"All the nice girls love a bastard!"

Dimensions Magazine

Help Support Dimensions Magazine:

taobear

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2010
Messages
211
Location
,
I personally like the sweet, shy nerdy guys who need a lot of affection :wubu:. I'm turned off by mean men....

But a lot of girls go for this type? Why? Not sure. I just know what I know. lol
I think I'm in love:bow::bow::bow::bow:
 

Delineator

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2010
Messages
75
Location
,
Um no this isn't All about physical attractiveness.
Physical attractiveness really is the limiting factor, however.

Let me explain: Female mate choices consider only two unifying quantities of selective value which compete to monopolize female reproductive potential, and have thus co-evolved in a bivalent morphology.

The first strategic morphism, is Genetic benefits: Attractiveness based fitness traits(ie. physical 'chemistry'), which are more strongly correlated with female sexual choice(observed in its nearest correspondence) given that
sensory bias in sexual choice is 'fixed' by evolutionary success(biological 'viability' is communicated by the most 'rudimentary' of sensory cues, and since biological viability is selectively limiting, such cues retain 'primacy' - continuous signals which tend away from a direction of decreased viability will be favored by evolution), and impossible to
'expopriate' by rival males(unlike in the case of direct benefits below).

This strategy lends best to high turnover, short-term investments of 'mating effort' within mating systems where polygyny prevails.

The second strategic morphism is Direct benefits(benefits with implications for paternal investment): Where less physically ornamented males must rely more upon their utilitarian value than genetic contributions in securing
sexual access to receptive females.

Here it lends best to mating systems which ensure a tight correspondence between male utilitarian/economic proxy and female sexual fidelity(and thus reproductive success), by posing a selective advantage for long term paternal investment that trades off relatively low offspring yields for high survivability.

The thing is, that in any economically prosperous welfare-state(as prevails in Western populations), implicit system dynamics of inclusive fitness will severely marginalize paternal advantage(as a form of direct benefits), and corresponding male competencies(in rendering economic benefits, relationship security, etc) as a determinant in female mate choice(correlating with individual male reproductive success).

This has the effect of (severely) biasing females towards physical attractiveness in their mate choices.

So it is with PUA methods that the success rate is preponderantly weighted by physical attractiveness.

Evolution predicts this, and experiment demonstrates it.

Your talking about sociological (aka money/social status), natural selection, genetics, and pre-programmed instinctual awareness. Like it or not, somewhere down the line we are all the offspring of rapist and pillagers. I dare you to find someone alive today who doesn't exist because their great-grand-pappy of some 40,000 years go (or much longer) murdered rapped and pillaged.
Rape is the predictable consequence of sexual conflict - much like social monogamy, it evolved out of selective advantages in male control over female reproduction.

This observation is academically impolitic(if not controversial, per se).

Having once enjoyed some measure of success as a rogue fitness strategy, rape has since fallen out of favor with a hostile fitness landscape(where antagonistic strategies prevail), that has further rendered it a prohibitively high-risk venture.

Many women are not with their "physical ideal"
True, only a minority of women can achieve their physically ideal mate, so the others will tend to optimize their prospects as best they can, leading to high relationship turnover as they proceed to 'trade-up', ad-nauseum.

they are far more willing to be with someone they sync with rather than someone they think is "just hot". You can go right now on any popular dating service and find many women searching for a guy who can "make me laugh".
What women claim to be looking for, and their decision weightings are often two very different(ie. contradictory) quantities.

If a guy can't connect with women in a way that lets her "feel" him, he's going to be FOREVER-FRIEND-ZONED.

You don't have to be PERFECT, you don't have to be CHISELED, you don't have to be SUPER FUNNY, you don't have to be WORTH A BILLION DOLLARS.
No, you don't.

But if a man deviates significantly from male trait averages in the wrong direction(like with any BHM), he will incur a huge signalling handicap, and unless he can compensate with some exceptional characteristic(which likewise deviates from average, but this time in the direction of female choice), he will be relegated to the very few women who can't do any better(and such women will always be in short supply, as males are far less selective, and thus large populations of
females tend to 'share' and circulate relatively small populations of 'choice' males between them).

Run some experiments and you will see that regardless of what independent variables you might be considering(esp with respect to PUA assumptions), components of male physical attractiveness are always the confounding variable.

Control for the predictable effects of physical attractiveness, and you will note a greater sensetivity to the confounding variable - this tells us something about the relative dependencies.

You HAVE TO MAKE HER FEEL! I would rather a woman hate me cause she doesn't like who I am; rather than feel indifferent because she couldn't get a clear reading on who I might be and what I might be all about.

So screw all this talk of genetics, natural selection, and whatever else BS people want to trip about. Women feel, and if women don't feel you, (on whatever level, sexual, emotional, etc.) they are Done With You! If they do Feel You, and they think your worth taking a chance on, they're gonna take up up on a date to at least get to know more. I think guys really underestimate how much stress some women can feel about just giving a guy a chance into their heart.

