Meh. You've got several problems with this line of thought, the same problems as the men promoting the hypergamy theory.

1. You're miss using the term. You have to have a caste system in order for hypergamy to take place. "Hypergamy" is being used to mean something else.

2. "Hypergamy" is being falsely labeled as natural evolutionary development. Clear bullshit on so many levels. I'll refer you to @ElleBeau to start to get a handle on just how ridiculous this claim is. I'm at work, so I don't have time.

3. You're conflating attraction with mate selection. They're not the same.

4. You're conflating attraction with desire for sex. Also not the same thing. I might like looking at a hottie but if I don't get some kind of indication that I would get a happy ending, I'm not that fussed about bothering with sex. Why would I be? Being hot has zero to to with me.ending up sexually frustrated because the guy is a poor performer or a one hit wonder. Just saying.

There's more, but I'm out of time. Point is, your thinking here is highly flawed because you're looking at it like a man would and assigning those things to women even though women have a different value system for sex, love, romance, and mate selection and just think about it differently. Then you're crying foul.

Give me a break.