Welcome Guest Search | Active Topics | Members | Log In | Register

are the Evolutionary Psychologists right? Do women really prefer the dominant alpha-male asshole typ Options · View
Guest
Posted: Sunday, November 25, 2012 8:06:58 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 819,718
I don't know about other women but I do not like dominant males and i especially don't like assholes. I don't want to control a man either. I want to be an equal partner with him in and out of the bedroom. I am a very intellegent woman and I want to be treated that way; with respect and dignity. That is how I would treat my man and I expect the same in return. I hate all this degradation stuff...what kind of person gets off on degrading someone else? I would never put up with a man that did that!!!
elitfromnorth
Posted: Sunday, November 25, 2012 8:16:14 PM

Rank: Brawling Berserker

Joined: 2/12/2012
Posts: 1,637
Location: Burrowed, Norway
It all depends on when you meet her. There was done some research on women and who they thought would be considered good fathers for any children they have. Now this is being one of the parents of the most important person(s) that will ever be in your life. Researches showed women a bunch of pictures of different guys and found a(at least to me) quite interesting result: While ovulating women considered the ones that looked properly like a bad boy as who they thought would be the best father. While not ovulating they chose the more well groomed not so Alpha male looking kind of person as who was probably the best father.

Of course this research goes ONLY for appearance and the connection with who they want to father their children, but regardless it proves an interesting point; women are attracted to different types of men(to a degree of course, not that she's gonna want a bodybuilder one day and turns into a chubbychaser the next week) depending on where they are in the cycle. This shows that not only regular biology but also hormone levels decides what's attractive and what's not. I'd say that that's why teenage girls are more likely to pick the bad boy in the class; hormones. Add a little sociolgy that the bad boy suddenly get hyped up a lot because he's not walking the straight line and you got yourself a circle where social law dictates that this is the kind of guy you want. Since this is indoctrinated in youth it is something that stays with many women through the years until they get older, hence why bad boys are attractive to girls in their 20's and 30's.

That's not to say that us men don't get imprinted with the same ideal woman from a young age; nice body and big boobs is something we all drooled for and many still do. It was "decided" that this or that girl was attractive, that became the norm of what was attractive and it stays with us. Personally I can't say that I've broken out of that thought completely, but I'd like to think that I've matured a bit and realised that an ideal partner is someone that has a personality that will fit with mine, not a sexy booty.

"It's at that point you realise Lady Luck is actually a hooker, and you're fresh out of cash."
WellMadeMale
Posted: Sunday, November 25, 2012 9:48:27 PM

Rank: Constant Gardener

Joined: 9/30/2009
Posts: 10,863
Location: Cakeland, United States


Obscenity is the last refuge of an inarticulate motherfucker.
ByronLord
Posted: Sunday, November 25, 2012 10:49:55 PM

Rank: Forum Guru
Moderator

Joined: 11/14/2010
Posts: 839
Location: Massachusetts, United States
Umm, I am pretty sure that you can't generalize to that extent about 'women'.

The works of evolutionary psychologists have to be read with some skepticism as many of them really don't understand evolution very well. The whole point of evolution is that the process is driven by random changes. When someone is writing that characteristic X is *designed* to do Y then they are missing the point. I find a lot of their stuff rather too mechanistic and finding explanations for rather too many details.

The reason we have an appendix is that a distant ancestor had a need for one and it seems that the coding to create it does not turn off very easy. So even though there is a clear advantage to not having a useless appendage that can kill you, we still have them.

Guys chase 'hot' girls, girls chase 'hot' guys. What is hot is of course a matter of personal preference but there are cultural norms that make certain people more in demand than others. And people who are in demand often turn out to be assholes about it.

One of our cultural norms is that the men do the chasing and the women select. And some of them get rather better at put downs than anything else. So they narrow the pool of prospective mates to the 'hot' guys and end up with the type of guy who is very skilled at finding mates and continues to practice that skill...

