20% of men get 80% of women?

Post Reply New Topic

85% of Americans are or were married to a person of the opposite sex, as per the last census. Mathematically, this precludes 20% men "taking" 80% of the women.

as of august 2014 [last study by the bureau of labor statistics] 124.6 million over-16 americans were single, 50.2 percent of the population, making married folk a minority for the first time. this is likely to remain the same for the foreseeable future, due to economic trends that are accelerating. and even if this were not the case, it is still possible and indeed probable, that 20% of men are boffing 80% of women, married or not, judging by rates of infidelity in this country.

Well, I define subjective attractiveness, which is what is determined entirely by the individual; and objective attractiveness, which is what is usually considered biologically attractive by our bodies, and what society and the media push as attractive.

We typically are attracted to people who present signs of health and fertility, to ensure healthy and fertile future off-spring.

So yes, I do believe 'universal attractiveness' does exist, to an extent.

That doesn't mean I agree with the universally attractive traits, and my personal, individual, subjective tastes might be entirely different, but that doesn't ignore the fact my taste might be unpopular.

"What if I'm a 10 and I'm thinking I'm just a 7 then I'm not shooting high enough!"

But what's the third party that determines if you're a 10? Who aside from yourself would be the one telling you you're a 10? Society?

If so, why would you be considered by society to be a 10? Because you'd fit the traits society considers universally attractive...

They say there are no silly questions ...

In reality the correlation between sex, relationships and marriage are probably lower than most think.

I think that the paradigm is shifting so that people are having sex outside of marriage more than in it. Married people have less sex and less sex with their partner. Unmarried people are choosing to stay single and play the field constantly or else have serial monogamous relationships.

With all this complexity, its hard to say whether the 80 / 20 observation you made is true. It probably is in some circles and is inverted in others.

(sorry more of a ramble than an answer ... but your question is impossible to answer accurately)

Yes, culture comes into play.

But of course, each culture has different views on what they consider universally attractive.

And, I find many of the time traits that are considered attractive in most cultures, no matter how different, are still based-on what each cultures considers signs of health and fertility.

Yes, in medieval Europe plump and heavier women were considered 'attractive', because during those times food was scarce and people had to work hard for very little to eat.

People were skinny and malnourished, so a plump and chunkier woman indicated she was healthier as she had more likelihood to survive than a slimmer person. She also might have been more likely to not suffer nutritional deficiencies, have lower risk for many diseases and health problems.

Only the rich or generous had enough recourses to get as large as they did.

Just as in some cultures tan skin is considered more attractive now, and that's also associated with healthy Vitamin D levels and tanning is typically a reaction to the suns UV radiation levels by darkening the skin for better protection from sun-rays.

I'm probably a 6 in attractiveness. I'm not going to only seek people who are 6's in attractiveness.

I've known people who are, say, 4, in attractiveness--and I really liked them.

I've known people who are close to 10 in attractiveness--and I've been totally turned-off by them.

I'm sure there's 1s and 0s who are in great relationships. It's about conventional attraction. It may not matter when you are already in a relationship, but it does affect your chance of finding a relationship.

When I was in my early 20's, I was a 3 or a 4. In fact, I wanted to get plastic surgery, but couldn't afford it.

I'm probably a little bit higher now, since women seem to treat me with more respect, even if they don't like me.

As for 10's, I find them quite threatening and uncomfortable to be around. That goes for both men and women.

Physical looks is but one of many aspects of a person.

I would be turned off totally if a very attractive woman had poor hygiene.

I would be turned on if a "plain" woman had a nice scent.

But for example not a lot of men would be turned on if conventionally unattractive woman had a poor hygiene. Not a lot of people in general find bad hygiene to be attractive.