Am I getting better looking or are women getting more desperate?

Hammer89 · 31-03-2018 3:22am

You've got the air of a bloke who started a one-night-a-week night course in psychology at Ballyfermot College of Further Education last month.

You're older than me by the way*

Bambi985 · 31-03-2018 6:38am

Kissing 5 women over a boozy weekend in nightclubs is not much of an accomplishment tbh and icks me out tbh when you think about it too much like. All that saliva, all those germs.

Have you had any substantial relationships with the opposite sex at all?

irishrebe · 31-03-2018 6:42am

Debtocracy wrote: »

No you're not getting betting looking. It’s not that women are getting desperate, it’s that the effect of hypergamy lessens after 30.

So hypergamy is at its most extreme at a women’s peak attractiveness, let’s say about 22. If we categorise people into deciles of attractiveness, we should see the following patterns for relationships at this age:

10/10 man - 10/10 woman
9/10 man – 7/10 woman
8/10 man – 5/10 woman
7/10 man – 4/10 woman
6/10 man – 3/10 woman
5/10 man – 2/10 woman

Now hypergamy works fine when most people are single. Basically, the top 20% of men can get with 50%+ of woman through short-term relationships or hook-ups. The problem for hypergamy occurs when people start pairing into monogamous long-term relationships. The 1:1 gender ratio kicks in and women have to start settling for men closer to their own attractiveness level.

If you're a man it makes sense to wait a bit longer to start a long-term relationship. The chances of having a relationship with an attractive, intelligent girl at 22 is very slim – she’ll be in demand from guys from 1/10 - 10/10 and from guys aged 18 to 40. However, such a relationship can become realistic at 32 when you’re no longer competing with most of the ‘good men’ and she’ll probably won’t go for guys under 30. So good things come to those who wait… except if you’re a woman.

I'm sure OP is probably a lot better looking than he thinks he is and/or has charisma and a good personality, maybe more confidence than he had before. Contrary to what he seems to think, women over 28 aren't all desperate to settle down and have kids asap (I know plenty of women who would run a mile at the thought of kids) and it's quite the comical reach to think that some woman who is wasted in a nightclub drunkenly snogging him means she's desperate and wants to have his babies. I'm fairly recently single and kiss someone pretty much every time I go out, the same I did when I was single at 21! It's just a bit of fun, dancing with and kissing cute guys and enjoying myself. I would like to find another relationship eventually but I'm definitely not looking for one in a nightclub. OP's self deprecation seems to be masking some very sexist, outdated ideas about women and the rather arrogant assumption that getting a snog means that she wants anything more than that.

irishrebe · 31-03-2018 6:47am

Potatoeman wrote: »

Debtocracy wrote: »

No you're not getting betting looking. It’s not that women are getting desperate, it’s that the effect of hypergamy lessens after 30.

So hypergamy is at its most extreme at a women’s peak attractiveness, let’s say about 22. If we categorise people into deciles of attractiveness, we should see the following patterns for relationships at this age:

10/10 man - 10/10 woman
9/10 man – 7/10 woman
8/10 man – 5/10 woman
7/10 man – 4/10 woman
6/10 man – 3/10 woman
5/10 man – 2/10 woman

Now hypergamy works fine when most people are single. Basically, the top 20% of men can get with 50%+ of woman through short-term relationships or hook-ups. The problem for hypergamy occurs when people start pairing into monogamous long-term relationships. The 1:1 gender ratio kicks in and women have to start settling for men closer to their own attractiveness level.

If you're a man it makes sense to wait a bit longer to start a long-term relationship. The chances of having a relationship with an attractive, intelligent girl at 22 is very slim – she’ll be in demand from guys from 1/10 - 10/10 and from guys aged 18 to 40. However, such a relationship can become realistic at 32 when you’re no longer competing with most of the ‘good men’ and she’ll probably won’t go for guys under 30. So good things come to those who wait… except if you’re a woman.

There are also other factors at play too. There are more single men than single women under 29 but there are more single women than men from 30+. This because more women date older guys, more men die younger and more men remove themselves from that dating market.

In the U.S. surveys show that most women prefer men that are 3-5 years older. Where men are more attracted to women in their early to mid twenties consistently at every age.