But there is also a difference between partner selection and selecting for a hookup. The reason 'pickup artists' are successful is rather simple and obvious. Given 100 women in a night club, at least 10 are looking for casual sex without strings attached. Men who go dressed up like peacocks identify themselves as someone interested in the same. Selecting someone who is obviously a jerk has an advantage if you are planning to dump them from the start.

ByronLord
Posted: Sunday, November 25, 2012 10:50:14 PM

Rank: Forum Guru
Moderator

Joined: 11/14/2010
Posts: 839
Location: Massachusetts, United States
Should have mentioned that one effect of the 'men do all the work' convention is that often times it is only the aggressive guys who win them through sheer persistence.

For example the girl who tells every guy she meets that she just wants to be friends, nothing more when what she is really after is a mate.

There are women who make themselves very high maintenance and the nice guys run away fast.

overmykneenow
Posted: Monday, November 26, 2012 1:33:10 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 6/8/2010
Posts: 1,405
Location: United Kingdom
To the OP: do you actually have a link to a paper from an Evolutionary Psychologist that postulates this or is it more something you think they would say? If there is a paper I'd hope it would point out many of the things in the replies you've already got.

The basic tenet of evolution is survival of the fittest or, those that compete best, win. Those that compete do better than those that don't - it's not a tricky concept

Women aren't attracted to assholes, they're attracted to men, who may turn out to be assholes. How many times have you heard "But he seemed like such a nice guy"?



Warning: The opinions above are those of an anonymous individual on the internet. They are opinions, unless they're facts. They may be ill-informed, out of touch with reality or just plain stupid. They may contain traces of irony. If reading these opinions causes you to be become outraged or you start displaying the symptoms of outrage, stop reading them immediately. If symptoms persist, consult a psychiatrist.

Why not read some stories instead

NEW! Want a quick read for your coffee break? Why not try this... Flash Erotica: Scrubber
Guest
Posted: Monday, November 26, 2012 4:47:29 AM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 819,718
overmykneenow wrote:
To the OP: do you actually have a link to a paper from an Evolutionary Psychologist that postulates this or is it more something you think they would say? If there is a paper I'd hope it would point out many of the things in the replies you've already got.

The basic tenet of evolution is survival of the fittest or, those that compete best, win. Those that compete do better than those that don't - it's not a tricky concept

Women aren't attracted to assholes, they're attracted to men, who may turn out to be assholes. How many times have you heard "But he seemed like such a nice guy"?



Survival of the fittest means MOST FITTING, most pliant, most adaptable to change. Not neccessarily most competitive. Please read through the whole thread. No I don't have a link to the subject. And no its not something ii have just come up with. What I was saying was based on actual experiments i've re and of in various books and on line articles. Now of course reading about them is different from first hand experimental data of our own. Never the less I strongly believe in EP and some of the theories. I'm sure if you wanted you could seek out the information yourself. Again please read the whole of this thread. Thanks.
overmykneenow
Posted: Monday, November 26, 2012 5:24:32 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 6/8/2010
Posts: 1,405
Location: United Kingdom
I did read the whole thread - I was referred to in a number of the posts. The rest read like any number of similar "why do nice guys finish last" threads on this forum.

Like most of the others, the argument soon breaks down into "not all alphas are assholes" and "not all friend-zone guys are nice". Friend zone guys can be pushy, manipulative, whiney and underhand - none of which I would class as "nice" attributes

ArthurG77 wrote:

Survival of the fittest means MOST FITTING, most pliant, most adaptable to change. Not necessarily most competitive.


It's exactly the most competitive - where there are limited resources, the ones most driven, most adaptable and most resourceful will win - these are the attributes of people who lead, not follow.

Don't fall into the trap of coming up with a theory based on your own limited and biased experience and then finding stuff on the internet to back it. What you end up is simply propaganda for your personality type over others. And it's pretty obvious.

