Hot Chicks, are they worth it?
Offline I have a question for those of you who understand Evolution (or at least think you do).
Why are some people physically more attractive than others? Why aren't ugly people just bread out of existence? Is it just that ugly people breed with other ugly people, so we have no end to ugliness in the human race? It has been proven that ugly people have economic and social disadvantages besides just mate selection, so one might think they would be naturally selected away. Why is there such a wide range of attractiveness?
Could it be that ugly people have other advantages that the physically attractive don't have? This question comes up because as us guys know, the hotter the chick, the more effort we have to put into getter her and keeping her. The more crap we're willing to put up with from her if she's hot. So many of us ask, "Hot chicks, are they worth it?"
I read this article from Christopher Hitchens on "Why women aren't funny":
http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/features/2007/01/hitchens200701
I know it's very sexist, but it makes a lot of sense. Hot women don't need to be funny, they can just bring their looks to the relationship. This is how it seems to be with better looking women, they just bring their looks that's it. I have to be funny, rich, interesting, pleasant, etc... It's also interesting how he says women get funnier with age, their looks fade, so then women develop other qualities to attract people. I find this to be true, more mature women are generally better for a relationship.
So, is the problems with hot chicks just that they know they're hot so they can treat men badly and still have men treat them like a princess? Or is it evolution? Has nature give some women looks, but then to balance things out given less attractive women other qualities to attract and keep a man? Is physical beauty just a trick nature plays on men to get us to waist our time and money on women that are otherwise bad mates?
Taxation is the price we pay for failing to build a civilized society. The higher the tax level, the greater the failure. A centrally planned totalitarian state represents a complete defeat for the civilized world, while a totally voluntary society represents its ultimate success. --Mark Skousen
- Login to post comments
Offline
Before I delve into comments, I wanted to point out that “high maintenance” behavior may stem from the fact that usually women are given the opportunity to be the choosier of the two sexes, analogous to a rate-limiting step in chemistry. Generally, men are the first to initiate “mating signals” and it is up to the woman to decide whether or not she wants to accept his advances.
If it has not been pointed out before, I wanted to point that out. WOMEN are the CHOOSERS, not the men. And it is for exactly the reason she pointed out, the time and effort and resources invested in carrying a child to term. A man can conceivable have THOUSANDS of children, a woman can have at the most a dozen or so, give or take for multiple births - and practically, the number she can have and give a decent life (and therefore chance of future reproduction is typically MUCH smaller than that in today's first world societies).
I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world. - Richard Dawkins
Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.
- Login to post comments
Offline Yellow and Hamby are sex manics , and that is very GOOD.
On second thought? INDEED ..... ( it's only me, you know, G O D ! ( g a w e d ) 
- Login to post comments
Offline I've not sallied forth into this thread yet, but I'm amazed by its staying power. Evidently, there are a lot of dudes on the RRS who have had terrible experiences with women they initially pursued primarily because of their physical beauty.
What man hasn't? You've never been rejected?
Personally, I'm going at this discussion from a biological POV, a POV BTW, which has helped me deal with said rejection, make sense of it, helped not to take it personally, and ultimately contributed to my success with the opposite sex.
Well shit, fellas. Count yourself lucky, especially if you got some. Those of you who claim they won't talk to you, period--you're probably not interesting to them. Sorry.
To the original question posed, I can offer very little in the way of new observations. "Hot chicks" are worth it in exactly the same sense as any "chick" is worth it, at least from an evolutionary point of view. There's nothing about "hotness" that is a perfect predictor of good offspring.
Not PERFECT, certainly, this has been covered.
If you want to maximize the chances that your genes will find a safe harbor, your best bet is to fuck around indiscriminately...
Also covered.
I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world. - Richard Dawkins
Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.
- Login to post comments
Offline But, while men do get frustrated by it, it really isn't being high maintenance - it's simply being selective. It often appears shallow, and personality-wise, I do believe it often is, but there IS a biological drive behind it - we simply aren't always aware of it.
To relate this to an earliar point I made: this is exactly why love is utter complete nonsense. The appeal to love simply provides a way for us as human beings to ignore the fact that it is the basic biological drives that play the biggest role in us getting or not getting a mate. Nothing more.
" Why does God always got such wacky shit to say? . . . When was the last time you heard somebody say 'look God told me to get a muffin and a cup tea and cool out man'?" - Dov Davidoff
- Login to post comments
Offline Yeah, a mate to suck me and fuck me, as I want too suck and fuck ! Well, I do ! 
Please please girl , LOVE MY DICK !
- Login to post comments
Offline greek goddess wrote::15
check the weather & put on clothes, jewelry, shoes
8:25
put in contacts, put on make-up
THis is where other guys will definatrly disagree with me. Wearing make-up and or jewelry makes you high maintenence becuase, make-up at least, requires a careful steady hand and a little skill if it is done correctly. However, it is absolutly unnecessary for anyone to wear makep-up unless they are appearing in a movie where they have to look a certain age or look like they are seriosuly injured. Jewelry, while not as bad as make-up (depending on the type of jewelry of course) is simply pointless unless you are trying to garner attention yb someone else. However, evne if you wear all that stuff becuase, as many girls claim to "For me and not for you" its still high maintenence since, in every sense of the term, they absolutley unnecessary in regards to what you need when going to school, work, or going out. Make-up espcially, again, almost requires constant checks in mirrors to make sure its not smudging and whatever the hell else can go wrong with make-up.
BULLSHIT.
Women and men in western societies are equally guilty of preening themselves. If I'm going out to a club or a bar or anywhere where I may meet a potential mate and I'm actually looking for one, I'm sure that my hair is combed, my shirt is pressed, my shoes are not scuffed, that I'm dressed appropriately for the venue, that my car is clean (and my apartment too, just in case we happen to get to that point) - IOW, I put in EFFORT to make sure I present myself as well as I possibly can, just as women do by putting on make-up and jelwery and short skirts. It's a mating ritual as well as a matter of personal vanity and pride (I don't go to work looking like a slob either, as I'm sure you don't).
I don't consider things like that high maintenance. High maintenance to me is 3AM phone calls, an insistence on overly extravagant dates (not that the occasional high class date isn't fun, but balance the $100 a plate dinners with going to the movies or a dive bar). But more than anything else, mind games infuriate me - which typically manifests as unjustified jealousy, possessiveness and manipulation.
I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world. - Richard Dawkins
Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.
- Login to post comments
Offline Yellow_Number_Five wrote:But, while men do get frustrated by it, it really isn't being high maintenance - it's simply being selective. It often appears shallow, and personality-wise, I do believe it often is, but there IS a biological drive behind it - we simply aren't always aware of it.
To relate this to an earliar point I made: this is exactly why love is utter complete nonsense. The appeal to love simply provides a way for us as human beings to ignore the fact that it is the basic biological drives that play the biggest role in us getting or not getting a mate. Nothing more.
Well, if we are going to reduce it to biology, love is still more than what you are describing it as. If love were SOLELY motivated by reproduction, we'd never stay with the same mate for decades, or after the kids could fend for themselves.
I do think, and have said, that initially attraction is key. I DO think you have to want to fuck somebody before you can fall in love with them, and that's sort of the rub. Repeated sexual encounters with a person help you fall in love with them. Sex releases dopamine in your brain - your REWARD hormone. Enough of that, and you end up with an attatchment to that person akin to a smoker and their cigarette. This is one of the reasons you pine for a person after you get dumped - you are literally going through withdrawl.
Now, that's the biology of it, and of course there is more to it than that.
I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world. - Richard Dawkins
Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.
- Login to post comments
Offline do >YOU< have a sexual organ ? Does it work ?
- Login to post comments
Offline I've noticed by the time stamps on the posts that there are persons here spending far too much time alone with their computers on a Friday night. GO GET LAID!!!
"Very funny Scotty; now beam down our clothes."
VEGETARIAN: Ancient Hindu word for "lousy hunter"
If man was formed from dirt, why is there still dirt?
- Login to post comments
Offline I've noticed by the time stamps on the posts that there are persons here spending far too much time alone with their computers on a Friday night. GO GET LAID!!!
Dude, I'm trying to but I can't find my blow-up sex doll !!!
- Login to post comments
Offline I've noticed by the time stamps on the posts that there are persons here spending far too much time alone with their computers on a Friday night. GO GET LAID!!!
I was out, I didn't start posting tonight until I got back from the bars and started drinking some more - why I'm still awake, I don't know.
And while I did not copulate last evening, I did manage to chat up some rather lovely women whom I hope to call in the requisite 3 days in order to copulate with them in the near future, Thor willing.
BTW, two of them complimented my shoes (it really is one of the first things lots of women look at), which obviously means I'm high maintenance.
I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world. - Richard Dawkins
Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.
- Login to post comments
Offline DamnDirtyApe wrote:I've not sallied forth into this thread yet, but I'm amazed by its staying power. Evidently, there are a lot of dudes on the RRS who have had terrible experiences with women they initially pursued primarily because of their physical beauty.
What man hasn't? You've never been rejected?
Personally, I'm going at this discussion from a biological POV, a POV BTW, which has helped me deal with said rejection, make sense of it, helped not to take it personally, and ultimately contributed to my success with the opposite sex.
Quote:The reason is usually more nuanced than that.Well shit, fellas. Count yourself lucky, especially if you got some. Those of you who claim they won't talk to you, period--you're probably not interesting to them. Sorry.Quote:To the original question posed, I can offer very little in the way of new observations. "Hot chicks" are worth it in exactly the same sense as any "chick" is worth it, at least from an evolutionary point of view. There's nothing about "hotness" that is a perfect predictor of good offspring.Not PERFECT, certainly, this has been covered.
Quote:If you want to maximize the chances that your genes will find a safe harbor, your best bet is to fuck around indiscriminately...Also covered.
As I said, I came into the thread late. I wasn't going to read three pages worth of posts. If I dealt with things that were already "covered", then I'm sorry that got your panties in a twist. But given that I stated up front that I couldn't bring many new observations to the table, I figured comments such as yours wouldn't be forthcoming.
"The whole conception of God is a conception derived from ancient Oriental despotisms. It is a conception quite unworthy of free men."
--Bertrand Russell
- Login to post comments
Offline As I said, I came into the thread late. I wasn't going to read three pages worth of posts. If I dealt with things that were already "covered", then I'm sorry that got your panties in a twist. But given that I stated up front that I couldn't bring many new observations to the table, I figured comments such as yours wouldn't be forthcoming.
Ow, my panties.
Do twisted panties make me high maintenance?
I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world. - Richard Dawkins
Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.
- Login to post comments
Offline
Do twisted panties make me high maintenance?
No, twisted panties just mean your butt cheeks are out of control and you could probably stand to lose about 50 pounds.
- Login to post comments
Offline Do twisted panties make me high maintenance?
Only if you demand twisted panties from your partners even when they are SO not into that.........
"We are the star things harvesting the star energy"
-Carl Sagan
- Login to post comments
Offline
Not this nonsense again. This proves nothing other than external stimulus, that is not taken internally can have similar effects as extrnal stimulus taken internally. Furthermore, if you were to talk to anyone who has a more robust notion of love other than "It feels good" will tell you that their "love" is also the cuase of their pain or frustration. How come there are no studies on headaches or imbalances in chemicals causing various reactions that make people angry or sad used as evidence for love? I'll tell you, because "love" is percieved as a good for the mind and body, thus, only the studies that reveal "good" consequences to the body or mind are deemed as evidence of love whereas any studies which indicate pain or suffereing are not. It is the most unscientific inquiry ever devised and should be stopped since it is this type of "scientific" inquiry that led to outlandish claims like "Science proves that Jesus bodily ressurrected and and reappeared to the desciples".
There is a bit too much of it from credible scientists at credible institutions to call it nonsense. Romantic love causes a chemical change, a feeling of euphoria. The pain and frustration is similar to other drugs when you can't get your 'fix'. Ask any heroine addict if they experienced pain and frustration when they couldn't get their fix. The pain and suffering is the drug withdrawal.
Taxation is the price we pay for failing to build a civilized society. The higher the tax level, the greater the failure. A centrally planned totalitarian state represents a complete defeat for the civilized world, while a totally voluntary society represents its ultimate success. --Mark Skousen
- Login to post comments
Offline
BULLSHIT.
Women and men in western societies are equally guilty of preening themselves. If I'm going out to a club or a bar or anywhere where I may meet a potential mate and I'm actually looking for one, I'm sure that my hair is combed, my shirt is pressed, my shoes are not scuffed, that I'm dressed appropriately for the venue, that my car is clean (and my apartment too, just in case we happen to get to that point) - IOW, I put in EFFORT to make sure I present myself as well as I possibly can, just as women do by putting on make-up and jelwery and short skirts. It's a mating ritual as well as a matter of personal vanity and pride (I don't go to work looking like a slob either, as I'm sure you don't).
So you will be high maintenence. Just becuase you condone it and do it yourself does not make it low maintenece.
I don't consider things like that high maintenance. High maintenance to me is 3AM phone calls, an insistence on overly extravagant dates (not that the occasional high class date isn't fun, but balance the $100 a plate dinners with going to the movies or a dive bar). But more than anything else, mind games infuriate me - which typically manifests as unjustified jealousy, possessiveness and manipulation.
Thats spoiled bitchyness. Not high maintenece. However, spoiled bitchyness is often combined with high maintenece (of course I can't think of a spoiler bitch that is low maintenece).
" Why does God always got such wacky shit to say? . . . When was the last time you heard somebody say 'look God told me to get a muffin and a cup tea and cool out man'?" - Dov Davidoff
- Login to post comments
Offline Well, if we are going to reduce it to biology, love is still more than what you are describing it as. If love were SOLELY motivated by reproduction, we'd never stay with the same mate for decades, or after the kids could fend for themselves.
The desire to keep a mate could also have a biological underpinning as well as cutural underpinnings. DO not see why we have to bring love into the picture.
" Why does God always got such wacky shit to say? . . . When was the last time you heard somebody say 'look God told me to get a muffin and a cup tea and cool out man'?" - Dov Davidoff
- Login to post comments
Offline
Do twisted panties make me high maintenance?
It means a) you are hyperactive or b) you have trouble putting on undergarments.
" Why does God always got such wacky shit to say? . . . When was the last time you heard somebody say 'look God told me to get a muffin and a cup tea and cool out man'?" - Dov Davidoff
- Login to post comments
Offline There is a bit too much of it from credible scientists at credible institutions to call it nonsense. Romantic love causes a chemical change, a feeling of euphoria. The pain and frustration is similar to other drugs when you can't get your 'fix'. Ask any heroine addict if they experienced pain and frustration when they couldn't get their fix. The pain and suffering is the drug withdrawal.
What does this "fix" consist of in romantic love according to these studies?
" Why does God always got such wacky shit to say? . . . When was the last time you heard somebody say 'look God told me to get a muffin and a cup tea and cool out man'?" - Dov Davidoff
- Login to post comments
Offline I've noticed by the time stamps on the posts that there are persons here spending far too much time alone with their computers on a Friday night. GO GET LAID!!!
Compromise:
I will stay at home, given my somewhat justified fear of the local night scene and the violently aggressive large oilfield men involved in it (http://www.lastlinkontheleft.com/e2000.html), but will not play illeatyourdog's blame game and instead take ownership of my personal problems.
Fair enough? 
"Natasha has just come up to the window from the courtyard and opened it wider so that the air may enter more freely into my room. I can see the bright green strip of grass beneath the wall, and the clear blue sky above the wall, and sunlight everywhere. Life is beautiful. Let the future generations cleanse it of all evil, oppression and violence, and enjoy it to the full."
- Leon Trotsky, Last Will & Testament
February 27, 1940
- Login to post comments
Offline My Rock n Roll house style is a girl magnet, 3 babes here now, I tell them the truth 
, I lost track of how many horny girls, they are every where, just honestly communicate to them .... with a smile of easy going approval ! .... ( well that works for me, just being me, a sex maniac at heart, a girl lover, HELP the Girls get FREE ! .... Fuck them old rules of men I tell all the girls .... Girl power, EMPOWER them girls, and reap the rewards ! Why be shy ?
Cool fav local copy band
ATOMIC PUNKS - VAN HALEN - ICE CREAM MANhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5otL0CSbClo
Tell the truth , it works bitches ...... "LOVE" SCIENCE !
SHY BOY (funny) some cute ones here ! Hell, most all girls just need your MAN help! .... In all shapes, young and old .....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SnLiiWzcILo
"They Call Me the Fireman" never said I was the best but here to help darling, the best I can .....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_s0yBW2QRDM
geezz, what is this old man (me) trying to say regarding helping girls like you 
well, getting serious, is not the way , never worked for ME ..... if it ain't fun and free, it fails .... Love has no rules and "keeps no records of wrong" ..... no contracts
- Login to post comments
Offline but will not play illeatyourdog's blame game and instead take ownership of my personal problems.
Where did I deny ownership of my own?
" Why does God always got such wacky shit to say? . . . When was the last time you heard somebody say 'look God told me to get a muffin and a cup tea and cool out man'?" - Dov Davidoff
- Login to post comments
Offline What does this "fix" consist of in romantic love according to these studies?
You can read more about it here:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/12/AR2007021201657.html
The bottom line is the reason narcotics drug work is because they act in a similar way to chemicals released by romantic love. And they have the same problem as narcotics, when you don't get your 'fix'.
Taxation is the price we pay for failing to build a civilized society. The higher the tax level, the greater the failure. A centrally planned totalitarian state represents a complete defeat for the civilized world, while a totally voluntary society represents its ultimate success. --Mark Skousen
- Login to post comments
Offline
The bottom line is the reason narcotics drug work is because they act in a similar way to chemicals released by romantic love. And they have the same problem as narcotics, when you don't get your 'fix'.
These two statements are very telling
"The most wonderful, soaring feeling known to all mankind . . . amounts to no more than a narcotic high, a temporal state of mania."
To illustrate how this statement alone shows how love is nonsense, let me use the same exact structure with a radically different scientific fact. 'What was believed to be the obvious evidence of a supreme being or at least a strong spiritual force is nothing more but the natural reactions particals have to being heated and then cooling'. To be clear I am talking about how wind works and functions. Based on this alone, we would conclude that attributing the wind to such things as nonsense. However, for some reason, when something very similar is said about love,, for some reason, we must both keep the notion and attribute the chemical release of dopamine to it. WHy don't we just save a step, like we did with wind and spiritual forces or gods, and call the primitive fantastic notion nonsense?
"'Being in love, having a crush on someone is wonderful . . . but our bodies can't be in that state all the time,' says Pamela C. Regan"
This statement is clearly conflating "being in Love" with "having a crush". Again, people who believe seriously in "love" or "being in love" would maintain there is a big difference between having a crush and being in love. Clearly, if these scientists are studying anything, it is what effects "having a crush" or "crushing" have a person. Not "love". Of course "Crushing is a Drug" is not a catchy as "Love is a Drug". Cynical humor aside, what this article clearly demonstrates is how, when studying love, we start with the conclusion and find evidence that either conforms to it natural or make the evidence fit it. Similar to how Creationists use the evolutionary beneficial as well as evolutionary developed desire to form societies with rules as evidence of an Absolute Morality.
" Why does God always got such wacky shit to say? . . . When was the last time you heard somebody say 'look God told me to get a muffin and a cup tea and cool out man'?" - Dov Davidoff
- Login to post comments
Offline This statement is clearly conflating "being in Love" with "having a crush". Again, people who believe seriously in "love" or "being in love" would maintain there is a big difference between having a crush and being in love.
I agree, but people insist they are "in love" when it's nothing more than this narcotic like high that the evolution process has produced so humans will bond with their sex partners. You can't tell people that, we assign spirtuality, religion instead of science.
What I'm tring to get at with this post is that as rational thinkers, we need to have a rational basis for any relationship including love. People will "love" Jesus even though he does not exist. He is just the high religious folk get from believing an all powerful celectial being loves them.
Just like believing in anything, we need to be rational about who we love. So just cause a woman is a hot chick is not a basis for love relationship. It can be like loving Jesus, you have this ideal being you try to adore and have a personal relationship with, but he doesn't love you(cause he doesn't exist).
Taxation is the price we pay for failing to build a civilized society. The higher the tax level, the greater the failure. A centrally planned totalitarian state represents a complete defeat for the civilized world, while a totally voluntary society represents its ultimate success. --Mark Skousen
- Login to post comments
Offline Quote:I've noticed by the time stamps on the posts that there are persons here spending far too much time alone with their computers on a Friday night. GO GET LAID!!!Compromise:
I will stay at home, given my somewhat justified fear of the local night scene and the violently aggressive large oilfield men involved in it (http://www.lastlinkontheleft.com/e2000.html), but will not play illeatyourdog's blame game and instead take ownership of my personal problems.
Fair enough?
BTW do you have that passport yet? Guyana is still there.
"Very funny Scotty; now beam down our clothes."
VEGETARIAN: Ancient Hindu word for "lousy hunter"
If man was formed from dirt, why is there still dirt?
- Login to post comments
Offline
I agree, but people insist they are "in love" when it's nothing more than this narcotic like high that the evolution process has produced so humans will bond with their sex partners. You can't tell people that, we assign spirtuality, religion instead of science.
I am sure I am misreading what you are saying here but, it sounds like you are essentially saying "yes, love is nonsense but people believe in it and it makes them happy so who are we to burst their bubble?"
What I'm tring to get at with this post is that as rational thinkers, we need to have a rational basis for any relationship including love.
Or have a rational basis for relationships. Love should not be included since that does nothing justify irrational actions and beliefs about relationships. The whole "if you truly love me, you will do X". If we do away with any notion of love and use rationality, such a statement would be clear nonsense. Once love enters the picture though, it becomes a serious problem.
Just like believing in anything, we need to be rational about who we love. So just cause a woman is a hot chick is not a basis for love relationship.
Yet, according to Hammbydammit, the basis for any relationship is finding the other person hot since, if we don't wanna fuck them, we don;t wanna love them. So the rationality is not "She/he is incredibly intelligent and can make my life more fullfilling and prosperous as I can with her life" it's "I want to fuck him/her and enjoy fucking him/her. Hopefully he/she is not an idiot or a bitch". Which I agree with, if only, as you can read for yourself, I really dislike his application of the term beauty to describe it since beauty is another term like love that is pure nonsense, yet, we believe in it anyway because being honest with the one we "love" by saying "I am attracted to you because you display traits that my biological drives and desires find very agreeable" is not nice and, accurately reduces these fleeting feelings of fancy to the brute physicalities that they are and humans tend to dislike that.
" Why does God always got such wacky shit to say? . . . When was the last time you heard somebody say 'look God told me to get a muffin and a cup tea and cool out man'?" - Dov Davidoff
- Login to post comments
Offline Stop enjoying your isolation and go get lucky.
But Lucky quit her job as a stripper and became nun so I have to make do with Phronesis and Sophia instead. They make an awesome double team pleasurable beauty 
" Why does God always got such wacky shit to say? . . . When was the last time you heard somebody say 'look God told me to get a muffin and a cup tea and cool out man'?" - Dov Davidoff
- Login to post comments
Offline pics or it didnt happen 
- Login to post comments
Offline
The Doomed soul has a weirdly sick sense of humor, and I love it. You were commenting to illeatyourdog weren't you?
"Very funny Scotty; now beam down our clothes."
VEGETARIAN: Ancient Hindu word for "lousy hunter"
If man was formed from dirt, why is there still dirt?
- Login to post comments
Offline without a doubt
- Login to post comments
Offline I am sure I am misreading what you are saying here but, it sounds like you are essentially saying "yes, love is nonsense but people believe in it and it makes them happy so who are we to burst their bubble?
Well ignorance is bliss. Relationship are not nonsense if we have a rational basis for having them. If it's just get my rocks off with some hottie, then it's just like any other drug. The high is temporary, you spend a lot of time and money pursing your drug and the crash when you can't get your fix really sucks. Relationships can be just like junkie with their supplier.
It would be best if people were taught in kindergarten "Everything is a drug", a consequence of being chemical beings. If we grew up understanding this, we wouldn't have any bubble to burst. Love and relationship would go much better if we had a rational basis to understand them and ourselves from the get go.
But with adults, just like religion, they pass a point of no return. They won't listen to science, reason or logic when it comes to understanding love or religion. So maybe it's best just to let them live in their world of delusion. Their delusions are their drug.
Taxation is the price we pay for failing to build a civilized society. The higher the tax level, the greater the failure. A centrally planned totalitarian state represents a complete defeat for the civilized world, while a totally voluntary society represents its ultimate success. --Mark Skousen
- Login to post comments
Offline Well ignorance is bliss. Relationship are not nonsense if we have a rational basis for having them. If it's just get my rocks off with some hottie, then it's just like any other drug. The high is temporary, you spend a lot of time and money pursing your drug and the crash when you can't get your fix really sucks. Relationships can be just like junkie with their supplier.
It would be best if people were taught in kindergarten "Everything is a drug", a consequence of being chemical beings. If we grew up understanding this, we wouldn't have any bubble to burst. Love and relationship would go much better if we had a rational basis to understand them and ourselves from the get go.
All in favor of Nietzschean sex, say AYE! ^_^
What Would Kharn Do?
- Login to post comments
Offline I've noticed by the time stamps on the posts that there are persons here spending far too much time alone with their computers on a Friday night. GO GET LAID!!!
I'm better off in front of the computer. Back in my good old drug days, me and my buds used sex very much like any other drug and, like the other drugs, we abused it(many of my close friends still do). The problem with "love" is the entire WORLD is addicted and in denial. We assume if it's a natural process it isn't dangerous....bullshit. But just like all addicts in denial, the great unthinking majority of people will see anything they want to to justify their addiction.
"We are the star things harvesting the star energy"
-Carl Sagan
- Login to post comments
Offline pics or it didnt happen
You think they allow cameras in the Champagne room?
- Login to post comments
Offline Well ignorance is bliss. Relationship are not nonsense if we have a rational basis for having them.
TO be clear I am calling love nonsense. Not relationships. To me, there is a distinction. One definately happens and it would be absurd to argue the the contrary. The other is absolute pure nonsense.
If it's just get my rocks off with some hottie, then it's just like any other drug. The high is temporary, you spend a lot of time and money pursing your drug and the crash when you can't get your fix really sucks. Relationships can be just like junkie with their supplier.
Thats not love thats horniness.
It would be best if people were taught in kindergarten "Everything is a drug", a consequence of being chemical beings. If we grew up understanding this, we wouldn't have any bubble to burst. Love and relationship would go much better if we had a rational basis to understand them and ourselves from the get go.
It would be best if we let kindergardners play and learn to be social rather than confound their minds with ideas. They [ideas] can come later.
But with adults, just like religion, they pass a point of no return. They won't listen to science, reason or logic when it comes to understanding love or religion. So maybe it's best just to let them live in their world of delusion. Their delusions are their drug.
So you would agree that what scientists are actually studying in these experiments is not love at all but what have human beings have mistaken for an undefinable, incomprehensible, and delusionary notion which should be done away with like God and manners (the manners one is a joke even though I honestly do not believe in manners).
" Why does God always got such wacky shit to say? . . . When was the last time you heard somebody say 'look God told me to get a muffin and a cup tea and cool out man'?" - Dov Davidoff
- Login to post comments
Offline Thats not love thats horniness.
True. People under the influence have a problem with mislabeling. You always here "love" to describe infatuation/horniness.
It would be best if people were taught in kindergarten "Everything is a drug", a consequence of being chemical beings. If we grew up understanding this, we wouldn't have any bubble to burst. Love and relationship would go much better if we had a rational basis to understand them and ourselves from the get go.
It would be best if we let kindergardners play and learn to be social rather than confound their minds with ideas. They [ideas] can come later.
Too many ideas would be bad. But, I'm not sure what the harm would be in teaching young children the how the world really works. Your thinking patterns get set early on, so teaching children things are not always what people claim they are and teaching them to think critically should start early.
Why can't "learning to be social" include teaching the science of friendships and relationships? Seems like it's pretty much left up to children to figure it out on their own. Some do this OK, many others have problems. Why don't schools teach how to make friends, how to deal with bullies and how to attract the opposite sex? That's a subject for another post.
So you would agree that what scientists are actually studying in these experiments is not love at all but what have human beings have mistaken for an undefinable, incomprehensible, and delusionary notion which should be done away with like God and manners (the manners one is a joke even though I honestly do not believe in manners).
We're pushing the notion here that things like what to do and believe need to have a rational basis. We don't "believe in Jesus" just because it may feel good or our parents and society preasure us. So this idea should extend to love and relationships. I think one can enjoy "love" for what is and not some magical, mystical power. It can be understood like everthing else scientifically. There is no reason for the nieve teenagers in "love".
Taxation is the price we pay for failing to build a civilized society. The higher the tax level, the greater the failure. A centrally planned totalitarian state represents a complete defeat for the civilized world, while a totally voluntary society represents its ultimate success. --Mark Skousen
- Login to post comments
Offline Too many ideas would be bad. But, I'm not sure what the harm would be in teaching young children the how the world really works. Your thinking patterns get set early on, so teaching children things are not always what people claim they are and teaching them to think critically should start early.
First grade would be the better place for such lessons.
Why can't "learning to be social" include teaching the science of friendships and relationships?
My next comment mihgt sound weird considering how I have been arguing so far but ther eis no science of friendships. There those who are natrually social and those who are not. We should not force those who are naturall not social to be social.
Seems like it's pretty much left up to children to figure it out on their own. Some do this OK, many others have problems. how to deal with bullies and how to attract the opposite sex? That's a subject for another post.
If I can make a brief sketch of an answer, its becuase these thing cannot be taught since it relies too heavily on the individual being able to carry out whatever action that needs to be done in the moment.
Quote:We're pushing the notion here that things like what to do and believe need to have a rational basis. We don't "believe in Jesus" just because it may feel good or our parents and society preasure us. So this idea should extend to love and relationships. I think one can enjoy "love" for what is and not some magical, mystical power. It can be understood like everthing else scientifically. There is no reason for the nieve teenagers in "love".Thats the thing, people believe in "love" becuase it is better than accepting that we have a basic desire for companionship. For give this cynical humor again, no professes their common and un-special desire to want a companion at a wedding, they profess their "love" becuase "love" by many definitions is more than just this biological or emotional need. Nor to couple on their wedding day think of their "love" as merely that.
" Why does God always got such wacky shit to say? . . . When was the last time you heard somebody say 'look God told me to get a muffin and a cup tea and cool out man'?" - Dov Davidoff
- Login to post comments
Offline Yellow_Number_Five wrote:
BULLSHIT.
Women and men in western societies are equally guilty of preening themselves. If I'm going out to a club or a bar or anywhere where I may meet a potential mate and I'm actually looking for one, I'm sure that my hair is combed, my shirt is pressed, my shoes are not scuffed, that I'm dressed appropriately for the venue, that my car is clean (and my apartment too, just in case we happen to get to that point) - IOW, I put in EFFORT to make sure I present myself as well as I possibly can, just as women do by putting on make-up and jelwery and short skirts. It's a mating ritual as well as a matter of personal vanity and pride (I don't go to work looking like a slob either, as I'm sure you don't).
So you will be high maintenence. Just becuase you condone it and do it yourself does not make it low maintenece.
Well, this just doesn't make any sense.
I COULD go out, unshowered, smelling like crap, with greasy, disheveled hair, let my car and home become cluttered with fast food wrappers and pizza boxes, and hope my disgusting appearance doesn't dissuade women from seeing what an awesome, albeit, smelly, guy I am.
Sorry, you are just flat out wrong. When it comes to choosing and winning (for lack of better term) a mate, appearances do count. Appearance is indicative of fitness; genetic, social and financial - and ALL of them count to varying degrees. This is nothing new for the human race; they are engrained in us.
So I will put effort into presenting myself to potential mates, as all of us do to some degree. And by doing things like this, I will likely be more likely to mate than somebody who does not do this, and I will certainly have more options for mating than somebody who does not do this - all other things being equal.
You may as well have said that the best hunter in a Cromagnon clan was high maintenence.
That really is the long and short of it.
Quote:I don't consider things like that high maintenance. High maintenance to me is 3AM phone calls, an insistence on overly extravagant dates (not that the occasional high class date isn't fun, but balance the $100 a plate dinners with going to the movies or a dive bar). But more than anything else, mind games infuriate me - which typically manifests as unjustified jealousy, possessiveness and manipulation.Thats spoiled bitchyness. Not high maintenece. However, spoiled bitchyness is often combined with high maintenece (of course I can't think of a spoiler bitch that is low maintenece).
But these games ARE tactical, whether the woman knows it or not. They are designed to secure you as a mate (or in some cases, entice interest and challenge amoung other potential mates), and typically, they work.
And btw, you cannot come up with a "spoiler bitch" due to your own lack of experience, and you lack of experience can probably be traced to things already discussed.
I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world. - Richard Dawkins
Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.
- Login to post comments
Offline Yellow_Number_Five wrote:Well, if we are going to reduce it to biology, love is still more than what you are describing it as. If love were SOLELY motivated by reproduction, we'd never stay with the same mate for decades, or after the kids could fend for themselves.
The desire to keep a mate could also have a biological underpinning as well as cutural underpinnings. DO not see why we have to bring love into the picture.
I explained this in the text you cut off after quoting me.
Repeated sexual encounters and fidelity train your brain to crave and be attracted to that mate. Oxytocin is released after orgasm and sexual encounter in both male and female. It is also released after nursing and other "bonding" acivities. This, in large part, is why we fall in love, like I already explained. It becomes a literal chemical dependence, and this can be seen in the withdraw symptoms of such.
I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world. - Richard Dawkins
Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.
- Login to post comments
Offline EXC wrote:There is a bit too much of it from credible scientists at credible institutions to call it nonsense. Romantic love causes a chemical change, a feeling of euphoria. The pain and frustration is similar to other drugs when you can't get your 'fix'. Ask any heroine addict if they experienced pain and frustration when they couldn't get their fix. The pain and suffering is the drug withdrawal.
What does this "fix" consist of in romantic love according to these studies?
You miss the point. All romantic love really is on a biological level are interactions such as these. This does not make it any less meaningful for those who experience it. Pair bonding is EXTREMELY powerful over a wide variety of species, and humans are no exception.
Sure, we like to couch such things in terms like romance and chilvarey and love, but it is basic biology for which we've developed the term "love". And regardless of what we call it or how we understand it, I'm glad we have it - and not just for the survival mechanisms of it.
I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world. - Richard Dawkins
Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.
- Login to post comments
Not this nonsense again. This proves nothing other than external stimulus, that is not taken internally can have similar effects as extrnal stimulus taken internally. Furthermore, if you were to talk to anyone who has a more robust notion of love other than "It feels good" will tell you that their "love" is also the cuase of their pain or frustration. How come there are no studies on headaches or imbalances in chemicals causing various reactions that make people angry or sad used as evidence for love? I'll tell you, because "love" is percieved as a good for the mind and body, thus, only the studies that reveal "good" consequences to the body or mind are deemed as evidence of love whereas any studies which indicate pain or suffereing are not. It is the most unscientific inquiry ever devised and should be stopped since it is this type of "scientific" inquiry that led to outlandish claims like "Science proves that Jesus bodily ressurrected and and reappeared to the desciples".
" Why does God always got such wacky shit to say? . . . When was the last time you heard somebody say 'look God told me to get a muffin and a cup tea and cool out man'?" - Dov Davidoff
I can't believe I didn't notice this trend before. Besides, this whole thread is based in a damn stereotype which as 'rational' people we should know is probably based in truth but largely inaccurate. And all this 'high maintenance' drama is based on a phrase that is just different for everyone and we(myself included) have put way too much time and effort into defining it. Why are we still arguing here?
"We are the star things harvesting the star energy"
-Carl Sagan
Just because it takes some skill/practice to get it right, it's high maintenance? With that criteria, playing piano is high maintenance. It takes me a couple minutes to swipe some stuff on my face, it's not exactly rocket science. I can understand that it is probably a foreign concept to you and the other guys here though. Maybe your tastes do honestly differ from those of the majority of guys.
Yes and no. Make-up serves no truly functional purpose. But it does help hide imperfections and enhance your features. Honestly, I'm sleep-deprived half the time and I've had dark circles under my eyes since I was a kid. I'd rather people didn't see those. But it's not the worst thing in the world if I go out in public without make-up on, and in fact, I do on a fairly regular basis. Some days when I'm tired I'll just sleep in an extra 15 minutes and forgo the make-up. It's not like I have a dependency.
I'm a bit concerned with the fact that you seem to think that make-up = tons of goop caked on your face, at least since you talk about make-up used in movies. Most women aren't putting on a porn-star face every day. I never even wear foundation, because my skin can't breathe well with it on. We're talking more of a "fresh-faced" look most of the time.
As make-up has become a standard grooming ritual for women, I would also argue that a "fresh-faced" look would have benefits in a professional setting because it makes you look more polished. This is probably even more important in a "people oriented" job like sales or real estate, because it gives customers a good first impression. It's the difference between showing up to work/class looking tired and disheveled, and showing up to work/class looking bright-eyed and eager. No, I don't need to be wearing make-up, especially on days when I have to go into the mouse rooms for work and cover up more than a muslim woman. That's why I don't wear a lot. But my professors, mentor, and supervisors are the people who will be writing my recommendation letters for grad school in another year or so, so giving a good impression certainly helps boost their opinion of you, and can't hurt.
I usually just wear a watch, and then a necklace or pair of earrings. I need a watch, but yeah, the other stuff I could live without. I save my glitzier stuff for when I go out to dinner or bars or whatever, because it's more appropriate in those settings.
You seem to have this really weird dichotomy set up. Either a woman is getting her hair dyed and fake nails put on, and caking her face with make-up, and spending hours picking out a designer outfit; or she's putting on the first ratty t-shirt she finds on her floor with pajama pants, and running out the door with stringy hair and puffy eyes. A woman is either very high maintenance or very low maintenance. Additionally, you're taking the word "maintenance" very literally, applying it to only physical grooming behaviors, when others on their thread are of the view that "maintenance" is derived from a combination of physical and emotional behaviors, and how a woman treats others (especially men). If you want to attract/date a woman of the latter type, then I suppose anything above that would be high maintenance for you, but it just seems a little extreme to me.
Honestly, I'm surprised you didn't say that contacts are frivolous too, as my glasses could serve the same function (I do wear my glasses around sometimes though, especially during finals week when my eyes are tired).
There is a such thing as medium maintenance. And it is possible to look nice without putting in tons of effort. In my opinion, it is healthy to care about how you look - to a degree. It translates to better self-confidence, and hence better relationships with people, and maybe even better job performance.
Yeah, I figured that you don't. Like I said, for most everyday tasks, you're right - it's silly to think that girls can't carry their own stuff around.
I find this comment interesting. I don't mean to be offensive, but I have to ask... have you ever been in a relationship? Your dichotomous classification of women, and your attitude that you have more important things to do than worry about women seem to suggest that you don't have much intimate experience with them (and I don't mean that in a sexual way, I just mean in a "close relationship" way). By labeling common female grooming practices as ridiculous or frivolous, you seem to be sort of saying to yourself that they're not worth your time, or something.
Additionally, you say you just wait for girls to come to you... and then by acting like a misogynistic jerk, you drive them away from the beginning. This just seems to be behavior that a guy would exhibit if he was scared of getting into a relationship and getting hurt. I could be totally wrong, so you'll have to pardon my internet diagnosis.
'Moralists' believe that the world is, by and large, a 'fair' place. That is, people 'create their own worlds' based strictly on choices they make (everyone has an equal shot, in otherwords). Naturally, just like theists (I've found many of them to be theists, in fact), they bring-up every example they can dig-out of a poor African making it big in America, a disabled person living a more or less full life, etc, and ignore every circumstance that goes against the grain (...as well as demonstrate complete ignorance of fields of study like Game Theory).
'Ugly' I was not using as a term to describe physical attractiveness alone. Some people are an 'ugly' (re: unattractive) package after all factors have been taken into consideration. Physical attractiveness is a big one, certainly, but this thread has already gone ahead and unveiled the vast majority of common deal-breakers and attractors.
An ugly person, essentially, is one full of common deal-breakers (just as an attractive person is someone full of sought-after qualities). Bitter, deformed people in an advanced age are likely the extreme end of this category, and it makes a gradient sweep backward from there (most ugly people sitting in the middle of such a gradient). Where exactly 'ugly' and 'attractive' diverge is going to be a fuzzy area, certainly, but there's little question that that are most certainly ugly people and most certainly beautiful people.
- Leon Trotsky, Last Will & Testament
February 27, 1940
Kevin , you is beautiful ,
Now moving on ,
Joe Cocker - You are so beautiful (nearly unplugged)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wlDmslyGmGI
Garth's Foxey Lady
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EvQikr1bmJE
Atheism Books.
Actually, yeah playing the piano kinda is, even if you play by feel instead of reading notes. It is an increidbly challenging instrument to play.
I apologise for making it sound foreign but cmon. You do not just slap it on your face and hope for the best. The primary reason to wear make-up is to hide "imperfections" for, if you really believed your face was fine as is, you would not wear it. Furthermore, if you really don;t care about imperfections on your face it makes absolutly no sense for you to wear it.
I was honestly not referring to whore or horror style make-up. I knew you meant a more modest application. That is why I said guys would definatly disagree with me on this becuase most guys would not feel that the modest application of make-up is high maintenence.
Your face being smooth is a deal breaker for your professors?
Not jewelry, it actually serves a useful purpose.
Dinners, depending on where you are having it, and bars, which is weird, usually call for high maintenence preperations since dinners are all about being "nice" and "mannerly" and bars are about spuerficial hook-ups or simply looking good for the sake of looking good.
Nope. I am just a very simple-minded person. Meaning if a certain part of the morning ritual does not serve any apparant practical purpose, it is high maintenence. So yes, to me, guys who simply gel up their hair in the morning are high maintenence becuase there is no apparant practical purpose to geling your hair. If you are doing that, you simply want to look good or believe you look good by doing that. I also feel the same way about guys who wear suits (of course I hate the whole idea of suits but thats a different issue) since suits are high maintenence clothing. A guy talking about his suit is almost no different than a girl talking about her favorite dress or pair of jeans.
Girls with low maintence mornign rituals have low maintence attitudes and girls with high maintence morning rituals have high maintence attitudes. And, I shjould have specified this earliar, simply beucase you wore make-up one or two daysw out of the week does not mean you are high maintence the other 5 days. So high maintence, to me, is not really an intrinsic quality but a property anyone can have, or not have, dependig on their mood. Also, High maintence (as I am using it) is not a general negative quality. It becomes a negative quality when their primary concern is being high maintenence. I know many girls who, on certain occassions, are reluctantly high maintenence and, in all honesty, it does suit them well. All I'm saying is I would prefer that they never feel need to be high maintenence since many are perfectly fine just how they are without it.
I think perfume and cologne are extreme and too many people wear it. It makes me gag.
I go back and forth on those simply becuase glasses can get in the way, for instance, making sure the lenses are clean and looking too far to the left or right takes your pupil past the lense. Contacts avoid these annoyances, yet, replace it with their own, namely, drying out, maintainig them with the solution every night and making sure you dont fall asleep with them in your eyes. To put it another way, it is not clear to me that contact are absolutly totally not practical even if many glasses weaeres get contacts for suprficial reasons.
I think many people look nice enough as is yet, whenever I tell them so, they think I am full of shit or just being nice. As far as job performance, it depends on the job. I guess a secritary would have to be concerned about how he/she looks since they are respresenting their boss in a certain sense and if the boss is high maintenece, which the boss usually is, it means that the secritary must also be high maintenence.
Depending on your defition of relationship its either a definate NO or a kinda sorta maybe.
Not in the slightest. I do not view girls shaving their legs as frivilous or them growing long hair as frivilous. The reason why I bring them up is becuase one activity, shaving legs, is very time consuming (based on what girls tell me) and the other results in simple tasks like washing their hair very arduous since it takes a long time to wash long hair. Second, in regards to the time worth comment, in my experience its usually been the opposite that, after spending a little time with me, it becomes apparant that they feel I am not worth their time. And girls whom I have developed close friendships with very often tell me why and suggest that I change but I refuse to because the changes, I feel, are not me.
I am not scared of getting in a relationship, I have simply accepted the fact that the majority of girls simply do not see me as relationship material and there is no way to argue that you are since the mere act of trying to convince them that you are only proves that their initial presumption was correct. Ironically, the last girl I had serious feelings about, and had serious feelings about me, seemed afraid of being a relaitonship. I deduced this since she turned me down siting how, being that she was a Christian (you might want to say my first mistake was trying to get with a Christian), I would, somehow be more influential on her than an omnipresent, omnipotent, and ominicient being who created everything. And no, I do not get serious feelings about girls that often.
" Why does God always got such wacky shit to say? . . . When was the last time you heard somebody say 'look God told me to get a muffin and a cup tea and cool out man'?" - Dov Davidoff
Girls wanting attention ? I AM glad they do, and they are good at it. Thing is, they are all really just perfect completely naked ..... just as they "naturally" are ..... breast milk included !
I AM a girl lover ..... they need not work hard , but I like when they do.
High Heels, lingerie, lipstick ! and all sexy messages ! GO GIRLS, I love what you do, but don't worry pretty ones , don't over work , Hey girls, you got all the slaves you want for that ! and I like it like that ....
"Slaves to love" , that is GOOD !
Dave Clark Five - I Like It Like That
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1H2REaKIOlg
Atheism Books.
Downright fiendish sexual dynamo, I'd say. Go ahead and deny it.
...
Indeed. If diabetes congenital heart disease was signaled by facial lesions, I reckon there would be a lot less diabetics and people having heart attacks at 23, as it would have a stronger selection element associated with if. There is SOME work that suggests that pheremones may indicate such things and play a role, but nothing solid.
Symmetry seems REALLY important to humans. An ability to recognize patterns and interpret them was likely key to the development of language and abstract thought - and would not be possible without the ability to recognize symmetry and appreciate the implications of it. This is something DEEPLY evolutionarily engrained in us.
Indeed. And it is worth pointing out that in the case of a peacocks tail, that the extra plummage makes him MORE vulnerable to being eaten by predators - but this is offset by the fact that it gets him laid more often than cocks with inferior plummage; hence his genes are more likely to be propogated.
Exactly. Excellent observation.
Learned that one the hard way.
I'm going with nature on this one.
I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world. - Richard Dawkins
Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.