You're premise is based on a fallacy... that there is a strict ordering of men, and women all have the same order.

A marriage is about finding a person who fits with you, and you can build a life together. That is not the same person for everyone. My best partner is not the same as your best partner.

I never said there was a strict ordering of men. But there are characteristics that will make one man more desirable than another (e.g. good looks, height, wealth, social status, intelligence, etc.). How these factors rank may vary depending on the woman.

You say that "a marriage is about finding a person who fits with you, and you can build a life together". So take the viewpoint from a pragmatic woman's perspective; wouldn't these aforementioned traits be desirable because the man who possesses them is a candidate more likely to provide the best life to build together?

First, wouldn't everything you said about men also apply to women? How is it different?

Second, there are a lot of other traits that aren't inherently good or bad; things like "do you like going out on the weekends or staying in" and "does your communication style work with mine?" and "are the things you are good at complimentary to the things I am good at?"

My best friend and his wife get along great, but both my wife and I can't imagine living our lives like they do. I am sure they feel the same about us.

> First, wouldn't everything you said about men also apply to women? How is it different?

This thread has been discussing the implications of the observation quoted in the article: "Sexual activity was largely unchanged among unmarried women, along with no notable decline among gay men, researchers reported."

So it's unclear what point you're trying to make in relation to that.

Your premise omits the possibility that there is correlation among the diverse orderings that women apply to men. Or even barring that, that they don't converge to an aggregate ordering which is what GP is explaining that men experience.

Some traits will be clearly desirable, but so many aren't. Introvert/extrovert, opinions on how to raise kids, family goals, what sort of place you like to live (rural/urban), political views, conversation style, etc. Those are going to vary greatly amongst people.

Yes, some preferences vary widely, while others are more narrow, such as height, income, seniority/authority, and facial structure. In aggregate there is a clear spectrum from desirable to less desirable along those dimensions. It's definitely true that beauty is in the eye of the beholder, or attraction more generally, but it's hard to believe that being 1.60 m tall won't make you (in general) less attractive as a man.