Warning: The opinions above are those of an anonymous individual on the internet. They are opinions, unless they're facts. They may be ill-informed, out of touch with reality or just plain stupid. They may contain traces of irony. If reading these opinions causes you to be become outraged or you start displaying the symptoms of outrage, stop reading them immediately. If symptoms persist, consult a psychiatrist.

Why not read some stories instead

NEW! Want a quick read for your coffee break? Why not try this... Flash Erotica: Scrubber
ByronLord
Posted: Monday, November 26, 2012 6:10:49 AM

Rank: Forum Guru
Moderator

Joined: 11/14/2010
Posts: 839
Location: Massachusetts, United States
overmykneenow wrote:

The basic tenet of evolution is survival of the fittest or, those that compete best, win. Those that compete do better than those that don't - it's not a tricky concept


Actually it is random variation plus natural selection. Something a lot of biologists rather miss.

Also what propagate are genes rather than species. And each gene has multiple effects.

What a lot of these mechanistic approaches overlook is that most people are not alpha males or females. Yet they seem to do more than ok at procreation.

Studies of chimps show that the dominant male does not actually get more than his fair share of the sex. The non-alpha males just wait till the alpha is out of sight to make their move.

Also, note how many women round here complain that their husband is crap in bed. There is maybe an assumption that men who try very hard to get sex will have practiced a lot and be good at it.

Guest
Posted: Monday, November 26, 2012 6:21:57 AM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 819,718
overmykneenow wrote:
I did read the whole thread - I was referred to in a number of the posts. The rest read like any number of similar "why do nice guys finish last" threads on this forum.

Like most of the others, the argument soon breaks down into "not all alphas are assholes" and "not all friend-zone guys are nice". Friend zone guys can be pushy, manipulative, whiney and underhand - none of which I would class as "nice" attributes



It's exactly the most competitive - where there are limited resources, the ones most driven, most adaptable and most resourceful will win - these are the attributes of people who lead, not follow.

Don't fall into the trap of coming up with a theory based on your own limited and biased experience and then finding stuff on the internet to back it. What you end up is simply propaganda for your personality type over others. And it's pretty obvious.


No. Your reasoning is simply that adaptation = competition. No. Evolution is about genetic transmition. Sometimes the most competitive perish whilst the opposite, the most conforming flourish. You are looking at only one aspect.

I have not come up with my own bias statements based on limited knowledge. I have been pleased with this thread so far as it has become a debate whore and people have contributed some great input on the subject. Please don't accuse me of trying to propagate things. Its not true, I am a skeptic and critical thinker and do not take this subject lightly. My knowledge comes from years of interest. Your accusation is a personal attack on me. And its not true
Guest
Posted: Monday, November 26, 2012 7:27:40 AM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 819,718
sexybbw71 wrote:
I don't know about other women but I do not like dominant males and i especially don't like assholes. I don't want to control a man either. I want to be an equal partner with him in and out of the bedroom. I am a very intellegent woman and I want to be treated that way; with respect and dignity. That is how I would treat my man and I expect the same in return. I hate all this degradation stuff...what kind of person gets off on degrading someone else? I would never put up with a man that did that!!!


Hi sexybbw. Thanks for your input. I have copied and pasted below a reply to a previous comment that will shed some light on what i was trying to say when I started this thread. Thanks. And it's nice to see ladies like you around that have decent standards when it comes to relationships Big Hugs

comment deleted
Guest
Posted: Monday, November 26, 2012 7:47:58 AM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 819,718
ByronLord wrote:
Umm, I am pretty sure that you can't generalize to that extent about 'women'.

The works of evolutionary psychologists have to be read with some skepticism as many of them really don't understand evolution very well. The whole point of evolution is that the process is driven by random changes. When someone is writing that characteristic X is *designed* to do Y then they are missing the point. I find a lot of their stuff rather too mechanistic and finding explanations for rather too many details.

The reason we have an appendix is that a distant ancestor had a need for one and it seems that the coding to create it does not turn off veiiiiry easy. So even though there is a clear advantage to not having a useless appendage that can kill you, we still have them.

