One of the most popular posts on Huffington Post this week, “Hot or Not? Why Women Shouldn’t Pick Attractive Husbands,” claims that smart, beautiful, and financially independent women should resist the temptation to marry attractive and masculine men because they are, by definition, going to fail to be good husbands and fathers.
Attractive men don’t make the best husbands, according to researchers. Guys who are rated as the most masculine—a billboard for a man’s good genes—tend to have more testosterone, and men with higher testosterone levels are 43 percent more likely to get divorced than men with normal levels, 31 percent more likely to split because of marital problems and 38 percent more likely to cheat. In other words, they may be better cads than dads.
Writes author Vicki Larson before concluding:
So, now that Abedin evidently has Weiner’s good genes, she can either stick it out another few years or split from Weiner now, before their unborn baby will have memories of the divorce, and while she’s still young and attractive enough to snag another mate. This time, perhaps she should go ugly.
Evidently those men who are attractive, have testosterone, and are manly are inherently not to be trusted. And of course this is all written in the context of yet another celebrity caught with his pants down somehow representing all men, even those staying-at-home with the kids and those fighting for our country in the Middle East.
One of my favorite lines is from Martin Luther King’s “I Have a Dream” speech. Facing violence and bigotry, he said on that sweltering day in our nation’s capital, “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.”
The content of their character. It seems to me that goodness, as men and women, has nothing to do with looks and everything to do with the content of our character as husbands and wives, fathers and mothers, as human beings. In looking for a spouse, how about looking for a human being who is a man or woman of character. Sure attraction is part of the laws of reproduction, but attraction is more than skin deep.
The continued piling on in our popular press that men, specially successful and handsome men, are guilty of evil just because of their gender and their looks is nothing less than the bigotry fought by MLK and others during the Civil Rights movement, by brave women who fought for Equal Rights, and currently by homosexuals seeking the right to marry. Let’s stop trying to put people in boxes and start having a frank conversation about what it means to be a good man and a good woman.
Photo by Kjunstorm
I’ve always advised my readers: “Pick a partner who not only treats you well, but others as well. Ask : ‘Can I be real around him (her)? Is (s)he someone who makes an effort to be kind, not only to me, but to everyone?'” When you find those qualities in a partner, you will have found someone who is worthy of your love and time.
I saw a handsome man in a park and felt compelled to talk to him because I found him so physically appealing. A year later, I’m still with him, and everyday I get to appreciate the fact that he is funny, romantic, selfless, and very much worthy of the title Good Man.
You’re right Tom, in that physical appearance is part of the Laws of Reproduction and that it only goes so far. Had my Good Man been a Bad Boy, I wouldn’t have wasted my time. Stereotypes be damned!
Good article, Tom.
I think, for the purposes at least of the “goodmen project”, that a good man is being defined as a *well behaved* man (i.e. works, comes home on time, does dishes and diapers and gives his woman multiple orgasms and buys her flowers for no reason). Good men SHOULD be defined by their character, as omgchronicles observes…but I think they rarely are, because the definition has obviously changed.
You can have a good looking “bad boy” (which really just means a man that doesnt conform to the mainstream pro feminist expectation) and have him still be a good man.
How would you define character, then? Always works late… Never changes a diaper… Couldn’t care less if the woman has an an orgasm… Cheats on his wife…. But gives money to the Red Cross? Sounds like a real peach to me! 🙂
Natasha is not a real woman. ‘She’ is a MRA dude who comes here posing as a woman.
Good list. If only “giving multiple orgasms” was actually under his full control. A man can change a diaper and wash a dish by himself, but ultimately it’s not up to him to make multiples happen. Talk about an unrealistic responsibility!
She never said multiple orgasms. She said caring about her orgasm, not even making her orgasm even. Oh, that is so difficult being man nowadays, they are now being asked to stop being so selfish and caring only about their penis but actually remember the clit and try to stimulate their women for at least 3 or 5 minutes! Why can’t men just receive lots of blowjobs, not give head back (and when giving back, doing it less frequently and for a much shorter period of time) and just jump to intercourse (that doesn’t bring orgasms by itself to most… Read more »
I think Weiner looks like a death’s head, and Hef looks like an ur-nerd. (Hint, Hef, lose the pipe.) They’re both thin, which is now really in, I guess. I guess Weiner hinted he’s really hung. (How not!) But it’s an empirical question.
