Hyacinthe

I'm not talking about getting laid I am talking bout relationships that have actual substance to them beyond the physical. One night stands are NOT a relationship - not accoring to my understanding anyways.

Believe this guys is to otherwise money wouldn;t matter - wow financial security for a night - whoopee! (note sarcasm)

__________________
"I want to be remembered as the girl who always smiles even when her heart is broken... and the one that could brighten up your day even if she couldnt brighten her own"

"Her emotions were clear waters. You could see the scarring and pockmarks at the bottom of the pool, but it was just a part of her landscape – the consequences of others’ actions in which she claimed no part."

MSD

If I'm understanding you correctly, "Because it is" isn't a reason to say it's wrong, but "everyone knows it" is a valid argument for it being right. Did I miss anything

Infinite_Loser

No. That's not what I'm saying at all. I'm pretty sure, however, that I did say something such as this along the lines somewhere:

I didn't say anything about one-night stands.

Men are far more visually stimulated than women are. Men put a whole lot of stock in looks. It's really no more complicated than that. Hot and dumb-as-a-rock will get you farther than average-but-sweet. No, it's not true ALL the time, but it is true on average. Similiarly, women state that they want a "nice guy" but often go chasing after the guy who's the exact opposite of what they claim to want.

*Shrugs*

They're just facts of life.

__________________
I believe in equality; Everyone is equally inferior to me.

MSD

I rarely see ladder theory discussed (thank God,) but every time it comes up, the people who support it tend to be bitter nerds and losers who wallow in self-loathing and categorize all women as whores rather than try to better themselves and try to make themselves attractive to women (not just physically.) It's a self-fulfilling prophecy: assume that relationships are a competition and a zero-sum game and even if you get into one, you're not going to get anything out of it.

Infinite_Loser

Well, excuse me while I go wallow in my own self-pity like the bitter loser/nerd I am.

>_>

I wonder who came up with the "Nice guys finish last" mantra?

__________________
I believe in equality; Everyone is equally inferior to me.

MSD

In my experience, people whose only redeeming quality is that they're a "nice guy" and think that it should be enough.

abaya

Your honesty is refreshing on this thread.

__________________
And think not you can direct the course of Love;
for Love, if it finds you worthy, directs your course.
--Khalil Gibran

Menoman

Wow, that's absolutely insane dude.


if you want to barely deconstruct the words he used, ya. But if you want to understand them. Ya know, the part about being based in truth, and all that? It means something quite different.

__________________

MSD

I thought it was fairly clear that I reject the notion that any of this is based in truth.

And what, exactly is insane about what I wrote?

Lasereth

If you think the Ladder Theory is complete bullshit you've never been to college. Yes it's exaggerated but a lot of it is so realistic that it's scary, especially the intellectual whore and cuddle bitch parts. Does the ladder theory apply to everyone? Not by any means, but it does apply to a huge portion of the population.

abaya

Funny, I think it's bullshit, and I've spent 10 years in higher education. I'd be willing to bet that the majority of the most educated people on TFP will agree that it's bullshit. So I'd have to say that without a scientific, random sample to back up your statement, it's really just based on your own opinion. Which is fine and all, but don't generalize to the rest of us.

Also, don't forget that a huge portion of the world population has NOT been to college, which means that if you say "a huge portion of the population," you're talking about maybe 30% of the American population (and that's only in the US; other countries have much lower percentages of college-educated people). Sorry, but that's not a huge portion, if you're associating that with going to college and therefore believing in the ladder theory.

Basically, your logic is all confounded here.

__________________
And think not you can direct the course of Love;
for Love, if it finds you worthy, directs your course.
--Khalil Gibran

MrFriendly

The way I see it if you've become someones intellectual whore or cuddle bitch it's because you've let yourself become that.

If you want to fuck them and be more than friends than you should have made that intention clear in the first place.

The reason you "Fall off the ladder" when you try to jump ladder is because chances are these people trusted you as a friend and didn't have to worry about the run of the mill bullshit from you that they get from everyone else. Then it turns out all you wanted to do was fuck.