Guys chase 'hot' girls, girls chase 'hot' guys. What is hot is of course a matter of personal preference but there are cultural norms that make certain people more in demand than others. And people who are in demand often turn out to be assholes about it.

One of our cultural norms is that the men do the chasing and the women select. And some of them get rather better at put downs than anything else. So they narrow the pool of prospective mates to the 'hot' guys and end up with the type of guy who is very skilled at finding mates and continues to practice that skill...

But there is also a difference between partner selection and selecting for a hookup. The reason 'pickup artists' are successful is rather simple and obvious. Given 100 women in a night club, at least 10 are looking for casual sex without strings attached. Men who go dressed up like peacocks identify themselves as someone interested in the same. Selecting someone who is obviously a jerk has an advantage if you are planning to dump them from the start.



Thanks for your input. Very informative. Good explaination of the mate selection process. Although you do sound like an EP a bit lol. I have to agree, a good understanding of Evolutionary Biology is essential if we are going to apply it to explain human behaviour. I believe the subject itself has great potential in shedding some light on our behaviours. EP's simply believe that Evolution is the basis of our primal urges. That our behaviours can be explained in the context of serving a purpose in Evlolution. For exmple in 'mate selection' it has been thought for some time that mates choose what they consider to be the 'superior gene carrier' in a species. And what we see as beautiful, EP's believe we biologically or unconciously think they are carrying a superior gene that will be beneficial to the transmission of our DNA - offspring. EP's believe just like random genetic mutations that have occured physically over time that a species has seen as benificial to the survival and reproduction, so have bred those changes over generations (natural selection). The behaviour of our species has done the same. Copied behaviour that is seen to be beneficial to survival and reproduction. But I agree the subject has not been practiced to it's full potential and a lot of theory is just hrown out there by half assed intellectuals.
Guest
Posted: Monday, November 26, 2012 8:15:07 AM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 819,718
ByronLord wrote:

Guys chase 'hot' girls, girls chase 'hot' guys. What is hot is of course a matter of personal preference but there are cultural norms that make certain people more in demand than others.


I don't believe this is entirely true. I don't believe for example that Brad Pitt is considered more attractive than Jay Leno simply because culture imposes it. I believe that we unconciously respond to symetry and certain shapes in facial features - we unconciously see as beauty. Of course there are so many personal preferences and variables. But i believe our genes have a definition of beauty that is not defined by culture. (that superior gene theory again comes into play - and the peacock plumege). I can't say I'm 100% sure though.
Guest
Posted: Monday, November 26, 2012 8:35:20 AM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 819,718
elitfromnorth wrote:
It all depends on when you meet her. There was done some research on women and who they thought would be considered good fathers for any children they have. Now this is being one of the parents of the most important person(s) that will ever be in your life. Researches showed women a bunch of pictures of different guys and found a(at least to me) quite interesting result: While ovulating women considered the ones that looked properly like a bad boy as who they thought would be the best father. While not ovulating they chose the more well groomed not so Alpha male looking kind of person as who was probably the best father.

Of course this research goes ONLY for appearance and the connection with who they want to father their children, but regardless it proves an interesting point; women are attracted to different types of men(to a degree of course, not that she's gonna want a bodybuilder one day and turns into a chubbychaser the next week) depending on where they are in the cycle. This shows that not only regular biology but also hormone levels decides what's attractive and what's not. I'd say that that's why teenage girls are more likely to pick the bad boy in the class; hormones. Add a little sociolgy that the bad boy suddenly get hyped up a lot because he's not walking the straight line and you got yourself a circle where social law dictates that this is the kind of guy you want. Since this is indoctrinated in youth it is something that stays with many women through the years until they get older, hence why bad boys are attractive to girls in their 20's and 30's.

