Shocking, shocking news

[andrewducker]

Women choose wealthy partners, men choose sexy ones. - one wonders what the conflation between "wealthy" and "good at something" is in that study.
Also Kissing means more to women than men - apparently women use kissing to assess the person they're kissing. Which strikes me as a good reason why so many women end up with appalling partners.

Comments

[dougs.livejournal.com]

> But men placed less importance on it, using it to increase the likelihood of sex

Is "less" a typo, do you think?

[rosamicula.livejournal.com]

Which strikes me as a good reason why so many women end up with appalling partners.

Rough translation = Why so many women fail to end up with me ?

[hfnuala.livejournal.com]

I knew I shouldn't follow that first link.

While humans may pride themselves on being highly evolved, most still behave like the stereotypical Neanderthals when it comes to choosing a mate.

What utter, utter bollocks. People from a society where they are told from a young age that looks are important when men chose partners and money is important for women, when put into an nonsense situation[1] act on this message. This proves fuck all about evolution.

[1]is speed dating in any way like how mate selection has been done over evolutionary time? I don't think so.

[channelpenguin.livejournal.com]

"Which strikes me as a good reason why so many women end up with appalling partners"

For that to be true, the supply of appalling partners has to be pretty abundant, eh?

As to the kissing thing - I am honestly surprised that anyone doesn't consider being decent at it to be important. Anyone for the male POV here? Do guys *really* not care that much? Is it just that in a straight choice between good kiss and no sex and iffy kiss and sex that he latter scenario wins out? Cos that's a bit more understandable (though I must admit that I wouldn't be expecting the sex to be any better than iffy).

If affectionate or sexual contact with the person is not pleasant, I can't see why you'd do it - and therefore why you'd be be in a relationship with them - as opposed to being just friends. I know people do it - and intellectually, logically, the partner may have every other good quality going - but I can't see how that can be expected to work *as a relationship* if you dislike the way the smell/can't bear to touch/kiss them/be touched by them/kissed by them or if you don't enjoy the sex.

Unless, of course, neither of you is ever interested in that sort of thing with anyone, then I could maybe see it.

Otherwise the partner is going to sense that physical reluctance as emotional distance, if nothing else. Close physical contact is incredibly bonding - and that is something most people want/need at an emotional level, at least to some degree. If you don't get it from each other, then what happens?

[lilitufire.livejournal.com]

Couldn't go out with a crap kisser. It's a deal breaker for me, sort of like being a really heavy smoker or hating cats :)

[neferet.livejournal.com]

Hmm, if there is actually any weight behind either of those articles then I should be male. I find wealthy partners intimidating, definitely need my partner to be at least a bit sexy, and as for kissing; I can really take it or leave it!
Gotta love articles that try to pin down gender-related behaviour / gender-differences.

[ishkhara.livejournal.com]

As far as I'm concerned it doesn't make a blind bit of difference to me whether a man is wealthy or not. I place more importance on personality and attraction than I do on how much they earn, which should be painfully obvious from my previous choices of partners. I need to feel attracted to someone so I have to find them sexy to be with them. I can't imagine being with anyone whom I didn't find sexy or didn't enjoy kissing! I love kissing: to me it's a way of showing affection and I don't analyse the kiss itself, I enjoy it for what it brings - a sense of closeness to my partner.