Ladder Theory

I think something like a "ladder theory" is a broad generalization that ignores too many variables in what can become a very complex situation. People are not machines and their behavior, while sometimes predictable, varies from person to person.

This is coming from someone who "jumped ladders," although I don't think we were that particularly close at the time. I had known her for awhile, went to college, and we started talking more. Things just happened after that.

I'd go into more detail, but I'm going to make a wine run. Drinking alone hurrah!

 

I wouldn't want to box myself in with thinking like that, just go with the flow and see what happens.

 

This theory is so fucking sexist and is the perfect excuse to not take responsibility for acting like a mindless pig. The way they present this as "science", to be believed by the masses, is disgusting. The sad thing is that this kind of theory has become a self-fulfilling prophecy.

 

I think it's more or less right. My close female friend (who is in a relationship) agrees.

I was actually thinking of posting the link on the forum myself, but was worried about getting responses like this...

 

I don't know. I have a couple gf's that I don't find attractive physically, though they are extremely fun to talk to. Physical attractiveness is a must for me regarding sex. I wouldn't have sex with someone just because I liked their mind.

 

I think it is pretty much spot on. I am glad that I ran across this theory all spelled out and everything. Thanks.

 

The method of presentation is extremely crass. At heart I would like to believe that this theory holds no validity on the interaction between the two sexes. Upon reflection I've observed this theory in action countless times and it carries alot of truth to it. This is the first time I've actually read the theory.

I guess if you truly believe that the theory is complete bullshit then spend a good long time considering your past interactions with the opposite sex. I consider it to be very feasible to live outside the boundaries of this theory, but only if you are truly honest with what you value in a potential mate and those values are indeed outside the boundaries of the theory. Many things to consider in regards to the sort of human being you want to be, but be honest with yourself...no matter how blunt the theory is, consider the overall validity before you judge it and how your past and present interactions reflect its content.

 

The only thing I can really completely diagree with is that all women will date a biker drug dealer is there isn't a donald trump around. I do not like placing myself or any potential offspring in such dangeraous circumstances... (not that I plan to have any offspring anytime soon if at all)

but its really common sense...who wouldn't want the exact same person... but with more money?

--------------------
On another note... Ladder theory is funny and makes light (or really quite heavy depending on how you see it) of some undeniable hapenstances that occur in this world...

I say we fix tear it apart and fix all its flaws!

 

Well...I don't think this theory explains why you sometimes find that you're physically attracted to someone who I would say was on a "friends" ladder, after getting to know them and finding that you have an emotional connection.

Also, I am not attracted to money/power-the whole "alpha male" thing just doesn't do it for me (tbh, these kind of guys make me suspicious).

 

Seems to me that the author has taken some of the theories on the effect evolutionary impulses have on mate selection, and then blown them out of proportion (for example, he seems to have ignored the studies that show people tend to be drawn to those who have a similar economic status, which somewhat undermines his idea that women most often go after the guy with the most money).

 

Nearly all of social science is broad sweeping generalisations- I personally have no "faith" in the majority of psychology because of that. People are not machines and thus cannot be reduced to a list of laws. The problem with psychology, in my opinion, is that there is too much systemising and not enough empathy.

Well, I see these things the product of certain social constructs that someone may be integrated by some into their identity. Some view being only concerned with sex as being important to their identity as a man. Some who do not can be treated as though they possess a strange pathology. "Studies" like that one encourage the proliferation of such social constructs only make the matter worse.

Science deals primarily in theories- not in absolutes. However, many members of the general public and even the scientific community forget that and they state these theories as though they are ubiquitously true. Most of the times when studies are published by virtue of the media they is no mention of the exceptions to the rule- there is also little or almost nothing to even imply that they are exceptions. Yet, personal experience, philosophical reasoning, and more academic sources would tell you- even though they do not emphasise- that they are exceptions.

From what I have discerned many humans have a tendency to over simplify the universe into paradigms and then lock themselves into their paradigms, holding everything in contradiction to such paradigms as non existent, a delusion,or a deviancy that is worthy of being disparaged or seen as negligible.

On another note, I found that the author's neglect of asexuals and reduction of homosexuals to a mere footnote very repugnant

 

The ladder theory is too simplistic, even going by personal experience it hardly ever holds true.

 

Lol, this fabrication is beyond any proper measures of ridiculousness, and deserves no further comment, imo.

 

So this is what women want apparently, from the OP

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Says:[/FONT][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif] I want a man who is motivated and has goals.
Means: I want a rich man[/FONT]


[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]*BS*
[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
[/FONT]​

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Says:[/FONT][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif] I want a man who knows how to treat a woman.
[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Means: I want a rich man[/FONT]


[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]How does that translate to rich? This sounds more like an issue of respect.
[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Says:[/FONT][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif] He's from a really good family.
Means: He's from a really rich family.

Or, he comes from a non-broken family with a mother and father and has a positive outlook on "family".

Who wrote this shit?
[/FONT][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
[/FONT]Incredibly, I find that women will settle for a guy who is just ambitious and doesn't want to settle in his shitty job and never see progress again. You don't have to be rich to be ambitious. From what I have figured out, women just want a guy who is going to keep plugging away and trying to improve life not just for him but his loved ones. Most women I know would rather build something with someone who is an active partner then to just marry some random rich asshole.

 

No! NO! you damned P! Show your anger! Let it rule you!!!! Do not take the high road!

 

To be honest, I agree with it.

And this is because of two reasons.

1) No scientific evidence has been brought against this theory except for protests as stated on the site and simple hurt feelings.

2) This is what the majority of women and men act like. It's hardwired into our brains, it's biology. Naturally, for the advancement of the human race, humans will automatically pick what has the best traits for survival. Beauty reflects health, and richness reflects survivability so its natural.

3) Reproduction is once again something to advance the human race. As said in 2, it is hardwired in our biology to find the guy with the best "genes" and the best stature in position. Lions are an example of this.

Despite the fact that there are exceptions (many being in the NT/NF forums), let's face it. Out of the many who are NTs or NFs, who isn't sex hungry, who doesn't like looks? And also, out of the 6 billion people out there, who are NTs or NFs? Not to mention the rare amount of sapiosexuals out there, and how many fat women are actually married.

 

*ahem*

More info on that kind of stuff here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biological_attraction

To the best of our knowledge, lions don't have the ability to consciously override their basic instincts, whereas human beings do. For example, if a lion is hungry and there is food available, they'll eat. If a human is hungry and there is food available, they can choose either to eat or not to eat, even if not eating results in death (hunger strikers).

Loads of them? Don't forget that in some cultures it's actually considered a particularly attractive quality.