Being more attracted to that age group doesn't mean they have any success in it though, does it? I was constantly hit on by older guys when I was 20-25. Found it creepy and sad. I wanted to enjoy my youth with someone my own age, not be an accessory for some balding middle aged guy trying to relive his.

Hammer89 · 31-03-2018 11:28am

irishrebe wrote: »

OP's self deprecation seems to be masking some very sexist, outdated ideas about women and the rather arrogant assumption that getting a snog means that she wants anything more than that.

Are you doing the same one-night-a-week psychology course at the Marino Institute as the other fella?

You know that philosophy trick in regards to Wikipedia? I think it's something like, if you visit some random Wikipedia thread and keep clicking the very first hyperlink in the article then you'll eventually come across the 'philosophy' page. Well, there's an equivalent to that on After Hours, in the sense that no matter the subject, we'll always come to sexism eventually. The thread could be about Postman Pat, or pogs, or whether Tesco are bastards for phasing out traditional plastic bags, there will be an instance where one poster accuses another of being a sexist.

In reality, I'm not a sexist. I'm just a fella who is asking - that's the key word - what I considered an interesting question: were the kisses a reflection of a heightened sex appeal or a reflection on the women? That's literally it. There's no witch hunt to be had here.

Hammer89 · 31-03-2018 11:38am

Bambi985 wrote: »

Kissing 5 women over a boozy weekend in nightclubs is not much of an accomplishment tbh and icks me out tbh when you think about it too much like. All that saliva, all those germs.

Have you had any substantial relationships with the opposite sex at all?

Yes.

I didn't say it was an accomplishment. It wasn't some irrelevant detail that I threw in for the sake of bragging. The quantity is a pertinent fact to include. This was all in the same night by the way, not over the course of two or three days.

irishrebe · 31-03-2018 11:40am

Hammer89 wrote: »

irishrebe wrote: »

OP's self deprecation seems to be masking some very sexist, outdated ideas about women and the rather arrogant assumption that getting a snog means that she wants anything more than that.

Are you doing the same one-night-a-week psychology course at the Marino Institute as the other fella?

You know that philosophy trick in regards to Wikipedia? I think it's something like, if you visit some random Wikipedia thread and keep clicking the very first hyperlink in the article then you'll eventually come across the 'philosophy' page. Well, there's an equivalent to that on After Hours, in the sense that no matter the subject, we'll always come to sexism eventually. The thread could be about Postman Pat, or pogs, or whether Tesco are bastards for phasing out traditional plastic bags, there will be an instance where one poster accuses another of being a sexist.

In reality, I'm not a sexist. I'm just a fella who is asking - that's the key word - what I considered an interesting question: were the kisses a reflection of a heightened sex appeal or a reflection on the women? That's literally it. There's no witch hunt to be had here.

You don't think it's sexist to assume that all women aged 29-35 are getting desperate to settle down and have kids, and that they are lowering their standards? You honestly don't see anything disrespectful or demeaning about labelling women of a certain age group 'desperate' because they kissed you? Really?

Bambi985 · 31-03-2018 11:45am

You kissed 5 women in the same night whilst dosed up on jäger bombs? Sounds like a standard teenage disco for any 15 year old.

You obviously went out for the shift, got ****faced and the Dutch courage carried you through. Not sure why you think there’s any greater mystery than that.

Hammer89 · 31-03-2018 11:53am

irishrebe wrote: »

You don't think it's sexist to assume that all women aged 29-35 are getting desperate to settle down and have kids, and that they are lowering their standards? You honestly don't see anything disrespectful or demeaning about labelling women of a certain age group 'desperate' because they kissed you? Really?

When did I assume that? I ASKED a question Irishrebe. That's a bit different to assuming, isn't it?

Re-read the first post and tell me how many times I used the word 'maybe'. Then tell me how many times I ended a sentence with a question mark. To me, that indicates that I'm not really jumping to any conclusions and am merely interested in reading what people think.

Hammer89 · 31-03-2018 11:55am

Bambi985 wrote: »

You kissed 5 women in the same night whilst dosed up on jäger bombs? Sounds like a standard teenage disco for any 15 year old.

You obviously went out for the shift, got ****faced and the Dutch courage carried you through. Not sure why you think there’s any greater mystery than that.

