Ladder theory
 

http://www.intellectualwhores.com/masterladder.html

Totally misogynistic drivel, or is there a hint of truth to it? Your call.

Based in truth.:cool:

Totally misogynistic drivel [bored sigh].:zzz:

"misogynistic" seems like a somewhat problematic term to me to describe this Ladder Theory, because the proposition that "men are only interested in women to the extent they can fuck them" is hardly flattering to men, anymore than, "women only fuck rich men" is to women.

Anyway it's reductionist is what it is, pure and simple. I've met plenty of people who are like he describes--I'm sure we all have. But I've met plenty who aren't. I just had lunch this past Thursday with a former work colleague who happens to be female and I can categorically say I'm not interested in having sex with her and she's damn sure not interested in my money (or if she is she's deluded about how much I have!). I'd say it's helpful for each of us to know someone else who is on somewhat the same professional path (albeit at different places) to compare notes, strategize, give a bit of advice, and pass along news & job tidbits. I don't give a damn what gender that person is.

Does that mean I never walk down the street, see an attractive woman, and think, "Ummm... yeah"? Of course not. But it's not my sole criterion for interacting with women.

You've heard the saying, when you have a hammer, everything's a nail? Well this guy has a brush, it's broad, and he's painting.

IMHO.

I don't know if I agree with the theory but

that is a great line.:thumb:

The flaw in the theory is they are speaking in absolutes. That will never be the case when you deal with people. But I've seen the basic premis happen more often then not.;)

Though the website is obviously a silly over-generalization, I solidly approve of one aspect:

It tells these guy friends ("intellectual whores") that they need to wake up and accept the fact that just because this woman is friendly does not mean they're going to sleep with them. AMEN to that. Whether or not one believes the women are *using* these men for their scintillating minds and emotions before they go hang out with their brainless, dangerous, biker boyfriends (which sometimes is the case and sometimes isn't), I think this first part is extremely good advice to people who complain that girls don't go for nice guys.

I know lots of nice guys and nice girls who are married to each other--so quit whining about how women don't like nice guys, and quit BEING a guy who only likes women that date abusive guys.

edit: I realized it sounded like I was talking to xoxoBruce, which I totally wasn't. I was just trying to further illustrate the advice given in the Ladder Theory.

I think it's helpful to consider that this guy seems to be in his mid 20s or so.

Stuff is pretty intense at that point in life and I can imagine trying to reduce it to a framework I could understand.

Seen xoxoBruce's picture? If he's not an Outlaw Biker, I bet he rakes in the chicks who think he is!

This "ladder theory" is an oversimplification of reality and an overly complicated extension of what could be described in a few sentences.... but IMO it's not totally without truth.

This ladder thing has been around at least 6 or 8 years.

No raking, maybe a little hoeing though.;)
I'm speaking more from observation and conversations than personal experience. I see the same principles coming true, frequently. Lots of variation but the framework is there.

I think it demeans both sexes and is just one more example of mindless stereotyping. All it does is promote bitterness and misunderstanding on both sides:

Joe: "All women care about is a guy with a great car and money to burn."
Mary: "All men care about is ONE THING."
Joe: I hate women!
Mary: I hate men!

Well, that sure creates harmony, doesn't it?

I see the bitterness, but where's the misunderstanding?

Actually, when you look at it evolutionarily, women want someone who is able to take care of and protect them; For women, money and material things represent security and stability, and if the man is able to acquire such things, then it is evidence of his intelligence and/or strength. This is the one that the woman wants to pass her genes on with. The stronger and more intelligent a man, the more chance there is that those traits will be passed to the offspring, thus making their survival chances, and chances to procreate, better.

Men want someone attractive with whom to pass on their genes. The more attractive the offspring, the more chance that they will procreate.


I'm not saying that we make these decisions consciously. There are a lot of subconscious, instinctual factors at work as well. For instance, did you know that we choose people whose pheromones (think DNA) are most compatible with our own? I thought that was pretty cool when I read it (I'll have to find the book). Also, it's been found that there's a link between intelligence and body hair in men. Betcha wouldn't have thought that, huh?


Sidhe

Along the lines of the compatible DNA...

I read about a study many years ago where 10 men and 10 women weren't allowed to shower or use any fragrance/deoderant products for three days or so (and had to wear the same white t-shirt the whole time.) Then they were all put in a room together and told to mingle. After a few hours, they were told to rank the respective 10 on general attraction--not just looks, but who they were genuinely interested in after the conversing.

Almost unilaterally, men and women both ranked highest the people in the room who had immune systems the most opposite of their own, the concluding theory being that mating with someone who complemented your weaknesses with their strengths would produce healthier offspring, and the pheromones subconsciously clued them in to what their immune system was like.

No, I have no reference for it. But as anecdotal evidence... I get bacterial infections constantly, but I've only had fungal infections a couple of times in my entire life. My husband is the exact opposite, fungal infections every few months but never needs antibiotics for anything. I've never had a single cavity; he had more than all his siblings put together.

Anyone else experience this, or did I just hear that Paula Abdul song too many times as a child? :)

I think most people that disagree with this do so out of principle rather than any logical basis. Sure it ain't pretty but deep down, it's true. Some of it is very harsh and a little over the top but the framwork works and I've only seen one exception on the male/female friends thing that he doesn't mention - it can work if you sleep together first.

More hair, more brains, hey?:D

I have a male friend who I occassionally have fantastic sex with. Does this count? We're not fuck buddies, but neither are we 'just friends'. No jealousy, commitment or relationship politics. It works brilliantly.

Not sure if this is relevant but I just wanted to tell someone because we have a secrecy pact.

Yeah, decidedly oversimplified, but rooted in sound principles.

