The problem with letting a woman know you care about looks

Page 9 of 17 [ 257 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 ... 17  Next

MONKEY
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Jan 2009
Age: 32
Gender: Female
Posts: 9,896
Location: Stoke, England (sometimes :P)

31 May 2012, 4:47 pm

Men can have preferences too you know!

Women are so sensitive. :P


_________________
What film do atheists watch on Christmas?
Coincidence on 34th street.


Adam82
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 29 Jun 2010
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 615

31 May 2012, 5:17 pm

Kurgan wrote:
If a man isn't attracted to someone, he's shallow. If a woman isn't attracted to someone, it's "lack of chemistry".


:cheers: :thumright:



Adam82
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 29 Jun 2010
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 615

31 May 2012, 5:19 pm

I'm not shallow. I value a good personality. However, I feel affronted when people tell me I should drop my standards, because I'm hardly ugly. Why should I settle when I'm not fat and ugly myself?



Adam82
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 29 Jun 2010
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 615

31 May 2012, 5:22 pm

The Omega Man, yep that's me, alright. The last one standing. The one who they literally wouldn't notice if I was the last man on Earth.



ValentineWiggin
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 May 2011
Age: 37
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,907
Location: Beneath my cat's paw

31 May 2012, 6:17 pm

Adam82 wrote:
I'm not shallow. I value a good personality. However, I feel affronted when people tell me I should drop my standards, because I'm hardly ugly. Why should I settle when I'm not fat and ugly myself?


You've a right to date whoever you choose, so it's not really an issue of "should".
I think it's more that some have a hard time keeping a straight face around complaints from people who could have dates or relationships,
but choose not to because of said standards. :D


_________________
"Such is the Frailty
of the human Heart, that very few Men, who have no Property, have any Judgment of their own.
They talk and vote as they are directed by Some Man of Property, who has attached their Minds
to his Interest."


Kurgan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Apr 2012
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,132
Location: Scandinavia

31 May 2012, 6:33 pm

ValentineWiggin wrote:
Adam82 wrote:
I'm not shallow. I value a good personality. However, I feel affronted when people tell me I should drop my standards, because I'm hardly ugly. Why should I settle when I'm not fat and ugly myself?


You've a right to date whoever you choose, so it's not really an issue of "should".
I think it's more that some have a hard time keeping a straight face around complaints from people who could have dates or relationships,
but choose not to because of said standards. :D


Getting a relationship just to get a relationship isn't a big deal. If a man with impaired social skills want someone who's otherwise on his level, getting a relationship that actually lasts can be tricky, though.



DogsWithoutHorses
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2012
Age: 32
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,146
Location: New York

31 May 2012, 6:40 pm

@MXH
this isn't a productive conversation, I'm not going to engage with someone who refuses to have a respectful discussion
have a nice day

@MONKEY, you realize other male posters are trying really hard to prove there isn't sexism here, stop making their job harder with this nonsense

@Adam82, if you're such a catch, you'll get caught, don't worry so much about it or be down on yourself (omega man? what?)
You should have standards of course, but maybe you should move towards them being "a woman I find beautiful" instead of a detailed list of exacting qualifications. Like I usually like blond guys, but sometimes a brunette guy is attractive to me, going after him wouldn't be abandoning my standards. Or when I'm seeing girls, I usually like a curvy body type, but sometimes I see a more boyish figure that I find attractive on that person even though it's not usually my thing. If I was super vocal or belligerent about my "standards" I could lose my chance with other kinds of people who might surprise me.
One of the benefits of being the "pursuer" is you get to chose who you pursue. Women/other who are passive have to pick from what is offered to them.

@Kurgan, I don't understand your difficulty with the concept of chemistry. Have you never had a platonic friend who though attractive you had no feelings for? Or kissed someone and not felt anything?
I've had male friends who thought I was attractive (as evidenced by their testimony and penchant for dating girls who could be my body double) didn't want to date me because they didn't feel a romantic spark.
Women who want muscles or height are derided as being shallow too.


_________________
If your success is defined as being well adjusted to injustice and well adapted to indifference, then we don?t want successful leaders. We want great leaders- who are unbought, unbound, unafraid, and unintimidated to tell the truth.


Kurgan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Apr 2012
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,132
Location: Scandinavia

31 May 2012, 6:51 pm

DogsWithoutHorses wrote:
@Kurgan, I don't understand your difficulty with the concept of chemistry. Have you never had a platonic friend who though attractive you had no feelings for? Or kissed someone and not felt anything?


