How Women Categorize Men

[BlackSexyllence]

I only have 2 yes or no

 

[Draje]

Even then, it should be divided into more categories, because the superstar nikkas are elite, but they're not common and very few women are ever gonna be in there presence let alone get with them.

Like a nikka that's handsome/tall/in shape, got a good ass job, pushes a 2 year old 7 series is a dream nikka to 99% of women, but an NBA nikka is on a whole different level.

That's kinda the point, breh. 99% of dudes are gonna be in category 2-4 and elite dudes will be in category 1.

You can also have dudes that might be on the lower end of the category 1 that would get upstaged if a dude like Trey Songz walked into the room.

Category 1 dudes are simply the dudes that girls would drop pretty much everything to have a chance of being with him.

What about people you spend time with and get to know and become attractive to you. It's rare that i meet unattractive men. It could just be because I like faces and people. But I feel like it's hard for men to be ugly.

With that in mind, most guys I meet are handsome. Where does personality fit into this? Clicking with a person can completely eliminate all attraction categories. And I've seen similar happen with men.
So maybe a category between 1 and 2 and 3 for those who grow to become important to us.

Girls can fall in love, be happy/content, and be with dudes in category 2. They might even choose a category 2 dude they love over a category 1 dude that walks in because most girls do understand the stress that goes with dating a category 1.

 

[Hungry Rabbit]

You're assuming a lot here. First and most importantly you're assuming most women can atractt a guy like number one . Most women are avg or below. They can daydream all they want but number one is/was never a option for them.

Perhaps I was assuming that, but I don't think I was.

How would the man behave with each of these categories? Does it go simp and seek to marry the top shelf, side chick the second and avoid/one-night the last one?

Top shelf women: Men try hard to impress these women; care very much how these women perceive them and will try to be their very best around these women; do not want to offend them at all for fear he will lose her.
Middle shelf women: Men try to impress these women, but don't go overboard; care about how they are perceived but not overly; care about offending these women, but will also be themselves are these women.
Bottom shelf women: Men do not try to impress these women, as they are bottom shelf; don't really care how they are perceived by these women; don't care about offending these women, as these women can simply take it or leave it.

 

[ignorethis]

That's kinda the point, breh. 99% of dudes are gonna be in category 2-4 and elite dudes will be in category 1.

You can also have dudes that might be on the lower end of the category 1 that would get upstaged if a dude like Trey Songz walked into the room.

Category 1 dudes are simply the dudes that girls would drop pretty much everything to have a chance of being with him.

But that's the point I'm making, why combine them into one category if it's a spectrum and a lower "category 1" can get shytted on by another "category 1"

Are the other categories 2-4 also spectrums? If that's the case, it would make more sense to have one big spectrum rather than 4 different categories. I'm just arguing the technical aspect of what OP was saying.

The four categories are too simple and not fleshed out enough.

 

[Hungry Rabbit]

What about people you spend time with and get to know and become attractive to you. It's rare that i meet unattractive men. It could just be because I like faces and people. But I feel like it's hard for men to be ugly.

With that in mind, most guys I meet are handsome. Where does personality fit into this? Clicking with a person can completely eliminate all attraction categories. And I've seen similar happen with men.
So maybe a category between 1 and 2 and 3 for those who grow to become important to us.

Well it's all based on the perception of the particular woman/women, and certainly men can rise/fall in the categories depending on their actions, luck, circumstances, etc.

I would say that this isn't about men simply being "attractive OR unattractive." More so it is about HOW attractive a man is to a woman that determines where he's placed. Category 2 men are attractive, yes, but they are not as attractive as category 1 men. And a man in category 3 may even have some "attractive" aspect to him, but he is simply not as attractive to a woman as a man in category 1 or 2.

When it comes to personality I think that it, too, plays a role in attraction JUST like looks, money, social status, family, health, etc. does.

Certainly I assume that women can think a man is very PHYSICALLY attractive with a SHYTTY personality that impedes his ability to be a category 1 man - am I correct?

 

[Prince Mongo]

Wtf kinda grown nikka thinks likes this? This thread sounds like a middle school kid wrote it

 

[Draje]

But that's the point I'm making, why combine them into one category if it's a spectrum and a lower "category 1" can get shytted on by another "category 1"

Are the other categories 2-4 also spectrums? If that's the case, it would make more sense to have one big spectrum rather than 4 different categories. I'm just arguing the technical aspect of what OP was saying.

The four categories are too simple and not fleshed out enough.

Nothing like this can be absolute because not everyone weighs different attributes the same.

Lebron James and Beno Udrih are both elite/amazing basketball players that are better than 99% of the world but Lebron still shyts all over him as a baker all player.