That's not to say that us men don't get imprinted with the same ideal woman from a young age; nice body and big boobs is something we all drooled for and many still do. It was "decided" that this or that girl was attractive, that became the norm of what was attractive and it stays with us. Personally I can't say that I've broken out of that thought completely, but I'd like to think that I've matured a bit and realised that an ideal partner is someone that has a personality that will fit with mine, not a sexy booty.



This is a great post. Thanks. This makes me proud of starting the thread in the first place. I was hoping for some interesting discussions on the subject. I see some amazingly intelligent and well written responses. Cheers.
crazydiamond
Posted: Monday, November 26, 2012 11:32:03 AM

Rank: Clever Gem

Joined: 7/17/2011
Posts: 2,301
Location: Exactly where I should be!, Canada
overmykneenow wrote:
I did read the whole thread - I was referred to in a number of the posts. The rest read like any number of similar "why do nice guys finish last" threads on this forum.

Like most of the others, the argument soon breaks down into "not all alphas are assholes" and "not all friend-zone guys are nice". Friend zone guys can be pushy, manipulative, whiney and underhand - none of which I would class as "nice" attributes



It's exactly the most competitive - where there are limited resources, the ones most driven, most adaptable and most resourceful will win - these are the attributes of people who lead, not follow.

Don't fall into the trap of coming up with a theory based on your own limited and biased experience and then finding stuff on the internet to back it. What you end up is simply propaganda for your personality type over others. And it's pretty obvious.


Damn OMNK!!! , you are such a dominant alpha-male asshole, and so competitive too! Let's be friends Big Hugs .

POINT MADE kekekegay

ByronLord
Posted: Monday, November 26, 2012 11:56:57 AM

Rank: Forum Guru
Moderator

Joined: 11/14/2010
Posts: 839
Location: Massachusetts, United States
ArthurG77 wrote:


I don't believe this is entirely true. I don't believe for example that Brad Pitt is considered more attractive than Jay Leno simply because culture imposes it. I believe that we unconciously respond to symetry and certain shapes in facial features - we unconciously see as beauty. Of course there are so many personal preferences and variables. But i believe our genes have a definition of beauty that is not defined by culture. (that superior gene theory again comes into play - and the peacock plumege). I can't say I'm 100% sure though.


I think you have it backwards there. Jay Leno would beat out Brad Pitt by a mile with most women. I can't think of any reason I would have to talk to Pitt, I can't even remember which films he was in and I am pretty sure most women don't either. In fact I don't think I could even pick him out from a room full of people.

Jay Leno on the other hand, of course everyone wants to be in his group because he is funny. And he is expected to be funny 24 hours a day. So when it comes to a party its going to be Jay who has the line of women wanting to talk to him. And like fools throughout history he has license to break social conventions such as not talking about sex.

So no, Jay would be in bed with as many girls as he had the stamina for while Brad was still munching on his canape's trying to get to first base. There are some aspects of physical beauty that are probably innate. Symmetry is a good indicator of health, so is the ratio of a woman's waist to her hips. But preference for thin or fat is very culturally based - remember baby got back?

Swollen
Posted: Monday, November 26, 2012 12:05:47 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 5/27/2010
Posts: 1,044
Location: United Kingdom
Oh my! Can't you boys just 'waffle on.' Go make dinner for your women and put the god-darn wheelie bins out.
Guest
Posted: Monday, November 26, 2012 12:08:45 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 819,718
ByronLord wrote:


I think you have it backwards there. Jay Leno would beat out Brad Pitt by a mile with most women. I can't think of any reason I would have to talk to Pitt, I can't even remember which films he was in and I am pretty sure most women don't either. In fact I don't think I could even pick him out from a room full of people.

Jay Leno on the other hand, of course everyone wants to be in his group because he is funny. And he is expected to be funny 24 hours a day. So when it comes to a party its going to be Jay who has the line of women wanting to talk to him. And like fools throughout history he has license to break social conventions such as not talking about sex.

