•
•

Thoughts on hypergamy (self.TheBluePill)

fackmegood が 投稿

I'm not a redpiller. I disagree with most of their theories. The only ones I don't are ones which are not exclusive to them. So things like working out, standing up for yourself etc are generally good for both men and women etc.

Been noticing a trend on this sub about hypergamy. Most people here seem to disagree with it so I'd like to see my views challenged from you and see where that goes.

I think people in general are hypergamous, not just women, not just men. Both. For instance, women will go for or like the cooler guy or the tougher guy in general or the guy that is more popular, well liked. His looks in general has a part to play in that is well. Similarly men will go for the better looking women etc. I think both behaviours is hypergamous because people in society are socialized to view those attractive women with more value, and those attractive men with more value. Although even the way that value is derived can be debated. The value that society places on the most attractive men is going to be way different and much more than the value society places on the most attractive women.

In other words, its not a biological truth that women will go for one type of man, but a truth that women will like what society usually presents to them as the most attractive. And the exact same thing happens with men I think.

Thoughts?

全 13 件のコメント
並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A

[–]jessicadiamonds 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (7子コメント)

According to Google, hypergamy is "the action of marrying a person of a superior caste or class." Otherwise known as "marrying up" or "gold digging." It is not an imperative fact, as you state it, that women will go for the cooler, tougher or more popular guy. Honestly, people go for who they are attracted to. In most couples I know, both partners are very well matched. But say that it is true, that people try and go for someone "better." That isn't hypergamy. Class/caste is about status and money, not about being better looking. Would it be two-way hypergamy if a hot woman married a rich ugly man? No, the woman is the one marrying up in that instance. So what you are saying is just incorrect as far as what your concept of the word is.

I do think you're correct, society values good looking and/or rich people as better than others. But I would definitely argue that more people seek mutual attraction in relationships and the TERPs that cry hypergamy every chance they get literally think all women are interested in "marrying up" and will stop at nothing to do that.

[–]greeneyedwench 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

And TERPs move the goalposts on hypergamy; if the TERP is built but not rich, he'll accuse women of gold digging, while if he makes good money but isn't conventionally hot, he'll accuse women of using him for beta bux while secretly screwing a dumb, poor, handsome guy. If he has neither looks nor money, he'll bash her for both. And all three of these guys will call it hypergamy. But really, everybody is unlucky in love sometimes and gets dumped, and it's not always part of a vast plot by an entire gender.

[–]fackmegood[S] 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (5子コメント)

'Otherwise known as "marrying up" or "gold digging." It is not an imperative fact, as you state it, that women will go for the cooler, tougher or more popular guy. Honestly, people go for who they are attracted to.'

Right but the people they are attracted to are going to be the people that society dictates are attracted to. This attraction thing is for the most part decided by society. Now I gave some examples of that that may not specifically be true for the west. But whatever is true for our current society in the west is going to be what is generally seen as more attractive, and women/men will go for that, if that makes any sense.

'But say that it is true, that people try and go for someone "better." That isn't hypergamy. Class/caste is about status and money, not about being better looking. Would it be two-way hypergamy if a hot woman married a rich ugly man? No, the woman is the one marrying up in that instance. So what you are saying is just incorrect as far as what your concept of the word is.'

I understand what you mean, I think this is the perspective I was missing. In this current society, people aren't hypergamous. But then would it make sense to say that women in the past were hypergamous because those women at the time wanted to pursue the richer guy always.

But I guess those women were also influenced by cultural factors and misogynistic ideas which prevented them to go to work, so they kind of had to look the best for the best man to survive or live better for the rest of their lives...Hmmm..

In any case, you have convinced me. Here's a non-existent delta for you...

[–]jessicadiamonds 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (3子コメント)

I don't think true attraction is always dictated by society. Possibly who we initially see and find attractive? But there is simply so much more to attraction than traditional beauty, otherwise online dating would work much differently than it does.

[–]fackmegood[S] 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (2子コメント)

So then where does true attraction come from? What is true attraction really?

[–]jessicadiamonds 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Obviously I'm not saying that we are not influenced by society, we are. Have you ever been attracted to someone and been like "oh, but they aren't cute, why do I like them so much?" There are so many facets other than looks/status that can be attractive.

[–]fackmegood[S] 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I know you weren't saying that society as a whole plays no part. I understand you were saying there is a part of society but its not the whole picture.

And yes that has happened, but then I would argue that the personality or body language or whatever else that I am so subconsciously attracted to is probably also a societal thing. I'm not saying looks/status is the only part/idea that society dictates. Even subtle things are also subconsciously picked up by our brain, no?

[–]greeneyedwench 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

A lot of women in the past didn't have much of a choice in their hypergamy. Fathers marrying off their daughters to rich men to advance the family was a thing. So was getting raped by conquering lords. And then yes, some women would choose to marry up, as there were not a lot of other career options out there for them.

[–]saturnapartmentsLittle White Cuck Ball 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (1子コメント)

I think if we as people were strictly looking for a quick fuck, hypergamy is to be expected. It's expected that if all you want is a one night stand, things like "great with kids" or "a fun personality" won't matter.

I've concluded that unless we're talking about people made of straw, it's unlikely to have a person just drop an entire relationship because this person is 0.4 more attractive physically or their salary nets them a few grand more.

In terms of long term relationships, I really feel hypergamy is something that can't be measured. Say a man and woman really connect. The woman likes the idea of having kids but the man doesn't seem to keen on it. The woman breaks up with him and dates someone else more in agreement to what she wants. Something like this can't be measured in the black-and-white thinking commonplace in TRP Land, so obviously the woman is a branch swinger and went with him for (x reason).

So if we view hypergamy as "finding a partner that best aligns with our ideals and values", yes, everyone would be guilty of this. I think ideals/values matter most in LTRs, so it's unlikely a person would drop everything because of "biological programming".

[–]fackmegood[S] 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Yeah which is why I tried my best to dispell the thought that I'm not talking about biological notions. I think most attraction stems from social situations. In any case you bring up an interesting angle that I was not really thinking of. But I think yours and /u/jessicadiamonds comment really helped me put ideas into perspective.

[–]odoroustobacco 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (2子コメント)

As creatures, we're both evolutionarily prone and socially cultured to seek mates that will consciously or subconsciously satisfy what we believe our needs to be and the needs of our theoretical offspring.

In the state of the world at present, hypergamy exists as potential to secure a future. This can exist in a number of different ways--I'm sure Melania isn't attracted to Donald's looks or personality. However, it makes sense to seek a mate who provides what you need.

Although even the way that value is derived can be debated.

This is the most important statement in your post. Hypergamy can take a number of forms, and depending on the match, both people can believe they're "marrying up".

[–]greeneyedwench 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I read somewhere that a good marriage is one where each partner thinks "I'm the lucky one."

[–]fackmegood[S] 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

So you are saying that both people are being hypergamous? For long term relationships, sometimes people are not always looking to trade up and in the words of /u/saturnapartments said and I generally agree with it that: "I've concluded that unless we're talking about people made of straw, it's unlikely to have a person just drop an entire relationship because this person is 0.4 more attractive physically or their salary nets them a few grand more."

In other words, because both sexes are starting to make money now and have their own agency, nowadays women or men are not necessarily always trying to trade up