I’ve always felt a little nervous about dating incredibly attractive alpha male types because those guys have too much temptation around them. A guy like that has women chasing after him constantly. It just isn’t possible to believe he will never give in to the temptation. It’s not really a question of character, it’s opportunity. Most men have trouble passing up an opportunity for sex with an attractive woman if she’s making a play for him.
It doesn’t mean you have to date unattractive or ugly guys, but avoid the alpha male/player types.
Sure, marrying an ugly man might save you headaches in the long run, but what about the problem of marrying someone you’re not attracted to? I would hate to be married to someone I don’t want to have sex with and who will never leave. Worst of both worlds!
I think that is how the whole ‘lover on the side thing’ is for. JK.
But this article is terrible. False and full of stereotypes.
Women can no more be married to a man who they are not attracted to any more than men could be married to a woman they weren’t attracted to.
For the record, there are some truly UGLY douche bags out there. Ugly don’t mean nice. Pretty don’t mean cruel.
Kevin James and Leah Remini in King of Queens. Mark Addy and Jami Gertz in Still Standing. Homer Simpson and Marge Simpson. As an out-of-shape fat guy who is anything but tall, dark and handsome, I’m a big fan of the “Hot Girl, Average Guy” phenomenon. Like my fictional TV predecessors, I somehow conned a hot woman into marrying me. I don’t care why, I’m just glad it happened. But she did say she never wanted a pretty boy or someone REALLY good-looking because of the characteristics (most) of those guys brought to the table. So maybe there’s a kernel… Read more »
Those are fictional characters BTW. But good looking out for your one true love.
Men keep talking about the hotness of their women as if they were more valuable for this… and then complain when women point this out. Pathetic. I am gonna tell you why you made it: because most women are like yours, we do not see good-looking men as the more valuable. Sure looks are still important, but much less than personality. And if the guy is good looking enough (we are forgiving and most of the times settle for “less” anyway, so to speak) we already see them in the same light as the hottest guy we know… they are… Read more »
Hello Tome, Thanks for finding me — I think! My article — written tongue-in-cheek, which few people commenting on the Internet recognize anymore — is not slamming men as inherent cheaters. I’m really asking women to look at what they consider “hot” or “eligible.” Weiner has a lot of what women say they want — he’s a fit, intelligent, promising politician with a six-figure income. That’s “attractive,” even if he isn’t classically handsome. What he doesn’t have is character. We all need to reevaluate “hot.” If it doesn’t include character — aka, being a Good Man, which is what I… Read more »
Weiner has a lot of what women say they want And can we please evaluate the women who “wanted” Weiner? I understand that you weren’t trying to slam attractive men, or men in general, with that piece. However where’s the criticism of the women willingly getting involved with this married man who can only offer pictures of his penis? What about how these women are jumping in front of the press or going all Fatal Attraction on this man? Where’s the articles deconstructing them? Oh that’s right..there were a couple of solid pieces written recently, like Tracy McMillan’s Why You’re… Read more »
You’re absolutely right, AndThatsWhyYoureSingle — Jezebel and its ilk will come after any woman who dares to criticize or even make an honest observation about her gender. (But a man can — http://www.thezerosbeforetheone.com/better-question-wtf-are-these-women-thinking).
I am sorry my article is seen as male-bashing and not seen in the light I intended it — that women should reexamine what they consider “attractive.”
Have men ever been asked to re-consider what they find attractive. Is there anyone who would dare suggest that men should stop seeking out physically attractive women?
Physically attractive women who will be b-tchy, abusive and destroy their lives… but that men cannot give up because men also do not focus on character, but boobs and asses.
I doin’t think Hef is a dreamboat, nor is Weiner. In these cases, the men are well resourced, and that’s the key to their ability to mess around. In ev psych, “sexy sons,” the “joadies” who are waiting for the wives (Joadies who are testosterone laden,) don’t need to be well-resourced.