So simple end of story is sometimes "the bastard" has better skills and ability at letting himself and his interest be known to a woman in an attractive evident way. Sometimes, genuinely good guys have an amazing ability to do it too. Usually these are the guys who aren't concerned with needing to be nice. They just hold themselves to values such as being true, just, and perhaps even refreshingly old fashioned.
-----------------
Sorry didn't mean to Rant...I think.
Where PUA comes into its own is in respect to hair-splitting prospects once the physical attractiveness condition is satisfied.

One thing I have noticed is that women are highly credulous of conventionally attractive males as they will not ignore even a remote chance that such a male will turn out to justify some long-term value(which is difficult to determine in any acute interval of time) - this makes women strategically naive, and savvy guys know just how to play this(by parlaying into short-term mating opportunities).

So, PUA methods are all about manipulating initial female expectations(where the 'Halo effect' comes in *very* handy by letting a woman's *imagination* do most of the work for you).

But, the success PUAs attribute to their methodology is frequently spurious, and of limited value to BHM(who tend to fall below the minimum attractiveness thresholds for the *vast* majority of women, and thus will quickly become discouraged by their lack of success), in my opinion.

Don't get me wrong - I find PUAs harmless, and some happen to be really cool guys.

But I just don't find much value in their methods - I would rather invest in physical attractiveness(which is a very well known quantity - sufficiently physically attractive males never want for female companionship, regardless of their other defects).
 

Delineator

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2010
Messages
75
Location
,
There are hints along the way, and since when is cheating alone the definition of abuse? I sure didn't say that in my post!
I didn't mean to imply that, but it is commonly inclusive of 'abusive' connotations.

And who said BHMs aren't able to do the EXACT SAME DAMN THING to a woman regardless of how he or his partner looks?!
It is possible, but much less likely.

My thin and beautiful friend was dating a BHM.
You're already straining credulity.

The guy was more than just a cheater. He was physically abusive and denied everything. To say it's just about looks is completely wrong in every way.
Correction: looks aren't the only variable, but they are a significant one.

And this claim is absolutely justified(scientifically - I can back it up with evidence if you desire).

So, even if your anecdote is accurate(there are always two sides to every story, and your account is further biased by a second-hand source), we should still expect that BHMs would tend less to abusive behaviors.

The guys I've dated, except one, have been slim and were not of the cheating or abusive variety. And to this day aren't, even if not with me.

If you call cheating "abuse" then there's something wrong in that. My post meant the abusive type in verbal, physical AND mental. Not just cheating but so much more. In fact, most of the abusive guys weren't cheaters, just ACTUALLY abusive.
 

CarlaSixx

Just Another Weirdo
Joined
May 27, 2010
Messages
3,982
Location
,
So, even if your anecdote is accurate(there are always two sides to every story, and your account is further biased by a second-hand source), we should still expect that BHMs would tend less to abusive behaviors.
He personally knows he was abusive. Admitted to it often, but didn't do a damn thing to change it. She knows he's abusive, but keeps running back. She THINKS he's the kind of guy she deserves when everyone KNOWS she deserves the complete opposite of the guy.

It isn't biased if I know their stories first-hand because they openly and verbally admit to it, as well as visual evidence, and the stories all match up.
 

Delineator

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2010
Messages
75
Location
,
Sorry, I don't like the hype either and I consider myself a hot piece of caramel ass. I don't deal with assholes yet I do not want a doormat either.

The point is, most women want a man who is sure of himself and knows how to protect his territory when need be. I hate how some self serving guys turn this into "women love assholes who mistreat them'. What the hell, women are not all masochists.
Yeah, I disagree with that too.

I'm saying that women tend to like conventionally attractive men, who in turn tend to be opportunistic assholes(because such behaviors have have proven adaptive with respect to problems in sexual conflict).
 

WillSpark

King Of The Robo-Sluts
Joined
Nov 3, 2008
Messages
1,636
Location
,
I'm just going to go ahead and try to sum something up here.

Based on common evidence and reports, one could say that BHMs have less opportunity for relationships in certain cases, where conventionally attractive people have more options. From this point of view, one may be able to infer that because BHMs would have a lower percentage of relationships, they would value a relationship more, and therefore tend to be less abusive.

However, because BHMs may have less opportunity, almost every statistic for them will be lower than that of the larger number of the other group. Plus, this does not account for abusive personalities, which are goign to be ever-present regardless of appearance based on factors unrelated to the attractiveness of an individual.

And I apologize that my attempt at "summing something up" was two paragraphs long.
 

Delineator

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2010
Messages
75
Location
,
He personally knows he was abusive. Admitted to it often, but didn't do a damn thing to change it. She knows he's abusive, but keeps running back. She THINKS he's the kind of guy she deserves when everyone KNOWS she deserves the complete opposite of the guy.

It isn't biased if I know their stories first-hand because they openly and verbally admit to it, as well as visual evidence, and the stories all match up.
An interesting anecdote, I will admit.

Thanks for clarifying.
 

Delineator

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2010
Messages
75
Location
,
That's sad; that a man's loyalty depends on his opportunities.

"Yeah, better get with those fat guys. They won't cheat on you 'cause everyone finds them ugly except you."

