What do women look for in a male body?

Page 12 of 18 [ 274 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 ... 18  Next

Haliphron
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,980

25 Feb 2009, 11:51 am

mitharatowen wrote:
^ Actually, I can agree with that.


Perhaps not chemistry, but online romance can easily become offline love once the 2 parties actually meet face to face. :wink:



Gromit
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 May 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,302
Location: In Cognito

25 Feb 2009, 11:51 am

Alaspi wrote:
"What do women look for in a male body?"

Answer: Vital organs. ...at least I would hope they do.

:D That sounds a lot like "The shortest way to a man's heart is through his ribcage". I really hope the bodies in which you look for vital organs are dead before you start looking. Are you, perhaps, a pathologist?



mitharatowen
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Oct 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,675
Location: Arizona

25 Feb 2009, 11:55 am

Haliphron wrote:
mitharatowen wrote:
^ Actually, I can agree with that.


Perhaps not chemistry, but online romance can easily become offline love once the 2 parties actually meet face to face. :wink:

True. But it is primarily based on fantasy. However, I would say the same about the early stages of any romance. *shrug*



LePetitPrince
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Mar 2006
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,464

25 Feb 2009, 12:06 pm

mitharatowen wrote:
LePetitPrince wrote:
But a chemistry can't be initiated with any physical attraction , so if a guy doesn't have any physical feature that you find it attractive then no chemistry can take place ,so personality alone can't be enough to determine how attracted you for a man.

I completely disagree with this statement. I was attracted to my husband for personality alone. I do not find him physically attractive in the least. But I was physically attracted and turned on by him based on the fact that I loved him for his (perceived at the time) personality. I made a conscious decision to love him even though I find him physically unattractive because I did not believe that looks mattered at all. If his personality had held up to my expectations, I probably would not regret my descision.


...but if you were dating someone (while you were dating the man who became your husband) with very similar personality (almost the same) yet he's much physically hotter than him ,and then you have to decide which one to pick then who would be? :)

No offense, but when you have access to only 5 rotten-like apples and you want to eat one so badly , but one of these rotten-like apple has a good smell then you gonna pick to eat that rotten apple, but if there's a 6th beautiful apple with nice smell (yes,smell represents personality here) too then you gonna pick this 6th apple, mating is also about availability.

And since you are admitting that you don't find your husband attractive in the least (and I noticed that you have used the present for of verb do and not the past) then why you don't tell him that to face and post me here how was his reaction?

As for what you said that you are "physically attracted and turned on by him based on the fact that you loved him for his (perceived at the time) personality" while you find "find him physically attractive in the least" is something hard to believe, at least for me.

I would believe better if you said that you didn't find physically attractive at first and then later , after knowing him well, you started finding him physically attractive because of his nice personality.



mitharatowen
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Oct 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,675
Location: Arizona

25 Feb 2009, 12:13 pm

LePetitPrince wrote:
...but if you were dating someone (while you were dating the man who became your husband) with very similar personality (almost the same) yet he's much physically hotter than him ,and then you have to decide which one to pick then who would be? :)

Interesting to ponder. This would not happen to me because I am very loyal to the one that I love and would not be the least bit interested in a more attractive man. Perhaps if I had gotten to know them both at the same time and they both liked me and had similar personalities, I would most likely go for the attractive one.

LePetitPrince wrote:
And since you are admitting that you don't find your husband attractive in the least (and I noticed that you have used the present for of verb do and not the past) then why you don't go to him and tell him by face and post me here how was his reaction .

Indeed. I have told him. He's not happy about it.

LePetitPrince wrote:
As for what you said that you are "physically attracted and turned on by him based on the fact that you loved him for his (perceived at the time) personality" while you find "find him physically attractive in the least" is something hard to believe, at least for me.

Notice the tenses. I was attracted to him because of the personality that I percieved at the time. I can admit that I never was attracted to his looks but I was attracted to his personality. I am currently not attracted to him at all because his personality has changed or perhaps I have just gotten to know him better.

LePetitPrince wrote:
I would believe better if you said that you didn't find physically attractive at first and then later , after knowing him well, you started finding him physically attractive because of his nice personality.

Exactly. And then it reverted.

Of importance to note:
mitharatowen wrote:
If his personality had held up to my expectations, I probably would not regret my descision.



