes or the speed at which our telomeres shorten . .. . but even if we are like Art Devaney in the physical self care process, he isn't as quick as he used to be.

And I like getting older for reasons unrelated to my experiences with other people's deaths or impending deaths. I dislike getting older for reasons directly related to my experience with other people's deaths.

How did you mean this comment? Because I think I'm taking it way differently than you might have intended.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: -2 (6 votes cast)
This is the anon arguing th... (Below threshold)

October 14, 2010 3:35 AM | Posted by Anonymous: | Reply

This is the anon arguing that men like young women... and thank you Lexi for being honest. Interesting how the two confirmed women in this discussion both agree men like young women whereas it seems as if the men are in denial about this for some bizarre reason. Being PC, perhaps? On TLPs blog? Since when! This is the one place where being PC is not required, duh.

Lexi said it: she's 32 and was hotter at 22, no questions.

My perspective on the cost benefit analysis of older men seeking younger women is that most men keep their older wife and attempt (or fight the urge) to have mistresses. The man, unless he is a moron, does not leave his wife for his mistress, but he has sexual affairs with younger women assuming he is capable of it (amoral, as well as reasonably capable of having affairs in terms of attractiveness to women and/or money to buy them gifts). There are benefits to having a wife as you point out - a partner, a relationship, someone who means more than just sex, a mother of your children, etc. Unless he is a fool he does not divorce his wife and has his affairs on the side. Women age, and any smart man knows that, why would he leave his older wife, mother of his chilren, for a younger woman who will be older eventually anyway? I mean it happens, but I suspect when that happens it has more to do with the man's own hang ups about his own aging (divorcing his old wife, a reminder he is also old).

To the anon saying I've never dealt with death: try again buddie, I work in health care. I've been with and have watched maaaany human beings grow older and die. I know ALL TOO WELL about the life span and death. I fear neither. I am just rational unlike all of you delusional ones trying to make the foolish argument that 20 year olds are not intrinsically more sexually attractive than older people.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: -4 (6 votes cast)
Anonymous 28yo, gotta say i... (Below threshold)

October 14, 2010 3:41 AM | Posted by Aikou: | Reply

Anonymous 28yo, gotta say if "you say men no like young gurrls! lol u wrong i'm right and sexier than u old haggz/blue-balled men" is all you get out of what other people say here (excuse my own paraphrasing) I'd obviously be wasting time further clarifying the point of my post...

I'm a sucker, I'll do it anyway. *clears throat of alleged fossil dust* It is quite possible to learn to take the best of what your natural impulses tell you to seek in a person's looks (aka recognizing indications of health and fitness)
without being entirely enslaved by the evolutionary imperative. You can learn to see the other "dude/dudette" as a separate entity that is greater than the sum of their physical attributes and/or youth/social station. I'm not trying to argue that men don't prefer young women, what would be the point of that? I don't decide for other people in any case, and that's all as it should be. However, it would be great if people were able to make educated choices when it comes to partners, not just be all shark-after-blood about it. People tend to get hurt that way.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: -1 (5 votes cast)
Whoops, clearly the discuss... (Below threshold)

October 14, 2010 3:44 AM | Posted by Aikou: | Reply

Whoops, clearly the discussion has jumped ahead while I was slow-typing. I'll just have to catch up!

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: -1 (1 votes cast)
Lexi - The other anon broug... (Below threshold)

October 14, 2010 4:11 AM | Posted, in reply to Lexi's comment, by AnAnon: | Reply

Lexi - The other anon brought up fear of death, I was responding to that (and the projection of what they believe it's like to be 40). Having had many friends die of AIDS at young ages, I appreciate being able to get older and am very much enjoying being in my 40s. We aren't talking about being geriatric here, we're talking about being middle aged. Obviously after menopause and/or andropause a person's body changes.

Sure Demi Moore isn't the average woman in her 40s but she wasn't an average women in her 20s either so that's a pretty bad example. Just as "Walmart people" of all ages are going to be on the unattractive side to people who aren't chubby chasers. Sometimes there can be a pretty big disconnect between what people really find sexually attractive and what they tell others they like so they conform to popular consensus to avoid being ostracized. Human sexuality, even men's desires, is a bit more complex than "must impregnate barely legal girl". Not saying there aren't men out there who prefer naive girls to experienced women, and that American culture isn't pathological about youth in oh so many ways, I'm just saying that's not the whole story.

This is a pretty entertaining conversation all round.


Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 2 (2 votes cast)
When I say hot, I specifica... (Below threshold)

October 14, 2010 4:18 AM | Posted by Lexi: | Reply

When I say hot, I specifically mean visually sexually attractive.

And yes there are fewer men that try to get my attention, but that's a good thing! Less work for me! Because a man who wants my attention now has a higher probability of being a good match because he is not just following his monkey mind. And while there are fewer men that want my attention, there is still no shortage, much to the chagrin of others.

Also until I'm like 72, there are going to be a enough men older than me, and as long as I take care of myself, mentally and physically . . ..

I think if a person were morbidly obese at 22 and was a healthy weight 6-10 years later, it could be said they were hotter older, but that is also because they fit within the norms now.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
The anonymous 28yo is not t... (Below threshold)

October 14, 2010 4:21 AM | Posted, in reply to Aikou's comment, by AnAnon: | Reply

The anonymous 28yo is not the same anonymous that called the anonymous 28yo "dudette" - this conversation is all the more entertaining because of the confusion and assumptions upon assumptions (some made by me, of course, my apologies if I've contributed to it being annoyingly confusing).


Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Hm yes, I'll admit the amou... (Below threshold)

October 14, 2010 4:30 AM | Posted, in reply to AnAnon's comment, by Anonymous: | Reply

Hm yes, I'll admit the amount of anonymous here gets me confused at times!

But I found the word 'dudette' intriguing. Don't hear that where I come from, kno vat i em sain. *add ridiculous accent*

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
That was me, Aikou. Gosh, w... (Below threshold)

October 14, 2010 4:32 AM | Posted by Anonymous: | Reply

That was me, Aikou. Gosh, what a mess!

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: -1 (1 votes cast)
Lexi - So you mean people i... (Below threshold)

October 14, 2010 4:32 AM | Posted, in reply to Lexi's comment, by Anonymous: | Reply

Lexi - So you mean people in photographs or seen from a distance then if you're talking only visually sexually attractive? Because as soon as you get up close all kinds of other things come into play - real life is more complex than the movies or tv. But I get the impression you know that already. And, yes, some people do lose weight or overcome shyness or some other change that makes them more attractive when they're older than when they're younger. Anyway, my main point at the beginning was to point out that the oth

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Yeah, all these Anons make ... (Below threshold)

October 14, 2010 4:52 AM | Posted, in reply to AnAnon's comment, by Lexi: | Reply

Yeah, all these Anons make it hard to figure out who is who. It would be nice if people could consistently use fake names at least. I will be Lexi.