:doh:
Well, that's the nature of the dilemma.
 

Delineator

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2010
Messages
75
Location
,
Like I said, women are attracted to confident and loving men who respect themselves and his woman. I am a female, I can tell you that.
You can claim that, but it would not be very compelling as a universal statement of fact.

It really is trivial to observe how frequently women entangle themselves with abusive men(everyone can see this)

And like I said, conventionally attractive males will tend to be more abusive for evolutionary reasons.

This conclusion is justified, and I have case studies(would you like to see them, or would you just be inclined to dismiss them?) and a commonly held evolutionary synthesis to support my claims.

Personal incredulity is not a counter-argument.

Perhaps some of these guys don't have a good opinion of themselves and so that turns off many women.

Cheating is all about will, if a man wants to cheat and get some pussy, believe me he will--doesn't matter if he is the CEO of a billion dollar company or the crackhead down 14th street.

If a woman wants an asshole, then she has low self esteem issues.
 
Joined
Apr 17, 2007
Messages
3,242
Location
,
When it comes to the BHM/FFA relationship ..the dynamic is different than most conventional relationships. When dealing with someone who can literally crush you, it really helps to know they are a nice sensitive person before you get "personal" with them. It also takes a certain level of maturity to really appreciate a nice huge guy. Likewise, a nice huge guy has to be mature enough to realize when he is being admired. I think that BBW/BHM's forget that they can be very intimidating up close.




Considering I have a muscle fetish...I have to add that when I see BHM/BBW's I just see barbarians and amazons who got soft because of modern society.
 

GiantGil

Active Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2010
Messages
26
Location
,
I think he just missed the memo on this being an FA/FFA website. Perhaps he has no clue what FAisim is really like. I am willing to be he has no clue of the extreme ecstasy an FA/FFA can feel when their lover pics up their belly and puts it on them, or how pleasurable it can be to make out against a wall with their large lovers weight slowly enveloping them in bliss.

Yeah, but not many of us really do(yourself, being an apparent exception).
 

escapist

Belt Buster!
Joined
Jan 7, 2007
Messages
2,143
Location
,
Delineator - Thats just to much to quote and I'm not sure I care to pick it all apart. One only has so much time in a day. Not sure where all the PUA stuff came from on that but ok whatever. I'm not about to say I'm an ugly guy, but being over 400 lbs really hasn't stopped me from finding a mate, a date, or anything else. If one where to study any dating advice be it PUA, a website, or just listening to friends, they are going to get advice to "clean yourself up". No girl wants a guy that looks like he can't take care of himself, or smells bad. So learning how to dress with style, and groom yourself go a long way in increasing "physical" (sensory) attractiveness.

Much of what you've said reminds me of what many guys who are "less successful with the ladies" have to say. I'm not saying you are, but there are undertones and comments that are exactly what many of "those guys" would say until they discovered blissful success.

There really is no need to pull out statistical data or over-analyze all of this. The facts are simple. If you want a date you have to put yourself out there enough to find one. Don't hunt, fish. Hunting is far to predatory and you'll probably creep girls out. Fishing, well hell, everybody can have fun when its catch and release based on having fun and giving things a chance to develop deeper.

This topic was started on "Nice girls love a bastard". The problem was "a bastard" was a rather fuzzy term that everybody put their own twist on as the thread went on. Hell, I've been called a bastard many times, its usually when I tease a girl to the point she can't resist me. I just don't see this as a bad thing. Its playful, its fun, its not meant to hurt anybody's feelings. If anything it should convey true affection and my willingness to let my guard down and let them play ball with me.

Does being a BHM thin the number of women who come up to me and try to just get in my pants? YES, I don't see this as a bad thing though. I wasn't always huge. At one point I was 325 lbs. Then I dropped to 250 buff as hell. I had so many women on me it made my virgin head spin. This isn't a brag its just the truth. It really felt like "its whats on the inside" was a lie. Problem was it was a 1/2 lie. It was also a 1/2 truth. You can't be just hot on the inside, or hot on the outside. Either one will only leave you with only 1/2 the relationship you want. At that point in my life I did not crave every woman (I had never even had one yet). I just wanted to find my soul-mate, and nothing more.

Oh and PS, many people simply realize there "Physical Ideal" isn't always perfect nor is it truly ideal. The person behind the Physical is more important than the physical itself.
 

escapist

Belt Buster!
Joined
Jan 7, 2007
Messages
2,143
Location
,
Yeah, but not many of us really do(yourself, being an apparent exception).
There are more of us than you think, some tend to lurk and rarely post, many others are simply living out their daily life unaware of the term BHM/FFA. I had more FFA's before I knew what an FFA was myself. Often these girls identified themselves as, "Chubby Chasers", "Liking big men", or they just like guys with "meat on the bones", and I had one who simply said, "I love belly's". There are plenty out there.


And yet another FFA who dates more skinny guys. :mad:

No offense, just very frustrating, being a BHM and all.
Oh man now you sound like some of the BBW's lol.....don't worry they are like M&M's they do exist and sometimes they melt in your mouth and in your hands
 
2

Latest posts

Top