I know a lot of the time, if the gender rolls were reversed, the guys maybe wouldn't mind so much. However, I've seen this happen a lot of times to guy friends and they've flat out turned their friend down because they just didn't seem their friend in that way. But hey, if people actually give a crap about the friendship you'll both get over it.

People can and do come up with all sorts of theories to explain social interaction and will be able to find a group of people to apply that to. But they're not hard and fast rules to be obeyed and the chances are that for every person you can apply it to there's a bunch of other where that shit just wont fly.

__________________
You are not a slave

filtherton

Are you talking about the negative response to ladder theory in this thread, because that fits this description too.

mixedmedia

Earlier today:

8-year-old: I'm hungry

me: well we have Cheerios and Life cereal...I can make you a bagel or some toast to go with it

8-year-old: I don't want any of those things

me: well, then I guess you're out of luck

8-year-old: you don't care if I starve

This same conversation, in essence, is going on in this thread.

__________________
Most people go through life dreading they'll have a traumatic experience. Freaks were born with their trauma. They've already passed their test in life. They're aristocrats. - Diane Arbus
PESSIMISM, n. A philosophy forced upon the convictions of the observer by the disheartening prevalence of the optimist with his scarecrow hope and his unsightly smile. - Ambrose Bierce

Menoman

Then you live in fantasy land, most anyone can find the truth in this... nobody here is saying its 100% correct. But it is correct much more than it is wrong.

Besides its absurdity and lack of thought behind making a categorization like that. You perhaps, though I doubt, know a bunch of nerds and losers into this theory. There are more people not categorized as nerds/losers who see truth in it. Hell anyone with an open mind and any amount of experience will see truth in it.


I honestly don't see how people are even argueing this

__________________

Ustwo

I can't ever read the whole thing because I instantly get the same feeling about it.

It feels like something a bitter nerd would come up with after being rejected again, or perhaps someone who just got dumped for someone better looking, from a rich family who he thought was an asshole.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

MrFriendly

Oh, you mean like, all women just really want a man who's cashed up, like that kind of categorization?

__________________
You are not a slave

abaya

We need a poll here... how many ladder-theory believers are currently single and have been rejected at least once, and have perhaps never had a healthy, long-term relationship?

__________________
And think not you can direct the course of Love;
for Love, if it finds you worthy, directs your course.
--Khalil Gibran

Menoman

LOL you actually think the majority dont?!?! LOL

__________________

filtherton

That's a funny answer to his question.

You have seen into the soul of the majority of women?

Menoman

are you fucking kidding me? seriously THAT is your rebuttal? Do I have to look into their souls to know that the majority of them like to fuck too?

__________________

abaya

I'd really like to hear all the believers answer my question. Menoman, you're first up.

__________________
And think not you can direct the course of Love;
for Love, if it finds you worthy, directs your course.
--Khalil Gibran

Menoman

A) I'm currently single
B) Who hasn't been rejected once? Even non believers of the theory have been.
C) I have had more than 1 good, healthy longterm relationship.

1)current status has nothing to do with it, I've known the theory and even saw truth in it when I was in one of those relationships. Having an open mind doesn't change when you're in a relationship
2)makes no sense, thats like saying "who has been kissed at least once" it really doesnt affect anything.
3) makes sense, and like I previously stated also, some people do not see truth in the theory because of its accuracy, some use it as an excuse for their inadequacy. I do not believe most do.

__________________

sapiens

This poll appears to be an ad hominem attack. I don't see how the results either way could speak to the validity of "Ladder Theory".

Much like any other theory, I would like to see empirical evidence beyond personal anecdotes. I don't know of any social psychologists that use ladder theory in their research. I have also never seen any empirical investigations of the theory appear in a peer reviewed scientific journal.

EDIT: I suppose that if all people are using to support or refute the theory is personal experience, ad hominem attacks might be appropriate.

abaya

Well, that's kind of what I'm getting at. If people are using personal experience to evaluate theories, then I want to know what those personal experiences are. At least it will bring a degree of reality and non-abstraction to the thread, which will never be a "scientific" evaluation of anything (this is, after all, an internet forum).

I don't feel that I am attacking anyone, just asking an honest question that has been poked around by pretty much everyone here who dislikes the Ladder Theory. (E.g., stating that people who believe it are those who are bitter, rejected nerds, etc). I want to hear what the believers are basing their beliefs on, that's all.

