COLLEGE DATING

That woman tends to gravitate towards the "superior" male. If Mr. Alpha is better looking, wealthier, and has a more interesting life...the typical guy doesn't seem all that outraged that Mr. Alpha got the girl. He pretty much expects as much.To give a particular example, I remember when I was a freshman in high school. Only a handful of the most alpha male type freshman guys were able to date at all. For the most part, upperclassmen ruled the roost...and took all of the freshman women. I honestly don't remember my freshmen peers complaining much about this phenomenon. I guess we were lonely and probably didn't care for it, but it made sense. The seniors were bigger (taller and more muscular) than we were, had more resources (money and cars), and just seemed so much more confident and at ease (not surprising...being bigger, stronger, and possessing more resources than the competition can have a nice effect on the ego lol).Let's face it: they were just plain more fun and appealing than we were. It wasn't even a close contest. Even if by some fluke a hot chick had taken a shine to us...I seriously doubt that we would have had any idea of what to do with such an opportunity.The best-looking freshman girls were ALL dating upperclassmen. Every single one of them.Of course, time marched on...and WE became the seniors. And sure enough, we had the hottest underclass girls hanging all over us. The tables had turned, and it was really amazing. I had never even kissed a girl before my senior year, and all of a sudden I had some of the best-looking girls in the school pretty much fighting over me. It was a heady brew! And something that, frankly, I didn't have the maturity to handle properly. But that's another story for another post.The only girls that didn't like it were...you guessed it...the senior females. Those same girls that caused us to go dateless for what seemed like eons. Those same girls that refused to treat us as dating material, for which we were invisible.The difference? Those girls tried to lecture us about the cradle robbing of dating underclassmen (dating girls two to three years younger...the horror!). Yet when we were the ones with the short end of the stick, we never had presumed to lecture them or make snide remarks to them about their preferences for Senior males. Again, we may not have liked the situation, but we understood it.And that's the difference in a nutshell.Then, of course, the entire process repeated itself in college. The freshman guys were again out of luck, losing most of the freshman girls to upperclassmen. Then time marches on, and the tables are turned. Once again, the same female that ignored her peers feels free to lecture and ridicule the newly minted upperclassmen who, after several years in a barren and unforgiving wilderness, are finally able to enjoy an embarrassment of riches.The point is that you can't count on many of these females to acknowledge contradictions. Or even to feel a tinge of shame at their hypocrisy. The same female that ignored you to date older guys...may well berate you when the tables turn. Apparently riches are for them, not for you.We've seen the same ugliness all too often on this board. I don't think there is a male here who doesn't accept that females have some important advantages on the dating scene. But mention one of the FEW male advantages (the most notable being older guys having some advantages as compared to older women), and the freeboots on the board go nuts...and into massive denial. The very idea of a man being happy and having lots of options seems to drive them up the wall.Fair play? What's that? Again, the basic rule is simple: she feels free to exclude you at any time and for any reason that she pleases. You, on the other hand, are an immature pig if you do the same to her.If a woman finds out that a man has selection criteria that exclude her...she is apt to go ballistic. She becomes aware that a guy is more attracted to younger females? He's scum!! He's a cradle robber! (Never mind that she dated older guys when she was young).She learns that he doesn't want to get involved with a woman who already has kids by another man? He's pathetic! (Never mind that when she was young, she made snide remarks about guys who dated "old hags" with children. Now that she is that "old hag", she makes snide remarks about guys who date "teeny boppers").Never mind that she isn't interested in you. That doesn't matter. You should be interested in her. Period.The contradictions are blatant and egregious...and she couldn't care less.I've learned that it is bad politics to let women in on your selection requirements if the woman in question does not meet them. Of course, she will feel free to speak of her own requirements...whether the guy meets those requirements or not.If the guy dares complain about her refusal to date men that lack - take your pick - height, wealth, etc. - he's a bitter loser.But again, let HIM let it be known that the female is too old for him, or that her having children by other men is a deal breaker for him, and watch out! Hell hath no fury like a woman who has been told that she doesn't meet a man's selection requirements!That's not the way things are supposed to go!The sense of entitlement often leads to the ludicrous. I've seen seriously overweight women go pretty much nuts at the notion that their excess fat is a turn off