Interesting take: however I do disagree.
Why do people think that ltbs only get with htn+ thats only true for 1 night stands (which tbh is most of ur sexual life if u just wanna slay)
however htns can have standards and they ussualy do they dont want people below them for dating but theyd be happy with their tier or above (maybe a bit lower)
so chad gets with stacy
htb gets with htn
ltn gets with ltb
this isnt all relationships status and shit can affect it alot but this is a good rule of thumb
First, it is important to note - yes one night stands do typically have higher levels of hypergamy. This could be for one or two reasons: I theorise the following.
1) Men who want a ONS are more likely to dumpster dive, and accept a lower than usual looks level partner to just simply sleep with
2) When it comes to getting fucked, a women actually feels DEGRADED if they get ran through by someone they aren't 100% attracted to, meaning they will go for the best looking guy who is hitting on them (usually tens in person and if not 100s on online dating sites)
So absolutely, your point about ONS being more hypergamous is true.
However for dating?
This is a different story - take for instance, a foid whom for all intents and purposes is a MTB. She can makeup fraud to atleast HTB, if she isn't fat.
She will also be in social groups with easy access to HTN and CLs to even Chads, this is just the simple nature of intersex relations. Sure it may be purely platonic, but they are atleast on a peership level with these men.
Now due to this woman, getting attention from men that are MTN all the way through to CL in most cases, of course she will choose the CL.
This is common sense, it is like asking someone to choose between a $1 bill or a $100 bill...
However you are right, sometimes maybe you will see a LTB with a MTN or a MTB with a HMTN or even two mid tier peoples together.
I know there hasn't been any official study, but I am (from my own oberservations and personal experiences) willing to bet that these relationships are not fulfilling for either party and results in the two going separate ways.
For instance, how can a woman be satisfied with her man, when she sees much more attractive men daily, gets validation from more attractive men daily and due to validation through social media; the irl social pedestal that foids are put onto; she BELIEVES she deserves better.
Same for the man, though his options are less, he may be dissatisfied with the arrangement, the partner is likely not to be affectionate, or intimate due to this lack of a spark.
Either way, though you will and have seen these couples it is safe to say the relationships are not fulfilling or meaningful. They often come about, maybe on an initital spark that burns out quickly, or even just because the foid is lonely, there is not one reason alone why this happens. But I have seen it happen time and time again,
long term relationships (USSUALY WITH PURELY LOOKS)
0.5 dif
as in hltn lltb
and so on so on
As to answer this: I don't believe this is the case. Sure it is possible, we have all seen the couples that seemingly disprove our BP philosophy.
I will point back to the point, however, that this is not more than just a relationship in names sake. It is superficial, there is no mutual love, there is no intimacy, there is lying, and arguments etc. Simply because, the woman is not attracted enough to you to submit and allow herself to become your property (this is a point which, though women will say they hate to be objectified, is true. Watch how a woman even a feminist is happy to become a whore, a housewife, drop all her opinions just for a man they're attracted to).
I will hypothesise, and given a group of say 50 couples (50 men and 50 women; all hetrosexual of course) that the following would be true:
1) the bigger the gap between the man and the womans looks (where the man is more attractive) will have more active sex lives then their less apart peers.
2) the higher up the looks scale both parties are, the better quality of relationship will be had
3) both the more attractive the guy is compared to the woman, where the guy is still with an objectively attractive woman, is the couple whom will have the relationship with the most longevity!
So in summary - I would say, while your basic premise is correct, a lot of time the looks requirement for a relationship is much less strict than it is for a one night stand. I would argue it is still wrong to argue that hypergamy is misunderstood.
It is correct, and I believe that though there are exceptions to the rule, the rule of hypergamy still wins (by this I mean it becomes self evident, you can see it in the vast majority of couples)
Though my argument raises some interesting questions.
Namely:
1) Is a relationship with no affection better than being single for the man
2) If a woman doesn't love her partner, does this count as a relationship?
3) What actually is meant by relationship success? E.g is this objective or subjective?
As you said, I acknowledge that I may be off the mark with my theory - so am 100% open to criticism, objections or alternative points of view!
I hope this answer is well structured and comes off as constructive as opposed to ignorant and argumentative as I spent a good amount of time thinking about my response to this.