Ah that makes sense, seeing people that die younger, or your age would also make me appreciate being able to get older.

Oh, I agree it is not the whole story, hence my comment about mugs and cost benefit analysis. I'm still sad that no one got my joke about determinism. Oh well. You know like on a scale of 1 - 10, I'm a sad of .5, where 10 is suicidal, and 0 is neutral.

And yes, seen from a distance, or in a photograph, (which many studies, probably just show photos, when judging age/attractiveness), and/or in some way that you are not picking up on other cues. Like . . . posture, to bring it back to the original topic.

And I know Demi is an anomaly, that is why I said she was at the far right of the curve.

Hopefully this adds to the entertainment, as clearly I'd rather be doing this than sleeping, which if I were doing instead, would surely help me keep a youthful appearance longer! :)

http://www.xtranormal.com/watch/7353155/ it is a documentary about this conversation, Nanook of the North style . . .

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
OMG lexi erase that video f... (Below threshold)

October 14, 2010 5:13 AM | Posted by Anonymous: | Reply

OMG lexi erase that video from the planet. I am so freaked out now I can't even tell you.

I'm the red robot I guess?

Really to be honest I have no idea why this discussion became so out of control. It's a fact. Younger people, particularly younger women are more attractive. There are always EXCEPTIONS, we can sit around talking about them all day: Some people have horrible acne at 21 and then go on accutane, some men are gay and not attracted to women, some women were in a coma from 18-20 and so not attractive by default of being bed bound and minimally kempt, some men are really into older women or children...

But in general there is a preference of men to be reflexively more attracted to youthful looking women and I have no idea why 20 posts later we are all fighting and you are making creepy ass videos about it.

I need to sleep.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (2 votes cast)
heh.... (Below threshold)

October 14, 2010 5:18 AM | Posted, in reply to Anonymous's comment, by Lexi: | Reply

heh.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (2 votes cast)
I loved how the 28 yo sayin... (Below threshold)

October 14, 2010 6:38 AM | Posted by Steve: | Reply

I loved how the 28 yo saying men prefer younger women was ferociously attacked.

So much ferociousness, bitterness and denial. Very entertaining.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (6 votes cast)
"Ferociousness, bitterness ... (Below threshold)

October 14, 2010 8:19 AM | Posted by Sinead: | Reply

"Ferociousness, bitterness and denial"? O_O

There will always be people who want to see drama where there is none. Maybe Steve has a thing for catfights?

Or then I'm just too used to seeing a helluva lot more foul invective than any visible here released upon a casual comment on the arenas of internet discussion, since none of the happenings here so far translate to me as anything but harmless ol' bantering.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 3 (3 votes cast)
Anaonymous @ 03:12 on 10-14... (Below threshold)

October 14, 2010 12:37 PM | Posted, in reply to Anonymous's comment, by Jack Coupal: | Reply

Anaonymous @ 03:12 on 10-14-10:

All along, I've been thinking that Spanish was our Official Foreign Language.

Now, I know that Italian is challenging it. Maybe my fellow Frogs will make a go. Wait.., they're rioting and on strike about their pensions. Scratch that.

but, competition is good.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: -1 (1 votes cast)
And, obviously, homosexual ... (Below threshold)

October 14, 2010 1:41 PM | Posted, in reply to Lexi's comment, by AnAnon: | Reply

And, obviously, homosexual men who like younger men do so because younger gay men are obviously at their peak fertility. My point isn't that peak fertility doesn't exist for both men and women (and decline with age), it's that human sexuality is more complex than anon28 is proposing (and it's not purely about reproduction, we're hardly the only species that has sex for other reasons).

We can argue all night and day whether age of peak fertility (youth) trumps hip/waist ratio and facial symmetry (individual reproductive fitness) in terms of attractiveness to men - we'd need an actual study to start claiming "it's a fact" either way. I'd also find it interesting to see who men chose if smell played a part and not just photos, since smell has to do with who is at the most fertile part of their cycle (you know, the period where women are attracted to men with more pronounced masculine features that indicate high testosterone each month, as opposed to the rest of the month where we're generally attracted to less hyper masculine men). If we're going to talk reproductive biology and female sexuality, it's good to at least know the basic research - rather than repeating cherry picked studies and/or pseudoscience one learned in "how to snare a man" instruction manuals of the men are from mars women are from venus variety).

About hormones, ovulation and women's choices in men - http://news.discovery.com/human/women-ovulation-hormones-behavior.html
About hip to waist ratio
http://www.femininebeauty.info/i/singh.pdf

I'm not arguing that men aren't generally attracted to women they can get pregnant (younger and older), I'm simply saying that in real life human sexuality and fertility (and the research being done on it) is a bit more complex than anon28's proposed "she's hawt because she's young" hypothesis and books like The Game and the person who claims to be a 28yo girl would propose in their initial post (it was The Game style cliches I was objecting to in their post on October 12, 2010 2:28 AM).

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 4 (6 votes cast)
Liberal-creationist women w... (Below threshold)

October 14, 2010 1:42 PM | Posted by AnonyMouse: | Reply

Liberal-creationist women would love to believe that the reason men reject their aging shriveling bodies is because of patriarchy. That way they don't have to face the truth that they wasted the best years they could have used to find a husband and instead rode the cock carousel into irrelevancy.

The belief that a species-typical man would want anything but a young fertile woman is a product of the mythology of liberal-creationism, wishful thinking, and feminists who suffer from the Dunning-Kruger effect.

"Evolution is centred on survival of the species, not you or me as an individual - the belief we're the centre of some grand narrative is a bit of a byproduct of our neurobiology"

Education fail!: "Cooperation benefits a society, while evolution selects at the level of individuals."

http://physicsworld.com/cws/event/15806

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: -6 (8 votes cast)
Well as the anon steve is t... (Below threshold)

October 14, 2010 1:43 PM | Posted, in reply to Sinead's comment, by Anonymous: | Reply

Well as the anon steve is talking about, I would agree the responses I got were pretty extreme considering my original comments were generalized and benign. I might have expected it if I said something super inflammatory and personal (religion, sexuality, your usual hotbed topics). All I said was this:

1) Timidity, cowardice, apathy and social failure is extremely repugnant in a man

2) Men are often attracted to the opposite qualities in women and so may prefer a "sweet girl next door" who is slightly naive and has some timid qualities.

2) Men are attracted to youth in women, 17-25 year old women are most physically attractive to men and I was a bit more attractive when I was younger.

