Indeed. And it’s funny how often I see men claim 1. They can’t see signals from women, but 2. That woman was totally hitting on them because they are married!
Again, we’re seeing sweeping generalizations of the genders from the actions of “a couple” of women. Notice any faulty logic here? We can make inferences about billions and billions of people because two women chased you. Yeah.
If we’re going to settle human nature by personal anecdotes, I know or have heard of a number of women who have pursued men, and the vast majority of them were after available men. Yes, I know that one woman who was after her friends’ guys, but I can’t comprehend why someone could assume he has insight to the nature of an entire gender because of a few.
This sort of sloppy thinking always comes out in gender threads. First, many people fail to really assess the situation well. As several posters note, there are guys who misinterpret signals. You are claiming this isn’t the case. We’ll skip this one this time.
Second, the initial error in this particular argument is the failure to distinguish because correlation and causation. There are many reasons for people to find others attractive, and simply being hit upon when one is married cannot make the case that the was because one was married. Even if a person were to pursue another after the other person became attached, motives simply cannot be assumed as there are countless other possible reasons. You liked them, but didn’t realize it until they were no longer available, for example.
Finally, unwarranted generalization has raised its ugly head. A couple of women who pursed one man suddenly means that the nature of females can be deduced. Absurd. Especially since it’s based on 1960s stereotypes of women.
There are a number of women who don’t care if the guy is married or not. Just as there are a number of men who don’t care if the woman is attached or not. I’ve personally seen it, you read about it, my wife knows people who are like it, etc. etc. That’s really not ground shaking news. What you don’t hear about so much are women who are constantly only after unavailable men. Yes, there are some, just not the majority or even a significant minority.
My WAG is that the number who don’t care if the other is in a relationship would be far greater than the number who are more interested because of the attachment to the point of pursuing someone.
But “view a man as more attractive” is not the same as “eager to have sex with him”. When married men say “women hit on me all the time now that I am with someone”, the subtext is “I could have had sex with those women, if I hadn’t rejected them.” There is a lot of ground between “more attractive” and “so much more attractive, I am eager to participate in an act of infidelity, whatever the ethical or logistical hurdles.”
Every woman who has ever laid eyes on me wants me, therefore I must be married, only I’m not married, therefore they must not be true women.
It was the ‘‘women hate women/mistrust women’’ thing that raised my hackles. My husband has eighty gajillion female friends, in part because of his chosen career field (clinical psych) and in part because he relates more to women. (Interestingly, I relate more to men.) When traveling around the country he has spent the night at the houses of single female friends in lieu of a hotel room, and I never even thought twice about it, until I encountered some women flipping their shit over their men spending time with women. Which also, of course, raises the question of why a woman would feel guarded around another woman if she trusts her spouse. If you trust your spouse, it really helps cut through the unnecessary always having your guard up around other people thing.
We do have a sort of silly joke that whenever he talks about a conversation with another woman, I ask him, ''Did you tell her I’ll cut her?" Sometimes he passes that along to his girlfriends and they think it’s great. (I am really not the jealous type. You either want me, or you don’t. If you don’t, I’ll find someone who does.)
I think men in a relationship may be viewed as more attractive than a single man because it establishes that they are relationship material, capable of long-term commitment. We might even get the chance to see him act in a mushy romantic way, which could be appealing. I wouldn’t know because I’ve never been attracted to someone more based on his relationship status, and I’ve certainly never thought, ‘‘I gotta get him and I will slit her throat to do it.’’ At best, it was, ''Gee, I hope he becomes single again someday."
You’re taking my point way past anything I said. Finding someone attractive is (in general) a necessary condition for wanting to have sex with them. I never said it was a sufficient condition. It’s just my experience that one element of attractiveness of a man to a woman can be that that man has a (especially if attractive) wife or girlfriend. And being attracted to somebody makes having sex more likely all else equal. Whereas a woman having a husband or BF seldom if ever makes her more attractive to a man IME (not necessarily less, just that ‘validation’ factor which I think exists with women doesn’t with men, or a lot less).
I think I was clear I couldn’t prove even that limited statement though, and likewise I don’t think you can prove this isn’t so and this phenomenon is all the heads of married men flattering themselves, if that’s your position.
It’s not a logical deduction. I didn’t say it was. And OTOH what ‘sweeping generalization’ can we make about every person on the planet? I guess we can just say ‘there are no patterns of behavior in any way correlated to group identity of any kind’. That’s sounds very virtuous, at least, not sure it’s a lot more logical. 
Again, I believe based on life experience that a man having an attractive ‘SO’ is a factor in increasing his attractiveness to women, more than not, in general. I believe that’s basically a non-factor in how men view women. You’re free to believe otherwise.
Yep, based on two people. As I said it’s absurd.
Surprised this comment from Fair Rarity didn’t get more traction… I think this is the likeliest reason in answer to “Why are women blamed so much more for being homewreckers when both sexes cheat?”
I’m going to come at this from the opposite sex. When one’s wife cheats with another man, I think it is perfectly reasonable to say that one would primarily blame their wife for the infidelity, and that would be logical… BUT when your wife actually cheats, emotions get involved, and you just want to fucking kill that asshole bastard of another man. That’s where the hate gets directed… it’s admittedly not logical, it’s just raw emotional feelings that take real restraint from the thinking part of your brain.
That is a great insight. Sorry I missed it.