There is discussion about tango that repeats itself in the internet. It goes something like this, although typically not as bluntly and directly:
A: Dancer X did not dance with me in milonga last night! Who does she think she is? I think people should dance with everybody. Being nice helps to build up community because it helps beginners grow. Does she not want to build up the community? Her behaviour is selfish.
B: Maybe she just did not want to dance with you because she has much more experience and she can dance with the best dancers. It can even hurt her physically to dance with you. It is her choice to dance with whomever she pleases. Everybody should be able to choose who they dance with. It is actually good that she did not dance with you, because it will motivate you to learn more dancing and a nicer embrace.
From this invented discussion, we can already guess the approximate attractivity of each as a dance partner in the milonga.
Why can we guess it? Wikipedia explains it:
Nietzsche argued that there were two fundamental types of morality: ‘Master morality’ and ‘slave morality’. Slave morality values things like kindness, humility and sympathy, while master morality values pride, strength, and nobility. Master morality weighs actions on a scale of good or bad consequences unlike slave morality which weighs actions on a scale of good or evil intentions.
According to Nietzsche, strong people favour master morality, whereas weak people favour slave morality. We can guess the approximate attractivity of the person at the milonga just from their chosen morality, and that we can tell from the language they use.
There is a third way to see things beyond this master-slave morality dichotomy, which can lead to experiences that are more interesting than you can imagine.