Then people went crazy calling me a pedophile and a controlling man.
When I explained I was a 28 year old woman they started accusing me of being self loathing, a botoxed empty whore, perceiving myself as having nothing to offer other than youth, etc etc etc. I mean, it was pretty crazy... I"m reading the responses to what I said and they are all personal attacks which have nothing to do with my original argument. A few nutjobs jumping to crazy conclusions that I do not think relationships are important and that I do not think people consider other things besides appearance when choosing a partner (which they obviously do).
Then you had people out and out lying saying ridiculous crap like "my 60 year old mother got lots of male attention" which only deserves LOLs in response.

I am quite used to the concept of being flamed on the intarwebz but yea I think steve summed this discussion up most accurately. The responses were insane and personal and I can only assume those saying them were either old people in some major denial who got all offended by the discussion of youth, or frustrated men who just freak out when female attractiveness is discussed. I have no idea, I"m not anyone's psychiatrist, maybe TLP can figure it out. I'm sure he'll say narcissism though.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (6 votes cast)
Dudette...the female analog... (Below threshold)

October 14, 2010 2:01 PM | Posted, in reply to Anonymous's comment, by Anonymous: | Reply

Dudette...the female analogue to "dude", though "Betty" predates it in the skater lexicon as the term for a girl.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Um, at closer inspection mo... (Below threshold)

October 14, 2010 2:23 PM | Posted, in reply to Anonymous's comment, by Sinead: | Reply

Um, at closer inspection most of the people did resort to ad hominem, yourself as well. In fact, the ones that didn't were largely ignored, almost as if they didn't make it past some sort of emotional treshhold to get people to respond. Seems like you let some of the stuff that was said under your skin though, always unwise when it comes to internet discourse, and responded in kind, which further invited more personal attacks... Out of necessity, I usually filter those out semi-automatically these days, focusing instead on the strength of the arguments. Guess that's why most of the hostility *swooshed* by me. Plust most of the crazy personal stuff here is still pretty tame in internet terms.

Gotta say though, if you're liberal with curse words and coarse evaluation of the opponent's intellectual capabilities (like calling them "fucking moron"), you're not exactly inviting them to engage in civilized discussion...

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 7 (7 votes cast)
Or maybe when I saw where t... (Below threshold)

October 14, 2010 2:54 PM | Posted by Anonymous: | Reply

Or maybe when I saw where the conversation went, I decided "screw it" and just got in the gutter as well? Because to be honest none of this is serious and I don't care at all, although I agree with steve's observation that it is interesting how extreme and viscious people became for no reason. I'm not talking about how things went when I responded in kind, I'm talking about the initial reactions.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: -2 (2 votes cast)
Well, if you like it in the... (Below threshold)

October 14, 2010 3:08 PM | Posted by Sinead: | Reply

Well, if you like it in the gutter, knock yourself out... ^^ And about the initial reactions, maybe it's just your style. Or tone. Stuff usually gets down voted for a reason, and it's not always due to the reader's delusions. Often is, mind, but I don't fancy a trip down the gutter so I'll just leave it there.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 5 (5 votes cast)
I'm sure smell plays a role... (Below threshold)

October 14, 2010 4:06 PM | Posted, in reply to AnAnon's comment, by Lexi: | Reply

I'm sure smell plays a role in attraction as well, especially as it relates to immune compatibility. I've got 23andMe data, and some of the guys I have varying levels of attraction to also have this. It is funny to me to notice the correlations between visceral attraction and histocompatibility (Ie the person I am about 60% compatible with I am very gut level attracted to). (http://women.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/women/style/article722915.ece or http://www.divinecaroline.com/22081/42913, yeah I know, not the most robust info)

"I'm not arguing that men aren't generally attracted to women they can get pregnant (younger and older), I'm simply saying that in real life human sexuality and fertility (and the research being done on it) is a bit more complex than anon28's proposed"

Yeah, I agree.

I think what is interesting are the extreme reactions saying that no she is 100% wrong, and personal attacks/projections etc, even people stating that she is making projections (something about splinters and logs come to mind).

And I agree it is more complex than just appearance, that said, appearance is often the VERY FIRST filter.

I know certainly I am visually and viscerally attracted to guys who are about 18-36, 6'2" 200-230, 6%-12% body fat, any race, with not a distinctly mean or hard set facial expression, ideally open/confident body language (which at 6% you're going to have some confident body language because you've trained your muscles with good form).

That said, talking to them, assessing for SES compatibility, influence, intelligence, health habits (ie no matter how hot a guy is, if I see him smoke, something switches), and then there is also overwriting some of my family conditioning, or going with it. My actual partner is 5'11, darker than I am but same race, probably 15% body fat, intelligent, able to accept influenced and to lead me, parents are still married, believes sugar is evil, as smart as I am in some areas, smarter than I am in other areas, and not as smart as I am in yet others, always logical, good emotional regulation skills (superior to mine 70% of the time), and younger than I am by 8 mos.

In the past, while there are guys that I did not notice visually, I still became intensely attracted to them anyway. I noticed them for their ability to lead groups, kindness, emotional receptivity and responsiveness, entertainment abilities, lack of clingy-ness, etc.

For all I know, Alone looks like Danny Devito, but I find the way he presents this aspect of himself attractive. (If he actually did look like that, no amount of awesome personality can undo my lack of attraction to that amount of heft)

And of course, attraction is sometimes not mutual.

I also think her reactions are interesting. Especially the comment about being rational. My general sense is that if you are human, you aren't as rational as you think you are, which is also why I think people that worship the concept of rational self interest have major blind spots. Not saying she worships that concept, but claiming ownership on the trait of being rational is like "protesting too much." To me.

But it is probably clear that I find human behavior fascinating.

People become extreme and vicious on the internet because they forget there is a living and breathing and feeling person on the other end of the machine. Some companies are starting to limit the amount of time a person spends in customer service because they are noticing their employees are ending up with PTSD symptoms because some asshole on the internet isn't being kept in check with a healthy sense of humility that can come from being seen, aka, not anonymous.

Maybe I ought to change my name to Libertarians Vs. Unicorns, and call it a day.

People are often very sensitive to generalities, especially if they think they are on the wrong side of the generality. So when Anon28 says people personally attacked her for no reason, it isn't true there is no reason, it just isn't a reason that she views as worthy, or can even see.

