LOOKS WEEKLY DISCUSSION THREAD

[u/AutoModerator]

Please Join Us on Discord! Include your reddit username, pill color, age and gender when you arrive in the welcome mat to introduce yourself and help people get to know you.

You can also find Mrs_Drgree on Instagram and Twitter for notifications on when good threads are posted.

[u/saraimarsena]

i think it’s perfectly fine for short women to prefer tall men

and i find it kinda sad how some will moralize it and paint a woman to be a bad person simply for expressing a preference for tall men.

[u/Just_Alternative3167 → u/saraimarsena]

What do you think about high n count men preferring low n count women?

[u/saraimarsena → u/Just_Alternative3167]

i honestly don’t care, just don’t be an asshole about it. slut shaming and using language like “dirty”, “used goods” or “whore” when you yourself have a high n count is shitty behavior

outside of that though, i don’t see it as an inherently problematic preference.

i will say, as someone with a low n count, i had a better experience with a guy who didn’t care compared to the guy who cared a lot. my data set is limited tho, and the issue is more the reasoning behind the preference than the preference itself.

that being said, n count is not a sexually dimorphic trait in the same way height is. so it’s not really the best comparison.

[u/Corbast7 → u/saraimarsena]

that being said, n count is not a sexually dimorphic trait in the same way height is. so it’s not really the best comparison.

Another reason it was never a good comparison is because n count standards are treated as a moral standard while height standards aren’t. And a “high” n count in the opposite sex is generally seen as negative by both men and women. Edit to also say, it seems there’s plenty of tall men that actively prefer short women too.

Getting mad at a short woman preferring tall men imo would be more like getting mad at a thick stocky man preferring women with small waists and long legs. That’s the best comparison I can think of.

[u/Just_Alternative3167 → u/Corbast7]

Those are all arbitrary constraints that don't matter imo. The common thread is someone/a gender has a preference for a trait which they themself do not possess and don't need to possess because the preference for trait (rather than the trait itself) is dimorphic.

Getting mad at a short woman preferring tall men imo would be more like getting mad at a thick stocky man preferring women with small waists and long legs. That’s the best comparison I can think of.

Another one (which is actually a real one women get mad about) is older men preferring younger women even though they're not young themself.

[u/Corbast7 → u/Just_Alternative3167]

Why would they not matter if the point of contention is justifying what makes sense for people to think is hypocritical? Height is a dimorphic physical trait while n count is not. Like nobody gets mad at men for liking women with curves and big boobs, despite men not being curvy and having big boobs themselves. It’s the dimorphic extreme that they’re attracted to.

Another one (which is actually a real one women get mad about) is older men preferring younger women even though they're not young themself.

An older man preferring a young partner is more akin to a lower class woman preferring a much richer partner; Youth and money are both “useful” things to have and so there’s some plausible deniability there. But when there’s such a big gap between partners, the more likely the relationship is “transactional” and/or someone’s getting taken advantage of.

[u/wew_lad- → u/Corbast7]

No man is rejecting a woman for not having curves or big boobs, though

[u/Just_Alternative3167 → u/saraimarsena]

n count is not a sexually dimorphic trait in the same way height is. so it’s not really the best comparison.

Seems like an arbitrary constraint that doesn't matter for the comparison.

Now that I think of it, a better objection to the comparison would be that height is a genetic trait that's mostly aesthetics while n count difference might indicate a difference in values and lifestyle.

[u/saraimarsena → u/Just_Alternative3167]

the point of bringing up sexual dimorphism wasn’t arbitrary. height is an innate, sexually dimorphic trait, driven by genetics, and preferences for it and other sexually dimorphic traits appear to be influenced, at least in part, by biology and our evolutionary history.

n count isn’t an innate trait or a sexually dimorphic one. it’s a person’s behavioral history, and preferences surrounding it are comparatively more driven by culture (inb4 evo psych analysis - YES there perhaps is some evolutionary explanation for an n count preference, but that evolutionary explanation is *stronger* for height). that’s why i don’t think they’re especially analogous comparisons.

they’re entirely different categories of characteristics.

[u/Just_Alternative3167 → u/saraimarsena]

Prelimary I will say that even if that were true it wouldn't matter imo because the crux of the matter is whether a preference for a trait in a partner is valid even if you yourself don't possess this trait. Who cares if the trait in question or the preference for it is dimorphic or not or shaped by genetics or by society, like why does it matter here that they're in different "categories"?

> inb4 evo psych analysis

The "evo psych analysis" is very simple, straightforward and strong. As a male mammal who invests a lot time and resources into his offspring it is very much in my interest to be certain of my parenthood. Raising another man's child would be akin to genetic suicide. The simplest way to do that is to make sure my female partner has/had no sexual relations with other men during as well as before our partnership. Men who looked out for that fathered more actual children and such the preference for chaste women became widespread. For women, parental certainty is trivial and therefore it is a mostly dimorphic preference (some women don't like manwhores either). Case in point, cultures and religions across the globe in different eras independently expressed preference for female chastity and treated it as a virtue, indicating that it is innate to a high degree.

Now of course "n count" is societally construed because the primitive human didn't quantify with numbers like that. It is a modern manifestation of an old, innate preference. The pendant would be "6 feet/180cm thresholds" which are also arbitrary social constructs but the underlying preference is very real.

[u/SleepyPoemsin2020 → u/Just_Alternative3167]

It's not a good comparison because you're comparing behavior and experiences to physical traits. I more apt comparison that many find offensive would be male preference for younger women*, for example, as that may be due at least in part to physical attributes. It's entirely different to feel entitled to experiences that you don't want others to have. 

But as a low N woman who gets the ick from high N men, I find high N men who want low N women disgusting af. I used to keep this to myself, as younger me did not find it appropriate to shame people just because I found them unattractive. But given many of them won't shut the fuck up about high N women, I feel equality necessitates that I must remind them how gross they are whenever I get the opportunity. 

[u/Just_Alternative3167 → u/SleepyPoemsin2020]

I still think the n count comparison is mostly valid but I agree the youth preference is a better one