We women and our wiley ways

Many of you may be sitting at home, perhaps snuggled up with your boyfriend/girlfriend/spouse/lover/paid escort, thinking "I am so happy and thankful to have this person. He/she is so kind/loving/compassionate/good in bed/willing to tie me up and pour maple syrup on me." Well, my friends, if you are not extraordinarily pretty, you may, in fact, be wrong.

What the hell am I talking about, you ask?

I found this study - the press release is entitled, "Do attractive women want it all?" which I love because, um, hell yes and not just the "attractive" ones. And we all deserve it. OK, tangent. Anyhoo, the University of Texas at Austin study casts a shadow over the popular belief that women choose our partners based on the kind of relationship we want (ie if we want something long-term, we look for someone who'll bring home the bacon and take our kids to Wii practice; but if we just want a quick bonk, a hairy chest and chiseled jaw win out. If you're into that kind of thing.) Hogwash, these researchers say. The new theory: We'll take what we can get, and gals who are widely considered hot maintain high standards for prospective lovahs. So we'd better be super pretty and smart and highly-paid and successful because if we're shlubby or chubby or blue-collar, that's the kind of guy we can expect to see when we roll over in bed.

The researchers ID'd four categories of characteristics women seek in a partner:

Good genes, reflected in desirable physical traits
Resources (they make it sound so romantic!)
The desire to have children and good parenting skills
Loyalty and devotion (awww...)

Interestingly enough, while women’s choosiness across these categories reflected how attractive they appeared to other people, researchers found the characteristics men desired in a partner did not vary based on their own physical attractiveness. In plainer words: Billy Joel and Christie Brinkley. Lyle Lovett and Julia Roberts. Etc.

Those worked out well.

Of course, I'm taking these researcher's conclusions a wee bit out of context - they're examining this phenomenon from an anthropologic and evolutionary standpoint and published their data in an academic journal. I, um, am blogging about it.

But I do tink (hah! I wrote "tink" instead of "think" but it looks too cute to correct) it's an interesting concept worth discussing because it once again shows the emphasis of looks in our culture and proves, in its own way, that no matter how good-hearted and accepting we believe we are, on some innate level, there's always this primal "Me want pretty children" yearning churning inside of us.

I'd like to hear from you - if you're in a relationship, how do you and your mate stack up in these four categories? Do you think when you first met, you consciously assessed the other's potential to be a good provider? (BTW it's OK to say yes - lots of people like shiny sportscars and a sharp suit.) Can you ever imagine yourself adjusting your requirements in, say, the Loyalty category because you suspect you're not the cutest puppy in the litter and thus must lower your standards? (pleasesaynopleasesayno.) I can honestly and wholeheartedly say I've never dated anyone based on potential earning power OR the desire to have children, while loyalty and devotion are paramount. I would NEVER sacrifice in that category. As for Dan's chiseled, extra-wide shoulders and deep blue eyes and luscious, kissable lips? Gravy, baby.

Comments

Need to ponder if Im proud of the latest findings to emerge from that institution o'higher learning down the road.
I dont really buy into the study (for me. since Ive not walked a mile in anyone else's manolos (or paylesses if youre me)) as when I started dating my nowhusband I knew he was aesthetically pleasing but not MY TYPE really.

he was/is waspy handsome and I was raised to be drawn to the more dark & swarthy types.

what drew me to him? the way his eyes CRINKLED UP when he smiled as if too say "I do this alot. so much so that Im young and already have smilecrinklelines!"

and the provider? nah, we were both in school and somehow *I* ended up supporting us (in not a fine fashion) during the first few years of our marriage.

I do agree with the loyalty part as that SHOULD BE important to us all (unless you have an open relationship with is a post for *you* for another day :)) and I could tell that right off the bat.

The me want pretty progeny? I/we have always wanted to adopt a houseful.

Sorry UT :)

You know, I'd love to say it's all bogus and we're evolved enough to know our worth regardless of our looks but...honestly, there's probably more to it than I'd like to admit.

Personally...even as a teenager I had one criterion that was unassailable: I could not fall in love with a man who wasn't smarter than I. My mom laughed...but my DH is, literally, a rocket scientist. :-) He's also sexy as hell...and a great provider. Like you said, gravy, baby. :-)

But what I was consciously looking for was someone who would be loving, a good father to my daughter, and who could fix stuff around the house. :-) I can honestly say his looks didn't enter into it, nor did his financial potential, though I was impressed to find he was an engineering grad student. But that was the "smart" thing again, I think.

