Lack of Men

You made 1 statement about women preferring men in power and with money that by statistical analysis cannot be true as most men are poor and have very little power if any. Case close.

You are arguing that something rare can't possibly be desirable compared to something common?

LOL, that's a good one. No we don't (of course). We just rely on porn.

That's true, on average, but it's a recipe for emotional disaster. In the end you want a companion, a comrade. Trophy wives and husbands only go so far.

What we want is not always what we need.

I know a man who used to be beautiful as a youth, and very smart. His wife was in love with him at college, but he initially rejected her. She's super bright but not particularly sexy. He thought he could get better... Then he had a car accident, lost an eye and half his face got scared/burnt. She went to visit him every day at the hospital, kept him company, made him laugh... He came to enjoy her visits more and more. And finally he "settled" for her, married her and got one kid. They've been together for over a decade now, and look quite happy.

Not to mention the First Lady of the US that someone mentioned earlier. She is not American. I don't think this gold digger or young model older wealthy man is an American thing. You can reach out to pretty much any culture and she it including those with arranged marriages.

That is absolutely true, we have them everywhere, but it is also true that some cultures have more of it than others. The value of money and what constitutes value with more or less nuance in people's lives is not exactly the same in all cultures. A good example could be made with the Chinese marriage market where job, social status, money and young age are very important vs the European more independent more romantic free marriage. America from where I stand seats in the middle with lack of social security playing a role on the outcome. None of that changes the fact as Olivier pointed out with his example that what you perceive as valuable changes with time and as you age your criteria becomes more complex and refined. The point being made in this thread from the start is that these things have much more nuance then at first glance meets the eye. if for one side one can gladly grant there are some universal common denominators to what is considered attractive by most people, for another, washing it down to a simple-minded set of basic rules makes a mockery out of what is really happening. Indeed what people want many times is not what people really need. Ageing has many set backs but one single advantage, experience, and no time to be wasted with fools gold. When one is about to die one does not think of the car or the house left behind, nor the bank account size...its the peoples relations, the good times spend together, the festivities and the human warmth...going for money is bad business in the long run and smart people know it sooner rather than later!

Because I know its coming one more point:
For Trump alike, age is not enough to get the point. You see there is IQ and there is EQ, emotional intelligence...showing status and power by marring gold diggers or young chicks has nothing to do with a personal happy and complete life. The only thing such choices accomplish is boosting to the world how great you are, and for some of us, how silly...

I don't believe in magic. There is no supernatural force that is jumping in to make sure that there is some special match for every person, or that if people do what is right they will end up happy.

In any dating pool, there are some people who are considered desirable by most people. And there are some people who don't get very much romantic interest. The factors that make people "desirable" in any community change, but that's not the point. Anyone who is dating knows that there are some of us who get way more than their share of interest from the opposite sex, and there are others who get very little interest. Life isn't fair.

Humans have adapted to make do. I believe Osso worked in neuroscience (if my memory serves), so she can confirm this. We lust after people who we can't get, then we accept someone who we can get. When that happens we rely on neurochemicals that we humans have evolved to make us bond.

When we begin a relationship our brain is flooded with chemicals that are designed to make us act irrationally. Our fear receptors are deadened, we trust way more than do, we feel a sense of calm and belonging. This isn't anything magical... we are basically drugging ourselves. Of course, this serves a purpose in creating human reproductive bonds out of a random group of people. Sometimes these neuro-chemicals that deaden our sense of reason cause problems (which is why it is so difficult for people to leave abusive relationships).

It is natural that we create a mythology about human relationships. We want to believe that our partner was "meant" for us, as if some sort of deity tweaks genetics and geography to put people together.

In reality, we find ourselves in a random community of people. We sort ourselves according to the community's sense of desirability with some random perturbations (humans are complex). Then once we have paired up, the neurochemicals kick in. We bond with whatever random person we happened to end up with, and then create a story to match the hormone driven feelings at first... and later the reality of a long term relationship economically speaking would be difficult to replace, and so people make up stories to assign a deep meaning to the relationship.

The OP is about what happens when the initial step breaks down. In this case there is a part of the dating pool with a high sense of desirability that is unwilling to accept the available options.

