But, unlike Nat, I don't think you refuted my post but simply gave some alternative reasoning for the things I observed.
There is one comment of yours that I disagree with, and that is that women wear make-up and dress in expensive attire to attract notice from men. I say that women dress for other women much more than they do men. What do most men know, or care, about fancy make-up and clothes? Most men I know still wear a shirt 15 years later if it still fits and the stains aren't too noticeable. If women really dressed for men, they would just wear butt-hugging jeans and a midriff-baring top (a la Shania Twain in "Any Man of Mine" video) . . or a cute summer dress. It is women that expect other women to ride the fashion-go-round. Yes, a man will look at an attractive woman dressed to the 9's and with professional hair and make-up, but what they also see is, "high-maintenance woman . . look, try to touch, but then move on . . let some other guy bankroll that do". Also, having seen what women may look like after the make-up comes off, I think a lot of men prefer a more natural beauty.
I do agree with your point that, sexually-speaking, women are and need to be more selective than men. As for getting hit on by old, paunchy guys, I am in my 50's and learned years ago that unless I want a strong and steady diet of rejection, it is best not to even look too long at a woman under 50. Maybe the guys with big flashy money think it can help them overcome this, but your more typical older guy has gotten the message loud and clear that he is some variety of "YUK" (e.g, sleazy, creepy, dirty-old-man, etc) to a decided majority of women (in US anyway) and should spare himself the embarrassment by trying to forget why he was interested in women in the first place (an exception being if you are married, and then if you are smart you know that you MIST give the ol girl some attention if you hope to live a reasonably happy remainder of your life).