Does Having A Job In Finance Kill Your Chances With The Ladies?

Author:
Updated:
Original:

It's one of the perennial mysteries of life in New York City. Big shot young Wall Streeters find themselves shelling out for bottle service at the latest lounge or night club of the moment hoping to attract women, while guys who do things like "web design" or advertising seem to scoop up the girls effortlessly. It turns out that this is not just some sort of "grass is always greener" banker dystopian fantasy. It's scientifically true.
Here's the bad news from the BBC:

High-flying men are not as attractive to women looking for love as those with an average job, scientists say.
Perhaps unsurprisingly, the University of Central Lancashire research found the 186 female students asked preferred good-looking men.
But within that group, those without top careers were deemed most suitable, the Personality and Individual Differences journal reported.
The team said women seemed to feel high-flyers would not be good fathers.
We suggest that females see physically attractive, high status males as being more likely to pursue a mating strategy rather than a parenting strategy
Simon Chu, lead researcher
Lead researcher Simon Chu said the high-earning career men were deemed to be "too good to be true".
"Under particular circumstances, high socio-economic status in males can be subtly counter-productive in terms of attractiveness as a long-term partner.
"We suggest that females see physically attractive, high status males as being more likely to pursue a mating strategy rather than a parenting strategy.

Translation: you might be a BSD, but the women don't trust you to help them out with the kids and have already figured out you're going to cheat on them .
Why women fall for 'Mr Average' [BBC]

Related

Does The British Business Lady Who Just Felt Really Passionately About Her Clients Having Drinks, Cigarettes, And Pet Names Deserve A Second Chance?

Gang, something's come up in across the pond that needs our immediate attention. I'll get right to it: at issue is whether or not "high powered financial adviser" Amanda Daughters should be allowed to have her job back at Aqua Financial Solutions, the firm she founded and was fired from by the chairman a couple years back. She's currently appealing the decision but ahead of hearing what an employment tribunal has to say, why not give Daughters a trial by jury of her peers? Here's the rub: On January 22, 2010, Daughters left the office to sit down with a couple clients at an off-site meeting place (a bar). Naturally, she got there a few (4) hours early to have a bunch (12*) of drinks. So far, so good. When the clients arrived, one ordered a "spritzer," which was not to Daughters' liking, which would explain why she proceeded to "berate" the woman to the point of tears. Then Daughters had a few more drinks. At this point, things apparently got "hazy" for AD who, while she can't recall much, remembers thinking that making the client cry was "not unduly serious," as the woman accepted her apology. Then Daughters had a few more drinks. Around this time, she "dragged the other client outside to have a cigarette, even though he was a non-smoker" and called him a cunt (which despite her obviously having meant as a joke was received as "shocking and offensive"). Forty** drinks later, Daughters took herself home and despite being more or less black out drunk, had this weird feeling she'd done something she'd be embarrassed about the next day and called up hr chairwoman to let her know she'd "fucked up again and offended a client." Having been there before, Daughters also sent an email to the client the following morning to say "I hope you can forgive me." Unfortunately, the client and the chairwoman couldn't, which resulted in Daughters's firing for "gross misconduct." And while Big D realizes maybe she should have done a few things differently, she's not in agreement a few drinks, a few tears, and a few "you're a cunt"s are necessarily grounds for dismissal. So! Does this lady deserve her job back? On the one hand, perhaps downing 75 drinks prior to and over the course of a client meeting is not the most professional way of conducting business. Okay. That's fair. On the other, she clearly possesses the type of self-awareness any employer would pay good money to have on staff, as evidenced by the "fucked again" call. Please weigh in now. Businesswoman sacked after complaining client drank spritzers [Telegraph] *Guessing. *Ball park.