for many guys. Whereas the overweight guys that I know have no difficulty accepting the limitations that their appearance creates for them. Again, they may not LIKE the reality of the situation. But they at least seem to more or less GET the reality of the situation. Whereas many conversations with women about this subject seem to end up somewhere near Alice in Wonderland. Reality has very little to do with such a conversation.It's a totally different mindset, and says an awful lot about the different psychological worlds that males and females inhabit.And finally, it's not discussed because it's not "manly" for men to admit to failings such as this. Agreed. Again, the woman who rejects a man who is short, poor or bald has "standards". The guy who complains about these standards is a bitter loser. And the guy who has equivalent standards of his own is a pig.The guy can't complain, nor can he express standards of his own.The 20% of younger men who are mostly invisible to younger women (my % guess for the ages between 18 and 23) are NOT going to form 20% of these younger women's nontrivial contacts with men. True enough. But at the end of the day, I don't think that the discrepancy in attention devoted to the respective plights of older women/younger men has as much to do with "knowledge" per se, or anything particularly fair or rational. Instead, it seems that in the current mass culture, it is perfectly acceptable to denigrate "loserguys". Their feelings simply don't matter. There is a coldness and callousness to it that is truly shocking.I've speculated before why I think the younger guy's plight never gets discussed. One reason is that when people are older and in a position to write books and magazine articles, the guys are no longer in the disadvantaged group, so they no longer have an axe to grind. Another reason is that this issue hits older women much harder than younger men (although I still think it hits a sufficient percentage of younger men that fairness in reporting would dictate there be at least some exposure of their plight). And finally, it's not discussed because it's not "manly" for men to admit to failings such as this. Men express things, just not as often where you hear about them. (Usenet, neighborhood bars, etc.) There's another factor involved that I also think needs to be brought out into the open. Many older women believe the difference between their plight and that of younger men is larger than it really is because their views are not based on a true random sample of young men. The younger men these women knew and dated when these women were younger are clearly going to be biased in favor of those younger men who are more desirable by women. The 20% of younger men who are mostly invisible to younger women (my % guess for the ages between 18 and 23) are NOT going to form 20% of these younger women's nontrivial contacts with men. Another thing, and not trivial, is that these older women, who once got action but not anymore, at least might have some memories of past satisfying intimacy to look back upon whereas the "chronic loser guy" who wallows in bitterness to the detriment of all else, has no such memories and never will. The real tragedy occurs when the chronic loserguy allows this failure in just one part of life (an admittedly important part, for most guys) to destroy his potential in other parts of life, (career, hobbies, religion, family, etc.) Talk about getting stung by the same wasp of fate twice! CoatsI've speculated before why I think the younger guy's plight never gets discussed. One reason is that when people are older and in a position to write books and magazine articles, the guys are no longer in the disadvantaged group, so they no longer have an axe to grind. Another reason is that this issue hits older women much harder than younger men (although I still think it hits a sufficient percentage of younger men that fairness in reporting would dictate there be at least some exposure of their plight). And finally, it's not discussed because it's not "manly" for men to admit to failings such as this. Men express things, just not as often where you hear about them. (Usenet, neighborhood bars, etc.)There's another factor involved that I also think needs to be brought out into the open. Many older women believe the difference between their plight and that of younger men is larger than it really is because their views are not based on a true random sample of young men. The younger men these women knew and dated when these women were younger are clearly going to be biased in favor of those younger men who are more desirable by women. The 20% of younger men who are mostly invisible to younger women (my % guess for the ages between 18 and 23) are NOT going to form 20% of these younger women's nontrivial contacts with men. Another thing, and not trivial, is that these older women, who once got action but not anymore, at least might have some memories of past satisfying intimacy to look back upon whereas the "chronic loserguy" who wallows in bitterness to the detriment of all else, has no such memories and never will.The real tragedy occurs when the chronic loser guy allows this failure in just one part of life (an admittedly important part, for most guys) to destroy his potential in other parts of life, (career, hobbies, religion, family, etc.) Talk about getting stung by the same wasp of fate t