[rcoreyus]

The problem I have with the ladder theory is that it is based on the idea that everyone has roughly the SAME preferences. I don't question the idea that individual people will have strong preferences, just that everyone will agree on them.

As an aside, its best to try to keep the discussions polite - I'd much rather hear from someone I disagree with so that I can understand their point of view, rather than drive them away.

[Obelisk]

The problem I have with the ladder theory is that it is based on the idea that everyone has roughly the SAME preferences. I don't question the idea that individual people will have strong preferences, just that everyone will agree on them.

I really should create my own webpage explaining Ladder Theory so that people's first contact with it isn't the one written by that "angry frustrated dude".

Anyway, as far as the theory is concerned from the way I understand it, it's simply a matter of primal desires, and does not work at the higher reasoning centres of the brain.

For men it's simple. At the primal level, we want a hot woman, and we want to sleep with her. Are you going to deny that this is the case at the primal subconscious level? Probably not.

When you start getting into the higher brain functions where you can reason, then you start to see that maybe that really hot girl is kind of *****y, while a more homely girl might be a sweetheart. You were able to make a decision to date the homely girl, and you'll probably be happy with this.

All of that has nothing to do with Ladder Theory. The simple fact that, if the hot girl was also sweet, you probably would have picked her instead of the homely girl. Ladder Theory is all about animal drives and desires. Suppressing those desires due to reason kicking in and providing an overall better path doesn't mean Ladder Theory didn't take effect, it just means you were able to suppress it successfully. Some people are better than others at doing this.

[Stillness]

Define "primal."

From what I understand of myself I find women attractive. Different women are attractive in different ways. Some may smell nice. Some move in appealing ways. Some may have pretty eyes, a bright smile, great curves. Another woman may have feminine charm or share important spiritual values. I'm a sucker for deep thinkers.

Some of those traits will be apparent at first glance from across a room. Others take time to recognize. Each woman may have some or all of these characteristics and express them in their individual way. I don't make a distinction between my "primal" desires and my "higher" ones, if I understand what you mean. I'm one person with one set of desires.

Also, in my experience each man will place a different value on these things and have different preferences altogether. From what I've seen, your theory doesn't fit my experience. It may be how you and others see the world, but it's not universal like gravity or the laws of thermodynamics.

[Obelisk]

I think there are some universal guidelines for attraction. Some guys might like big butts, some might like skinny (but still shapely). Some might like large breasts, some smaller breasts.

But you'll notice there's always facial features and body shape that always stay roughly the same. I believe there was a study done that most men preferred a woman's waist to hip ratio to be about 33% different, as in, the waist should be 33% smaller than the hips (I hope you don't mind the use of Science!™ )

The differences between our tastes once we go over the bigger stuff is probably negligible stuff, like hair/eye colour, and the things you mentioned, like smell, a bright smile and such are universal (they improve everyone. Nobody wants to be with a woman that only knows how to frown, or doesn't smell good)

And the theory has fit my experience to a tee. It's just that people lower their standards compared to what they can offer. An overweight guy is likely to end up with an overweight woman. A short guy is likely to end up with a short woman.

I rarely see a short guy with a tall woman, it's extremely rare out in the wild (). I rarely see a knockout woman with an average/less than average guy. Most of the time people pair off pretty equally to their level. I would chalk that out as the need to have companionship overriding the Ladder Theory. Just as you could override hunger with thirst if you don't eat or drink anything for a couple of days.

[rcoreyus]

If you look at historical art you will see that the "ideal" shape for female bodies has changed a lot over time. Compare neolithic "venus" figures, to greek and roman art, to renaissance art, to early modern to now. In fact just compare Marylin Monroe to modern movie stars.

I think that being attracted to women in general may be to some extent "primal", but the characteristics, even the large ones, that men find attractive seems to me to be a learned behavior.

There are some common threads - most people consider actual disease / deformity to be a significant negative and that could be more primal.

The same applies to women's attraction to men. Some women may find the Sparticus series to be constant eye-candy, but I know my wife doesn't find muscles all that attractive (lucky for me ).

[Lady Syrinx]

Loud confirmation, as in porn, is not necessary for me. I can hear when a girl breaks the rhythm of her breathing. It is one of the first clues that I am doing something well. Some of the sexiest moans are relatively quiet. And, somewhat quieter keeps the neighbors out of it. That being said, there is no problem if a girl is loud. To each her own.

Loud confirmation doesn`t come from porn alone. Hollywood is just as guilty of portraying it in popular films. I assume everyone here is old enough to remember Meg Ryan`s famous fake orgasm in "When Harry met Sally." If not it`s probably on You Tube. Hollywood is possibly the biggest reason that women feel a need to fake orgasm or at least embellishing the real thing.

[Obelisk]

I think that being attracted to women in general may be to some extent "primal", but the characteristics, even the large ones, that men find attractive seems to me to be a learned behavior.

I agree with you somewhat.

Keep in mind that all the examples you mentioned still hover around that 33% hip to waist ratio. So a woman can have small or large hips, a smaller or larger butt, smaller or larger breasts, but as long as it's within the 33% ratio I think most men would find such a woman attractive.

I think that kind of answers Stillness' question about "what's primal" also.

[Stillness]

I think that kind of answers Stillness' question about "what's primal" also.

It doesn't. You still haven't defined it.

[boredpa]

my husband is around 7.5/8 and pretty nice thickness. best penis ive ever had. I actually go around showing my friends pix of it that he sends me...theyre all jealous