Self-serving biases, Rant 1
I'm a student of the human mind, so I can't help but read things like the personals ads to get a better idea of how it works -- but I swear, if I read once more something along the lines of "I'm a 5'9 female, so my target guy is at least 5'11," I'll just puke. If she wants a tallish guy, that's perfectly fine, of course, and is no one's biz but her own. What grinds my gears is the self-serving bullshit qualifier that precedes the statement of the preference. No matter what height the girl is, she typically wants a tallish guy -- but what girl wants to think of herself as just another drone in the hive of superficial females? Enter some slapdash disclaimer to save her self-image! It's not that "I'm a slave to my bestial instincts like every other female" -- it's just that "I'm a tallish girl, so I deserve a tallish guy; it's only fair." Or maybe, "I don't deserve such a guy, but I would feel awkward and manly around a shorter guy."
All right, seems reasonable, until you consider that they're comparing apples and oranges. Being a tall girl doesn't earn you squat in the mating game -- guys may care about your waist-to-hip ratio, the geometry of your face, your skin tone, so on, but one thing we couldn't care less about is your height. But being a tall guy does earn you a lot in the mating game. So, translating: "I've got some trait that provides you w/ no information as to my mate value, but you must be highly desirable." It's like if a guy wrote, "I have full lips and lustruous hair, so you'd better be hot from the neck up too." This is idiotic since girls don't care much about male beauty -- does he have a job, if so what kind, how tall is he, etc. -- that's what inquiring female minds want to know.
And the real male counterpart ads would be worse, given that the female ads bald-facedly provide crisply quantified cut-offs (e.g., "at least 5'11"). They'd read, for example: "I have man-breasts, full C cup, so any respondents must have at least a D cup; the larger, the better." Riiiight. Except guys don't act retarded like this -- we know what qualities girls are interested in, and thus, which ones entitle us to demand good things. Perhaps it's the feminist influence in the US that's rendered many modern females clueless of sex differences in preferences, but this is the sort of stuff they should be teaching in high school health class -- anyone else remember how pointless that class was? Who was doing hard drugs and having sex then? A tiny minority of druggies or super-popular kids, and that was it. If we had a better understanding of sex differences, we'd be better prepared to deal w/ each other once we reached full adulthood. But if we've lived in ignorance all our lives, then the awful reality will only irritate us even more once it rears its head: a girl becomes incensed that guys don't value her height or brains that much, while a guy gets upset when he finds out girls really want a manly man instead of gentle stay-at-home dad.
But to get back to the self-serving biases, what of the short girl who demands a tallish guy -- surely she can't use the same disclaimer, so what's the deal in this case? "Well, I like to wear 4-inch heels / platforms, and I guess just an extra 3 inches taller than me in such shoes would be fine." Employing this flapdoodle, a 5'4 girl gets to demand the same 5'11 guy as the 5'9 girl. It's not that she's obeying her primitive instincts -- she's just a modern gal who loves to wear heels!
Now here's a case where guys act just as retardedly self-serving as girls, namely when they specify what age their ideal partner would be. Let's see, when guys are 15, their ideal girl is some hot college girl -- the greater maturity, the fact that she could teach him things a high school girl couldn't, the appeal of the slightly older girl! Then that same guy is in college, and his ideal partner is -- also a fun-loving college girl, not some 25-y.o. intern or full-time career girl, nor some immature high school girl. Later, when that same guy is in his 30s, whom does he secretly lust after, even if he realizes it's mostly in vain -- Girls Gone Wild! The charming innocence compared to his age-mates, the fact that he could teach her a thing or two, the appeal of the younger girl! In other words, there's a peak that girls hit, and pretty much guys of all walks of life want a girl in that age range, but in order to not appear like drones will make up one excuse or other, contradicting their previous reasons as they age.
Only a really cold sonofabitch would speak honestly: "Well, just before that, they're not ripe enough, and after that, they're like spoiled fruit. Who wants spoiled fruit?" All right, so you shouldn't put it so bluntly, but it's better than lying. Same goes for girls. It's fine if you house some bestial instinct; we all do. If you want to tame it and not have it play a role, that's fine, but if you're going to allow it out of its cage, don't try to disguise it as a fluffy bunny. Others will only get pissed when they try to approach it and get thrashed instead. Although you could argue that only a moron would fall for the disguise in the first place, so they deserve to pay for their stupidity.
Next rant: on rosy retrospection (things were so much better when... , I hiked to school uphill both ways, etc.).