I've kissed a girl who wasn't attractive to me, thereby feeling nothing for her. The attractive female friends I have, I've known since childhood. My instincts prevent me from desiring a relationship with them, as it would feel incestous. 15 years ago, how often did you hear about "chemistry" in terms of dating?

Quote:
I've had male friends who thought I was attractive (as evidenced by their testimony and penchant for dating girls who could be my body double) didn't want to date me because they didn't feel a romantic spark.
Women who want muscles or height are derided as being shallow too.


I can't offer much in terms of height, but I pack a good dose more worth of muscle than the average man. I actually wish girls cared more about muscle and less about confidence. Todays ideal man packs less muscle than yesterdays ideal man.

Another comment to your post:

A woman can choose to take the active role if she wants to, but as a woman usually gets plenty of offers, she doesn't have to take this role.



ValentineWiggin
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 May 2011
Age: 37
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,907
Location: Beneath my cat's paw

31 May 2012, 6:58 pm

For me, it's alienating. I've nearly sabotaged several early romantic relationships for not responding in kind to some sort of admiration of my appearance, which is apparently an NT way of communicating mutual interest, and to me, translated, computes as "I notice XYZ physical arrangement of yours is in keeping with my personal pre-conception of desirability as compared to similar body parts among your peers". It's a foreign language to me, and for people who aren't wired to be aesthetically-driven, this disconnect can prove awkward early on, in the approach/flirting/early dating phase.


_________________
"Such is the Frailty
of the human Heart, that very few Men, who have no Property, have any Judgment of their own.
They talk and vote as they are directed by Some Man of Property, who has attached their Minds
to his Interest."


DogsWithoutHorses
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2012
Age: 32
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,146
Location: New York

31 May 2012, 7:12 pm

Kurgan wrote:
DogsWithoutHorses wrote:
@Kurgan, I don't understand your difficulty with the concept of chemistry. Have you never had a platonic friend who though attractive you had no feelings for? Or kissed someone and not felt anything?


I've kissed a girl who wasn't attractive to me, thereby feeling nothing for her. The attractive female friends I have, I've known since childhood. My instincts prevent me from desiring a relationship with them, as it would feel incestous. 15 years ago, how often did you hear about "chemistry" in terms of dating?

Quote:
I've had male friends who thought I was attractive (as evidenced by their testimony and penchant for dating girls who could be my body double) didn't want to date me because they didn't feel a romantic spark.
Women who want muscles or height are derided as being shallow too.


I can't offer much in terms of height, but I pack a good dose more worth of muscle than the average man. I actually wish girls cared more about muscle and less about confidence. Todays ideal man packs less muscle than yesterdays ideal man.


Well neither of us were big players in the dating scene 15 years ago. My dad got married before then though, and he talked to me about finding someone who just "feels right". That sounds to me like a version of the concept. I've totally had make or break kisses before. Sometimes guys I had been crushing on for ages just fell completely flat. So disappointing.
If you know what the first mention of chemistry as a romantic concept is that would be super cool (nerd moment). It would make sense to me that it would be around the same time we figured out chemicals in the brain are responsible for that "in love" high feeling. I just can't find a definitive first mention.

So you don't approve of the criteria you think women use to make their choices?
Or is it just on a personal level and you wish what you feel are your strengths were a "hotter commodity".


_________________
If your success is defined as being well adjusted to injustice and well adapted to indifference, then we don?t want successful leaders. We want great leaders- who are unbought, unbound, unafraid, and unintimidated to tell the truth.


Adam82
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 29 Jun 2010
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 615

31 May 2012, 7:35 pm

DogsWithoutHorses wrote:
One of the benefits of being the "pursuer" is you get to chose who you pursue. Women/other who are passive have to pick from what is offered to them.


Ah, but women are the choosers. They choose the guy they want, and they give him the subtle signals, then he approaches them. If you go pursuing after particular women, when they've given you no such signals, it is usually unproductive and fruitless. Or, as in my case, when you misread their signals as interest, when it's just friendliness. I have trouble reading warm friendliness from a girl, and distinguishing it from romantic interest.

One girl told me she didn't have a bf, and asked me if I was single, which sounded like interest to me. And later, when I asked her out, she said (politely) no. So I really can't tell the difference.



Kurgan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Apr 2012
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,132
Location: Scandinavia

31 May 2012, 7:41 pm

DogsWithoutHorses wrote:
Well neither of us were big players in the dating scene 15 years ago. My dad got married before then though, and he talked to me about finding someone who just "feels right".


Feeling right can mean a lot of things, but commonly stretches further than attraction.