All behavior that looks irrational has a reason. Most of the time we just don't have a context big enough to know what that reason is. It isn't always a justifiable or helpful reason.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 1 (3 votes cast)
Lexi - Thanks for having a ... (Below threshold)

October 14, 2010 4:48 PM | Posted, in reply to Lexi's comment, by AnAnon: | Reply

Lexi - Thanks for having a rational discussion about the topic of sexual attractiveness. Yes, I can own that I was being a pot but I'm not calling the kettle black and denying I'm a pot while doing so and saying it's all the kettle's fault and claim I'm being victimized. I take responsibility for my behavior and feelings - I don't try to put all responsibility for my own behavior on someone else. I was reacting - and it was a reaction - to the initial post because of it's tone and because I find it annoying when people misrepresent science in the way that was being done. It was an aggressive assertion that cliches (later revealed to be learned from tv and personal anecdotal evidence) are "fact" and I find that annoying so responded aggressively to the aggression. Doesn't seem like anon28 was really interested in discussing the subject itself anyway. I also find it a little silly on a blog that dissects scientific studies and discusses how media influences our perception of reality to propose that what the media presents is scientific proof of any kind, or even an honest reflection of reality. But, hey, mileage may vary.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 3 (3 votes cast)
To AnAnon . . .... (Below threshold)

October 14, 2010 5:27 PM | Posted, in reply to AnAnon's comment, by Lexi: | Reply


To AnAnon . . .

Yes, agreed, the tone from "October 13, 2010 12:56 AM | Posted, in reply to Anonymous's comment, by Anonymous: " definitely had some charge laden words in it, and I think most people can see and will react to that.

Again, I think my statement still stands, that while Anon28 will say she got attacked for no reason, there are reasons! To which you can attest. ;) And while she may not think those reasons exist, they clearly do, because people reacted to them.

I do recall having read information that suggests what she says has been researched and verified, but I also know that there are many other factors that have also been researched an verified. My hook was people denying there was any truth to what she was saying at all, because there is truth to what she says, it just isn't the whole picture. I don't know that we will ever have the whole picture on anything, but that is a story for another time.

See I wouldn't even call this a rational discussion, I mean it might fall into that camp (I have an irrational distaste for the word rational it seems), I would maybe just call it a de-escalated conversation where actual information can be exchanged because neither person is so hooked on something.

For my next trick, I'm going to step away from the internet for a few hours, instead of let my dopamine reward system run my behavior . . . :) (information, social interaction, learning (which I often do best through arguing/interaction) is my # one addiction. Number two addiction: coffee.)

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Lexi - Yes, "de-escalating"... (Below threshold)

October 14, 2010 6:21 PM | Posted, in reply to Lexi's comment, by AnAnon: | Reply

Lexi - Yes, "de-escalating" is probably a better term for it and I do agree with you about our ability to be "rational" (and unbiased, cue Foucault). A large part of critical thinking is checking one's own assumptions and biases. Overall I'm more interested in the science and reality of sexuality - something we're still very much only starting to strip away prejudices around and to understand.

Yes, there has been research that confirms that peak fertility occurs in women in our early 20s but women's fertility is also cyclical during her fertile years and this greatly influences both what kind of men we're attracted to (and when we're attracted to what type of features) and also our own attractiveness to men. Purely conjecture, of course, but I'd suggest that a woman in her late 30s with long limbs, an attractive hip to waist ratio, symmetrical and feminine features who is ovulating will be more attractive to a room full of men than an asymmetrical, obese/no waisted short limbed girl/woman with testosterone shaped features in her early 20s. The key factor isn't age, it's reproductive fitness at that very moment - who is the most likely to get pregnant if the guy has sex now. (And as you point out, genetic compatibility also has its influence regarding who we're attracted to.)

And, if we're going to claim to be speaking about evolutionary psychology, then the continued existence of men who aren't on the alpha testosterone end of the gender continuum and women who aren't shrinking violets really disproves that rather simplistic idea about human sexuality (as attractive as this idea is to people who want to feel like they've got it all worked out when science keeps blowing all kinds of assumptions about sexuality out of the water).

Not so surprisingly, it's often women with high testosterone levels themselves who are attracted to men with high testosterone (which kind of blows the meek girl mates with macho man scenario). I find it fascinating to see how so many of the tropes about older men/younger women are falling away as women as women become more economically powerful in their own right. Granted I run in non-mainstream circles but I know a lot of couples with older women and younger men (where it was the men pursuing the older woman and convincing her to date him), as well as the older man/younger woman and same age couples. But, like I said, I don't really run in conventional circles and us freaks like to make up our own rules ;-)

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 2 (2 votes cast)
I'm pretty sure the ... (Below threshold)

October 14, 2010 6:27 PM | Posted by Anonymous: | Reply


I'm pretty sure the reason I was attacked is because a few old women and men got really uncomfortable when I matter-of-factly stated that youth is a major turn on for men, speaking only of initial visceral sexual attraction of course, and speaking for the majority of men and not every individual man of course.

The way I said it was sorta snarky so they felt totally entitled to just get personal and insane. It wasn't hurtful in the slightest since they were soooo off base (first round: "YOU ARE A PEDOPHILE CONTROL FREAK" second round: "YOU ARE A SELF LOATHING EMPTY BOTOXED WHORE"). It was more entertaining than anything else like watching a bunch of apes at a zoo freak out randomly.

Sometimes people attack you because they are supersensitive about the issue. If I go to a bunch of catholics and say "the pope helped cover up child molestation, he should go to jail", I would totally expect this group of people to start saying crazy crap to me. If I wrote that here, I would expect several people to agree with me. It depends on the sensitivities of the audience as well as the way you say something. I totally admit I said what I said in a rather insensitive way, but then again I wasn't expecting anyone to be sensitive in the readership here.

I sorta assume 75% of the readership of this blog are men, particularly young men, so I totally didn't expect anyone would care. I WUZ WRONG. I never anticipated the butthurtness of various old women and men when confronted with basic biological facts in a matter of fact way.

I am not at all surprised to discover AnAnon is a woman, and I am almost certain she is well into her 40s and single and totally personally offended by any slight suggestion that men may prefer youth.

You two can glad hand each other all you want about being "de-escalators" of my awful presentation, at the end of the day your egos and childish sensitivity is showing.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: -7 (9 votes cast)
Oh and regarding women with... (Below threshold)

October 14, 2010 6:36 PM | Posted by Anonymous: | Reply

Oh and regarding women with high testsosterone being attracted to men with high testosterone... nonsense.

What is shown is that womens' sexual attractedness to types of men fluxes with the menstrual cycle. During periovulation (the fertile window) women are most attracted to masculine men... deeper voice pitch and masculine faces, signs of high testosterone. At this time a woman's estrogen and testosterone are elevated, which make her sexually more attractive (estrogen = full face, soft clear skin, full lips, high voice pitch) as well as interested in having sex (tesosterone and dopamine are all higher during periovulation which shifts ovulating women to be more sexual).

It is totally deceptive to state "women with high testosterone are attracted to men with high testosterone" and it is much more accurate to say "fertile, ovulating women are attracted to men with high tesosterone".

