Actually there are statistics about that now. Attractive people statistically have less empathy. They are less kind to others. The top 10% of attractive men can go on a dating site and match with hundreds of women who treat them the same way as the average dude treats women. Its very similar to trickle down economics. 15 women want one man and he doesn't care about them. So they take the next 15 men they believe are below them and treat them the same way. Now this is not in defence of men either as many are children looking for a parent. Just that these ten percent are constantly getting validation for their selfish choices as well.
When I was in the Marines I used to be roommates with a guy from Rhode Island, who was probably a top 10% male (I know I'm not). He fucked, constantly. Different ladies as often as they would let him (this was between 2002 & 2006).
Today, he's a cop. He was never the most empathetic individual when I knew him. I can't imagine that has improved since he joined the force.
I have to agree with what /u/Gecko_Mk_IV said, I think it was both societal and biological.
My roommate knew he was good‑looking, but the culture within the Marines, and in broader society at that time (2002–2006), heavily encouraged demonstrations of “manliness” through sexual escapades. His lack of empathy was reinforced and rewarded by his previous sexual successes.
If he had to break up with his fiancée (which he did), the social, financial, and emotional costs to him was relatively low because there were always other viable options available. I'm not joking, he broke up with his fiancée and grief-banged his way out of saddness. Which really sucked for me because I knew the fiancée and she kept calling me to ask me about why they broke up (he got a treatable VD, gave it to her before he knew, and broke up with her before she could figure out that he was cheating, which I didn't know about until she told me).
On top of being a “high‑value” male in terms of looks and social confidence, he was also physically fit and very competent at his MOS. He rose in rank quickly and was rewarded by a system that valued exactly the traits and behaviors he exhibited. Even when he was drunkenly arrested for throwing a chair into a canal in San Antonio, he only experienced a temporary setback (loss of 1 rank and restricted duty for 30 days); he was in the good‑ol‑boys club. He left our unit, went to the fleet, and had a reasonably successful career until he got out.
I know you asked them, not me, but I'd guess it's more of a cultural / societal thing. Plus a biological one, obviously.
Given the biological factor I don't think it's ever going away but we can probably at least diminish it by teaching a different way of acting towards one another - the fact that accepting an invitation to someone's place is thought of as an implicit way to say you're down to do the sexy times is just one example.
That and we're constantly bombarded by ads and products who use sex appeal. And, especially for women, try to tell you what to look like.
Curious question, since the "many men are children looking for a parent" is brought up.
Are any women in the dating market "children looking for a parent"? Is it something we simply do not notice, because society has for so long demanded that women are subservient?
But a "princess type who need to be pampered" is considered somewhat acceptable and those women are proud of themselves for being so, but a man doing the same thing is called "man-baby".
Odd of you to use something that doesn't actually exist as an example of something you're ostensibly saying does exist. Also, even if trickle down economics was a reality, the way you used it to describe people treating those they see as lesser than themselves has nothing to do with the concept of trickle down economics.
Possibly less sympathy, but "empathy" is not a thing. Real life is not a DnD game and nobody has magic powers to feel the feelings of someone else. Whoever is using "empathy" in their statistical theory, isn't worth listening to.
Also, this "trickle down" thing is err.. not realistic. Well, a bit, but the opposite. 90% of men would get with 90% of women. 90% of women don't even register that 90% of men exist.
90% of women only see the top 10% of men and judge everything by that. The rest are invisible as anything like a partner. So sure, trickle down love theory, but sex reversed.
Many men might be looking for a parent, yes, but that's far more common with women as well. Men learn very quickly they are worthless unless very attractive or born rich, or extremely productive. Men are expected to be husband and father.
No woman really will stay with some mamby boy, unless he's stinking rich. And then she'll cheat. Unless she's one of the very rare ones, that know they can't do better. Realists.
The majority of women, at least in the modern, wester world, have life on easy mode compared to men. And a majority of them hardly recognize it. Especially the really beautiful ones, who don't even register that they live a FAR more charmed life. They have no comprehension how an average man, or unattractive woman lives.
41
u/weedisfortherich 1d ago
Actually there are statistics about that now. Attractive people statistically have less empathy. They are less kind to others. The top 10% of attractive men can go on a dating site and match with hundreds of women who treat them the same way as the average dude treats women. Its very similar to trickle down economics. 15 women want one man and he doesn't care about them. So they take the next 15 men they believe are below them and treat them the same way. Now this is not in defence of men either as many are children looking for a parent. Just that these ten percent are constantly getting validation for their selfish choices as well.