Because even as a slimmer and slightly younger man I've been sh*t faced in nightclubs and still hadn't experienced the volume of interest as I did that night? Did you even read the first post?

irishrebe · 31-03-2018 12:00pm

Hammer89 wrote: »

irishrebe wrote: »

You don't think it's sexist to assume that all women aged 29-35 are getting desperate to settle down and have kids, and that they are lowering their standards? You honestly don't see anything disrespectful or demeaning about labelling women of a certain age group 'desperate' because they kissed you? Really?

When did I assume that? I ASKED a question Irishrebe. That's a bit different to assuming, isn't it?

Re-read the first post and tell me how many times I used the word 'maybe'. Then tell me how many times I ended a sentence with a question mark. To me, that indicates that I'm not really jumping to any conclusions and am merely interested in reading what people think.

Ah, come off it. Why would such a question even enter your head if you didn't have a backwards, sexist mentality on this issue? Instead of just chalking your success up to being better looking than you thought and having a good night, you're on here asking if these women from a specified age group were just desperate to settle down and have kids with anyone at all? Because they kissed you?

irishrebe · 31-03-2018 12:07pm

Orange Duck wrote: »

irishrebe wrote: »

Ah, come off it. Why would such a question even enter your head if you didn't have a backwards, sexist mentality on this issue? Instead of just chalking your success up to being better looking than you thought and having a good night, you're on here asking if these women from a specified age group were just desperate to settle down and have kids with anyone at all? Because they kissed you?

Is he not allowed to be open minded and pose the question?

Do you really think this:

Maybe I'm being too hard on myself, but I think the women, at their age, might feel under societal pressures to find a man and start families, and therefore have abondoned certain preferences regarding the opposite sex. Would they have let me kiss them in their mid-20s for example? No, they would have knee'd me in the bollox in the belief that they could do better, but now desperation has set in and any man will do.

is the language of someone who is open-minded? I certainly don't think so. It's bordering on contemptuous. Reading between the lines 'I wouldn't have had a chance with these ladies ten years ago but now they're past it and desperate, any man will do'. Notice how this is not a question, it's a statement.

Rikand · 31-03-2018 12:08pm

When you said you were no Bradley cooper and had a beard, I knew I'd seen you somewhere before....

Hammer89 · 31-03-2018 12:09pm

irishrebe wrote: »

Ah, come off it. Why would such a question even enter your head if you didn't have a backwards, sexist mentality on this issue? Instead of just chalking your success up to being better looking than you thought and having a good night, you're on here asking if these women from a specified age group were just desperate to settle down and have kids with anyone at all? Because they kissed you?

What's this baby thing you keep going on about? Someone suggested that ovulating women prefer masculine men and I, as a joke, blurted out that 'they want my babies'. Given the choice of words here it's pretty obvious that it was a tongue in cheek comment.

Hammer89 · 31-03-2018 12:12pm

irishrebe wrote: »

Do you really think this:

is the language of someone who is open-minded? I certainly don't think so. It's bordering on contemptuous. Reading between the lines 'I wouldn't have had a chance with these ladies ten years ago but now they're past it and desperate, any man will do'. Notice how this is not a question, it's a statement.

Considering I used the word 'might' it's also not the language of a sexist who has concrete opinions on the matter. I am open minded and I suggest you read subsequent responses by me, where I accepted other people's theories, as proof.

irishrebe · 31-03-2018 12:17pm

Hammer89 wrote: »

irishrebe wrote: »

Ah, come off it. Why would such a question even enter your head if you didn't have a backwards, sexist mentality on this issue? Instead of just chalking your success up to being better looking than you thought and having a good night, you're on here asking if these women from a specified age group were just desperate to settle down and have kids with anyone at all? Because they kissed you?

What's this baby thing you keep going on about? Someone suggested that ovulating women prefer masculine men and I, as a joke, blurted out that 'they want my babies'. Given the choice of words here it's pretty obvious that it was a tongue in cheek comment.

You do realise your OP is still there, for all to read? Back pedalling now and referencing that joke (nobody took exception to that joke) isn't going to work. I quoted a section of your OP, and it wasn't tongue in cheek in the slightest.

Hammer89 · 31-03-2018 12:23pm

irishrebe wrote: »

You do realise your OP is still there, for all to read? Back pedalling now and referencing that joke (nobody took exception to that joke) isn't going to work. I quoted a section of your OP, and it wasn't tongue in cheek in the slightest.

