Are Men More Shallow Than Women?

In responding to a woman whose husband was mean to her because she was overweight, you wrote that "one of life's unfair aspects is that women tend to be more tolerant of physical imperfections in men than men are of physical imperfections in women." It seems to me that there is a big implication to what you are saying, that women--by not judging men by their looks the way men judge women--are deeper and morally superior to men. I don't have the sense that you're a big feminist, so what do you say to that?

Dear Women are Kinder,

If this were the only issue distinguishing men and women, then you'd be right: greater female openness to men who are not physically attractive would show women to be emotionally and morally deeper than men.

The problem is that while women are more tolerant than men in the area of looks, women tend, like men, to have their own areas of shallowness, specifically, money and professional success. Thus, if you were trying to fix up a man with a woman and told him, "She's gorgeous, bright, and very kind, but she's not that motivated professionally. I don't think she'll ever be a big earner," most men I know would think: "If she's gorgeous, bright, and very kind, I really want to meet her. I can make peace with the fact that she won't bring home a fat paycheck."

On the other hand, if you told most (though obviously not all) women, "There's a guy to whom I want to introduce you. He's really good looking, bright and kind, but not all that successful professionally," I suspect that a far higher percentage of middle-class women (the group I know best), would think, "Well, it's very nice that he's so good looking, bright and kind, but this lack of ambition and low-earning abilities sounds worrisome. I think I'll pass on this one."

A number of women to whom I've outlined this scenario acknowledge that what I've written is pretty much true, but insist that such reasoning does not reflect badly on their sex. As one friend put it: "When a woman looks at a man, she's thinking of building a family with him, and she wants to know that he'll be motivated to support her and their children. There's nothing shallow about that. Security is a more serious consideration than looks."

Perhaps, but I'm only saying that your argument doesn't convince me that women are morally superior to men. In fact, I've long suspected that for many women, money plays the role that looks play for men (enough certainly to earn one a first date, and maybe more). That's why when we hear of an older man married to a much younger woman, we generally assume that he's rich and she's pretty (on the other hand, whether it's fair or unfair, when people hear of a young man with a much older woman, they often assume he has a need for a mother figure). When was the last time you saw a 30-year-old woman on the arm of a man living off his social security check?

In truth, it's a bad idea to turn this into a "who's better?" issue, because life is more complex than that. The attraction of many women to wealth (and there are no shortage of men who are attracted to wealth as well) is, in part, motivated by a desire to have a safe environment for their future family, and by their attraction to the ambitiousness and vitality of a man who's made himself rich (obviously, this would not necessarily follow if the man's wealth was inherited).

Continued on page 2: »