From your pov a poor Danny de Vito wouldn't stand a chance that is how elaborate your reasoning goes...
It is well know you can be a top model but if you lack self confidence and social skills your desirability and sex appeal falls down big time.
On the opposite end a self confident individual with some street smarts and charming personality can work miracles.
As for the hormonal and chemical talk I have covered it up in previous posts.
Way before bounding kicks in there is pheromone testing about immune system compatibility to ensure proper resilient offspring. That, is only a small part of the equation in a sequence of progressive tests as people move on forward in the matting game. By the way, speed dating is one of the most pathetic inventions of the new millennia.

I think the thing with America is that we are so diverse culture-wise. For example what you would experience in the Northeast would be completely different than the south vs. Northwest vs. Midwest. Even within same states you can experience different attitudes say urban vs. suburban vs. country.

I once went on vacation in the west coast of Mexico. This area was frequented by vacationers more by those from the US west. I was in my early 30s and several times upon meeting up with some young men, they seemed astonished that at my age I had never been married. Whereas at home, no one would be surprised.

By the way being compatible genetically speaking is not to be taken as exclusively compatible. That is obvious and you are muddling the water on a very simple subject. I advise you some more reading as this has nothing to do with supernatural geo location nor Cinderella talk.

Yes, that is a fair acessement. We tend to have a stereotypical view of America as the media focus on some clichés but there is far to much of it to bag it in one single cultural paradigm. Nonetheless if you chunk the all thing down in a scale there is a outcome from which you can draw some conclusions. Lack of social security support and women being the ones having the child makes them more wary there then here...America can be brutal as much as it can be inspiring.

...dodgy video but it fits the bill well enough...

This one is better:

You know, everybody is different. We all want some common things until we decide we don't.  Unlike monkeys, humans can decide they don't want the banana of the other monkey.

Sometimes, you want what the others DON'T want. You want someone special, even if that means someone damaged. And everyone around you goes "why her?" But if you feel a strong empathy with this woman, you want to give her a chance. Because she's the one for YOU.

Story of my life... There's a song by "chanteur à femmes" (ladies' singer?) Julien Clerc, ma préférence that expresses this feeling well.

Il faut le croire - Believe this
Moi seul je sais quand elle a froid - Only I know when she's cold
Ses regards ne regardent que moi - Her glances look only at me
Par hasard, elle aime mon incertitude - By chance, she likes my uncertainty
Par hasard, j'aime sa solitude - By chance, I like her loneliness

Je le sais - And I know that
Sa façon d'être à moi parfois vous déplait - Her ways of being mine sometimes upset you
Autour d'elle et moi, le silence se fait - Around us, silence falls
Mais elle est... - But she is...
Elle est ma chance à moi - She is my only chance
Ma préférence à moi - My preference

...that one remind me:

Hmmmm.... There's wisdom in those songs, man...

Determining the desirability of an individual in the dating pool is no different than determining the value of a product in an economic market. Every consumer is different.

Lakefront property has value because as a group we desire it more. Not everyone wants lakefront property (sometimes you want a plot of land that others don't want). The value (in this case it is measured in a price that people are willing to pay) isn't set by what individuals want... it is set by the collective group. If one person doesn't like living next to a lake won't lower the price. And if one person loves scrubland with no shore, the price won't go up. It is the entire market that agrees on a price.

In dating it is the same. Some people are desirable because as a group we desire them more (this is easy to prove, some people get lot more interest from the opposite sex than other people). The fact that some women might prefer unemployed men who live with their parents doesn't change the fact that these men aren't given much value by the dating pool.

And... I don't accept the idea that there is "one for you". Unless there is a magical deity assuring that the "one for you" is geographically position so that you will meet, it seems unlikely you would ever meet "one" (most of the people in the world will never be in the same country as you).

There is no magic. I do believe that neurochemicals have a powerful impact. The person we decide is acceptable will soon seem like the "one person" that we could ever be with as our brains adapt to being with them. This is usually a beneficial process.

Many cultures have had arranged marriages, where the "One for You" is assigned by your parents based on social class and familial needs. These marriages often work very well, because humans have evolved to bond with the person they are with.

http://lyricstranslate.com/en/toi-joe-dassin-you-joe-dassin.html

Nice..

They do and I grant French just tell it better then anyone else...

This is how I feel about my wife. Irreplaceable!