London - They’re the words that have been uttered by every unattached woman at some point in the dating game: “He’s out of my league.”
You may be dazzled by the handsome Adonis on the dance floor or at the bar, but a little voice inside your head tells you it would never happen.
To boost your ego, your friends egg you on with cries of “Rubbish! There’s no such thing”, and with exaggerated tales of your attractiveness.
Sadly, they’re wrong. Fairy tales may be full of mismatched couples - think Beauty And The Beast - but new research suggests they are just that: fairy tales. There really are different leagues of attractiveness - and we stick to our own.
The study by the University of California shows that when looking for a mate, we select partners whose social desirability approximately matches our own. Most strikingly, people who were the least attractive opted for similarly unattractive mates.
“It’s called assortative mating,” says Dr George Fieldman, a London-based cognitive behavioural therapist.
“By and large, people don’t mate randomly. They choose people who they perceive, rightly or wrongly, have things in common with them.”
And the most important part of this is looks.
Numerous research studies have shown that girls who have a good relationship with their fathers will often end up falling for a man who looks like him; the same goes for men and their mothers. In one study, people shown faces with their own features morphed into them rated them as more attractive.
But what seems to matter most is choosing someone in the same league of physical appeal. Which is why Brad Pitt goes for Angelina Jolie, and Tony Blair falls for Cherie.
There are exceptions: Marilyn Monroe paired up with gawky, bespectacled playwright Arthur Miller, Julia Roberts fell for hatchet-featured Lyle Lovett and Claudia Schiffer dated big-nosed perma-tanned magician David Copperfield.
But none of those relationships lasted. Even though the males concerned were high (or high-ish) status individuals, the looks gap between them and their lover was just too great.
“There’s an element of potential humiliation in falling for someone much better-looking than you,” says Dr Fieldman. “If you’re rejected, that might mean a loss of status, so in some circumstances it’s better not to try.”
My own first serious boyfriend was a fashion photographer. I was still a schoolgirl and he swept me off my feet. The only downside was that he was a decade older and several inches shorter than me, not to mention bald.
At first, I didn’t notice his physical shortcomings: I was dazzled by the lifestyle. It all changed when I took him to my school’s leavers’ disco and spotted my classmates giggling.
But dating-up doesn’t work either. My friend Nicole (who is very pretty, if a bit overweight) was hugely flattered to be pursued by a male model.
“I knew he was out of my league, but it was really gratifying,” she admits. “When we went out, women would actually stuff their phone numbers into his pocket.”
Unfortunately, Tom’s personality and intellect didn’t match up to his looks. “I knew I was being immature and behaving exactly like those men who date bimbos,” says Nicole.
She’s now happily married to an attractive (but not too attractive) man.
A 1991 survey of 1,300 married couples by Goldsmiths College found that good-looking people married other good-looking people, rich men fell for wealthy women and, by and large, most couples were in the same age range. “Similarity is the general rule. How many young women really have sugar daddies?” said the study’s author, psychologist Robin Russell.
Which may explain why Hugh Hefner’s love life doesn’t seem to be panning out too well.
Another important factor is a similar level of education. Some social scientists say this is because such couples are likely to earn the same; others point to lifestyle factors, such as an appreciation of the same books and music.
And a study of film star marriages in the Journal of Human Capital found they, too, tend to have similar educational backgrounds.
There’s also the question of status, and here, there’s a sex divide: men are less preoccupied with their partner’s standing than women.
“Women tend to choose people of higher status than themselves,” says Dr Fieldman.
“These days, with women approaching parity of status, it makes less sense. But even very high-status women will tend to want partners with higher status.”
Hence, no doubt, mega-famous and mega-rich Harry Potter star Emma Watson’s difficulty finding a boyfriend.
When female celebs attempt to downdate, it rarely seems to end happily: think of Britney and Kevin Federline, Cameron Diaz and Paul Sculfor, or Madonna and Carlos Leon.
The discontent cuts both ways: even the most dazzled civilian gets tired of being elbowed out of the way by fans desperate to meet their famous other half.
“The disparity of status is usually too big,” explains Dr Arthur Cassidy, celebrity media psychologist. “And celebrities’ lives are chaotic. They have much more in common with other celebrities.”
There are blissfully happy couples out there whose union defies simple analysis: the clever can marry the stupid, the wealthy hitch up with the poverty-stricken and beauties live happily ever after with beasts (the dazzling Cate Blanchett and her homely-looking hubby Andrew Upton come to mind). But in general, unless you’re Angelina Jolie, you’d probably be happier with Mr Average than Mr Pitt. - Daily Mail