The bit you quoted wasn't tongue in cheek but it was still a suggestion, not an assumption! The bit about the babies - a theory I didn't bring up, and that's very important to note - was quite clearly a joke. I mean, this has to be obvious.

Here's another theory I explored after the OP. I have supported THREE possible explanations for what happened in the nightclub, and you're hell-bent on the one which relates to sexism and ignoring the other two. Would a real sexist even explore two other possibilities?

Hammer89 wrote: »

I suppose another theory is that I get drunker with age, which means maybe I'm more brazen than I was when I was slimmer and therefore more appealing.

bebeman · 31-03-2018 1:22pm

In simple terms.
Men age like wine,
Women age like milk
Men are a appreciating asset, when 20 years old have very little, the older they get the more status they have , the more money they have, the more stable they are, the better prospect for a woman to settle down with and raise a family.
Women are a deprecating asset, have it all at 20 years of age, then down hill, Looks and Fertility fade with age, less likely to have children as they age, numerous sex partners, all a turn off for men.
So these women hit 30 and desperately try to compete will the 20 year old women, the easiest way to get male attention is to be easy.
This is seen in nature, and at the end of the day we are no different.
https://i.redd.it/7gzya7sd09rz.jpg

Icemancometh · 31-03-2018 1:52pm

bebeman wrote: »

In simple terms.
Men age like wine,
Women age like milk
Men are a appreciating asset, when 20 years old have very little, the older they get the more status they have , the more money they have, the more stable they are, the better prospect for a woman to settle down with and raise a family.
Women are a deprecating asset, have it all at 20 years of age, then down hill, Looks and Fertility fade with age, less likely to have children as they age, numerous sex partners, all a turn off for men.
So these women hit 30 and desperately try to compete will the 20 year old women, the easiest way to get male attention is to be easy.
This is seen in nature, and at the end of the day we are no different.
https://i.redd.it/7gzya7sd09rz.jpg

Now that's what sexism looks like.

Bambi985 · 31-03-2018 3:01pm

Icemancometh wrote: »

Now that's what sexism looks like.

That’s what a PUA spambot looks like. Pretty sure there’s an algorithm that flags AH threads even remotely related to gender issues to them & suddenly we’ve got a plethora of new choresex guy accounts posting at each other like no man’s business.

irishrebe · 31-03-2018 3:05pm

Icemancometh wrote: »

bebeman wrote: »

In simple terms.
Men age like wine,
Women age like milk
Men are a appreciating asset, when 20 years old have very little, the older they get the more status they have , the more money they have, the more stable they are, the better prospect for a woman to settle down with and raise a family.
Women are a deprecating asset, have it all at 20 years of age, then down hill, Looks and Fertility fade with age, less likely to have children as they age, numerous sex partners, all a turn off for men.
So these women hit 30 and desperately try to compete will the 20 year old women, the easiest way to get male attention is to be easy.
This is seen in nature, and at the end of the day we are no different.
https://i.redd.it/7gzya7sd09rz.jpg

Now that's what sexism looks like.

It's basically the same sentiment voiced in the OP. Just worded in a more crass, troll-like way.

bebeman · 31-03-2018 4:24pm

Icemancometh wrote: »

Now that's what sexism looks like.

Bambi985 wrote: »

That’s what a PUA spambot looks like. Pretty sure there’s an algorithm that flags AH threads even remotely related to gender issues to them & suddenly we’ve got a plethora of new choresex guy accounts posting at each other like no man’s business.

irishrebe wrote: »

It's basically the same sentiment voiced in the OP. Just worded in a more crass, troll-like way.

You cannot refute what i posted, so revert to name calling.

pillphil · 31-03-2018 5:12pm

pumpkin4life wrote: »

Unless you're small, a baldie or socially awkward, in which case you can't really afford to wait.

Ouch...

professore · 31-03-2018 5:58pm

bebeman wrote: »

In simple terms.
Men age like wine,
Women age like milk
Men are a appreciating asset, when 20 years old have very little, the older they get the more status they have , the more money they have, the more stable they are, the better prospect for a woman to settle down with and raise a family.
Women are a deprecating asset, have it all at 20 years of age, then down hill, Looks and Fertility fade with age, less likely to have children as they age, numerous sex partners, all a turn off for men.
So these women hit 30 and desperately try to compete will the 20 year old women, the easiest way to get male attention is to be easy.
This is seen in nature, and at the end of the day we are no different.
https://i.redd.it/7gzya7sd09rz.jpg

Or in even simpler terms... In the real world Those sex and the City women are really unattractive to any normal well adjusted men.

seanrambo87 · 10-04-2018 3:46pm

Hammer89 wrote:

You've got the air of a bloke who started a one-night-a-week night course in psychology at Ballyfermot College of Further Education last month.

