Page 7 of 7 [ 105 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7

Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Gender: Female
Posts: 26,797
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

08 May 2017, 10:21 pm

The_Face_of_Boo wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
The_Face_of_Boo wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
The_Face_of_Boo wrote:
ltcvnzl wrote:
I think we can't ignore that there is much more emphasize in woman's beauty than male beauty.



This is all a myth that many of you women always love to repeat. I don't buy any of it.

When for example 90% of women refuse to date men shorter than them or when the vast majority state strong preference for taller/bigger, isn't that a super strong emphasis in men's beauty imposed on men by women? It's imposed by real women , you can see them on dating sites, and not by some fashion industry like how Wolf explained about the mythical female beauty that doesn't reflect real straight men's preferences in reality.



Can you site an actual study that proves 90% of women on earth would refuse to date men shorter than them? A majority do have a preference for males taller than themselves but I say it is false claim that 90% of them would see it as a deal-breaker.

A majority of males have a preference for women shorter than them, does that mean 90% of them would refuse to date a taller woman?


I have cited researches before showing that males do not care if women taller than them - and if anything, males don't try with taller women because we know that they will reject us, this preference is on the women side.

When it comes to height pickiness, it is your gender, not ours; 90% of people of your gender. Just accept it and stop arguing this every time, it has been proven so many times in so many studies and so many males here and on boards stated they won't mind dating taller women.

"One 2008 study of college students found that about 50 percent of guys wanted their partners to be shorter than them, while 90 percent of women wanted their partners to be taller than them"

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/do ... 1&type=pdf

"Nearly half of men indicated their tallest acceptable date could
be taller than them (24%) or their height (23%), while only half (53%) required that their
partner be shorter than them. For women, the vast majority indicated that the shortest per-
son they would date would still be taller than them (89%)
, with only a small minority being
willing to accept a mate who was their height (7%) or shorter (4%)."


It hasn't been proven once that 90% of the worlds females will flat out refuse to date males shorter than them. Now I could buy that most women have a preference for guys taller than them, but NOT that 90% will flat out refuse to date any guy shorter than them.

Also 2008 was a long time ago so trends could be different now, and they surveyed one small, specific demographic, they'd need a much larger sample size for more accurate and general results.

Do you understand how statistics work?...Or do you think regardless of the sample size results of statistical surveys can be applied to vast demographics like the entire male or female gender.


Why don't you go teach the researchers how to do stats? You sound more expert than them.


Because they already know how to do it...its the general public that needs more educating about it for the most part. I learned about taking statistics in college, but I am sure the info is out there on the internet or in books anyone could view.

90% of women at one college, isn't the same as 90% of women in general for instance.


_________________
Don't go on, put it back
You're reading from the Bible Black!


cberg
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Dec 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,054
Location: Boulder CO

08 May 2017, 10:31 pm

Perhaps we should focus on aesthetic subtleties then.


_________________
"Standing on a well-chilled cinder, we see the fading of the suns, and try to recall the vanished brilliance of the origin of the worlds."
-Georges Lemaitre
"I fly through hyperspace, in my green computer interface"
-Gem Tos :mrgreen:


The_Face_of_Boo
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Jun 2010
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 23,094
Location: Beirut, Lebanon.

09 May 2017, 12:11 am

Sweetleaf wrote:
The_Face_of_Boo wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
The_Face_of_Boo wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
The_Face_of_Boo wrote:
ltcvnzl wrote:
I think we can't ignore that there is much more emphasize in woman's beauty than male beauty.



This is all a myth that many of you women always love to repeat. I don't buy any of it.

When for example 90% of women refuse to date men shorter than them or when the vast majority state strong preference for taller/bigger, isn't that a super strong emphasis in men's beauty imposed on men by women? It's imposed by real women , you can see them on dating sites, and not by some fashion industry like how Wolf explained about the mythical female beauty that doesn't reflect real straight men's preferences in reality.



Can you site an actual study that proves 90% of women on earth would refuse to date men shorter than them? A majority do have a preference for males taller than themselves but I say it is false claim that 90% of them would see it as a deal-breaker.

A majority of males have a preference for women shorter than them, does that mean 90% of them would refuse to date a taller woman?


