Race - Socioeconomics & The dating game • Know where you fit in.

[Birdsfoot]

OK time to put all this dating prefference confusion into perspective:

*I will be assuming capitalist motives to be the main driving force in womens' dating motivations (i will be using the word "most" allot because nothing is 100%)

MOST WOMEN DATE UP:
That means that wether they are rich or poor they go for a man they believe to be above them financial and or socioeconomicaly. WHY? Because they have more power due to their limited supply in relation to the surplus of males available to them. So any man who, by what ever means, can show a higher earning potential than the female will have the better chance at the pussy. The better looking the female is, the higher she can aim.

MOST MEN DATE DOWN:
That means they go for a women they believe to be below them financial and or socioeconomicaly. WHY? Because they have less power due to their surplus supply in relation to the limited supply of females available to them. So any woman who, has a lower earning potential than the male will be seen as a viable pussy prospect. the lower the man goes the better his chances.

AMERICAN RACIAL CULTURE PUTS THE BLACK MALE AT A DISADVANTAGE:
On average black males have a much lower earning potential in relation to white males, hence black males are automatically less attractive to most females of any race who "date up".

Now for a quick rundown of the common dating stereo types bassed on womens' choosing tendancies:

IN CONCLUSION:
As is usualy the case in most areas of ameriKKKan culture, in the dating game if you are a black male you most step-up more or work harder to gain more financial wealth to compensate for the perceived negativity and lack of earning potential associated with your "blackness".

 

[QueEx]

Source ???

 

[Birdsfoot]

Source ???

This is the culmination of my years of dealing with the relationship issues, race issues and financial issuse of GA residents. This information is purely optional I just posted it to see if any one had any informative opinions in response.

 

[QueEx]

Cool. Anxiously awaiting responses.

QueEx

 

[yureeka9]

This is interesting. I'm going to have to look this over. Are you saying that you designed this table and all of the contents of the article?

 

[nittie]

Thats an interesting theory but I don't think it's true. People and especially women are ruled by their emotions. Everybody knows of a man or woman who had everything and threw it away for love or lust. Look at Whitney an Bobby, Princess Diana and Dodi, Bill Clinton and Monica or K Fed and Brittany, you could argue that almost every pro athlete is dating downward, the list is endless. The part about dating upward is only true with women and men who are emotionally detached or social animals.

 

[rude_dog]

Thats an interesting theory but I don't think it's true. People and especially women are ruled by their emotions. Everybody knows of a man or woman who had everything and threw it away for love or lust. Look at Whitney an Bobby, Princess Diana and Dodi, Bill Clinton and Monica or K Fed and Brittany, you could argue that almost every pro athlete is dating downward, the list is endless. The part about dating upward is only true with women and men who are emotionally detached or social animals.

I think the part about pro athletes proves his point. They date poorer women than them but they're usually dating an attractive women who wouldn't give them the time of day if they didn't have money. Remember Dodi was the son of a billionaire, Clinton was a 55 year old man getting a blowjob from a young busty 20 intern. People talk shit about Monique, but Monique lose some weight, she would be nice. Whitney and Brittany are just stupid, no excuse or explanation. How the fuck you become a crack head when you're rich.

 

[Birdsfoot]

How the fuck you become a crack head when you're rich.

Many rich people have drug issues.

 

[Birdsfoot]

This is interesting. I'm going to have to look this over. Are you saying that you designed this table and all of the contents of the article?

Yup. Sociology is my thing.

 

[Birdsfoot]

Thats an interesting theory but I don't think it's true. People and especially women are ruled by their emotions. Everybody knows of a man or woman who had everything and threw it away for love or lust. Look at Whitney an Bobby, Princess Diana and Dodi, Bill Clinton and Monica or K Fed and Brittany, you could argue that almost every pro athlete is dating downward, the list is endless. The part about dating upward is only true with women and men who are emotionally detached or social animals.

I did not factor in the emotional aspects of human behaviour that would cause deviation from the trends noted because I believe trhat race, socioeconomics and the physical attractiveness of females to be the primary driving forces in peoples' dating decisions.

 

[QueEx]

Thats an interesting theory but I don't think it's true. People and especially women are ruled by their emotions.

What about security -- or at least, perceived security?

If it is true, as Birdsfoot proposes, that women date/marry up, arguably, security (or a woman's perception of security) is on par with love/lust. While "Up" and "Down" are relative terms, even the chick who needs a thug is looking for the one that ain't broke.

QueEx

 

[Birdsfoot]

What about security -- or at least, perceived security?

If it is true, as Birdsfoot proposes, that women date/marry up, arguably, security (or a woman's perception of security) is on par with love/lust. While "Up" and "Down" are relative terms, even the chick who needs a thug is looking for the one that ain't broke.

QueEx

^Exactly and many females are also considering that they might have kids with said amle pertner in which case she will want financial security for her kids too.

 

[nittie]

This is an interesting topic because it touches on what America is suppose to be and what it is.

for instance

What about security -- or at least, perceived security?

If it is true, as Birdsfoot proposes, that women date/marry up, arguably, security (or a woman's perception of security) is on par with love/lust. While "Up" and "Down" are relative terms, even the chick who needs a thug is looking for the one that ain't broke.

I agree but what about the term "thug" it's as relative as "up" and "down", a middle class chick wants her definition of a thug and most times it is a bad boy from her socio-economic class, she not going to go to the hood and find a real thug, but in any case she is dating down.

think the part about pro athletes proves his point. They date poorer women than them but they're usually dating an attractive women who wouldn't give them the time of day if they didn't have money.

This is true for male athletes but what about females, I can't think of one top female athlete dating a man thats her financial equal. The same can be said for female entertainers, maybe 1 percent have partners that make the kind of money they do and thats the case with most high earning women.


This theory would be the norm if society had it's way. Women would gravitate to the ideal man and that would be the rich white guy, but reality is different, if men and women really behaved this way there wouldn't be any interracial people in America, would there?