The Ladder Theory is purported to analyse how men and women evaluate members of the opposite sex, especially on a first impression basis.
Ladder Theory was originally satirical but, as is often the case, proved to have more than a grain of truth embedded in it.
Ladder Theory was first conceptualized in 1994 in Exeter, California USA, by Dallas Lynn, with acknowledgement to the contribution made by Jared Whitson.
Detailed explanation of The Ladder Theory is on the website: intellectualwhores.com. Please be aware the language on this site can be (very) strong and it has a similarly strong male-bias.
Ladder Theory is specifically aimed at heterosexual men and women, although it could arguably be applied to any legal sexual orientation.
See the Ladder Theory Disclaimer below for contextual explanation (i.e., why Ladder Theory is on this website).
The basic premise of Ladder Theory is that all men gauge women on an I-would-have-sex-with-this woman/how-likely-is-she-to-have-sex-with-me scale.
Women apparently have two ladders:
Given that women are arguably a lot more more complex than men, then that figures..
Classification and ranking (for both sexes) is described as a 'Ladder' hence the name Ladder Theory.
Allegedly, the higher up on someone's ladder you are the more likely you are to get laid.
The following (basic) table sets out how men and women apparently make their initial mental assessment of each other.
| men | % | women | % |
| How attractive is she | 60 | How much money/power does he have | 50 |
| How soon she will have sex with me | 30 | How attractive is he* | 40 |
| Other aspects | 10 | How much women say and don't mean (e.g., I prefer a man with a sense of humour, a sensitive man, etc) | 10 |
* Attractive (40%) to women is broken down as follows:
Based on the above, a man will place a woman highest on his ladder if (he judges) she is willing to have sex with him and he finds her attractive.
It could be said that most men and women would not find that statement ground-breaking.
Men apparently classify women as follows:
As an aside it should be remembered that beauty is subjective, and (often) superficial, especially when applied to women (although some men also prefer not to be to seen without their make-up or other physical enhancements).
Men, as stated in the Ladder Theory, do not have a ladder for 'Platonic' females since the theory works on the premise that all men basically evaluate women as sexual objects.
Women as stated earlier have two ladders - Potential Sexual Partners and Platonic Partners.
The first problem here for men is that they often don't know which ladder they are on.
When they do get it wrong they can come to an 'abysmal' end.
Women place Money/Power as a man's most attractive aspect.
This is borne out by how many 'not very attractive' powerful rich men have beautiful women companions. (If the cap fits..)
This is common to the bottom of both sex's ladders.
Abandon Hope All Ye Who Enter the Abyss.
Especially if entering via a monumental fall from grace - and if you are a man!
According to the Ladder Theory women very rarely allow ladder-jumping (no pun intended) so men need to make clear early on they want a woman's body, as well as her mind, if men want a position on the 'Potential' ladder, otherwise you could end up on her Platonic Ladder, and never more to be seen in a sexual context.
Please note this is not a call to action. There are laws about sexual harrassment.
Ladder Theory is a superficial classification and does not try to explain the subtle unconscious foundations upon which initial assessments are made. People will continue to make judgements based on their own life-experiences and values and needs, which are liable to change depending on their current personal circumstances - and unfortunately at times how drunk they are!
Use of the Ladder Theory is not without risk or injury.
Many ladder-related injuries are caused by not understanding how to use the ladder correctly.
Injuries can sometimes be serious and long-lasting.
Some 'minor' incidents do not preclude further attempts at scaling the giddy heights again.
The amount of grovelling that accompanies a desire to be put back on a ladder is usually commensurate with the seriousness of the 'incident' especially (again) if you are a man.
Ladders can be flimsy constructions, and can be extended or shortened without warning.
Locking mechanisms on extended ladders are rarely used and both sexes continually revise the payload on their respective ladders.
Men can find themselves at the top of a woman's ladder without being aware of taking any conscious steps - and of course vice versa.
Also remember that what goes up can come down!
Accusing the owner of a ladder of misuse - particularly if the owner is female - is no guarantee that a problem will be rectified - and you could find yourself consigned to the Abyss.
If you like/don't like the Ladder Theory, and seek further information or enlightenment then please see www.intellectualwhores.com for the original authority and wisdom, such as it is, on the subject. Be warned - it is not the most politically correct website in the world.
This webpage is an introduction and summary explanation of Ladder Theory for those who might find it useful or amusing, either as a subject for discussion, or an interesting reference example (good or awful depending on your standpoint) for learning or teaching various aspects of human relations and motivation.
If referring to this material in a teaching or training context you must ensure that you do so in a manner that will not cause offence or breach relevant discrimination laws. To some people Ladder Theory will be harmless fun and interesting. Others could regard it to be insulting or offensive, so if in doubt don't use it.
(Almost) needless to say, Ladder Theory is based on absolutely no scientifically validated research whatsoever, and in terms of its reliability and seriousness should be treated as such.
That said, Ladder Theory can with a little imagination potentially be related to the following areas of learning and development:
See the other free resources on this website for personal and organizational development, especially those relating to human motivation and communications, for example:
NLP (Neuro-Linguistic Programming)
Howard Gardner's Multiple Intelligences Theory
McLelland's Motivational Theory
Kirkpatrick's Learning Evaluation Model
Bloom's Taxonomy of Learning Domains (Educational Objectives)
and lots more on the main businessballs website if you are not already there.
The use of this material is free provided copyright (see below) is acknowledged and reference or link is made to the www.businessballs.com website. This material may not be sold, or published in any form. Disclaimer: Reliance on information, material, advice, or other linked or recommended resources, received from Alan Chapman, shall be at your sole risk, and Alan Chapman assumes no responsibility for any errors, omissions, or damages arising. Users of this website are encouraged to confirm information received with other sources, and to seek local qualified advice if embarking on any actions that could carry personal or organizational liabilities. Managing people and relationships are sensitive activities; the free material and advice available via this website do not provide all necessary safeguards and checks. Please retain this notice on all copies.
© Sandra McCarthy and Alan Chapman 2008.