Ha ha ha, Cork boi, you're right though I sound like a prat. Funny thread though.

wakka12 · 10-04-2018 3:59pm

bebeman wrote: »

In simple terms.
Men age like wine,
Women age like milk
Men are a appreciating asset, when 20 years old have very little, the older they get the more status they have , the more money they have, the more stable they are, the better prospect for a woman to settle down with and raise a family.
Women are a deprecating asset, have it all at 20 years of age, then down hill, Looks and Fertility fade with age, less likely to have children as they age, numerous sex partners, all a turn off for men.
So these women hit 30 and desperately try to compete will the 20 year old women, the easiest way to get male attention is to be easy.
This is seen in nature, and at the end of the day we are no different.
https://i.redd.it/7gzya7sd09rz.jpg

A lot of men seem to have this delusion. Some men age great, some women do too. The reality is ageing makes everybody less physically attractive, and judging off male and female people I know 45+ ageing doesnt seem to be any kinder to men than women
Ive met many older men who were desperate for a partner as I have older women
Some young women find older guys with money attractive. But plenty of younger men find older women attractive too. The reality is though if youre a 50 year old guy youd probably have a lotmore women who are physically attracted to younger version of yourself, money may just adjust this a bit in odler mens favours, depending on the situation and person in question
A lot of generalisations here.

the purple tin · 10-04-2018 6:48pm

wakka12 wrote: »

A lot of men seem to have this delusion. Some men age great, some women do too. The reality is ageing makes everybody less physically attractive, and judging off male and female people I know 45+ ageing doesnt seem to be any kinder to men than women
Ive met many older men who were desperate for a partner as I have older women
Some young women find older guys with money attractive. But plenty of younger men find older women attractive too. The reality is though if youre a 50 year old guy youd probably have a lotmore women who are physically attracted to younger version of yourself, money may just adjust this a bit in odler mens favours, depending on the situation and person in question
A lot of generalisations here.

There are a good few young ladies out there with 'dad fads' too.

20silkcut · 30-08-2018 4:36pm

Debtocracy wrote: »

No you're not getting betting looking. It’s not that women are getting desperate, it’s that the effect of hypergamy lessens after 30.

So hypergamy is at its most extreme at a women’s peak attractiveness, let’s say about 22. If we categorise people into deciles of attractiveness, we should see the following patterns for relationships at this age:

10/10 man - 10/10 woman
9/10 man – 7/10 woman
8/10 man – 5/10 woman
7/10 man – 4/10 woman
6/10 man – 3/10 woman
5/10 man – 2/10 woman

Now hypergamy works fine when most people are single. Basically, the top 20% of men can get with 50%+ of woman through short-term relationships or hook-ups. The problem for hypergamy occurs when people start pairing into monogamous long-term relationships. The 1:1 gender ratio kicks in and women have to start settling for men closer to their own attractiveness level.

If you're a man it makes sense to wait a bit longer to start a long-term relationship. The chances of having a relationship with an attractive, intelligent girl at 22 is very slim – she’ll be in demand from guys from 1/10 - 10/10 and from guys aged 18 to 40. However, such a relationship can become realistic at 32 when you’re no longer competing with most of the ‘good men’ and she’ll probably won’t go for guys under 30. So good things come to those who wait… except if you’re a woman.

Just on your hypergamy scale you have left out 8/10 women and 6/10 women.
Also I would argue that 10/10 men and women are almost non existent in the dating world and are really confined to the celebrity world.
I would rank myself in terms of looks as about a 7/10 man.
My experience on dating sites has been that I have no bother matching up with 4/5/6 out of ten women will occasionally match with 7/10 women more than likely they will be foreign women. Have better luck with 7/10 local women in the real world where they know my status and place in the world but it is still rare as I am a more introverted personality and don’t tear it up in pubs and nightclubs. Will never match with an 8/9 out of 10 woman either online or off line. I have a male friend who is probably an 8/9 out of ten and anyone who says women are not into looks is utterly misguided I have seen women form an orderly queue to get off with this guy. And my 7 out of ten standing is completely irrelevant in his company. When I socialize with men who are well below me in looks then I will get a lot more attention. When I socialize with men who are my equal or slightly below but who have better game then they will dust me.
If your a 5/6/7 out of 10 guy and manage to land yourself an 8/9 out of ten woman then there is a good chance you will be looking over your shoulder while your dating her unless your money and status blows everyone out of the water but that’s no guarantee look at Donald trumps wife do you think she fantasizes about him?? Do you think if a Ryan gosling or brad Pitt type looked in her direction she wouldn’t look back?
Of course having a bit of game and being extroverted can improve things but it won’t bring you dramatically up the hypergamy scale and certainly not comfortably. As the song says “ when your in love with a beautiful woman everybody wants her” and if a 9/10 man is knocking around and available your not safe.

professore · 30-08-2018 4:52pm

20silkcut wrote: »

anyone who says women are not into looks is utterly misguided

QFT. Women are far more into looks than guys are even though popular culture will tell you the reverse.

Samuel T. Cogley · 30-08-2018 5:50pm

Women and Dog-**** the older they are the easier they are to pick up.

Hammer89 · 30-08-2018 5:51pm

Hammer89 wrote: »

Would you be interested in a bear who smells like smoke and Jagerbombs by any chance?

Offer still stands.

GingerLily · 30-08-2018 5:53pm

The one good thing about these kinda threads, it exposes posters who have truly ****ty attitudes who I might have respected in other forums!

7aubzxk43m2sni · 30-08-2018 5:56pm

professore wrote: »

QFT. Women are far more into looks than guys are even though popular culture will tell you the reverse.

Strongly disagree. In fact I thank God on a regular basis that the opposite is true.

The way I see it, a not-stereotypically attractive guy can make up for it with confidence, humour, etc and potentially sway a girl.

The reverse does not hold. She'll be a cool, funny girl, but less likely to be your girlfriend.

billyhead · 30-08-2018 6:14pm

Instant attraction applies equally to both men and women. You usually go for someone at an equivalent standard on looks when approaching the opposite sex i.e a Good Looking girl will go for a good looking male and vice versa.

30-08-2018 6:16pm

GingerLily wrote: »

The one good thing about these kinda threads, it exposes posters who have truly ****ty attitudes who I might have respected in other forums!

Well actually I think you'll find that scientifically a 1/10 as opposed to a 2/10 ... ah i give up i can't even
haha

banie01 · 30-08-2018 6:21pm

GingerLily wrote: »

The one good thing about these kinda threads, it exposes posters who have truly ****ty attitudes who I might have respected in other forums!

I have to read back now and see if I posted! :P

30-08-2018 6:23pm

This post has been redacted.

Panthro · 30-08-2018 6:36pm

Did anyone get the ride in the end?

20silkcut · 30-08-2018 6:42pm

Zain Angry Beef wrote: »

Strongly disagree. In fact I thank God on a regular basis that the opposite is true.

The way I see it, a not-stereotypically attractive guy can make up for it with confidence, humour, etc and potentially sway a girl.

The reverse does not hold. She'll be a cool, funny girl, but less likely to be your girlfriend.

Confidence, humour, etc will work a treat at beating off competition close to your own level to get a woman close enough to your own level in looks.
A below average or average looking man will need something extra special to bag a beautiful woman very few would argue with that. He would need to be much higher in status and wealth.
It is extremely rare for a woman to be with a man lower than her in looks, status and wealth. Non existent I’d say. Maybe in other cultures or situations of poverty or extreme scarcity.
Why would any woman in the western world do that?
It would be easier for her to stay single.

mariaalice · 30-08-2018 6:48pm

Do people really rate themselves out of 10, could someone be any more self-absorbed than that!!

indioblack · 30-08-2018 7:11pm

Hammer89 wrote: »

Legitimate question and one I can't work out the answer to. I'm no Bradley Cooper, but I'd think of myself as relatively handsome. I'm about 18 stone at the moment I think, but I'm also 6'4 so I can carry it pretty well - well, better than a man who is 5'7 for example - and I have a pretty decent beard going.

I've been lighter, which means I've been far more attractive at one stage, but I find myself getting more attention in nightclubs now than when I was, say, 15 stone.

Not bragging but I smooched the face off five women this past weekend - all of whom I found very attractive. I probably could have gone home with any one of them, but I had enough Jagermeister in me to sedate a mammoth and my knob is about as useful as Stephen Hawking's computer when I'm drunk, so I wasn't interested in sex. It would've been like trying to get a Tesco self-service machine to take a scrunched-up fiver.

Being an analytical type, I was interested in discovering why this was and came to two logical conclusions: I'm more attractive when I'm a fat, bear-looking prick, or these women have just lowered their standards. All of them were between the ages of 29 - 35 I'd imagine, which is why I think the latter theory is more plausible.

Maybe I'm being too hard on myself, but I think the women, at their age, might feel under societal pressures to find a man and start families, and therefore have abondoned certain preferences regarding the opposite sex. Would they have let me kiss them in their mid-20s for example? No, they would have knee'd me in the bollox in the belief that they could do better, but now desperation has set in and any man will do.

It really does make you wonder: how many couples in their late 20s and early 30s are together now because they love each other, and how many are together in fear that it's too late to find someone better? How many put the 'settle' in settling down? How many have abondoned the search for Mr Right and are settling for Mr Anyone?

Or maybe it's the alternative. Maybe, just maybe, there's a niche market for fat, bear-looking arseholes who smell of Jagerbombs. I quite hope it's this; not because I'm well placed to monopolise on the market, but because the alternative is quite sad to me.

Fortunately, there's a good way to test out this theory and it involves coming on to (not literally, not when I'm drunk anyway) slightly younger women and gauging the results. If they're game then it'll be a big confidence boost for me, but if I'm unsuccessful then I think it'll go some way toward proving that I'm a low-hanging fruit rather than the apple of someone's eye.

I do hope there's a women out there who's really desperate - that'll make two of us.

Hammer89 · 30-08-2018 8:20pm

indioblack wrote: »

I do hope there's a women out there who's really desperate

Don't sell yourself short mate.

Feisar · 30-08-2018 8:40pm

Avatar MIA wrote: »

I'm a bloke and this made me laugh. Not sure why, but there you go.

It could have been the beer goggles. What you think is attractive pissed off your head in a darkened nightclub may not live up to scrutiny in the cold light of day sans alcohol.

That or there's some famous guy you've not heard about that's your doppelgänger.

I was out one night and the tempo seemed to be lifting as I walked around. I thought well it's going to be one of those nights. Nope, girl came up to me thinking I was Michael Bubble Head. Was I raging. (I'd be a bit more rough around the edges looking.)

Feisar · 30-08-2018 8:43pm

Hammer89 wrote: »

Yes.

I didn't say it was an accomplishment. It wasn't some irrelevant detail that I threw in for the sake of bragging. The quantity is a pertinent fact to include. This was all in the same night by the way, not over the course of two or three days.

Could be an anomaly though. See what the success rate is like over the coming months and report back.

Yillan · 30-08-2018 8:44pm

Feisar wrote: »

I was out one night and the tempo seemed to be lifting as I walked around. I thought well it's going to be one of those nights. Nope, girl came up to me thinking I was Michael Bubble Head. Was I raging. (I'd be a bit more rough around the edges looking.)

Cool, indecipherable story bro

pickarooney · 30-08-2018 8:47pm

mariaalice wrote: »

Do people really rate themselves out of 10, could someone be any more self-absorbed than that!!

I rate myself out of 11.

aaronjumper · 30-08-2018 8:49pm

pickarooney wrote: »

I rate myself out of 11.

So 1 out of 11?

Galwayguy35 · 30-08-2018 8:56pm

GingerLily wrote: »

The one good thing about these kinda threads, it exposes posters who have truly ****ty attitudes who I might have respected in other forums!

It's an anonymous site, sure nobody cares what another poster thinks which is why people say things they wouldn't in real life.

indioblack · 30-08-2018 9:53pm

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

Women and Dog-**** the older they are the easier they are to pick up.

You old romantic.

Samuel T. Cogley · 30-08-2018 10:05pm

indioblack wrote: »

You old romantic.

99% sure it's a stolen Jim Davidson joke.

Am I getting better looking or are women getting more desperate?

Comments