So no, Jay would be in bed with as many girls as he had the stamina for while Brad was still munching on his canape's trying to get to first base. There are some aspects of physical beauty that are probably innate. Symmetry is a good indicator of health, so is the ratio of a woman's waist to her hips. But preference for thin or fat is very culturally based - remember baby got back?


Perhaps comparing brad to jay was not a good idea on my part, but my point was that culture does not entirely dictate definition of beauty. Yes the waiste to hip ratio as an inicator of superior genes thingy I am aware of ( i read that in the icon books inroducing EP), Though it isn't always the case. "some aspects of physical beauty are probably innate" - Indeed. Thanks again for your input. You are one of the better contributers to this thread. Hmm an idea for a new thread perhaps: who would ladies prefer brad or jay.....
ByronLord
Posted: Monday, November 26, 2012 12:09:13 PM

Rank: Forum Guru
Moderator

Joined: 11/14/2010
Posts: 839
Location: Massachusetts, United States
overmykneenow wrote:
I did read the whole thread - I was referred to in a number of the posts. The rest read like any number of similar "why do nice guys finish last" threads on this forum.


Since CrazyD. picked up on it, I will reply to this bait.

Actually the issue isn't so much not being able to pull women but the fact that so many women seem to be emotional wrecks that careen from one asshole to the next.

Pulling such women is pretty easy if you are prepared to either put in the time and effort on them as an emotional 'fixer-upper' or to become another entry in their string of ex-es.

And it really isn't just men who notice this. Those of us who actually listen to women (even fewer than the opposite sex imagine) know that they spend an incredible amount of their time invested in their friends' emotional rollercoaster lives. They can see this happening in so many of their friend's lives that they completely fail to spot that it is happening in their own.

ByronLord
Posted: Monday, November 26, 2012 12:10:05 PM

Rank: Forum Guru
Moderator

Joined: 11/14/2010
Posts: 839
Location: Massachusetts, United States
swollen wrote:
Oh my! Can't you boys just 'waffle on.' Go make dinner for your women and put the god-darn wheelie bins out.

Right after you fetch me a sandwich.

Guest
Posted: Monday, November 26, 2012 12:15:13 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 819,718
675-lick
swollen wrote:
Oh my! Can't you boys just 'waffle on.' Go make dinner for your women and put the god-darn wheelie bins out.


Hehe. As a matter of fact I just made pasta for my wife. Just cleaned the dishes too
Guest
Posted: Monday, November 26, 2012 12:26:57 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 819,718
crazydiamond wrote:


Damn OMNK!!! , you are such a dominant alpha-male asshole, and so competitive too! Let's be friends Big Hugs .

POINT MADE kekekegay


Oh, I get the joke now. Pity he's such a Fuckwit!
crazydiamond
Posted: Monday, November 26, 2012 12:48:52 PM

Rank: Clever Gem

Joined: 7/17/2011
Posts: 2,301
Location: Exactly where I should be!, Canada
Fuckwit?? You reckon?.... and you did not get the joke either.

LadyX
Posted: Monday, November 26, 2012 12:56:01 PM

Rank: Artistic Tart

Joined: 9/25/2009
Posts: 4,773
overmykneenow wrote:
I did read the whole thread - I was referred to in a number of the posts. The rest read like any number of similar "why do nice guys finish last" threads on this forum.

Like most of the others, the argument soon breaks down into "not all alphas are assholes" and "not all friend-zone guys are nice". Friend zone guys can be pushy, manipulative, whiney and underhand - none of which I would class as "nice" attributes



It's exactly the most competitive - where there are limited resources, the ones most driven, most adaptable and most resourceful will win - these are the attributes of people who lead, not follow.

Don't fall into the trap of coming up with a theory based on your own limited and biased experience and then finding stuff on the internet to back it. What you end up is simply propaganda for your personality type over others. And it's pretty obvious.