I'm also bored and getting tired of the same old track that this thread seems to be wearing into the forum. Let's talk about real experiences here, folks.

Menoman, thanks. This gives me a little more insight to your responses, which is helpful.

__________________
And think not you can direct the course of Love;
for Love, if it finds you worthy, directs your course.
--Khalil Gibran

Plan9

I believe it (the OP link) is a philosophy that can be applied in part (no, not in the extreme that the author pushes) much like my other over-the-top-for-humor mantra of Henry Rollins Mekanik... which states that, in fact, "We {men} ALL want to fuck you..."

I don't really want to fuck every girl. Not all of 'em. Just a good portion.

- I'm seeing a girl right now, but I don't like superfluous titles like "girlfriend" anymore.
- Everybody gets rejected. NO WAY!? I got rejected a la divorce while I was deployed in A-stan.
- I've had many good, healthy long-term relationships. They didn't work out.

This isn't rocket science.

__________________
Whatever you can carry.

"You should not drink... and bake."

mixedmedia

I'll give you some real life experience.

I am 42, attractive and I have never dated a man for his money, his looks or because he seemed 'bad.'

Not even when I was 18 years old. I've always been 'turned on' by 'the click.'

I'm talking, hanging out, laughing and something just clicks and bam! that person is irresistibly attractive to me. Consequently, I have also been talked up by rich and extremely handsome men before and they are subject to the same exact standard. Funny thing is, as of yet, none of them have made the grade.

I have had bad relationships, good relationships and relationships that just ended.

What you guys are perpetually doing is limiting yourself to one particular subset of females. Perhaps, subconsciously you tell yourself that if you get one of these 'unobtainable' girls then you are a better, stronger, more desirable man. But really all you are is a fool. Talk about being used...who's using who? They're just as fucked up as you are. You're better off being the 'cuddle whore.' That relationship, at least, is somewhat real (someone else already said that, I think, so I reiterate).

But at any rate, stop using your fuck-schemas to dictate what is going on all over, because you're just being obtuse. And what's worse, you're limiting yourselves to a world where relationships are a game to be played like 'guerrilla marketing' or any of those other covert persuasion (ie, lying) bullshit sales/influence theories. Do you really want to live your life that way?

__________________
Most people go through life dreading they'll have a traumatic experience. Freaks were born with their trauma. They've already passed their test in life. They're aristocrats. - Diane Arbus
PESSIMISM, n. A philosophy forced upon the convictions of the observer by the disheartening prevalence of the optimist with his scarecrow hope and his unsightly smile. - Ambrose Bierce

Ustwo

I'll have to read the whole thing to really decide, so here goes...

Ok I have to agree with this one. Women don't' say what they really want in a man and asking that question is silly, the funny part is that most don't know what they really want.


This is also true.

He is right that if a guy finds a woman attractive he would like to have sex with her as a rule (and a strong rule) I do think hes off on the a guy would have sex with any woman 'friend' no matter the attraction.

I think the problem, besides the obvious misogynistic undertones, is that it gives external reasons for what a really internal problems.

If a guy is 'weak' in some fashion, he will be unattractive to women. The solution to this is to figure out why you seem undesirable and change it yourself.

The feeling I get from this guy is that of a victim, and a victim who blames women for his problems and that there is no way to get ahead in this unless you suddenly become rich or manipulative.

I can see why this appeals to some guys. Had I read this when I was 19, after a bad break up, I'd quite possibly have said 'yes thats it', and his bitter misogynistic tones would have southed my sorrow.

Still wouldn't have made me more attractive to women though and luckily I figured that one out soon after as I was due to meet my future wife the following year.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

MSD

Guess who's in college right now.
Sure, I can find some truth in it: everyone knows people they want to fuck and people they don't, men and women look for different things in a relationship, people judge each other starting the second they meet them, and so on. This doesn't mean that it's fair to say that all women (or 99.99% are bitches) and that men are driven solely by their desire for sex. Hell, the guy who wrote this all but flat-out admits it's satire.

I'm done with this thread, it's not going anywhere.

filtherton

No, that was just an observation meant to help you see the ludicridity (i just coined that word) of your position.