I have cited researches before showing that males do not care if women taller than them - and if anything, males don't try with taller women because we know that they will reject us, this preference is on the women side.

When it comes to height pickiness, it is your gender, not ours; 90% of people of your gender. Just accept it and stop arguing this every time, it has been proven so many times in so many studies and so many males here and on boards stated they won't mind dating taller women.

"One 2008 study of college students found that about 50 percent of guys wanted their partners to be shorter than them, while 90 percent of women wanted their partners to be taller than them"

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/do ... 1&type=pdf

"Nearly half of men indicated their tallest acceptable date could
be taller than them (24%) or their height (23%), while only half (53%) required that their
partner be shorter than them. For women, the vast majority indicated that the shortest per-
son they would date would still be taller than them (89%)
, with only a small minority being
willing to accept a mate who was their height (7%) or shorter (4%)."


It hasn't been proven once that 90% of the worlds females will flat out refuse to date males shorter than them. Now I could buy that most women have a preference for guys taller than them, but NOT that 90% will flat out refuse to date any guy shorter than them.

Also 2008 was a long time ago so trends could be different now, and they surveyed one small, specific demographic, they'd need a much larger sample size for more accurate and general results.

Do you understand how statistics work?...Or do you think regardless of the sample size results of statistical surveys can be applied to vast demographics like the entire male or female gender.


Why don't you go teach the researchers how to do stats? You sound more expert than them.


Because they already know how to do it...its the general public that needs more educating about it for the most part. I learned about taking statistics in college, but I am sure the info is out there on the internet or in books anyone could view.

90% of women at one college, isn't the same as 90% of women in general for instance.


it is a representative sample of the most educated girls.

And most people go to college, so it is not a bad representation of a whole population, sweetleaf. Stats are done based on samples, you know.



Moccu
Pileated woodpecker
Pileated woodpecker

User avatar

Joined: 4 Sep 2015
Posts: 182
Location: Ontario

09 May 2017, 6:58 am

Too much fat around the midsection can look like a poor health indicator for both men and women, as it can negatively affect most of your organs and cause heart problems. A six-pack isn't necessarily needed to be attractive with/without clothing, a flat stomach and trim body is just as good.

Also, a good diet alone will achieve a slim body faster than exercise with a poor/excessive diet. If you are very overweight, then you can't expect to do as much as someone that's already in decent health does, so results would vary, even if you are doing the same exercise.

Men don't really need to strive for a fitness-model body, and achieving a fitness-model body doesn't guarantee making you attractive from the shoulders-up (face/profile). A lot of women that I know don't really sensationalise abs or large forearms. A man that has to workout for hours in a day, just to maintain and supplement his physique, would take too much time away from them.


_________________
Your neurodiverse (Aspie) score: 29 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 193 of 200
You are very likely neurotypical


Closet Genious
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 12 Jan 2017
Age: 23
Gender: Male
Posts: 328
Location: Sweden

09 May 2017, 7:18 am

Moccu wrote:
Too much fat around the midsection can look like a poor health indicator for both men and women, as it can negatively affect most of your organs and cause heart problems. A six-pack isn't necessarily needed to be attractive with/without clothing, a flat stomach and trim body is just as good.

Also, a good diet alone will achieve a slim body faster than exercise with a poor/excessive diet. If you are very overweight, then you can't expect to do as much as someone that's already in decent health does, so results would vary, even if you are doing the same exercise.

Men don't really need to strive for a fitness-model body, and achieving a fitness-model body doesn't guarantee making you attractive from the shoulders-up (face/profile). A lot of women that I know don't really sensationalise abs or large forearms. A man that has to workout for hours in a day, just to maintain and supplement his physique, would take too much time away from them.


For most people, if you have a flat stomach you are already pretty damn close to having visible abs. Genetics play a part in this aswell though. I know for myself, that from flat stomach to good ab definition only takes 2-4 weeks of dieting. :)



Moccu
Pileated woodpecker
Pileated woodpecker

User avatar

Joined: 4 Sep 2015
Posts: 182
Location: Ontario

09 May 2017, 8:01 am

Closet Genious wrote:
Moccu wrote:
Too much fat around the midsection can look like a poor health indicator for both men and women, as it can negatively affect most of your organs and cause heart problems. A six-pack isn't necessarily needed to be attractive with/without clothing, a flat stomach and trim body is just as good.