Last edited by mitharatowen on 25 Feb 2009, 12:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Haliphron
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,980

25 Feb 2009, 12:14 pm

LePetitPrince: What women find physically attractive is signs of genetic fitness. There are PLENTY of other ways a man can convey this without having good looks. Such as musical talent or social suaveness, which DO result in a woman feeling physically attracted. But Ive said it before and I'll say it again: the physical trait in men that women admire MOST is height.



LePetitPrince
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Mar 2006
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,464

25 Feb 2009, 12:22 pm

Haliphron wrote:
LePetitPrince: What women find physically attractive is signs of genetic fitness. There are PLENTY of other ways a man can convey this without having good looks. Such as musical talent or social suaveness, which DO result in a woman feeling physically attracted.


I totally agree with you in that one.

After all, I am the one who posted this theory in detail :P

Quote:
^^ the other way around won't be in your favor in you are an omega/beta male , letting girls to approach first will lead to the same natural selection rules that are already applied.

Let's face the truth guys , we are under the mercy of the girls' choice , this is a basic nature and there's no way to change it unless inf your want to change your society into an arrangedmarriage-based society or to a ret*d masculine dominated society like the fanatic Islamic societies and treat women as a furniture.

As long that you live in a free society where dating is free then you'll still be under the mercy of serial monogamy rules==> the mercy of women's choice.

In serial monogamy system , guys ask out girls , the girl keeps rejecting guys till she is asked by the most 'suitable' guy.

So serial monogamy rules are very similar to the natural polygamy rules (not the islamic polygamy!): Females are the main players of the natural selection --> females are the ones who pick the males that most "fit" them (most fit them = that can provide best genes and security).

Nagging, whining , and revolutions will solve nothing ......if you are naturally an omega/beta guy then the best thing you can do is improving yourself , by improving yourself you became a better competitor and you increase somehow your chances to get a girl.


For a better help ,note that there are basically FOUR types of Alpha males in the current human society:

-The Knight (Strength): These are basically the pure natural alphas , the men with high level of Testosterone , the strong, tall , determinant , confident , masculine and handsome men. If you are not already one of those , it will be almost impossible to become one. A strong sport man who can achieve big wins can becomes a King/Knight (ie: the best footballers).This type of alpha might fade with age or can transform to the King type


-The King (Wealth/Social Power): The Kings are the successful men who can turn their success into great wealth and social power, this type of Alpha requires also some basic natural alpha traits found in the Knight-type like confidence and determination (ie.CEOs, great businessmen...etc) ...good physical traits might help too , it also requires mainly traits such as leadership, common sense, courage and good social skills. It is not impossible for Aspies to be one of those but keep in mind that without good-developed natural skills such as social skills and leadership that won't be easy at all.


-The Magician (High Intelligence): Naturally,this is the least attractive Alpha type to most females but they are alphas nonetheless and can attract 10% of females at least. The Magicians are the men who can achieve great things using their high intelligence ,education , great knowledge or great wisdom , the requirement for this type is one : High IQ/Intelligence or at least 1 useful savant skill(rare cases). The Magician doesn't need to be physically strong, confident or leader or any of that sort ....he just needs to be very smart in his field he works in. A Magician who can turns his achievements to success and wealth can becomes a Magician-King (ie. Bill Gates). Aspies with high intelligence should choose this path to Alphahood but if you don't naturally have a very high IQ (above 130)/intelligence or at least 1 useful savant skill this would be almost impossible.

(Even a physically handicapped very genius man such as Steven hawking can be considered as a Magician alpha because his natural high intelligence compensates all the other bad genes ..but of course this case is very very exceptional.)


- The Bard (Talent/Fame): The Bards are the people who get fame through their high talents ie: good singers, cool hardrockers,Hollywood actors, good musicians, excellent painters...

The Bards are the MOST attractive Alpha-type to females nowadays , they can harvest thousands of females' hearts.
Since fame brings wealth and since fame requires sometimes attractive looks then Bards are usually in combo forms mostly as Bard/King or sometimes in Bard/King/Knight , Bard/King/Magician exist but are rare cases (ie. like the savant pianist kids that can even compete adult pianists....will be Bard/King/Magician when they become adults).
Aspie can becomes a bard ....but of course he needs to have great talents.


There are the same types of alphas among females ....but here we are talking about competition between males which is much rougher than the competition between females (competition between females is caused by the artificial monogamous marriage system).

http://www.wrongplanet.net/postxf20753-0-285.html



Quote:
But Ive said it before and I'll say it again: the physical trait in men that women admire MOST is height.


