Article seems to implicitly assume that being *seen* as a candidate more suited to a "brief sexual encounter" is a bad thing. Whereas, it's quite possible this is what both the woman in question and "Flashy Dan" are after.
Particularly if a "Frugal Dave" can then be found who's more likely to help out- intentionally or otherwise- with the long-term care of any child resulting from the former encounter after "Flashy Dan" buggers off.
Of course, in reality, this is driven as much by evolution than by conscious and deliberate choice, but that's neither here nor there.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
