Turn on thread page Beta

How come men have more control over their own attractiveness? watch

    • #1
    • Thread Starter
    #1

    How come the general idea of societies is that a mans attractiveness is down to things he has some control over like career, personality, physical fitness yet a womans attractiveness is meant to be down to things she cant change like youth, beauty and fertility cues. As a woman gets older she is therefore given no or very little control over her attractiveness :/. Yet a man can always have hope of increasing his 'status'. Maybe its because men wrote most of these evolution theories so there will be bias's that are generalised.

    Just read this very reputable source lol
    http://mgtow.wikia.com/wiki/Sex_Market_Value

    But yea, its written as though men have control and hope as they age over their attraction yet indicates a bleak future for women.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Traditionally, a man's value lies in his ability to be able to provide whereas a woman's value lies in her ability to squeeze out healthy babies. This has filtered down into modern day society and manifests as well paid job and muscles (for men) and clear skin, bright eyes and wide hips (for women).

    That's the bare bones of it, I'm sure others will flesh it out.
    • #1
    • Thread Starter
    #1

    (Original post by TheThiefOfBagdad)
    Traditionally, a man's value lies in his ability to be able to provide whereas a woman's value lies in her ability to squeeze out healthy babies. This has filtered down into modern day society and manifests as well paid job and muscles (for men) and clear skin, bright eyes and wide hips (for women).


    That's the bare bones of it, I'm sure others will flesh it out.
    Yea thats supposd to be the evolution of it all but its ironic how women apparantly have no control as in they are only valued for reproduction and cant help getting older/infertile. Whereas a male apparantly has loads of ways to increase his attraction along with hope for the future.

    If the evolution theories had been written by women i wonder how different they would have been but then back then women wernt really seen as intelligent enough for education so maybe this caused the evolution theories of women to be more objectified ie only really being valued on reproductive ability.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Anonymous)
    Yea thats supposd to be the evolution of it all but its ironic how women apparantly have no control as in they are only valued for reproduction and cant help getting older/infertile. Whereas a male apparantly has loads of ways to increase his attraction along with hope for the future.

    If the evolution theories had been written by women i wonder how different they would have been but then back then women wernt really seen as intelligent enough for education so maybe this caused the evolution theories of women to be more objectified ie only really being valued on reproductive ability.
    I fail to see the irony.
    Women were only valued for reproduction, not are.

    In the end, even the mighty tiger is defeated by worms.

    I'm not even prepared to address that second paragraph; too much misinformation in such a small space.
    • #1
    • Thread Starter
    #1

    (Original post by TheThiefOfBagdad)
    I fail to see the irony.
    Women were only valued for reproduction, not are.

    In the end, even the mighty tiger is defeated by worms.



    I'm not even prepared to address that second paragraph; too much misinformation in such a small space.
    Exactly a lot of old theories do have misinformed ideas such as women and africans are unintelligent theres no point discussing them.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Anonymous)
    Exactly a lot of old theories do have misinformed ideas such as women and africans are unintelligent theres no point discussing them.
    confirmed troll
    • #2
    #2

    not for me actually.



    I seem to base attractiveness over things men can't change about themselves lol.

    like their shoulders etc, I don't care if he's muscly as long as he doesn't have fat on him and has naturally wide shoulders, and a narrow waist and very narrow hips etc.

    I also take face and humour into account.

    "Status" well I wouldn't go out with a shopkeeper, but a man who's work drive its equal to mine so basically I'd expect high status.

    So yes how much money he *initially* has doesn't change attractiveness.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    "Science is sexist and wrong because it doesn't fit my world view"

    You should educate yourself on the scientific process from a source that isn't owned by Gawker Media
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Anonymous)
    therefore given no or very little control over her attractiveness :/.
    What is makeup?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    science is sexist and racist deal with it
    • #1
    • Thread Starter
    #1

    (Original post by GwynLordOfCinder)
    "Science is sexist and wrong because it doesn't fit my world view"

    You should educate yourself on the scientific process from a source that isn't owned by Gawker Media
    Who says its sexist. I dont really have a world view, all these theories do though.

    Ha true I just came across it on a forum.
    • #1
    • Thread Starter
    #1

    (Original post by GwynLordOfCinder)
    What is makeup?
    Yea good point
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    OP has to be trolling. The theory was written by "sexist scientists" which shaped our modern day beauty standards?

    It's not like men was chosen to mate by their ability to provide and protect to increase survival during childbirth.

    It's not like women was chosen by their fertility and beauty to increase chances of a successful offspring with a competitive advantage which is their beauty. Therefore giving them a greater chance to find a mate and reproduce.

    Nah this never happened, it's all just a theory by a sexist scientist.
    Evolution is sexist not the scientists.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • #1
    • Thread Starter
    #1

    (Original post by Limerence.)
    OP has to be trolling. The theory was written by "sexist scientists" which shaped our modern day beauty standards?

    It's not like men was chosen to mate by their ability to provide and protect to increase survival during childbirth.

    It's not like women was chosen by their fertility and beauty to increase chances of a successful offspring with a competitive advantage which is their beauty. Therefore giving them a greater chance to find a mate and reproduce.

    Nah this never happened, it's all just a theory by a sexist scientist.
    Evolution is sexist not the scientists.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Do you think the wikia post on sexual market value reflects science, I dont lol its just something I came across. Though it might reflect some of societies views thats what i meant. Like gwyn lord of cynder says there are scientific studies but even these have accuracies and inaccuracies in different ways plus theres social models and what we are brought up with via the media etc that influence attractiveness. This is all i know though as im no good with research. Sorry if i offended anyone i never meant to say that anything was sexist/racist.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Not true. There is far more that women can do to boost physical attractiveness than guys, what with hair, make up, fashion. And of course they can exploit personality, fitness, career too.

    A difference does seem to be that women age worse than men, with child bearing taking a heavy toll. And perhaps ageing is also more tolerated in guys.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    ok.... So we've clarified... Science is not sexist... (How could it be?) and women can alter their physical appearance via makeup and stuff... But who said all men value women purely for things the study say they do (other than the studies... Granted the studies did say that) men can find things such as personality (which is easy to change) very attractive....
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: May 24, 2016

3,202

students online now

800,000+

Exam discussions

Find your exam discussion here

Poll
Should predicted grades be removed from the uni application process

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.