Actually, it is women with more favorable hormonal balance (high estrogen, low tesosterone) that are least like to express to the cyclical/monthly changes in attractedness to types of men. These women are are consistently attracted to masculine men (deep voices and masculine faces) throughout the month. It is the women who are less feminine from an endocrinological perspective who are more likely to show larger shifts in their sexual preferences during ovulation, preferring masculine men at ovulation and less masculine men at other times.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
You can make as many unback... (Below threshold)

October 14, 2010 7:37 PM | Posted, in reply to Anonymous's comment, by Anonymous: | Reply

You can make as many unbacked up assertions as you like anon28 but it's meaningless to claim you're being scientific or "factual" when the science contradicts your claims.(Which is not to say there may not be variables in the studies presented that needed to be controlled for or are not yet understood.) The fact that you still need to resort to ad hominems (which apparently you believe are very hurtful, which says more about your vulnerabilities than anything else) and are still itching for a bitch fight - while just assuming information that others have presented as your own knowledge when it contradicts your original claim - instead of actually just supporting your assertions with evidence, pretty much indicates what your main interest is. We get it that you only find men with indicators of high testosterone attractive and can't imagine that anyone would ever find friendlier, more feminine male faces more attractive...and this is based upon your own personal experience and what you see in the media (apparently Brad Pitt doesn't count or you only notice highly men with highly masculine faces...that's what a confirmation bias is btw).

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/north_east/7616354.stm

"When men's testosterone levels were high, they were more attracted to feminine women. When women's testosterone levels were high, they were more attracted to masculine men."

http://www.physorg.com/news140703687.html

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 4 (4 votes cast)
Anon above me, that study d... (Below threshold)

October 15, 2010 6:08 AM | Posted by Steve: | Reply

Anon above me, that study doesn't contradict in anyway the 28 year old woman.

It simply says that the SAME women, when they had higher testosterone (relative to THEIR levels of testosterone, not an absolute measure) preferred manly men.

This does not, in any way, contradict 28's claims of unbalanced women having shifts in preference and stable feminine women having stable preferences.

Regarding male attractiveness, I notice many women staring at me or glancing at me non stop. The women who seem to be most entranced by my very presence are the more delicate and feminine looking. Of course I'm so manly that my keyboard now needs to be shaved, but I'm also tall and ruggedly handsome (man I love myself) and my posture is great.

Considering this I think confidence in approaching women is overrated. If you are already attractive to them, you risk being too arrogant. I think many women, if they are already strongly attracted to you, are going to appreciate a little bit of humility, a bit of nervousness, or maybe a playful, non-macho attitude. And if you are not manly or attractive, confidence is going to make you look ridiculous.

I mean one should have the basic level of confidence in himself, but one should not approach like he is the manliest and more powerful man in the world, 100% sure in his imminent success. I think that if you are manly and powerful, it already shows in your looks. There is a risk of overdoing it (if she sees you already has manly, she doesn't need to be convinced any further) or appearing ridiculous (if she can tell you are not manly trying to appear

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (2 votes cast)
I'm starting to wonder if S... (Below threshold)

October 15, 2010 10:05 AM | Posted by Anonymous: | Reply

I'm starting to wonder if Steve, anon28 and the other grandiose angry anon - who's posted before (and also claims to be a health professional) and has a very similar aggressive style and lexicon - are one and the same. Wouldn't surprise me in the least. Not that I discount that a blog like TLP would attract a number of readers and posters that want to grandiosely conflate themselves with him and try to imitate his incisive wit and rogue persona by simply being hostile and grandiose. You know, people more interested in being "right" or an "authority" than actually being curious or a critical thinker. Or capable of being self critical. Not that I can't be an ass myself, or engage in hostile behavior - or come off as supercilious or superior at times. And it's not like I don't enjoy Alone's blog posts because they often affirm my own biases and observations about culture. I'm pretty damn human both at the start and end of the day.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 4 (4 votes cast)
Anon28 - "You two can glad ... (Below threshold)

October 15, 2010 10:58 AM | Posted, in reply to Anonymous's comment, by AnAnon: | Reply

Anon28 - "You two can glad hand each other all you want about being "de-escalators" of my awful presentation, at the end of the day your egos and childish sensitivity is showing."

It was a "de-esculation" of the situation, not your presentation (and both our contributions were dissected, not only yours), and you are and were quite welcome to put aside your hostility and engage in a non-hostile way if you have any interest in doing so or genuine interest in the actual topic. I'd credit Lexi with the de-escalation and appreciate her creating the context for it to take place. She's a better and more patient woman than me in that regard and I respect that very much. I can forget to be sensitive to people on the internet, and I apologize if I hurt your feelings by reacting the way I did.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 2 (2 votes cast)
"anon 28" here...Reg... (Below threshold)

October 15, 2010 2:21 PM | Posted by Anonymous: | Reply

"anon 28" here...
Regarding confidence, I agree with steve in the sense that if you attempt to fake confidence it is obvious. When a man is not truly confident, when he is old, unattractive, a social failure, or all of the above, if he attempts to be excessively confident it is just annoying and creepy. Confidence is not the same as being a jerk. Sometimes confident people are jerks but being a jerk is not confidence. It's hard to quite properly describe what confidence is, but when you see it you know it and you can't fake it (contrary to what TLP presents here).

to anon 10/15 10:05 ...
No, I am not steve and my posting style isn't remotely like his. I pepper my responses with internet jargon such as "u mad" and "interwebz" because I consider this about as serious as a post on ONTD. I have no driving need to impress anyone here, this is not that SRS guys.
And the idea that you think it is "grandiose" to compare myself to TLP earlier (in the sense of knowing what it is like to have crazy responses)... well that makes me saddoes for you. TLP is not god sweetheart, he doesn't have all the answers. You should try reading, analyzing, and coming up with your own conclusions. Gurus are false, all gurus all the time. TLP never asked to be a guru so please don't make him one, and I"m sure he wouldn't appreciate it since it is the polar opposite of the sort of mentality he himself espouses and would like to encourage (a critical, analytical approach to life as opposed to a passive "feed me my thoughts" perspective taken by all too many people).