Quote:
That sounds to me like a version of the concept. I've totally had make or break kisses before. Sometimes guys I had been crushing on for ages just fell completely flat. So disappointing.
If you know what the first mention of chemistry as a romantic concept is that would be super cool (nerd moment). It would make sense to me that it would be around the same time we figured out chemicals in the brain are responsible for that "in love" high feeling. I just can't find a definitive first mention.


It seems like it was used in romantic contest for the first time on the POF message boards somewhere around 2004/2005. Before then, it was used to describe how to people got along. Kirsten Dunst for instance said that there were "chemistry" between her and Tobey Maguire during the filming of Spider-Man, but neither had any romantic feelings for each other in real life.

Seems more like you didn't like the way they kissed, though, rather than chemistry having anything to do with it...

Quote:
So you don't approve of the criteria you think women use to make their choices?
Or is it just on a personal level and you wish what you feel are your strengths were a "hotter commodity".


I don't approve of what the media sets as the designated standard for men. Somehow, in 2012, this:

Image

is sexier than this:

Image



mv
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Jun 2010
Age: 57
Gender: Female
Posts: 3,131

31 May 2012, 8:14 pm

ValentineWiggin wrote:
For me, it's alienating. I've nearly sabotaged several early romantic relationships for not responding in kind to some sort of admiration of my appearance, which is apparently an NT way of communicating mutual interest, and to me, translated, computes as "I notice XYZ physical arrangement of yours is in keeping with my personal pre-conception of desirability as compared to similar body parts among your peers". It's a foreign language to me, and for people who aren't wired to be aesthetically-driven, this disconnect can prove awkward early on, in the approach/flirting/early dating phase.


Yes!! ! You might as well say, "that's my favorite color of blue you're wearing." WTF is that supposed to mean, personally, to me?



DogsWithoutHorses
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2012
Age: 32
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,146
Location: New York

31 May 2012, 8:18 pm

Adam82 wrote:
DogsWithoutHorses wrote:
One of the benefits of being the "pursuer" is you get to chose who you pursue. Women/other who are passive have to pick from what is offered to them.


Ah, but women are the choosers. They choose the guy they want, and they give him the subtle signals, then he approaches them. If you go pursuing after particular women, when they've given you no such signals, it is usually unproductive and fruitless. Or, as in my case, when you misread their signals as interest, when it's just friendliness. I have trouble reading warm friendliness from a girl, and distinguishing it from romantic interest.

One girl told me she didn't have a bf, and asked me if I was single, which sounded like interest to me. And later, when I asked her out, she said (politely) no. So I really can't tell the difference.


Um, everybody has a choice to reject relationships with people you don't want.
There are some advantages/disadvantages to both aggressive and passive approaches.


_________________
If your success is defined as being well adjusted to injustice and well adapted to indifference, then we don?t want successful leaders. We want great leaders- who are unbought, unbound, unafraid, and unintimidated to tell the truth.


edgewaters
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Aug 2006
Age: 52
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,427
Location: Ontario

31 May 2012, 9:18 pm

ValentineWiggin wrote:
For me, it's alienating. I've nearly sabotaged several early romantic relationships for not responding in kind to some sort of admiration of my appearance, which is apparently an NT way of communicating mutual interest, and to me, translated, computes as "I notice XYZ physical arrangement of yours is in keeping with my personal pre-conception of desirability as compared to similar body parts among your peers". It's a foreign language to me, and for people who aren't wired to be aesthetically-driven, this disconnect can prove awkward early on, in the approach/flirting/early dating phase.


Oh. See I do this sometimes, because some women are often commenting negatively on their own appearance. If I notice a woman does this I make note of that habit and then drop a compliment here and there in the future, just because I hate to see people beating themselves up. Doesn't necessarily mean anything.



NicoleG
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Dec 2011
Gender: Female
Posts: 667
Location: Texas

01 Jun 2012, 10:29 am

DW_a_mom wrote:
This conversation goes round and round on here, with men stating what they like, how they feel, and women trying to explain why the comments are a turn off. And the guys saying they are just being honest, women do it too, and so on.

I really felt a good example of the reason for the social rule happened on a silly reality TV show this week, of all things.

A man on the bachelorette joked about a woman getting fat after marriage, Emily asked if that meant he'd stop loving her if she got fat, and he tried to split hairs by saying he'd still love her, but not on her.


You are equating men being honest about what they want with a man who made a derogatory joke about someone being fat. Those two are not equal, and it's insulting to the men who are being honest. I personally find such derogatory jokes to be despicable, and it tells quite a lot about the person making such a joke, but to use that as a reason to chastise other men who do not like a certain type of woman and have an opinion regarding it is ludicrous and demeaning.