Also, a good diet alone will achieve a slim body faster than exercise with a poor/excessive diet. If you are very overweight, then you can't expect to do as much as someone that's already in decent health does, so results would vary, even if you are doing the same exercise.

Men don't really need to strive for a fitness-model body, and achieving a fitness-model body doesn't guarantee making you attractive from the shoulders-up (face/profile). A lot of women that I know don't really sensationalise abs or large forearms. A man that has to workout for hours in a day, just to maintain and supplement his physique, would take too much time away from them.


For most people, if you have a flat stomach you are already pretty damn close to having visible abs. Genetics play a part in this aswell though. I know for myself, that from flat stomach to good ab definition only takes 2-4 weeks of dieting. :)

I find bike riding is really effective for a nice all-over tone, and it's not boring to do and gets me to places faster.


_________________
Your neurodiverse (Aspie) score: 29 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 193 of 200
You are very likely neurotypical


The_Face_of_Boo
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Jun 2010
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 23,094
Location: Beirut, Lebanon.

09 May 2017, 3:49 pm

Moccu wrote:
Too much fat around the midsection can look like a poor health indicator for both men and women, as it can negatively affect most of your organs and cause heart problems. A six-pack isn't necessarily needed to be attractive with/without clothing, a flat stomach and trim body is just as good.

Also, a good diet alone will achieve a slim body faster than exercise with a poor/excessive diet. If you are very overweight, then you can't expect to do as much as someone that's already in decent health does, so results would vary, even if you are doing the same exercise.

Men don't really need to strive for a fitness-model body, and achieving a fitness-model body doesn't guarantee making you attractive from the shoulders-up (face/profile). A lot of women that I know don't really sensationalise abs or large forearms. A man that has to workout for hours in a day, just to maintain and supplement his physique, would take too much time away from them.



I will tell you a secret: People lie, and they don't want to sound shallow; and a lot of women especially have the tendency to try so hard to sound non-shallow and deep. ie. "No I don't care about looks! I care about personality" --> yet she dates only tall and dark handsome men.


Behind the doors, they masterbate over types they claim they don't care about. This is especially true for women too.



Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Gender: Female
Posts: 26,797
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

09 May 2017, 4:32 pm

The_Face_of_Boo wrote:

it is a representative sample of the most educated girls.

And most people go to college, so it is not a bad representation of a whole population, sweetleaf. Stats are done based on samples, you know.


Girls still in college are hardly the most educated girls...lol, half of them don't even know what they're doing yet especially the younger ones closer to just being out of highschool. Also did they survey many colleges across the nation or various nations, or is this stats from one college? college girls under the age of 25 hardly represent the majority of women.

Also preferences for quite a few people aren't so set in stone they will reject someone on one single feature if there are other attractive things about them. Even if 90% of women can be proven to have a preference for taller guys, that doesn't translate to they won't date a shorter guy.

Statistics are to give a rough idea of various demographics, that is all...too much hyperfocus on them isn't really useful.


_________________
Don't go on, put it back
You're reading from the Bible Black!


Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Gender: Female
Posts: 26,797
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

09 May 2017, 4:45 pm

The_Face_of_Boo wrote:
Moccu wrote:
Too much fat around the midsection can look like a poor health indicator for both men and women, as it can negatively affect most of your organs and cause heart problems. A six-pack isn't necessarily needed to be attractive with/without clothing, a flat stomach and trim body is just as good.

Also, a good diet alone will achieve a slim body faster than exercise with a poor/excessive diet. If you are very overweight, then you can't expect to do as much as someone that's already in decent health does, so results would vary, even if you are doing the same exercise.

Men don't really need to strive for a fitness-model body, and achieving a fitness-model body doesn't guarantee making you attractive from the shoulders-up (face/profile). A lot of women that I know don't really sensationalise abs or large forearms. A man that has to workout for hours in a day, just to maintain and supplement his physique, would take too much time away from them.



I will tell you a secret: People lie, and they don't want to sound shallow; and a lot of women especially have the tendency to try so hard to sound non-shallow and deep. ie. "No I don't care about looks! I care about personality" --> yet she dates only tall and dark handsome men.