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: -6 (6 votes cast)
I see you've thought out th... (Below threshold)

October 16, 2010 9:29 AM | Posted, in reply to Anonymous's comment, by Anonymous: | Reply

I see you've thought out the superficial style difference between yourself and "Steve" - a bit of attempted 1337 is a very superficial difference. And you do seem to be the same angry anon who's been around for a while (claims about working in the helping health professions...hello Nurse Ratchet, hostility towards other women and claims about your own attractiveness that are meaningless/unprovable online, desperate need to believe you're aligned with Alone and on his level while claiming nobody else gets it and everyone else is a sycophant, hostility towards psychology and psychiatry and assumption that your own subjectivity is more accurate while you clearly don't understand transference and counter-transference or neurobiology at all, and mistaking being critical/snarky for critical thinking...which you rarely actually exhibit). I actually appreciate a bit of clever snark but yours rarely is. So, yeah, I wouldn't be at all surprised if Steve is a persona of yours (or vice versa and you're posing as a "hot" girl...and a nurse because you couldn't get away with pretending to be a doctor) and that very little of what you claim about yourself is true. Or not. You seem pretty obsessed with this guru idea and keep trying to align yourself with Alone as his equal and everyone else as inferior...do you really think you're fooling anyone except yourself? Alone may be cynical and a grumpy old man who yells at kids on his lawn - and he may or may not be a psychiatrist (irrelevant to me, I'm here for the cultural analysis and because Alone works the territory I'm interested in) - but he's not bleeding interpersonal hostility all over the place and seems to actually care about people and society/culture. Who he is is less relevant than what he writes - you seem obsessed by some guru image you have of him and want to be equal to/aligned with somehow. The impression I get from you is that you're a wounded child vying for daddy's attention in a room full of adults having a conversation. Interesting to watch though.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 1 (3 votes cast)
"Men and women completed fo... (Below threshold)

October 16, 2010 10:24 AM | Posted, in reply to Steve's comment, by Anonymous: | Reply

"Men and women completed four different test sessions that were each a week apart. In each session, volunteers also provided a saliva sample which was used to measure testosterone levels.

Dr Jones, a Psychology lecturer, said: "People preferred different types of face in the session where their testosterone level was highest than in the session where it was lowest.

"When men's testosterone levels were high, they were more attracted to feminine women. When women's testosterone levels were high, they were more attracted to masculine men.

"Since masculine men and feminine women are thought to produce the healthiest children and sex drive is higher when testosterone levels are also high, these findings suggest that men and women in hormonal states where their interest in sex is highest, show stronger attraction to high quality – or healthy – mates."

Dr Welling added: "We tend to think that attraction is relatively stable over time. However, our research shows that attraction is affected by fluctuations in testosterone levels."

http://www.physorg.com/news140703687.html

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
anon28, what I'm saying is ... (Below threshold)

October 16, 2010 12:34 PM | Posted by Steve: | Reply

anon28, what I'm saying is not necessarily contrary to TLP's point of view. His suggestion was to adopt a powerful posture all the time until it becomes second nature. It's very different from occasionally faking it when you approach women.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Anon 9:29, you sound awfull... (Below threshold)

October 16, 2010 2:29 PM | Posted, in reply to Anonymous's comment, by Anonymous: | Reply

Anon 9:29, you sound awfully creepy. I would appreciate if you would stop fixating on me.

If anyone wonders why I don't use a moniker, people like 9:29 are why. He has a photographic memory for everything i have said about myself... AND I AM TOTALLY ANONYMOUS, imagine the ire and craziness and stalkerishness I might provoke if I actually posted under a name for every discussion?
And being female, I suspect that makes me more of a target for stalkers and nutjobs, so this is why I am anonymous and you will not see me referencing myself as any consistent tag (e/g "anon 28") in other discussions on this blog.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Oh and its upsetting and an... (Below threshold)

October 16, 2010 2:32 PM | Posted by Anonymous: | Reply

Oh and its upsetting and annoying you keep accusing me of "aligning" myself with alone. From day one on this blog I have taken a critical position toward alone's ideas. I agree with him sometimes, but I disagree and argue him far more often. Why do you keep accusing me of something as stupid and nonsensical and contrary to reality as "aligning" myself with him?

WHEN did I claim to be any of the things you are accusing me of being? I never claimed to be "super hot", I never claimed (nor do I want to be) aligned with alone, I mean, you're just crazy and you need to like leave me alone stat.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
A photographic memory for e... (Below threshold)

October 16, 2010 3:07 PM | Posted, in reply to Anonymous's comment, by Anonymous: | Reply

A photographic memory for everything you say yet I've gotten it all wrong? Hmmm, you just don't know which way to go do you? I've already said I'm a woman but, obviously, either of us could really be a man on the internet and lying about who we are - and you and I could both be responding to any number of people going by "anonymous" or any other name. Like I said, you come off sounding an awful lot like "steve" but I don't doubt that I also come off sounding like other people (and vice versa) and you're two different people.

Interesting that you seem to want to control the situation by telling me not to respond to you (while you respond to me) instead of just deciding to act differently to get different results. That may be your need you're expressing - the need I'm filling is distracting myself so I may more easily procrastinate. Not particularly constructive really. I assume (whether your intent is to be disruptive or not) that you visit this blog because the stuff that TLP writes about interests you (and his perspective on them does as well, whether you agree or not). Of course, I may be assuming we share the same motivation but I suspect most people who visit this blog do so because they think TLP has something interesting to say about the subjects he writes about (and his recurring themes). So, if I leave all the anonymouses alone will you, anoymous, leave all anonymouses alone?

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Dear anonymoys who doesn't ... (Below threshold)

October 17, 2010 4:11 AM | Posted, in reply to Anonymous's comment, by Ted: | Reply

Dear anonymoys who doesn't want to be known as anon28. As my chef friend likes to say, if you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen. Or in your case, if you don't like getting responded to, don't post! Or tune your style so people can actually take your points seriously instead of having to weave through derision and semi-hostility. It's almost as if you WANT to get the extreme reactions that you label as "stalkerishness". Why, then? I'm sure I don't know, but perhaps something in you needs to feel persecuted and harassed in order to more strongly feel that you're in the right, braving the masses of delusional imbeciles to tout out your shining, rational view of reality. Look, some of it's even backed by science and you use internet lingo, too! Surely that fixes everything? (Heavy sarcasm-ridden speculation of course, color me grumpy.)

Anyway, moaning "go away, go away" to big bad stalkers who dare keep answering you, some even trying to /gasp/ have actual conversations, says a whole lot about you.

/trollface off

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 3 (3 votes cast)
<a href="http://www.asics-u... (Below threshold)

November 2, 2010 2:07 AM | Posted by coach handbags: | Reply

asisc shoes

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
You are fucking brilliant. ... (Below threshold)

November 18, 2010 3:21 PM | Posted by Spootsy: | Reply

You are fucking brilliant. Email me if you want to meet up for a refreshing beverage.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
I normally love this site f... (Below threshold)

November 24, 2010 11:39 PM | Posted by Anonymous: | Reply

I normally love this site for the intelligent analysis and viewpoints discussed now I just feel vile, like I read a women's magazine.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
I can see that this convers... (Below threshold)

January 4, 2011 5:18 PM | Posted by KKB: | Reply

I can see that this conversation is so old, but I cannot help myself. Here's the strange truth: it does not matter what we prefer or say we prefer. It only matters what we do, and how successfully.