There's a distinct difference between how a girl will treat a dude in category 1 as opposed to category 2. That's why these categories are useful because it can give you a nice foundation to see how you might be viewed

 

[Hungry Rabbit]

But that's the point I'm making, why combine them into one category if it's a spectrum and a lower "category 1" can get shytted on by another "category 1"

Are the other categories 2-4 also spectrums? If that's the case, it would make more sense to have one big spectrum rather than 4 different categories. I'm just arguing the technical aspect of what OP was saying.

The four categories are too simple and not fleshed out enough.

To this I would say that once you get into category 1 (broadly speaking of course), then it merely becomes a "apples and oranges" thing in the sense that, because every woman is different, they're gonna have different preferences. So in sticking to @Draje example about Trey Songz, certainly there are men who are also in category 1 that could take women from Trey Songz IF these men simply happen to be more to the given woman's liking. But I'd say that AT LEAST 95% of the time, a chick isn't leaving Trey Songz for anything less than a category 1 man.

 

[Hungry Rabbit]

Wtf kinda grown nikka thinks likes this? This thread sounds like a middle school kid wrote it

...A logical man?

 

[ignorethis]

Nothing like this can be absolute because not everyone weighs different attributes the same.

Lebron James and Beno Udrih are both elite/amazing basketball players that are better than 99% of the world but Lebron still shyts all over him as a baker all player.

There's a distinct difference between how a girl will treat a dude in category 1 as opposed to category 2. That's why these categories are useful because it can give you a nice foundation to see how you might be viewed

I was literally about to say that a NBA/basketball metaphor would have been better for this.

But yea you right, I'm just saying there's a distinct difference between how a woman treats an upper category 1 and a lower category 1. One more category between 1 and 2 and it makes more sense.

To this I would say that once you get into category 1 (broadly speaking of course), then it merely becomes a "apples and oranges" thing in the sense that, because every woman is different, they're gonna have different preferences. So in sticking to @Draje example about Trey Songz, certainly there are men who are also in category 1 that could take women from Trey Songz IF these men simply happen to be more to the given woman's liking. But I'd say that AT LEAST 95% of the time, a chick isn't leaving Trey Songz for anything less than a category 1 man.

So what category does the example I said of a nikka that looks good with a good job would has a nice house, 2 year old S-class. That's a dream nikka to 99% of women, but if Drake or LeBron comes along they still gonna scoop his bytch. Is dude in the example category 2?

 

[Prince Mongo]

...A logical man?

Mane hell naw. No logical man has the time mentally to think about this type of shyt. What kinda man is going around thinking about categorizing other men? Nobody's thinking about this type of shyt irl at all, people just live their lives without these weird ass, useless labels y'all nikkas on the coli like to come up with

 

[Hungry Rabbit]

Mane hell naw. No logical man has the time mentally to think about this type of shyt. What kinda man is going around thinking about categorizing other men? Nobody's thinking about this type of shyt irl at all, people just live their lives without these weird ass, useless labels y'all nikkas on the coli like to come up with

... really, breh?

Not everyone can be as cool and awesome as you are, breh...

What kind of man would I be if I let you tell me what I can and can't think about?

 

[Prince Mongo]

... really, breh?

Not everyone can be as cool and awesome as you are.

What kind of man would I be if I let you tell me what I can and can't think about?

A weak nikka, so you should think about whatever you want, I'm just saying

 

[Hungry Rabbit]

A weak nikka, so you should think about whatever you want, I'm just saying

...you're just saying your opinion, which is cool breh.

Just know other people won't always share your opinions and in fact will have their own opinions about things sometimes, which is also cool, breh.

 

[Draje]

I was literally about to say that a NBA/basketball metaphor would have been better for this.

But yea you right, I'm just saying there's a distinct difference between how a woman treats an upper category 1 and a lower category 1. One more category between 1 and 2 and it makes more sense.



So what category does the example I said of a nikka that looks good with a good job would has a nice house, 2 year old S-class. That's a dream nikka to 99% of women, but if Drake or LeBron comes along they still gonna scoop his bytch. Is dude in the example category 2?

Depends on the women, breh. Drop a nikka like that in front of chicks like Brittany Renner or any of these industry thots, he'd be invisible next to a bunch of ballers/entertainers.

Drop that same nikka in the hood and he'd look like a diamond. GIRLS decide your category, breh. You can't pick where you are.

Now if that example nikka is a category 1 to 99% of women and then Lebron James walks in so those same 99% girls would choose James then the first nikka is just on a lower end of category 1 nikka "to them".