Ouch! man, thank you this hint and encouragement. Now I am gonna use my height to get girls' attention (by looking straight with my eye level on their b*ehem*oobs)



Last edited by LePetitPrince on 25 Feb 2009, 12:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.

LePetitPrince
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Mar 2006
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,464

25 Feb 2009, 12:28 pm

Quote:
Interesting to ponder. This would not happen to me because I am very loyal to the one that I love and would not be the least bit interested in a more attractive man. Perhaps if I had gotten to know them both at the same time and they both liked me and had similar personalities, I would most likely go for the attractive one.


I declare my victory in this argument, you can't say anymore that personality is far more important than looks.

And yes , this scenario I provide was dating them both before falling in love with any of them and I am sure that you'll naturally in love with the more attractive one if such scenario happened to you.


Quote:

Indeed. I have told him. He's not happy about it.


I win again.


Quote:
Notice the tenses. I was attracted to him because of the personality that I percieved at the time. I can admit that I never was attracted to his looks but I was attracted to his personality. I am currently not attracted to him at all because his personality has changed or perhaps I have just gotten to know him better.


This is another story.....

Quote:
Exactly. And then it reverted.


it can be reverted with any guy , even with an attractive one.



mitharatowen
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Oct 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,675
Location: Arizona

25 Feb 2009, 12:52 pm

LePetitPrince wrote:
I declare my victory in this argument, you can't say anymore that personality is far more important than looks.

How's that exactly? You said they both had a good personality. So therefore if I've got the basics covered, why wouldn't I want a cherry on top? That doesn't mean the cherry is the most important part.

You win nothing.

Besides, I've already admitted that my putting personality so far ahead of looks was faulty. My argument with you is only to challenge your claim that there is no chemistry possible when looks are not present.

I think it is best to have a good mix of the two. Then when you have a personality clash, you will still have physical attraction to bring you back together. And if he is a good guy, you won't lose your physical attraction to him due to it being overshadowed by his poor treatment of you (as would be the case if he was good-looking but jerky.. mm.. jerky).



Last edited by mitharatowen on 25 Feb 2009, 1:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.

LePetitPrince
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Mar 2006
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,464

25 Feb 2009, 1:02 pm

mitharatowen wrote:
LePetitPrince wrote:
I declare my victory in this argument, you can't say anymore that personality is far more important than looks.

How's that exactly? You said they both had a good personality. So therefore if I've got the basics covered, why wouldn't I want a cherry on top? That doesn't mean the cherry is the most important part.

You win nothing.

Besides, I've already admitted that my putting personality so far ahead of looks was faulty. My argument with you is only to challenge your claim that there is no chemistry possible when looks are not present.



enough! I win because I said so! :P (and because I got bored of this never-ending debate).



mitharatowen
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Oct 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,675
Location: Arizona

25 Feb 2009, 1:06 pm

Huh? Neverending? I just started this a few hours ago. But I guess you have been debating with others for a while, huh?

Well anyways. It is untrue that no chemistry is possible if physical attraction is not present. That does not mean, however, that physical attraction is unimportant. And the degree of it's importance varies from woman to woman.

Fin.
:lol:



Haliphron
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,980

25 Feb 2009, 1:46 pm

Admit it ladies, you like Tall men(6' and above)! Nearly ALL women do except women who are over 6' sometimes will take shorter fellows. :lol:



mitharatowen
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Oct 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,675
Location: Arizona

25 Feb 2009, 1:49 pm

^ I will not :P I've liked two guys that were shorter than me and of all the guys I've dated (4) only my current husband is 6' which has nothing to do with why I liked him and sometimes I wish he were closer to my height. Height has a psychological advantage (makes women feel safe) but several physical disadvantes (better suited to the adult forum) :lol:



Last edited by mitharatowen on 25 Feb 2009, 1:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.

anna-banana
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Aug 2008
Age: 41
Gender: Female
Posts: 5,682
Location: Europe

25 Feb 2009, 1:50 pm

Haliphron wrote:
But Ive said it before and I'll say it again: the physical trait in men that women admire MOST is height.


LOL you guys really know best don't you?

I don't know why we're even having those threads if you all still believe in crap like that, and I bet that no matter what we (the women) say you'll still blame your romantic failures on height/weight/small penis/wrong eye colour etc, instead on facing the truth.


_________________
not a bug - a feature.


mitharatowen
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Oct 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,675
Location: Arizona

25 Feb 2009, 1:52 pm

^ :hail:



Hector
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Mar 2008
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,493

25 Feb 2009, 1:53 pm

Wait, what is the truth?