Most people do not understand this, it is a secret seemingly known only to those who go for the deep study of Evolutionary Biology - - and sometimes the sort-of-true noise from magazines and friends and what we're afraid of (old men want only passive children to dominate, etc) gets in the way even for those of us who have a possibility of knowing better.

But ask the walmart people. Show your checkout clerk a photo of the babe of your choice and ask, do you prefer this?

Irrelevant what he or she prefers. The only thing that matters is who he or she mates with and whether or not their children have children. THAT is reproductive success, and it is so hard for us to understand because it feels counterintuitive that the mark of success does not fall within the individual I happen to be stuck being - - it's so hard to see outside of myself that I can barely imagine my children's children.

And that can be understood as a sort of species-wide narcissism: the crushing pull of the lived individual experience versus the reality of ourselves as something both bigger and way smaller than the individual. It's heady stuff.

And what's more, the male-centric world we live in makes it all the crazier. Because we do lots and lots of studies on "what men prefer," and then we all try to cater to or oppose those completely irrelevant and misleading findings.

Sort of like studying whether people prefer one million dollars or not one million dollars. What exactly did we learn?

(Besides how to sell things to us based on the horror of not-being-a-babe or on the horror of not-having-a-babe.)

If it were about procreation, we'd have to admit that the man's best bet is a woman with one child - - she's proven she's fertile, can survive childbirth and you can see that she can keep her offspring alive. But of course, human sexuality / orgasms are about much more than procreation: we've got alliance building, recreation, stress reduction, sleep aid, etc. etc. (But then if it were about procreation, or even just orgasms, we'd also have to talk about viagra and paternity testing. But tests have shown that men prefer to talk more about babes and less about that.)

And, by the way, I think men prefer "sweetness" for the same reason I do: because my daily existence here in the world can be a crushing place, and I'd like to be accepted and loved in a nice way despite my failings.

But then again, no joke, I'm a super hot babe. For real.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
I can see that this convers... (Below threshold)

January 4, 2011 5:19 PM | Posted by KKB: | Reply

I can see that this conversation is so old, but I cannot help myself. Here's the strange truth: it does not matter what we prefer or say we prefer. It only matters what we do, and how successfully.

Most people do not understand this, it is a secret seemingly known only to those who go for the deep study of Evolutionary Biology - - and sometimes the sort-of-true noise from magazines and friends and what we're afraid of (old men want only passive children to dominate, etc) gets in the way even for those of us who have a possibility of knowing better.

But ask the walmart people. Show your checkout clerk a photo of the babe of your choice and ask, do you prefer this?

Irrelevant what he or she prefers. The only thing that matters is who he or she mates with and whether or not their children have children. THAT is reproductive success, and it is so hard for us to understand because it feels counterintuitive that the mark of success does not fall within the individual I happen to be stuck being - - it's so hard to see outside of myself that I can barely imagine my children's children.

And that can be understood as a sort of species-wide narcissism: the crushing pull of the lived individual experience versus the reality of ourselves as something both bigger and way smaller than the individual. It's heady stuff.

And what's more, the male-centric world we live in makes it all the crazier. Because we do lots and lots of studies on "what men prefer," and then we all try to cater to or oppose those completely irrelevant and misleading findings.

Sort of like studying whether people prefer one million dollars or not one million dollars. What exactly did we learn?

(Besides how to sell things to us based on the horror of not-being-a-babe or on the horror of not-having-a-babe.)

If it were about procreation, we'd have to admit that the man's best bet is a woman with one child - - she's proven she's fertile, can survive childbirth and you can see that she can keep her offspring alive. But of course, human sexuality / orgasms are about much more than procreation: we've got alliance building, recreation, stress reduction, sleep aid, etc. etc. (But then if it were about procreation, or even just orgasms, we'd also have to talk about viagra and paternity testing. But tests have shown that men prefer to talk more about babes and less about that.)

And, by the way, I think men prefer "sweetness" for the same reason I do: because my daily existence here in the world can be a crushing place, and I'd like to be accepted and loved in a nice way despite my failings.

But then again, no joke, I'm a super hot babe. For real.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 3 (3 votes cast)
Thank you! The content is e... (Below threshold)

August 18, 2011 10:24 PM | Posted by cheap jewelry: | Reply

Thank you! The content is extremely rich.

cheap jewelry

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
You linked to your site but... (Below threshold)

January 3, 2012 12:44 AM | Posted, in reply to Sexy Pterodactyl at Wordpress's comment, by Anonymous: | Reply

You linked to your site but it's marked private. How are we supposed to see it?

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
I know; thread necromancy. ... (Below threshold)

April 1, 2013 12:08 PM | Posted by Oedepism: | Reply

I know; thread necromancy. Poor manners, maybe, but if history is really off-limits, the situation is worse than I can comprehend.

I'm 6'3" tall, which means that for 80-90% of the population, I have to look down, even slouch. Coincidentally, said people stand up straighter when they're addressing me. I should now add that I am a complete wuss with serious anxiety issues. It's a feedback loop of trying to appear friendly and being genuinely terrified of other people.

People like to say "I wish I was tall", then with a mysterious confidence from an unknown place, my shoulders will roll back and from the diaphragm I will explain with unwavering focus, "No. You don't."

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
lovely stuff you sound a lo... (Below threshold)

July 30, 2013 7:46 AM | Posted, in reply to Anonymous's comment, by dean: | Reply

lovely stuff you sound a lot like me. for me the most helpful thing i have taught myself is to not care what others think of me and my social awkwardness. in that state i find i am able to be more sociable because fucking up doesnt bother me too much anymore so im much more relaxed and therefore much more able to socialise. but im still deeply introverted at heart and always will be

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Or to take shame o... (Below threshold)

August 2, 2013 6:33 AM | Posted, in reply to Reader's comment, by jonny: | Reply

Or to take shame out of the equation entirely. Why is it shameful to be rejected (by a girl, a potential client, an unruly roulette wheel)? There's zero shame in being shot down.

On the rare occasions I'll enter a bar, I'm always amazed at how a flippant comment from a woman can castrate a man. She said no, and she was a bitch about it. So what, random male? Take it like a man instead of acting like it was a sucker punch.

Take it like a man? A flippant punch from a man can handicap a woman. I'm not advocating violence; the only way you can win is not to play their combative game. My point is that they're as stupid as they are malicious. They're just exploiting decency.

It's bullshit to pander to Toddler whores who get their illusory power to sell sex (and their malicious nature, and their utter uselessness as non-contributors) from being purged by older women who take out the competition they cannot compete with by slut-shaming honest girls.

Women who aren't telling the truth are either whores who want to sell sex or they're afraid of whores who want to sell sex. There are no women telling the truth (at least, not directly). They'll tell you with every single thing they do; their values and priorities are transparent.

