Should ChickMagnet even BE unisex?

Courtesy Link. Subject came up here.

A woman can only get pregnant every 9 months, so ones who were picky about whose advances they accepted were the ones who had children that lived. A man could impregnate a different woman every 17 minutes, so they\'d have every incentive to give each one a turn. Our savanna ancestors didn\'t have child support law, so for all we know, that\'s what chick magnets did. Evolution would only have held them back if it unconsciously took STDs into account, and even then, that depends on whether diseased breeders outbred healthy but low-reproduction tribes.

So while it might be slightly counter-intuitive to those of us with middle-school memories of being genuinely disinterested in the flirty popular girls whilst obsessed with the cute quiet girl, it stands to reason that males are hornier and/or less picky than females.

To cap it off, online those complaining about unwanted attention tend to be female, while those complaining that it\'s hard to avoid being accused of being too aggressive about it tend to be male. Well... either that or each sex is out to falsely impersonate the other en masse. But I doubt either sex could\'ve pulled it off.

So can we stop pretending to think these things are \"gender-neutral?\"

A lot of this is conjecture and evolutionary psychology psuedo-science, but even if you were right, what does that have to do with Chick Magnet as a trope in fiction? If a woman is picking up and enjoying the attention of tons of guys, she's an example. The fact that it might be more rare in a statistical sense in real-life means nothing.

Edited by TheMountainKing on Jul 14th 2018 at 12:52:58 PM

Agreed with

Tropes don't always have to reflect real life...

Pretty much. Tropes are tropes often because of how they differ from reality for the sake of the story. If the trope is used one way, it doesn't matter what reality says. What can matter is public perception of reality, since that affects what and how tropes are used.