As far as rebuttals go, since the process of rebutting generally involves some sort of refutation of evidence, it's difficult to rebut something when you've offered absolutely zero objective evidence to back it up. The fact that you think you can make claims about the nature of the majority of women, i think, actually points to the fact that you don't really know all that much about them- at least not enough to know how much you don't know. So your assertion that you understand the motivations of a majority of women can't be refuted, because there's nothing to refute- it's a matter of opinion that you're trying to pass of as some sort of objective reality, like "Red is the best color."

But fuck it, i'll try anyway. I do realize that there are women who just want men with money, but, the fact that everyday, millions, poor men hook-up would seem to fly in the face of your assertion that the majority of women want men with money so much so that poor men need a special "theory" to help them get laid. In fact, poor men have been getting laid since long before there was a website devoted to telling the hapless of them that its not their fault.

None of the women i've been with were interested in my money- because i don't fucking have any. I would be willing to wager large sums of this money that i don't have that most of the ladies i have been with don't concern themselves with the earning potential of the people they choose to get involved in a relationship with, much less the people they're just going to fuck.

Shauk

i think a simple way to figure this out is...


establish what is and is not an acceptable threshold of income for a male to achieve for "having money"

see how many on one side of that line are married
see how many on the other side of that line are married.

compare the happiness level of the married trailer park couple vs the married couple living in thier 2-3 story house with the white picket fence.

abaya

Shauk, that's a good idea. The only complication is that it would be measuring outcomes after the fact (after the couple is already married), when in fact the Theory is supposed to be measuring people's preferences while *looking* for someone to marry. E.g. some guy might have made a ton of money while he was dating/engaged, but then after marriage became a bum, or vice versa. So you have to control for that factor somehow... maybe by asking men's (and women's) income levels before marriage, and how that changed during marriage?

I actually think a study like this has probably been done... in my Demography program, there are quite a few people whose specialties are in Human Development and Family Studies. I'll take a peek around the research publications for something relevant...

__________________
And think not you can direct the course of Love;
for Love, if it finds you worthy, directs your course.
--Khalil Gibran

Lasereth

I don't see the difference in saying the Ladder Theory isn't true and saying it is true. None of us have real data to back it up. All I can say is I've seen events in real life play out according to the ladder theory on multiple occasions, more often that events do not. I don't have any huge sample data to go by and I don't have research papers to back my conclusions. My conclusions are based on me witnessing this theory play out in college over and over and over and over. Maybe it doesn't happen everywhere. But when I personally see it played out a dozen times within my small group of friends, I can't help but agree with it to a certain degree.

Is it exaggerated? Yeah. Is it made partly in jest? Yeah. Does it have a pretty big point fundamentally? Yes.

Maybe the people who go to TFP don't associate with it well because they're logical, reasonable human beings, as the ladder theory is mainly concerned with the general public (not logical, reasonable human beings). It's reasonable that the ladder theory may in fact be played out more than the naysayers admit, it simply gets played out among a different sector of the population.

And I will swear on my life that the guy-can't-be-friends-with-a-girl theorem they have going on has merit.

Ustwo

Actually this wouldn't work, the reason being that normally you don't meet your future mates after you have money.

I'm doing fine now, but when I met my wife I was a typical unemployed college student who couldn't offer her more then the occational dinner at olive garden.

Now there is a theory (and a 'real' one from guys with PhD's and the like) that what women find attractive at this point is traits which would give you the potential of future success.

So confidence, intelligence, a good social network, etc are all things which might clue off a young woman that this guy will someday be rich/important. The difference between this and the ladder theory is this is all unconscious. Few young women are thinking 'mmm lets see he has friends, is intelligent, and seems to have it together, I bet some day he makes 6 figures', its more of a 'Wow what a great guy'.

I was pre-med when I met my wife, and we used to joke about 'the test'. This is when you were getting serious with a girl you would tell her you decided to skip med school and instead go into research and get a masters, maybe stay at the university.

