Post: #1

in a sample of early 20-something girls at a Scottish university, daughters of happily married parents (HM) had more attractive and feminine faces than those whose parents either had separated pre-puberty (S) or had remained married but unhappily (UM). Color pictures in PDF here (L-to-R: S, UM, HM). As for body shape, the HM daughters had lower BMI (i.e., were slimmer) and lower waist-to-hip ratio (WHR, i.e., a more hourglass figure) than the other two groups. The authors make it clear that theirs is a correlational study that remains agnostic on the causal mechanisms,
==
It would not be shocking to see an impact with regard to receptivity to various types of phero signature.

Post: #2

Yeah, I heard some stats in a mandatory parenting class during divorce that even kids from families with unhappily married parents were happier later in life than divorced parents, so there is probably something hormonal and psychological at work that affects development significantly there. Sux that being happily married is so dependent on the person you are married to!

Personally I'm not ever getting involved seriously with someone from a broken family again, too many hidden minefields and repressed traumas - therapy is expensive and only works on the willing! Why settle for a fixer-upper when you can get into a fully functional intact one with a little extra effort?

Post: #3

(11-29-2011 11:33 AM)2Soon2Care Wrote:  Yeah, I heard some stats in a mandatory parenting class during divorce that even kids from families with unhappily married parents were happier later in life than divorced parents, so there is probably something hormonal and psychological at work that affects development significantly there. Sux that being happily married is so dependent on the person you are married to!

Personally I'm not ever getting involved seriously with someone from a broken family again, too many hidden minefields and repressed traumas - therapy is expensive and only works on the willing! Why settle for a fixer-upper when you can get into a fully functional intact one with a little extra effort?

Thank you for this.

At a slight tangent, one interesting thing is that the old ways of countries boasting about the beauty of their women might then actually have some grounding. A well-ordered society perhaps does produce happier families and prettier women.

And of course, if one sees an explosive decline in beauty, that ought to be considered potentially a symptom of something much deeper.

Post: #4

I love it - "explosive decline in beauty" - kinds described the USA at the moment, with our global leadership in epic obesity, diabetes, debt, imprisonment, sub-par education, unemployment, and divorce - kinda symptomatic I would think! Still plenty of hotties but they are far overshadowed by the thundering herds of buffet molesters.

Post: #5

(11-29-2011 11:49 AM)2Soon2Care Wrote:  I love it - "explosive decline in beauty" - kinds described the USA at the moment, with our global leadership in epic obesity, diabetes, debt, imprisonment, sub-par education, unemployment, and divorce - kinda symptomatic I would think! Still plenty of hotties but they are far overshadowed by the thundering herds of buffet molesters.

yes - many trends coming together at the same time. we have been here before in the west though - see Hogarth's Gin Lane - and recognition of a problem is usually prelude to its resolution, one way and another.

Post: #6

Here is one perspective:

Quote:Society today is fundamentally dishonest with women, and cheats them out of a honest choice. It lies and says that freedom comes with no strings (it does). Society does not tell women that nearly unlimited freedom also means a very thin tightrope to find romantic happiness. That all that sexual liberation is a two edged sword, to be worthy of a guy they find attractive, they'll have to be significantly younger, with relatively few partners, be pretty, fit, thin, and with a pleasing personality. All things they cannot do much about except on the margins (eat healthy, exercise, refrain from casual hook-ups).

Society also lies in that very few women are aware of the risks of falling deeply for an Alpha "” few other guys will compare. This is particularly true for the first guy, who remains perhaps the only guy in her heart. Not fun if he's with someone else.

It is not that women are choosing badly, though mostly they are. Rather, it is that women are being lied to, by a media-infotainment complex that feeds the worst delusions instead of the noblest instincts of women. Imagine a world where every guy watches endless Star Trek episodes featuring hot Borg Babes and Vulcan women fighting over some useless geek. That flipped on the gender, is the toxic environment women have to endure, and fight against every day, intellectually and emotionally.

The inevitable disappointment that most women endure, leads to over-eating to find love in food, partly, or binge drinking and useless hook-ups. Is Snooki happy? I think not. Nor do the women in the photos look happy. The road to happiness (and incidentally, women feeling positive not negative towards the West, and its civilization,and its people) requires honesty. About what a world of near total sexual and individual freedom requires. Which in turn is nothing less than constant vigilance and care, lest a woman's one chance at happiness slip away, without her even knowing it.

For the flip-side is, few men desired at all by any attractive women at all, needs to compromise. For many, a life of casual sex, and slacking will do just fine.

Post: #7

Sexual liberty:

Alpha can have all the girls he wants.
Girl gets alpha, alpha got choice and leaves girl.
Girl is unhappy and wants alpha back.
Girl won't really want another non-alpha guy, except for maybe a drunk hookup.

When the girl has an alpha at hand, she will probably not get him to have a relationship with her. So she always has to be in fear of him having other women. When she doesn't have an alpha she will be somewhat unhappy as well.

Bad for non-alphas, bad for girls.

IMO nature didn't so much intend a system of sexual liberty, but rather based our emotions on more primitive group structures. Anyways sexual liberty is the status quo in western societies.

As a guy you better become an alpha.
As a girl you better make sure to put a ring on it.

Post: #8

(11-30-2011 4:28 AM)idontknow Wrote:  As a girl you better make sure to put a ring on it.

Good post, but my experience tells me this makes no difference.

Post: #9

Yes. Her chances to keep him may get better, though. And after cheating guys may come back to their wife. Sometimes affairs spark new interest, some girls may perceive an affair as alphaness and some girls love drama. Even though they may not admit it.

Sexual liberty may not be too easy for women to handle, though. Got to agree with the article.

Post: #10

Viewed on longer horizons, these things do tend to be self-correcting, one way and another. Society is often such that if things go on like this, we will be facing utter disaster. But usually they don't.

Men have woken up to the dangers of presuming that women would behave as they were brought up to believe they ought, and possibly the large population of older never-married women and unhappily single divorced women starts to reflect their response. The more perceptive and intelligent amongst younger women must surely now start to ask themselves whose life they would rather have of the adults around them they see. Yes - people are brain-washed by the mass media, but only up to a point. Eventually the discrepancy between reality and perception gets so large that there has to be a trend change in social norms.

In particular one force tending to favour recent trends has been very high disposable incomes in the west, a high ratio of wages in female jobs to male jobs, and a low degree of violence (compare New York City today to the 70s - yes, policing changes had some influence, but we see the same phenomenon everywhere). I suspect all of these factors are about to reverse - the cost of living is likely to rise persistently (food prices, if not fuel), the jobs of the future are in N Dakota, not LA and NYC, and I suspect we are entering a more violent era. The squeeze on government spending has only started, and these kinds of jobs tend to be disproportionately female-dominated compared to say, agriculture and mining (boom industries of the future). (Similarly real estate, finance, real estate).

I suspect we will look back in twenty years time on the present era with a degree of fondness and nostalgia for its relative freedom for certain kinds of men, whilst at the same time recognizing that things had to change!