Behind the doors, they masterbate over types they claim they don't care about. This is especially true for women too.


Really? how do you you know this...you know peeping on people behind closed doors is creepy right?


_________________
Don't go on, put it back
You're reading from the Bible Black!


The_Face_of_Boo
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Jun 2010
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 23,094
Location: Beirut, Lebanon.

10 May 2017, 12:45 am

Sweetleaf wrote:
The_Face_of_Boo wrote:
Moccu wrote:
Too much fat around the midsection can look like a poor health indicator for both men and women, as it can negatively affect most of your organs and cause heart problems. A six-pack isn't necessarily needed to be attractive with/without clothing, a flat stomach and trim body is just as good.

Also, a good diet alone will achieve a slim body faster than exercise with a poor/excessive diet. If you are very overweight, then you can't expect to do as much as someone that's already in decent health does, so results would vary, even if you are doing the same exercise.

Men don't really need to strive for a fitness-model body, and achieving a fitness-model body doesn't guarantee making you attractive from the shoulders-up (face/profile). A lot of women that I know don't really sensationalise abs or large forearms. A man that has to workout for hours in a day, just to maintain and supplement his physique, would take too much time away from them.



I will tell you a secret: People lie, and they don't want to sound shallow; and a lot of women especially have the tendency to try so hard to sound non-shallow and deep. ie. "No I don't care about looks! I care about personality" --> yet she dates only tall and dark handsome men.

Behind the doors, they masterbate over types they claim they don't care about. This is especially true for women too.


Really? how do you you know this...you know peeping on people behind closed doors is creepy right?



Not only they allowed me to peep on them willingly, I have also heard them moaning.... (in an earlier stage of my life, i become addicted to that for some months, i swear I heard 100+ women orgasming in this period, but very few the ones I met for real)

Here, this might give you an idea how:
viewtopic.php?f=17&t=286702



Sirkmail
Emu Egg
Emu Egg

Joined: 16 Nov 2015
Age: 61
Gender: Male
Posts: 2

03 Jun 2017, 11:30 pm

yungsavage wrote:
Guys who are small or uncircumcised are really at a disadvantage. I (luckily) am the opposite of both of those, however, I have heard tons of women say that if a guy is uncut or their penis is small they flat out won't get intimate with him. Kind of messed up to be honest. The way our society shames people for how they look is terrible. I understand shaming people with un-healthy lifestyles (being fat or anorexic), because they are literally killing themselves, but shaming people for stuff they can't even change is messed up. Something you can't really change, however.
So I guess those guys are out of luck.


I'm a circumcised male who has always had an unusual perspective on foreskin because I grew up in a neighborhood where most guys were uncircumcised so the cut guys were the ones always being teased for being different.

As I was completely unaware that most guys my age were circumcised I dreaded the prospect of junior high gym class because I knew from my older friends that showers were required and I was afraid the teasing would be much worse that what I had ever experienced before.

Instead I was absolutely astonished to see so many helmet-heads and I thought for a moment that they all might be uncut guys skinning back to make fun of me like the mean kids in my neighborhood before I quickly realized they really were circumcised like I was.

What I didn't realize is that none of them had probably ever seen a foreskin before those of the three uncut guys in their gym class, and so they thought of themselves as normal and the uncut guys as repulsive (although I never witnessed any uncut guys being teased or bullied).

As I quickly become a social outcast I never realized that most Americans consider foreskins to be dirty, ugly and repulsive until much later in life, and still it boggles my mind to know that the practice of routine infant circumcision has become so ingrained that new parents feel compelled to have their sons' genitals surgically modified so they won't be bullied for NOT having had their genitals surgically modified.

Circumcision made no sense to me when I was a six-year-old and it makes no sense to me as a sixty-year-old.



Sirkmail
Emu Egg
Emu Egg

Joined: 16 Nov 2015
Age: 61
Gender: Male
Posts: 2

04 Jun 2017, 12:01 am

QuillAlba wrote:
When american male children are circumcised at the hospital, is it a free service?

Hmmm...I wonder why the doctors do it.