Now for the fun part, my wife, then gf, failed the test. She was pretty worried about the whole perpetual student life I laid out for myself. To me this was a good thing because I already knew she was insanely in love with me, but her reasons for me not doing a life of laboratory work were the same as my own so I couldn't really fault her.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

kutulu

This thread is a great read. I love how the non-believers get their panties in a bunch about the generalizations made by the creator and then go out and make their own generalizations. Classic.

Money, potential for money... same thing.

sapiens

No, they are not. If you look at research relating to what women prefer in long-term mates versus short-term mates, women tend to emphasize the importance of immediate resources (and a variety of other traits) in short-term relationships and emphasize the importance of intelligence, motivation, industriousness (and other traits) in long-term mate selection. An early examination of this can be found here:


Greiling, H., Buss, D.M. (2000). Women's Sexual Strategies: The hidden dimension of extra pair mating. Personality and Individual Differences, 28, 929-963.

A later investigation by a related researcher can be found here:

Li, N. P. (2007). Mate Preference Necessities in Long- and Short-Term Mating: People Prioritize in Themselves What Their Mates Prioritize in Them. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 39, 528-535.

Both of the above studies rely on self-report. Others researchers have used different methods. Both papers are testing hypotheses forwarded by:

Buss, D. M., & Schmitt, D. P. (1993). Sexual Strategies Theory: A contextual evolutionary analysis of human mating. Psychological Review, 100, 204-232.

who got a lot of his ideas from:


Most of the research cited above came out of the same lab or group of labs. There is a larger body of research that supports the hypothesis that men and women have different mate preferences, and that those mate preferences differ depending on the type of relationship they are seeking (and on their personal situation).

I would expect that the thresholds for acceptable income might depend on the mate value of both partners. So, I would expect marital bliss to be related more to matching levels of mate value between partners rather than absolute mate value levels. To put it bluntly a man who is a 2/10 might have greater marital stability with a partner who is a 2/10 than with a partner who is an 8/10.

Plan9

"We all want to fuck you!"

__________________
Whatever you can carry.

"You should not drink... and bake."

Menoman

My point is, I don't have to get inside an orange to know its orange inside.

Take two guys, one who is a decent looking, fairly nice guy, makes a good enough living that he can afford necessities and go out a few times a month.

The other guy, is not very good looking, a bit unkempt, smells a little bit, and is fucking loaded.


Being honest, we all know 9 out of 10 women will go for that rich bastard. Do you disagree? I will be very suprised if you do. That seems such a basic thing.




It's a pity we don't have a Mens Forum (I'd call it Urinal Cakes) so we could have this thread without female interferance. I believe it would have ended up much differently without women here who obviously take offense to the entire theory. (Just to keep the truth hidden lol just kidding:P )

__________________

Hyacinthe

In all honesty I would go for the first guy smelly =/= sexy in my books

And yes I know you're going to say I am being dishonest because I don't agree with what you want me to say but /shrug that's your problem not mine.

As for your correlation between women and oranges that's just stupid. You've opened up and looked inside numerous oranges so you can say that most oranges are going to be orange. Can you say that you've understood every aspect of numerous female psyches? what makes them tick what they want from life for themselves, their partners, their children, friends and family? That you know their dreams and ambitions?

Until you can HONESTLY say that you understood exactly how they work (and I don't think anyone can say that they completely understand anyone else) you can't say that you have any understanding of women enough to decide whether they're orange, red, blue, purple or pink with yellow polkadots inside. It's like me giving you a bag of clinkers (chocolate covered lollies that come with different coloured candy filling) and asking you to guess which colour you've picked out.

clinkers

I kinda like "Mens Manor" to match "Ladies Lounge" personally

__________________
"I want to be remembered as the girl who always smiles even when her heart is broken... and the one that could brighten up your day even if she couldnt brighten her own"

"Her emotions were clear waters. You could see the scarring and pockmarks at the bottom of the pool, but it was just a part of her landscape – the consequences of others’ actions in which she claimed no part."

Ustwo

Well I can't say globally but I can tell you it wouldn't be 9 out of 10 women I know.

I also know a good number of well off guys who don't have anything special for a wife.

Heh well I think the theory is pretty lacking and I can't say any womans opinion would affect how I post, after all I'm not looking to get laid here

The theory contains some truth, but is pretty well useless to either sex.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.