As for settling - oh, HELL no. I will never be Cindy Crawford - but I'd rather be alone than with someone who isn't right for me. At least then I'm not miserable AND picking up that someone's socks! :-)

don't get me started on the number of not that attractive guys who think that they "deserve" a girl who looks like a model. or feel able to call her ugly for minor flaws. pure and utter BS. but that said, I do think there's some corelation between how worthy you think you are and who you end up with. also, with different standards, how did these researchers define who was hot? so I guess I go with a qualified, yes, there's a a correlation, but it's more about attitude than any objective measure of worth.

MizFit, I have to agree on the crinkly eye thing! My husband's eyes are the same way and that's what drew me to him. He was 19 when we met and already with smile wrinkles! Oh - he's also a rocket scientist with sexy silver hairs at age 30 after almost 10 years of marriage. *sigh*
Anyway... I do think there is a correlation, but not consciously at all. We all know that if our children are more attractive they have a better chance of attracting a better mate, resulting in the continuation of our genes. It's all about gene survival. :) Not pretty consciously, which is why it's great to be human; we can consciously work to overcome our unconscious genes so that we look for what's really important in a mate and cultivate those qualities in ourselves as well.

When I was younger and single, I wanted someone tall with blue or green eyes, dark hair, and, preferably, British (think Timothy Dalton).
My husband is 4 inches shorter than I am, Filipino, with brown eyes (he does have the dark hair, however,lol!). He is kind, generous, supportive, funny, hardworking, gorgeous, talented, and smart. Did I mention gorgeous? And he's a GREAT dad! We have two wonderful kids, and we look at them every day and say "how did they get to be so beautiful?"
Personally, i think they can do all the anthropological studies they want. We all have our own reasons for choosing the people we choose, and I don't believe any one group of characteristics will fit all.

Valerie, my sister's the same way when it comes to intelligence thing; I think that that's one of the most important characteristics for her.

In my two most recent relationships I was definitely hands-down the "provider"... and out of everyone I've dated, there was only one that was really, really ridiculously good-looking:) However, I've also been cheated on by a couple guys... hmm... maybe I need to tweak what I look for in a man!

valerie? awesome point as youve articulated something I was selective on but never realized until I read your comment.

the amazing power of the BRAIN and, as you said, the allure of the brainier than am I.

the knowing that your mate will stretch you in the mental arena.

M.

I thought I'd throw in a male response to balance the query....Your Gma was earning the gargantuan monthly salary of $145 while I was going to college under the GI bill earning $.90 per hour...so she looked pretty good from a financial aspect. The mere fact that she was also gorgeous, bright and delicious sort of made up mind for a trial commitment....u kno the rest...oxoxox

I thought I'd throw in a male response to balance the query....Your Gma was earning the gargantuan monthly salary of $145 while I was going to college under the GI bill earning $.90 per hour...so she looked pretty good from a financial aspect. The mere fact that she was also gorgeous, bright and delicious sort of made up mind for a trial commitment....u kno the rest...oxoxox

Ever notice too that in the "happily ever after" stories where prince meets poor girl way below his class level, girl still looks like a princess despite her rags. In my experience, I dated a couple of those "ungettable get" type of guys and both ended up being a complete nightmare. I had to learn the hard way that packaging can be very deceiving.

When I met Matt, I just loved his energy (in an aura vibe way). It felt warm, safe and fun to be in his presence. I think people don't put enough creed into how they feel (body, mind, spirit) just being in their lover's presence. With the good looking guys, my gut kept nagging at me despite all the guy's good credentials on paper. I always tell people to listen to your gut, it can help you in soooooo many ways.

"Wii practice"!!! Love it.

My husband and I are so much alike that people often mistake us for siblings. So, you know, I think he's a total hottie:))I gotta echo BC & MizFit about the eye-crinklies - ditto here!

I won't lie though that the first thing that attracted me to him was that he was sitting right next to me in the front row of a graduate level computer science class - the smart thing definitely plays out here. Geeks in love;)

Bring on the gravy, baby!

One of the things that first attracted me to my husband was his under-bite. He's since had it corrected with braces, and he looks great, but sometimes I miss it,lol!

I think there are definitely exceptions to this rule, but it's also very true. Good-looking women (and men) tend to KNOW they look good, and that they can attract someone similarly good-looking (and possibly wealthy, well-educated, etc).