To engage them is pure degradation from start to finish. Once they've finished projecting their shameful needy onto men, they'll need children because they cannot take care of themselves. To get a glimpse into their mindset, check out this PubMed abstract:

Attitudes towards fragile X mutation carrier testing from women identified in a general population survey.

The most salient finding of this work is the apparent lack of relevance of carrier status to these women. Many expressed that although the information could be relevant in the future, it is not relevant at this stage of their lives in terms of family planning (either with respect to having unaffected offspring or to premature ovarian failure) and personal relationships. Although issues of abortion seemed prominent in the focus groups, we found that carrier status did not have an apparent effect on women's attitudes about termination.

Carrier status of the mutated gene is not relevant to women who need children because they were already planning on retarding their children with emotional lies because they need dependents. So retarded children suit women who need children just fine.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
The bit about fragile X is ... (Below threshold)

August 2, 2013 12:40 PM | Posted, in reply to jonny's comment, by analysisFTW: | Reply

The bit about fragile X is a total nonsequitur.

It's bullshit to pander to Toddler whores who get their illusory power to sell sex (and their malicious nature, and their utter uselessness as non-contributors) from being purged by older women who take out the competition they cannot compete with by slut-shaming honest girls.

This is classic splitting. Women are either whores, or honest girls. There is no middle ground. This has its origins in the relationship with the mother. If the mother is seen as all-bad, when the child is still a toddler, the child will see themselves also as all-bad, and begin to develop what some commentators refer to as 'toxic shame' -- unconscious shame at the core of the psyche. This happens because the self and the love-object (the mother) have not become fully differentiated yet - so if the object is bad, the self must be also.

And this is classic projection:

To engage them is pure degradation from start to finish. Once they've finished projecting their shameful needy onto men, they'll need children because they cannot take care of themselves.

When I say projection I'm referring specifically to the 'shameful neediness' that you refer to with such distaste. But what's really happening here is that you've split off your own shame from your conscious mind and projected it onto these women (who are a convenient stand-in for the mother you hate so much). The reality is that you are carrying shame, right at the core of your self. The abuse you suffered as a child in that cult caused you to see yourself as less-than, as shameful -- who but a 'needy, pathetic child' would be abused in that way?

You need to let go of your unconscious self-persecution if you are to ever heal.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
The bit about frag... (Below threshold)

August 2, 2013 3:09 PM | Posted, in reply to analysisFTW's comment, by jonny: | Reply

The bit about fragile X is a total nonsequitur.

Nonsense. It's directly linked to the lies of women who happily embrace the values of misogyny (leaching) to exploit credulous men and pursue their sole interest (sex / appeal), knowing that when they're forced into retirement they'll need to have children as their next pretext for having their non-contributing existence sustained by men.

They need children so their carrier status isn't relevant. If you imagine that's a non-sequitur, you're an imbecile.

Women are either whores, or honest girls. There is no middle ground.

You're dribbling nonsense. Little girls don't grow up imagining they're being set up to faceplant into shame at puberty; they're purged by women who can't handle the threat represented by honest girls who love sex (10x more than men, it would seem).

The abuse you suffered as a child in that cult caused you to see yourself as less-than, as shameful -- who but a 'needy, pathetic child' would be abused in that way?

I wasn't abused. I witnessed a lot of abuse; I was too sharp, too lucky, too alert, too 'difficult', whatever. I was never abused because I saw what happened to children who wanted to feel Special.

I've been an over-achieving star my entire life. When I retired at 26, I discovered the truth I'd been denying for half a decade; women are the same at every age. They don't emotionally develop or grow. They had no time for me and didn't care that I was a millionaire (not that I was advertising but whenever it was brought up, their utter disinterest was confronting); all they were interested in was being deceived and abused (gamed).

I did that shit when I was 20, it ended very badly; I wasn't interested in doing it again. I always been a little too adept at dark games for my own good.

Women are needy because they're lying and malicious and seeking to leech off men and children (who they force to suffer to please them). They're stupid Toddlers; only imbeciles think lying is oh-so-crafty. You can keep your filthy smear to yourself because this...

You need to let go of your unconscious self-persecution if you are to ever heal.

...is the filthy evil that has been smeared all over the world of decency by Toddler whore leeches who are psychotically malicious and pathetically needy and embarrassingly stupid. But they all imagine they're oh-so-crafty with their generic tricks passed down from whore to whore to whore. Save your smear for your children. The law gives you the right to piss all over them (yourself).

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Alexander Lowen and Willhel... (Below threshold)

February 1, 2014 8:49 PM | Posted by Theodore: | Reply

Alexander Lowen and Willhelm Reich. Bioenergetics and Character Analysis. The concept of body-changes-character at its best.

The former has a book about narcissism, too.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Gah, I meant to upvote that... (Below threshold)

March 14, 2014 6:56 PM | Posted, in reply to Anonymous's comment, by Anonymous: | Reply

Gah, I meant to upvote that.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Switching to dominant postu... (Below threshold)

October 6, 2014 2:54 PM | Posted by person: | Reply

Switching to dominant posture perpetually does increase behavioral dominance --noticeably.

It's worth the effort to alter your posture, doubly so if you're an adolescent.

--personal experience of the last few years

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Switching to domin... (Below threshold)

October 7, 2014 8:45 AM | Posted, in reply to person's comment, by jonny: | Reply

Switching to dominant posture perpetually does increase behavioral dominance --noticeably.

The people you dominate must be really valuable, if they're dominated when you sit up straight.

It's worth the effort to alter your posture, doubly so if you're an adolescent.

Is your image worth the effort? What are the opinions of people swayed by posture fraud worth?

I'm pretty sure Alone's post is about women's obsession with illusions; they value the appearance of value over value (as it exists, in reality). Reduced humans value lies over truth, insanity over sanity, feelings over welfare, fantasy over reality, etc. I'm not sure the opinions of insane people are worth anything.

They can let you pleasure them or they can kill you but they have only disapproval to offer; their approval / favour is worthless. Warriors and whores are hijackers with no upside. Suffering to please them is a huge mistake; there is no reward for doing so.

When the Buddha reached Enlightenment, his first words were:

"Through the round of many births I roamed without reward, without rest, seeking the house-builder. Painful is birth again & again.

House-builder, you're seen!
You will not build a house again.
All your rafters broken,
the ridge pole destroyed,
gone to the Unformed, the mind
has come to the end of craving."

Men are brought to this planet and violently forced to suffer, without reward, without rest, looking for answers (pain relief). Life is endless pain for men, so why are men brought here again?

The Buddha's mother was seen. She couldn't build her house of pain in his mind again. He broke her rafters, destroyed her ridge pole, tore down her formations; his mind reset. No more craving.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (0 votes cast)

Post a Comment


Live Comment Preview

October 31, 2014 20:50 PM | Posted by Anonymous: