Does Success Hurt Woman's Dating Chances

[Consept]

10 minutes ago, Preety_India said:

Most successful women settle for men who earn less than them. 

What is that based on? 

[Preety_India]

10 minutes ago, Consept said:

What is that based on? 

Numbers. Aren't enough men. 

 

[Emerald]

1 hour ago, Raptorsin7 said:

But if you value a LTR and a family then you have to ensure that you have develop those aspects that will contribute to securing a successful LTR and family.

Yes, that's true. It's very important to develop habits and traits that contribute to the health and well-being of a family. This is one benefit of having a life-purpose and well-balanced life.

Unfortunately, many women who end up only focusing on children, derive their identity only in their motherhood role. So, it puts a lot of pressure on the children to feel that they have to bring meaning to their mother's life. And there is often a desire to keep children young to keep that identity alive.

It's a common dynamic that children of mothers who are only focused on their motherhood role, end up in unhealthy enmeshment patterns. And this happens because the children become the only outlet of control and expression of their identity. 

So, it's a bit counter-intuitive, but you can't pour from an empty cup. If your children and family are the full extent of the meaningful things in your life, you will be ringing them out for meaning like blood from a stone trying to get fulfillment. 

Not to mention that many mothers who don't individuate in other ways, end up resenting their children and then being jealous of them for realizing the potentials that she hasn't.

Or there is a tendency to want to live vicariously through the children, if there is the sense of the life unlived. All children bear the burdens of the mother's unlived life.

And these are all very common issues... especially in my clients who are 50+ and were raised by mothers who were raise in a time where women only stayed home and were expected only to be wives and mothers.

So, if a woman does choose to stay home, it's very important for her to develop herself in other ways beyond the role of wife and mother. Otherwise, there are serious consequences for that.

As a man I'm very conscious of what it will take to create a successful family and have a good partner. Virtually everything in my life is built around that eventual goal. 

Your understanding of what creates a successful family will get in the way of that. Traditional dynamics with super rigid gender roles are not typically the most authentic or healthiest. There's often a desire to fit a certain ideal... but in aiming for this ideal, it leads to issues. 

I think as woman embark on early life path's that have historically been occupied solely by men they are being a fed a message that fails to account for the fact that many, if not most, modern woman want a valuable partner for a relationship and family but when you start talking about what that will require of woman, men get accused of being sexist, msygonistic, woman hating etc

What I'm saying is that your views are just not good advice for women for finidng a high value partner or for healthy family creation.

You're simplifying things down in such a way where the dynamic is likely to be unhealthy. And you're focusing in on things that don't really matter once you're actually in a committed relationship with children. No need to force anything. The natural dynamic will arise between any two given people. 

Either way, from personal experience, I can tell you that being an ambitious person with big goals and a lot to give to the world, never stood in the way of my capacity to attract and keep a partner nor has it ever stood in the way of being a good mom. Both of my kids are very creative and intelligent, and they see through example that they can do anything they want to do, just as I have. And that's the way I'm raising them. 

I don't want to raise them into some weird Stage Blue paradigm that's super traditional. That doesn't fit with my values, paradigm, or personality nor does it fit with my family's values, paradigm, or personality. I want to give my kids an actual leg up when it comes to living a fulfilling life, which means knowing that the sky is the limit they can pursue their passions and fully unfurl their potential.

 

[Emerald]

1 hour ago, Consept said:

I kind of agree, but to really be honest all the things you mention like individuation, education etc are things we end up liking because we like you. If we like you, we accept whatever about you, we don't like you specifically because you are into personal development or into fitness, there's just something we like about you.

Yes, magnetic attraction stems from a more intuitive source. No one is attracted to someone's job, really... just what their job suggests about them.

But given the nature of my interests and career, I do attract many men who value these things about me and specifically want these qualities in a partner. And that tends to be the big draw with me for guys who are actually looking for a deep relationship with someone who can have deep conversations with him and understand him. 

That's why I keep saying that, it isn't necessarily true that women's career/personal development stuff doesn't add to their ability to attract a high quality partner. It's been super valuable for me in that way. 

If we think of the dating "marketplace", when you develop these qualities as a woman, you attract a "niche market". This means that these qualities will appeal to fewer men. But the men you're likely to attract are more compatible. 

This has always been a tactic that I've used to help me in dating because I've always been unusual and have never had mass appeal. 

So, as a teenager, I dressed in a goth style, just because I enjoyed that. And given that I belonged to a sub-culture which is a "niche market" in the dating marketplace, it guaranteed that 90% of guys wouldn't be interested in me as a partner. But 10% of guys were ALL about it and had a thing for it. And those guys were far more likely to share common interests.

It's the same concept. Find a man who already wants what you are. Don't try to fit yourself to the general expectations of men as a conglomerate as that's largely irrelevant. As a woman, you don't need mass appeal to attract a high quality guy... you just need to be able to attract the right guy for you.

That means, you're wise to shine your light as brightly as possible if you're looking for a partner as you become a beacon for that type of guy. It's part of the peacock game. 

Also, you're more likely to attract men who get more holistic attractions.

The foundation of which isn't about maxing out on looks or being feminine (I don't know what a maxed out feminine person would even be) but there are a certain set of qualities that most guys want, (that I've mentioned) if they had a choice. However this is the foundation of attraction, then other things as you mentioned, are built on top of this. 

The qualities you'd mentioned, most women possess anyway as just an element of their personality. And at that more instinctual level of attraction it is these qualities that create a magnetic pull. Just as a man isn't really appreciated for his job on that more intuitive level... it's more about the instinctual qualities his job highlights in him. 

In terms of keeping a man, if I was to give advice to women, I would say don't compete with him, don't try and change him - if there's something you really can't stand and can't get passed then maybe move on, co-operate with him - be on the same team, add value to his life in some way, take a genuine interest in what he's interested in, have a high level of respect for him. If you don't feel like you can do these things then it probably won't work or you'll think it's working but he'll be unhappy underneath 

These are normal relationship expectations... with the exception of moving on if there's an issue. Issues left unresolved tend to fester. But that also shouldn't be approached in a blaming way... more in a cooperative way. 

 

[Consept]

6 hours ago, Emerald said:

But given the nature of my interests and career, I do attract many men who value these things about me and specifically want these qualities in a partner. And that tends to be the big draw with me for guys who are actually looking for a deep relationship with someone who can have deep conversations with him and understand him. 

Yes on a personal level i would be interested in someone who can engage in deep conversations, even if they cant but are open to new ideas thats also a plus. I do have to be attracted to them though otherwise i would more just see it as friends, its happened a couple times for me, but it definitely puts their attraction level up though, so if it wasnt someone id typically be attracted to, this factor could put them over the edge.

6 hours ago, Emerald said:

The qualities you'd mentioned, most women possess anyway as just an element of their personality. And at that more instinctual level of attraction it is these qualities that create a magnetic pull. Just as a man isn't really appreciated for his job on that more intuitive level... it's more about the instinctual qualities his job highlights in him. 

Right im completely with you on this point and here in lies the issue of the thread. There are a lot of women that dont posses these almost default qualities or at least suppress them, successful women in particular who think to be successful means being like an alpha male type man is just not attractive to men and the issue is that they think because now theyve got all this success in the material world that it automatically translates to success and desirability in the dating world. If you have success and keep these qualities then you wouldnt have a problem, there maybe issues with a man being insecure but as you say youll filter them out or possibly if you really like him work it out. 

I know some women, some even family members, who are very successful, phds, high education all of that, who are very strong, direct, say whats on their mind, theyre usually very vocal in terms of feminism, but they come off as masculine. They can barely get a man to stay around for a couple days let alone a relationship and if you tell them anything to help or make them think, theyll rip your head off and tell you 'men are the problem they just cant handle strong women'. This to me is sad because i do care about these people and i know that they will most likely never get someone who will be with them long term. Its also sad because in moments of introspection or just a deeper conversation you can see that feminine energy coming through. So these women and women like this, really need to work on themselves, not in the way they think but actual counselling to open up their feminine and intuitive side. 

These woman also seem to blame men for all their troubles, this needs to stop as well, this is not co-operative by any stretch of the imagination. There should be understanding between the sexes and i feel these type of women deeply want to be understood but have zero understanding of any man.    

[Raptorsin7]

2 minutes ago, Consept said:

They can barely get a man to stay around for a couple days let alone a relationship and if you tell them anything to help or make them think, theyll rip your head off and tell you 'men are the problem they just cant handle strong women'. This to me is sad because i do care about these people and i know that they will most likely never get someone who will be with them long term. Its also sad because in moments of introspection or just a deeper conversation you can see that feminine energy coming through. So these women and women like this, really need to work on themselves, not in the way they think but actual counselling to open up their feminine and intuitive side. 

@Consept This is a more insidious dynamic than it appears. You have a situation where people refuse to hear the truth, and if you try to bring it up you get labeled and chastised, and so people just leave the situation alone and you end with group think.

Meanwhile the clock ticks and the rest of world will leave people to their own doom

[Consept]

14 minutes ago, Raptorsin7 said:

@Consept This is a more insidious dynamic than it appears. You have a situation where people refuse to hear the truth, and if you try to bring it up you get labeled and chastised, and so people just leave the situation alone and you end with group think.

Meanwhile the clock ticks and the rest of world will leave people to their own doom

Yeah the funny thing is that this mindset is actually very similar to a male incel mindset. They believe 'women should just want them just because and its womens fault because theyre whores that are only attracted to chad'. Theres not much difference between 'high value men should want me because im successful and if they dont its because they cant handle a woman like me and theyre weak', both shift responsibility onto the opposite sex because theyre not being chosen. These are extremes, but with the incels they are kind of shunned and looked down upon, rightly or wrongly so, with the females theyre almost pandered and catered to, a lot of people agree will agree with them in conversation, which is why i think it could be a real problem if it becomes a mainstream way of thinking, which i guess it kind of is already. The result is the same though, both groups will end up alone and/or unfulfilled if they dont address their own personal issues. 

[Derek White]

I’ll just reply to the original post, I haven’t read everything in the thread.

There are many facets to this.

It’s well documented that women prefer more successful guys.

Firstly, personally I like women who are successful. The problem is other people will look down on me or the woman may feel insecure about me or think she’s doing me a favour. It’s the same problem with dating taller women, I don’t have a problem. Society makes you feel bad about it, you get ridiculed in public. These are thing I think about, unfortunately.

There’s also this tendency to simplify this by saying, “men don’t care about success at all,” which is not true. A successful man is unlikely to marry a minimum wage worker. Men do care. 

If I had a sister I wouldn’t want her to be with someone who’s broke. Money gives you freedom, good lifestyle, pleasure, safety, statues, and so on. And a successful guy, if he worked the right way, is also likely to be a better human being (bitter pill). He will have intelligence, discipline, positive attitude, independence, inter-personal skills, stress management, etc. All these things are valuable outside of your career as well. She’s just securing her future.

There also the aspect of our base biological survival desires, like picking the most powerful guy in a tribe for survival and safety. Likewise, if the base desire for men is to impregnate as many women, then they wouldn’t care about success of those women. I won’t get into it, it seems pretty obvious. I think it makes logical sense from an evolutionary biological standpoint why women do this.

Also, there’s this mutual understanding that the women may be slightly less successful, but she makes up for that by the fact that she has to take care of the baby and house, and that the husband has to earn more because he doesn’t do those other things. This is more common with traditional couples.

Idk, I wouldn’t say it hurts her chances if she’s successful, it narrows it down to men she may be interested in. I guess it has to with with base survival agendas.

 

[Derek White]

6 hours ago, modmyth said:

I kind of wonder if this is a greater Vancouver thing.

People in Vancouver are so cliquey, most of the people in university are only friends with their high school buddies. People only hang out with their racial/ethnic groups too. Even in high school people were mostly friends with people from their own elementary school lol.

[SLuxy]

@Raptorsin7 @Raptorsin7

I would be wary of trusting a man's opinion on what is attractive to men.

Its the 'I got knocked out by Mike Tyson' mentality.

[Arcangelo]

Hypergamy and intersexual dynamics in a nutshell:

-Women seek higher value men

-Women are lukewarm about same-status men

-Top men have the most options (and most dating power)

-Top women have the smallest market

Edited April 23, 2021 by Arcangelo

[Arcangelo]

My dad has known about hypergamy his whole life. He told me and his friends his ''secret''

You wanna be a player like me and have a lot of women and lots of sex?

Step down 2 notches in the social ladder. Look there for your girls.

 

Me personally I work at ''McDonald's''. If I step down 2 notches I think I will be left with homeless girls. I am becoming an electrician so I can be able to have a chance with the girls that work at McDonald's.

 

 

Arc

 

Edited April 23, 2021 by Arcangelo

[Raptorsin7]

4 hours ago, Derek White said:

There’s also this tendency to simplify this by saying, “men don’t care about success at all,” which is not true. A successful man is unlikely to marry a minimum wage worker. Men do care. 

Most men who posted on this thread said they don't really care about a woman's success. When it comes to valuing a partner a woman's success is low in on the totem pole.

Let me ask you. If you met a girl who was attractive, feminine, kind, submissive, etc but she worked as a server making minimum wage would that be a deal breaker? For most men I'm assuming they wouldn't care at all. 

If a woman has kids it is likely her success will take a hit, and many men end up being responsible for most of the bills anyway, so a woman's income when they first meet isn't super important.

As far as education and intelligence as a proxy for success, I agree most men wouldn't want some girl who reads at a 5th grade level or something like that.

4 hours ago, Derek White said:

Idk, I wouldn’t say it hurts her chances if she’s successful, it narrows it down to men she may be interested in. I guess it has to with with base survival agendas.

This issue is woman want to dating someone who they percieve as equal or greater value than them. So when woman become financially successful they want men of at least their socioeonomioc status and lifestyle. But men don't value financial success in woman the way woman value it in men so you have a mismatch dynamic. A woman can earn 200k a year and will refuse to settle for men earning like 60k, majority of men, but if she's a 5/10 in looks she's going to have a really hard time.

[Preety_India]

9 minutes ago, Raptorsin7 said:

. A woman can earn 200k a year and will refuse to settle for men earning like 60k, majority of men, but if she's a 5/10 in looks she's going to have a really hard time.

Whenever I look up successful women online, it's usually some supermodel or someone like Kim Kardashian whose name pops up. She is a billionaire now. A woman's success is directly proportional to her looks. This was very evident in the job interviews I attended and this is the same trend everywhere. The better a woman looks, the better are her prospects in virtually everything in life. Even if the job was a technological job, most women who were rejected were the not so good looking ones. I felt sorry for them. But this is facts. Most women in my neighborhood are into jobs or careers that are looks and beauty based. If I randomly browse through youtube, I never really come across ugly women, most women who are successful youtubers are also good looking, also a lot of women on youtube are into makeup, beauty channels, in fact they start out like that and then branch into subjects like philosophy or horror stories, they initially start out as makeup artists, so most women who are super wealthy are generally actresses, super models, models, beauty gurus and women who tend to look much better than the average women. 

I don't see why these women would have a difficulty in getting a boyfriend when most of the successful women are also good looking. 

And the not so good looking women in engineering and technology jobs are usually very rare, how many girls really show interest in science, in my college, most girls were into girlish things and few girls were into other stuff, this website itself is an example, most girls rely on their looks and if they look good, they capitalize on their looks by finding jobs that appreciate their looks, and such careers are a dime a dozen, even girls who are interested in technology don't make it too far if their enthusiasm is very cursory and if they are unable to compete in those jobs, then they drop out. 

So the 5/10 girl who is good at a  technology job, making a 6 figure income is like the rarest ever archetype.  Most women who are successful, I doubt they would be that successful if they really looked ugly or average. Most average women don't even try to compete, precisely due to the same reason, they usually get out competed by the good looking girls in the same field. 

Such girls get many many men liking their pictures on Instagram or Facebook because of their good looks and they have a huge pool of men to select from. In fact success makes it much easier because they get more public exposure on social media, more followers, more engagements and opportunities and events precisely because of their success. 

If a girl is really beautiful and feminine  but chooses to stay inside her home all day, doesn't go out much, doesn't get exposure, has nothing else going for her, I doubt she will have any chances at dating at all because nobody would even know that she exists. 

 

 

[Consept]

1 hour ago, Preety_India said:

A woman's success is directly proportional to her looks

This could be true for models or jobs that are based on looks but for every other job this is a reach. By your logic, every female in politics, law, medicine, tech should be a super model as these are the top jobs, of course this isn't the case, that is actually the most sexist comment on this thread so far ?? I love you though 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2017/07/28/opinions/ugliness-premium-opinion-drexler/index.html

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.businessinsider.com/really-ugly-people-make-more-money-2018-4%3famp

 

[Derek White]

2 hours ago, Raptorsin7 said:

Let me ask you. If you met a girl who was attractive, feminine, kind, submissive, etc but she worked as a server making minimum wage would that be a deal breaker? For most men I'm assuming they wouldn't care at all. 

I think it would. Maybe it is just me. I value life purpose, being skilled and being somewhat ambitious.

I think there are other men who share my POV. Men marry low but not THAT low. How many times have you seen a professional like a lawyer or an engineer marry a factory worker? I’ve seen doctors marry nurses but that’s usually as low as it gets.

2 hours ago, Raptorsin7 said:

A woman can earn 200k a year and will refuse to settle for men earning like 60k, majority of men, but if she's a 5/10 in looks she's going to have a really hard time.

She might have to change her standards a little bit then. I would say she would be better off with a 200k than without it. Her finances would give her more options.

According to me men do care somewhat about finances, you can do a survey on the forum asking “how much men care about the woman’s earnings in a long-term relationship, out of 10?” I think the response would be around 6 to 7 definitely not 1. 1 being doesn’t care at all.

[Preety_India]

3 hours ago, Consept said:

This could be true for models or jobs that are based on looks but for every other job this is a reach. By your logic, every female in politics, law, medicine, tech should be a super model as these are the top jobs, of course this isn't the case, that is actually the most sexist comment on this thread so far ?? I love you though 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2017/07/28/opinions/ugliness-premium-opinion-drexler/index.html

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.businessinsider.com/really-ugly-people-make-more-money-2018-4%3famp

 

Im not making a statement. Simply stating what I have observed. Most successful women I saw don't lack in the looks department.  Nothing sexist about something that already exists as a fact. 

If I said men are stronger than women physically, would that be sexist?

 

[Preety_India]

 

To be honest, I will never be with a person who doesn't allow me to grow, doesn't care about my goals and ambitions. 

That would be like death to me. 

It would feel very suffocating. It's okay if he wants me to take care of the house and kids something obviously even I would want, but if he pressured me into ignoring my passions, downplayed my interests in life and or acted in a disparaging way discouraging me from pursuing my goals and desires, to me it would indicate that he just doesnt care about me as a human who has desires and aspirations and simply wants me as a housekeeper and a bed warmer at night and a cook and nothing more. I would consider that he doesn't see me or value my existence or passions. 

The funny thing is that I would never be this way to me, discouraging him, never, in fact I would be very supportive of his careers, goals, passions and desires. 

One reason why we have relationships is not because we only want to fulfill our needs in the relationship, we also want to grow mutually. And mutual growth is not possible if youre not following what you're deeply interested in.. 

Also much of the sentiment expressed on this thread like resentment towards a woman having a career is coming from a stage orange mentality on career and growth itself, where you think that a career is only for money and as long as the husband provides for, why does the woman need to work, but you have to understand that often women aren't necessarily working for money, although working for money is also important (especially for personal security which is very important, self sufficiency ) but they are working for their passions, some woman is a doctor because she wants to heal people, she not only wants to contribute to her family but also society and community. 

So it shows a significant lack of consideration for a husband to ignore his wife's ambitions, desires and passions.. 

[Consept]

3 hours ago, Preety_India said:

Im not making a statement. Simply stating what I have observed. Most successful women I saw don't lack in the looks department.  Nothing sexist about something that already exists as a fact. 

Your taking your anecdotal experience and extrapolating it to make a wider point. I could find 10 overweight and not good looking women who are very successful but it doesn't necessarily mean every woman who is successful is that way. If you then say 'oh but I know 10 women who are good looking and successful', both samples are so small that they don't really help as come to truth that's why it's better to look at a wider scope of society than your own. 

3 hours ago, Preety_India said:

If I said men are stronger than women physically, would that be sexist?

The equivalent of what you said would really be something like  'a man's physical strength is proportionate to his success' which obviously doesn't make any sense. 

But the whole thing of if you're not that good looking you'll always be behind good looking people, is again not true and basically incel mentality. 

[Arcangelo]

23 minutes ago, Consept said:

But the whole thing of if you're not that good looking you'll always be behind good looking people, is again not true

Hold on. Are you saying the Halo Effect is not real?