This is so spot on that it should be required reading for everyone, prior to wading into any of the "why do girls like bad boys" threads.
crazydiamond
Posted: Monday, November 26, 2012 12:59:19 PM

Rank: Clever Gem

Joined: 7/17/2011
Posts: 2,301
Location: Exactly where I should be!, Canada
LadyX wrote:


This is so spot on that it should be required reading for everyone, prior to wading into any of the "why do girls like bad boys" threads.


See! he so did not get the joke!

I guess a good way too explain it is , I would prefer the "fuckwit" as per mentioned above than the "wet noodle " I mean," Pasta cooker". dontknow

Guest
Posted: Monday, November 26, 2012 1:02:28 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 819,718
crazydiamond wrote:
Fuckwit?? You reckon?.... and you did not get the joke either.


No, then please enlighten me. Not sure if you read all of our dialogue. But he doesn't seem to understand the basics of Evolution. My apologies if me calling him a fuckwit offended you. I don't know him as you clearly do, i can only judge from what i have read from him on here.
Guest
Posted: Monday, November 26, 2012 1:10:35 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 819,718
crazydiamond wrote:


See! he so did not get the joke!

I guess a good way too explain it is , I would prefer the "fuckwit" as per mentioned above than the "wet noodle " I mean," Pasta cooker". dontknow


From what LadyX said I did get the Joke. Please enlighten me on how his incredibly flawed decription of Evolution did not make him come accross as a fuckwit?

This isn't about Alpha-male vs nice guys. If you bothered reading the whole thread. It is a discussion on about the evolution of the human condition. Your friend contributed Nothing.
crazydiamond
Posted: Monday, November 26, 2012 1:17:12 PM

Rank: Clever Gem

Joined: 7/17/2011
Posts: 2,301
Location: Exactly where I should be!, Canada
ArthurG77 wrote:


From what LadyX said I did get the Joke. Please enlighten me on how his incredibly flawed decription of Evolution did not make him come accross as a fuckwit?

This isn't about Alpha-male vs nice guys. If you bothered reading the whole thread. It is a discussion on about the evolution of the human condition. Your friend contributed Nothing.


I read the whole thread Arthur! Otherwise, I would be ignorant.

Evolution then, right here right now- He's buff with a smart ass mouth! You are are hiding behind a finger with a smart ass mouth... survival of the fittest.

Guest
Posted: Monday, November 26, 2012 1:18:20 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 819,718
crazydiamond wrote:


See! he so did not get the joke!

I guess a good way too explain it is , I would prefer the "fuckwit" as per mentioned above than the "wet noodle " I mean," Pasta cooker". dontknow


He does appear to be intellectually out of his depth in this thread.........
Dancing_Doll
Posted: Monday, November 26, 2012 1:21:03 PM

Rank: Alpha Blonde
Moderator

Joined: 2/17/2010
Posts: 7,216
Location: Your dirty fantasy
ByronLord wrote:


I think you have it backwards there. Jay Leno would beat out Brad Pitt by a mile with most women. I can't think of any reason I would have to talk to Pitt, I can't even remember which films he was in and I am pretty sure most women don't either. In fact I don't think I could even pick him out from a room full of people.

Jay Leno on the other hand, of course everyone wants to be in his group because he is funny. And he is expected to be funny 24 hours a day. So when it comes to a party its going to be Jay who has the line of women wanting to talk to him. And like fools throughout history he has license to break social conventions such as not talking about sex.

So no, Jay would be in bed with as many girls as he had the stamina for while Brad was still munching on his canape's trying to get to first base.


Really??? Damn, what kind of women are you talking to??

Actually the correct answer is... both men would get scores of women because they are celebrities and wealthy.

But if they were both dead broke and gas station attendants, I'd take Brad Pitt any day of the week. Most women I know would as well. Being 'funny' can only take you so far in life... but they do make great additions to any woman's friend-zone. :)




Users browsing this topic
Guest 


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Main Forum RSS : RSS

Powered by Yet Another Forum.net version 1.9.1.6 (NET v4.0) - 11/14/2007
Copyright © 2003-2006 Yet Another Forum.net. All rights reserved.