The purely physical, and thus non-rational, aspect has been covered, so now on to the conscious.

The sociologist Veblen covered the conscious pursuit of prowess in a mate in discussing physical prowess versus pecuniary prowess. He's also the one who gave us the term "conspicuous consumption," or the idea of how people try to both attract mates and show their success in life by spending unnecessarily.

http://www.mnc.net/norway/veblen.html

http://cepa.newschool.edu/het/profiles/veblen.htm

I fail to see the line between that and fuck buddies.

Ladder theory would say, deep down, one of you is hiding something. Personally I feel there can be exceptions, I can think of one sexual-tension free friendship and as above: strings-free fucking.

My question for you would be, and you may as well be honest about this:
Could you in any situation, say your life suddenly fell apart, see yourself seeking anything more from the situation.

"My question for you would be, and you may as well be honest about this:
Could you in any situation, say your life suddenly fell apart, see yourself seeking anything more from the situation."


Prepared answer: no of course not, he's just a friend and I don't want anything more than that.

Honest answer: yes. But I think this would be on a delusional level and not related to actual 'real' emotion: I think women suffer from this more than men (easy girls, I generalise here), but I do think there is a tendency for a woman to make more of any given relationship than her male counterpart. They hang onto something that may or may not be good for them, for reasons I have yet to discover. And a woman's ability (myself included) to talk herself into an emotion and truly believe it is fascinating.

Excellent site. It reminds me of something I wrote a few years ago called "My personal observations about women". He is very insightful and truthful. It's just too bad pussified men, and bitter nasty bitches don't like to hear the truth.

I don't think it affects women more than men to be honest. There are plenty of men that lash themselves to women like a drowning man to a passing plank. I have noticed the talking into things though, interesting.

Women my overstate relationships but I've heard guys just make them up (and the fantastic sex to boot) out of a complete absence of knowledge, including name.

I think you hit the nail on the head here. I've had a female friend on one occasion cross the line between close friendship and something more when she was having a particularly rough time, any port in a storm stuff and she could trust me. Just found the phenomena interesting.

This theory may be based on some fundamental truths, but they are grossly oversimplified. Any complex subject that is boiled down to this level has had most (or all) of it's usefulness reduced away.

One could use similar reasoning to say that scientifically, every action that any person takes in his/her life is directly or indirectly in the pursuit of getting laid, because reproducing is what biological organisms are built to do. It may be a true statement at its heart, but it isn't useful. It ignores the immense complexity which makes people, and their relationships, much more than the sum of their parts.

It isn't difficult to scrutinize things to the point that the information doesn't contribute to a solution or to a more enlightened perspective. Knowing what a water molecule looks like isn't particularly helpful when one is drowning.

*sniffs the air*

Is it just me or is there a Troll about?

I agree with you that with humans it's much more complex, because of our ostensibly more evolved status. Despite the reasearch that shows how we choose mates based on DNA, I think there's a lot more to it than that, when it comes to us. But I do think it's interesting that those instincts are working in the background.

I think it's kind of along the lines of thinking, "yeah, money's good, but if he's an asshole, the money isn't worth it."

Sidhe

And this has to do with the thread.....HOW? While I agree with the basic premise, it looks like more of that rabid libertarianism to me...

Sidhe

And he wonders why he has had relationship problems.

Any luck getting through your immigration red tape problems yet?

And are you still in contact with your wife? The last guy I knew that had similar problems related to bride importation has not heard from her in about 9 months or so, and is trying to work on getting his Canadian marriage (that's as close to the US as he got her) annulled without her presence.

Whether this theory has any validity of not depends on whether or not you are personally ready to come down out of the trees and live like a civilized person.

Welcome to the world of talking leaves.

According to ladder theory then, you were on top of the friends ladder and slipped into the shag/potential relationship ladder, only to be subsequently replaced with someone on a higher rung...

As much as I outwardly contest the assumption that beneath my pleasant and genuine emotional exterior lies a cold-hearted malevolent status obsessed bitch, there does appear to be more than a few grains of truth in the theory, although all it has really done is glamourise/complicate what humans have possessed for eternity: a compulsive obsession with sex.

PS. Is this where the aphorism 'It's bad luck to walk under a ladder' comes from?

The paperwork is filed, and I'm just waiting. I call her, email her, write letters to her every other day, and meet her online on the webcam on weekends. We're very much in love, and very much in contact. I can't even say how much we miss each other. :(

Or moved back to the friend's ladder.

I still hold by the theory you can't have a decent friendship with a girl until you've had sex, only afterwards can you build a real friendship minus the sexual tension. Might sound odd but it works.

I don't think it's something we have active control over to be honest. We're just wired a certain way.

For some reason I found that phrasing particularly amusing.

"Hi bob, what business are you in?"
"Shipping"
"Ah, what do you specialise in?"
"Mostly wholesale bride importation, some groom exports and we operate on the bridesgroom futures market"

Excellent - I am a husband exporter so in similar industries. (I boast a good track record - I find them: they can't leave soon enough)*

What is the import market status? Have been tracking developments and it occurs to me that the recent drop in uptake from the Ukraine has left a backlog of brides in Belarus. Russia are keen to export but it leaves me no choice other than decrease the shipment of husbands to Indonesia to make room for the last-minute request from France for virile chefs. Any ideas?





*Obviously this is said in jest I have never been married.

There are some reports of stock going bad on the docks in Indonesia, also a growing demand for organic husbands, more expensive, but taste better. (sorry, couldn't help it)

lol. But I hear the new GMO wives are designed to love the taste...;)

May I steal that? :)

be my guest

Maybe it's not 100% but there is some logical construction to the social ladder theory...

Dare to bake your own pie.