Leaderboard

I don't have to look far to find EXTREMELY hot and fertile women like Uldouz Wallace who exemplify "better wrapped up than unwrapped"--I think if anything the wrapping itself can be an r-selection vs. K-selection signal. Women like Wallace would have a hard time not attracting men simply because...well, bing/google/yandex her to see why. Appearance-wise I'd argue K-selection isn't easily found because women who aren't downright ugly (like obese or with a monstrous face) are always at least a little attractive regardless of what they wear. Factor in kinks and some guys value hose, blouse, and pencil skirt over tight tube dresses or skimpy shorts and crop tops. Maybe those kinks have a "selection" value--perhaps being attracted to "classy" styles like the blouse + long/pencil skirt combo is more K while the crop top and shorts is more r. Or, they're all fundamentally r because they only give an appearance which implies personality rather than demonstrates it. However, contradicting myself, I think K-r can be reasonably discerned visually. Perhaps a K-selected woman is, in appearance, someone who cares about what they look like to ensure they appear well-put and self-disciplined but not so much that they are basically boner magnets. However again, there are limits. A woman who doesn't care at all about appearance would most likely lack self-discipline (by being fat for example) and would most likely have all sorts of negative traits by association (neurotic, possessive, etc.) while a woman who cares too much (to the point where they look sculpted and carved out to be boner magnets) could be too vain, superficial, and perhaps downright stating visually that their mating strategy is to trap a man with their hotness and then rape him of what he's worth when she can't seduce him any more. Therefore I think K-selection is a balance of the two extremes; neither ugly (unless by genetic misfortune, such as an ugly face or bow-leggedness etc. etc.), nor insanely hot but rather a "right" amount of hot which requires a fair amount of self-discipline and implies both a willingness to please a man physically (but not so much that that's all she's worth) while still having time to spare to invest in more intellectual and spiritual pursuits, and/or practical stuff like housekeeping, cooking, or whatever professional thing she's doing. Basically a K-selected appearance would be the girl who wears stylish clothes that aren't too provocative but attractive enough to please a fiance and signal self-confidence and a self-love. ...Yet again though, I'm not too sure. Beauty is much more important to a woman than a man after all. And lots of traits, both good and bad, are signaled by an excess or shortage of beauty. And natural beauty is tricky in its own right since having a lot of it might be r because Daddy preferred the hottie but also K because Daddy might be a millionaire businessman. I think you're over-reading hairiness versus hairlessness. If anything having too much hair is r selected because rabbits will screw anything while wolves will only mate with the best. I think it far more often for high quality (resource-wise) men to mate with high quality (character + body) women than with lesser (only body or only character) women and for high quality women to select other high quality men rather than settle for less. However character trumps beauty and the power of beauty can corrupt and lead to men/women being more r-selected than they otherwise would be, making the signal itself being not much to go on. No/less hair can be good since it's more attractive and therefore implies a better gene (k-selected) pool, but it can also be the luck of the genetic lottery that a pair of rabbits managed to pop out a hot she-wolf instead of another plain rabbit. Or I'm way off and still in grade school as far as beauty and selection goes. I just think that top-tier alphas (body + character) would pursue other top-tier alphas rather than settle for only body or only character. I'd rather look good and be good at the same time. Of course I prefer character over body, but that doesn't mean I'm going to select against beauty if all else is equal (although admittedly all else is seldom equal unless one happens to be a lucky or self-made top tier alpha).