Having worked at a health insurer and a hospital billing office I can assure you that circumcision is most definitely NOT a free service. Hospitals can charge anywhere between $500 and $3000 (and up), and that does not include physicians' fees. If a hospital charging $2,000 for a circumcision delivers 4,000 babies a year then 2,000 will be males, and if the circumcision rate is 80% then 1,600 will be performed, and if 1,600 circumcisions are performed then the hospital will make $3.2 million annually.

My father was an executive in the medical field; his boss was a distinguished physician who had four sons, none of whom were circumcised because he believed it was just a racket to line doctors' pockets.



JoeNavy
Tufted Titmouse
Tufted Titmouse

User avatar

Joined: 1 Apr 2017
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 34

04 Jun 2017, 7:47 am

Sweetleaf wrote:
The_Face_of_Boo wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
The_Face_of_Boo wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
The_Face_of_Boo wrote:
ltcvnzl wrote:
I think we can't ignore that there is much more emphasize in woman's beauty than male beauty.



This is all a myth that many of you women always love to repeat. I don't buy any of it.

When for example 90% of women refuse to date men shorter than them or when the vast majority state strong preference for taller/bigger, isn't that a super strong emphasis in men's beauty imposed on men by women? It's imposed by real women , you can see them on dating sites, and not by some fashion industry like how Wolf explained about the mythical female beauty that doesn't reflect real straight men's preferences in reality.



Can you site an actual study that proves 90% of women on earth would refuse to date men shorter than them? A majority do have a preference for males taller than themselves but I say it is false claim that 90% of them would see it as a deal-breaker.

A majority of males have a preference for women shorter than them, does that mean 90% of them would refuse to date a taller woman?


I have cited researches before showing that males do not care if women taller than them - and if anything, males don't try with taller women because we know that they will reject us, this preference is on the women side.

When it comes to height pickiness, it is your gender, not ours; 90% of people of your gender. Just accept it and stop arguing this every time, it has been proven so many times in so many studies and so many males here and on boards stated they won't mind dating taller women.

"One 2008 study of college students found that about 50 percent of guys wanted their partners to be shorter than them, while 90 percent of women wanted their partners to be taller than them"

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/do ... 1&type=pdf

"Nearly half of men indicated their tallest acceptable date could
be taller than them (24%) or their height (23%), while only half (53%) required that their
partner be shorter than them. For women, the vast majority indicated that the shortest per-
son they would date would still be taller than them (89%)
, with only a small minority being
willing to accept a mate who was their height (7%) or shorter (4%)."


It hasn't been proven once that 90% of the worlds females will flat out refuse to date males shorter than them. Now I could buy that most women have a preference for guys taller than them, but NOT that 90% will flat out refuse to date any guy shorter than them.

Also 2008 was a long time ago so trends could be different now, and they surveyed one small, specific demographic, they'd need a much larger sample size for more accurate and general results.

Do you understand how statistics work?...Or do you think regardless of the sample size results of statistical surveys can be applied to vast demographics like the entire male or female gender.


Why don't you go teach the researchers how to do stats? You sound more expert than them.


Because they already know how to do it...its the general public that needs more educating about it for the most part. I learned about taking statistics in college, but I am sure the info is out there on the internet or in books anyone could view.

90% of women at one college, isn't the same as 90% of women in general for instance.


Sorry to interject. Statistics actually uses methods for comparison based upon both samples and populations. While the equations are similar, they are not identical. Additionally, if a person were to use a specific part of the population they cannot extrapolate to the general population because there are too many variables. Girls at one specific college will only give you information about the girls at that specific college; regional, educational and age variances will skew the data to that specific subset. A sampling of college girls around the country will allow for college girls only as there will be differences based on socioeconomic and educational status. The smaller and more specific the sample, the less useful it actually is for measuring against the population because of differences that cannot be quantified. In statistics it is actually a comparison of t scores and z scores. Also the smaller the sample size, requires a much greater error range. There is likely some technical jargon that I missed, if so, sorry about that. Have a great day.


