Rainess:


Generalizing all women as gold diggers is really weak and unappealing. You think EVERY woman on earth is only interested in wealth and "calab" status? Lol how will you ever fall in love?

Yes there are women like that. And there are men like that too. But not every woman or man is like that. Not even most.

Rainess:


Generalizing all women as gold diggers is really weak and unappealing. You think EVERY woman on earth is only interested in wealth and "calab" status? Lol how will you ever fall in love?

Yes there are women like that. And there are men like that too. But not every woman or man is like that. Not even most.

RedCapChief:


Most women may not be gold-diggers, but most women are generally interested in guys who have wealth or power or social clout. It is just how they are socially engineered. These celebs have all the trappings of social security and women will swim towards that security

Female members of any species tend to gravitate towards male members who can take care of them and give their offspring the best chance of survival

Men are polygamous (that's why sperm come in millions); Women are hypergamous (that's why ova come in single digits)

Rainess:


Sperm come in millions because the uterus is an extremely acidic environment where millions of sperm die. Ultimately only a few hundred to thousand reach the ovum. Strictly monogamous species also have sperm made in the millions.

That aside, homo sapiens have evolved for hundreds of thousands of years to become highly intelligent creatures that are not ruled by base desires and instincts. Everyone is programmed to reproduce frequently and with the best partner, both men and women. But do we do that? No. We are in control. It's absolutely false to say that men are meant to be polyamorous and it just sounds like a weak excuse for promiscuity.

RedCapChief:


While it is true that homo sapiens have evolved to become highly intelligent, we are still controlled, in many ways, by these "base desires and instincts". That is why people leave their spouses for cheap thrills even when they know that a divorce could be the outcome. I'm sure you will not argue with the fact that emotions trump intelligence. A hot big boobed blondie dating a man old enough to be her grandfather and she calls it love?? Yeah right! Where is her intelligence?
Also, I stand by my thoughts that men are naturally polygamous (not polyamorous). Monogamous men are constrained either by religion, culture or a respect for his woman/family.
You come across as a smart woman and I can't possibly hope to convince you online so I'll have to refer you to do some reading on social psychology in your spare time and then revise your thoughts.

Rainess:
.
Polygamous is the state of marrying more than one person. How is marriage a basic instinct? Polyamorous is having more than one partner. Or if you want to be really specific, polygynous is where a male lives mates with more than one female in a group but the female only mates with one male. Also telling me to do "some readings" is literally the laziest thing you could ever do in a debate. Rather than telling me to do "some readings" prove to me that you have done some. Cite them in an academic matter and quote them to present your case.
People leave their spouses for very complex reasons unique to each divorce. Not because of some imagined basic impulse.
Emotions may trump logic many times. But emotions are a sign of an advanced, highly developed limbic system and evolved because we are social creatures. They are not the "basic impulses" you are talking about. You're talking about human males being ruled by the impulse to reproduce with many different people. This is an impulse that we DO have control over. Using it as an excuse for promiscuity is weak. Human sexuality is extremely complex and in fact female human sexuality (females having sex at any time of the year) is unique among primates. You cannot simplify it to "men were meant to be polyamorous" "women are meant to be attracted to wealth". It's crap.

But yeah you are never going to convince me and I don't think I will convince you. I enjoy debating.

RedCapChief:


I agree with many things you've said and maybe I've pigeon-holed many complex things but:

How is marriage a basic instinct?
Unfortunately, I can't upload a picture of Maslow's hierarchy of needs, but you can check it out. People marry for the reasons at the bottom of the pyramid: sex, family and companionship. Marriage in itself is not a basic instinct, but the things marriage provides are basic instincts. That is why lonely people have higher suicide rates (companionship) and the business of selling sex will always thrive.

I merely used the example of cheating spouses to show that people may, and will often, do the wrong thing just because they feel a certain way.

Let's not forget the original question. I'm only trying to show that these women who fall for celebs are simply lower down on the pyramid and they will always fall for the guys at the top who have it all: money, confidence et al. That's why they will continue falling for them

Rainess:


Chimpanzees (our closest relatives) do not get married! Lol. Marriage does provide stability, but only because we have socially constructed it that way.

Let me try another way: if it is because of basic instincts that women fall for the rich and powerful, why am I (and some other women I know) not attracted to wealth and power? I much prefer ambition, intelligence, kindness.