It is more important for a heterosexual woman to be sexy than a heterosexual man.

Rebuttals and Counterarguments R1. You have...completely failed to attack...the theory that "it is more important for a heterosexual woman to be sexy than a heterosexual man." C1. Forgive me if I'm wrong, but this is beginning to seem as though it's going in the direction of a semantic argument. Either way, it appears we've neglected to define "important." For the sake of this argument, we'll define "important" as "conducive to attracting the opposite sex." If this is, in fact, the case, then I directly approached the assertion that it is more important for one gender than it is for the other. First, I presented evidence that there is not any more weight put on women to be physically attractive than there is on men by stating the fact that a man who is attractive will receive attention from women just as an attractive woman would receive attention from men. Then, I presented counter-evidence by referring to the oft-made complaint that jerks receive more attention than "nice guys," as jerks are more physically attractive to women than nice guys are. Finally, I indicated that your suggestion that women are attracted exclusively to status, money, and the like is fallacious, as attractive men do not need to use such things to attract women. They simply attract women, because they're attractive. These things can add to their perceived attraction, but physical attraction is, at first, physical, and relates to appearance and attitude, not the minutiae of the person's life. Arguments and Rebuttals A1. Men are all about competing with 'things' with 'what they've done' or 'what they've managed to earn' and the woman they end up with is similarly the 'woman they managed to get' and a large aspect of competing is how 'hot' she is. R1. There are certainly men that are like that, but I contend that it's all men, or even most men, that carry their lives on in this manner. What you seem to be describing are hyperbolic caricatures dramatized by rappers. In reality, flaunting yourself or your status is a social faux pas. Quality women with whom one can have a fulfilling relationship aren't driven by such things. Most relationships that mean a damn result from physical attraction and compatible personalities alone. This is how all these great romances throughout literature between two people from completely separate walks of life even make sense. A2. This society is patriarchal. R2. That is completely irrelevant to women's tastes. A3. Women don't compete, they destroy competition. R3. There are entirely female sports leagues. A4. Women are more willing to share a man sexually than the reverse. R4. I see no evidence for this, apparent or otherwise. In my experience with women, they come in all degrees of jealousy, just like men. However, I've never heard of a group of women running a train on a man. In fact, I hear far more frequently in recounts of lewd experiences about women who indulge in many men, and I rarely hear stories of men who enjoy several women at once. A5. Women want men to provide for them and give them everything they want and need. R5. I got all your disclaimers and all this, but that's pretty disrespectful. Some women are like this, but really, there's a lot of guys like that, too. Latter-day society is a far cry from atavism. People no longer copulate due to primal, instinctive interest in gene perfection. People have emotional, complex relationships resulting from all sorts of situations and coming together in all sorts of ways. This is all not to mention the fact that physical attraction is not entirely objective.