_________________
Your neurodiverse (Aspie) score: 153 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 60 of 200
You are very likely neurodiverse (Aspie)


JoeNavy
Tufted Titmouse
Tufted Titmouse

User avatar

Joined: 1 Apr 2017
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 34

04 Jun 2017, 8:40 am

Almost forgot what I originally wanted to say. I would personally think that the height of the person choosing is also a factor.
Example: I am slightly taller than the average male in the United States based on historical and current medical data. I dated females that ranged in height from 4' 11" to 6' 2" (approximately 150-188cm) I had no preference in height. I have had conversations with dozens of women about height as a factor in their choosing a partner and discovered a part of why it could be a greater factor for a woman. While I am not attempting a generalization, I feel that many women choose men taller than themselves for different reasons based upon their own height. One of the ladies that I dated when I was younger was 4 inches taller than me and her greatest fear when dating a guy shorter than her was that it would emphasize her height in a detrimental way. The only way she could date shorter men was for the long term where she would be essentially removing herself from the market. Unfortunately for our relationship, which she actually had expected to last because of our longstanding friendship, I missed several cues from her that she wanted to move forward with our relation much faster than I would have expected. She broke up with me in frustration and told me why months later when we were both hanging out with my long-term slightly crazy ex. Crazy may seem a bit harsh. Perhaps neurotic is more appropriate. My lovely wife is barely 5' 2" (158cm) and she would never date anyone shorter than her because a larger, gentle man makes her feel safe. Plus she stated that many shorter men tend to try to overcompensate for their height with aggressive behavior which is a major turnoff for her.
In another post I mentioned having the dad bod. I think that with age and/or maturity, women will give a guy some leeway when it comes to his shape. I went from a lean, hard 151 lb. athlete in my youth; to a bulky powerful 216 lb. workhorse by the time I retired from the Navy; to a big, round 260+ lb. Chairborne Ranger as my years of intense activity and hard work are catching up to me and limiting what the doctors will allow me to do. I think that the male body stereotypes are really unfounded as in real life, a man's form will eventually fit his function, unless it breaks of course.


_________________
Your neurodiverse (Aspie) score: 153 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 60 of 200
You are very likely neurodiverse (Aspie)


Empathy
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Aug 2015
Age: 29
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,418
Location: Sovereign Nation & Commonwealth

10 Jun 2017, 5:51 pm

JoeNavy wrote:
Almost forgot what I originally wanted to say. I would personally think that the height of the person choosing is also a factor.
Example: I am slightly taller than the average male in the United States based on historical and current medical data. I dated females that ranged in height from 4' 11" to 6' 2" (approximately 150-188cm) I had no preference in height. I have had conversations with dozens of women about height as a factor in their choosing a partner and discovered a part of why it could be a greater factor for a woman. While I am not attempting a generalization, I feel that many women choose men taller than themselves for different reasons based upon their own height. One of the ladies that I dated when I was younger was 4 inches taller than me and her greatest fear when dating a guy shorter than her was that it would emphasize her height in a detrimental way. The only way she could date shorter men was for the long term where she would be essentially removing herself from the market. I went from a lean, hard 151 lb. athlete in my youth; to a bulky powerful 216 lb. workhorse by the time I retired from the Navy; to a big, round 260+ lb. I think that the male body stereotypes are really unfounded as in real life, a man's form will eventually fit his function, unless it breaks of course.


Well, I'm certainly not removing myself from the market any time soon.
I too wonder if factor of height is something men in arms worry about. I'm currently interested in a guy from the merchant navy, and I have no idea what he's like in real life, he's currently a second officer studying for his final exams and has to undergo tests.
The other night, he was on anchor watch, and it sounded pretty boring.. i kind of kept the convo schmoozing along a bit.. he's also someone I briefly knew from last time I checked him out, and we got on well then.. only he had to leave.
I sense that he hates doing this, but in his profile he says hes a machonist, sounds right up my street..I'm also decidedly attracted to the guy and he doesn't have a clue i dont think. Yet I find his jokes funny and he doesn't think he is. He has declared he wants to find a girlfriend, pretty ironic considering his job to be, right?
There are risks involved and I feel I've already jumped off the deep end.. there's a slow irony to this which I'm beginning to work out and panic about.. could be hormones. Romance is never dead, I'm just tryin to keep it alive.. now I'm wallowing in my sea bed.
Plus, I've just looked at a close up of his pic, and I've just noticed a pair of nautical sea green eyes staring back at me!