Looks And Dating

Post Reply New Topic

Bad comparison. If you are only somewhat hungry, you might pass on repulsive food, but if you are starving you won't and if you are not hungry at all then you might pass on most food.

Also, sex is not really like hunger because people can obviously be without sex but not food.



Certainly, but sex in the Western society is highly unlikely to lead to procreation since people use contraceptives unless they actually want to have children. Also, animals don't have sex all the time, rather their sexual activity is constrained to mating seasons and males will only have an urge to have sex with a female if she shows signs of estrus. This has been selected out of humans with concealed estrus, but that doesn't mean that all humans (NTs and NDs) will want to have sexual intercourse with each other at any time.



I don't think that was the claim. Instead, the claim was that if you meet the minimal attractivity level of many people, there is no need to try to achieve higher levels.



This is all NT stuff and nothing that is usable for NDs. NTs pair up with people of similar attractivity because attractivity is important for them, and because NTs have a large number of partners to select among and so they need to narrow down their dating pool, and matching attractivity is one way they can do this. Another way is to match cultural traits & interests. You only see this because NTs have too many potential partners and so need to filter. Back when most people were farmers, or even farther back when they were hunter-gatherers, NTs didn't have these filters because they didn't have a huge pool of potential partners.

NDs cannot afford to have all these filters, and especially not filters that makes no sense. We primarily need filters on neurotype.



Deep emotional connections don't need attractivity, and so attractivity becomes irrelevant in the long run. Actually, for NTs, it's all about status. You get higher status if you can pair up with somebody high on attractivity, but this has no meaning for many NDs.

I think I have lived exactly like I teach in this area. I make sure I don't follow any of the fashion ideals. I have rather long hair when most men my age have short hair. I never liked the music that my peers liked, partly because it was awful and partly because I didn't want to be average and typical. I don't want women to fancy me based on looks, and if somebody did I would just ignore her. It's Ok if a woman likes me based on my accomplishments, but not based on my job or social position and certainly not based on my wage.

I prefer if a woman knows absolutely nothing about my social position, and since the primary point of dating is to talk about that stuff I strongly dislike dating.

This thread in a nutshell:



The elephant is the "importance of looks in dating".

The lady standing there? That's Amity, the elephant is just in front of her and can't even see it.

@The_Face_of_Boo you are right. Earlier in this thread, I probably wasted several paragraphs trying to shed some light on the subject, but people will always prefer fairy tales.

"Looks" can definitely be important.....but it's not an "elephant" type of important.

I think more like a "rhesus monkey" type of important.

I don't know much about rhesus monkey importance, but the point that @Face_of_Boo was trying to make is that, because the importance of looks in dating is so inherently unfair, in our egalitarian society we resort to magical thinking to wish it away, in the process giving heartfelt but useless advice to people whose dating/sex life is nonexistent due to lack of attractiveness.

But I don't feel "lack of attractiveness" is actually at the crux of many "dating problems." I really don't.

I'm not a particularly attractive man. I am short and chubby. Yet I've done all right.

When I was in my 20's, I was what is now called a "neckbeard." I did all right romantically then.

I don't feel that a man having trouble obtaining dates is necessarily "unattractive." I actually believe there's a strong element of "luck" within this sort of thing.

I feel like it would be useful if a person makes sure he/she is properly groomed, wears clean clothes, and always seem like he/she is listening to the other person when the other person is talking to them.

I feel like when men lament their lack of a romantic partner, that women can sense that. There's something about that "sense" that turns off women.

I know....because that happened to me around the age of 21-23. I was desperate for a relationship. I was just boldly rejected by a lover who just wanted me as an "experiment." The women can sense my desperation....and they were turned off, to the point of saying "ewww!" to my face.

Last edited by kraftiekortie on 14 Oct 2019, 11:43 am, edited 2 times in total.

Boo and MaxE
Take from it what you will, ignore the part where I clarified the emphasis on looks at the top of thos page, focus only on the parts that confirm your perspective as you have, that is your choice... it's simply my lived experience with priority given to my limited autistic social energy.

Which btw I at least value too much to waste on the wrong type of people. Then again that comes from lived experience, go ahead make the mistakes I did. Let me know how that works out for you!

I wouldn't be a good fit for dating in cultures that prize looks above all else. Based on the responses here it seems just as important to men as women. I find this obsession repulsive and full of red flags.

^
Amity is spot on at least in one regard - too many people here see this issue exclusively in terms of either looks don't matter at all or they're the only (or main) thing that matters.

Especially after people grow up a little (those who do), things get way, way more complex or end - as once again Amity mentions - in bitter disappointment and potentially very unpleasant learning experiences.

Of course attraction is (usually) necessary to form a couple, but those who look for a long term partner, someone to live with not just genetic material, will take into consideration a number of other factors - or get burned.

Last edited by BenderRodriguez on 14 Oct 2019, 11:47 am, edited 1 time in total.

I haven't read this whole thread, but it seems to be a familiar theme. Correct me if I'm wrong. Is this thread saying that women, by virtue of having vaginas, can date any man they want and that they will, therefore, choose the most attractive among those hoards of potential suitors? Just checking.

Most people are average-looking, and average-looking people tend to get into relationships with other average-looking people.

Unless you're physically deformed, it's not JUST your looks that's holding you back.

The vibe I get from threads like this is you have average-to-below-average looking guys who are upset that they're not considered "hot," and thereby have to exert actual effort to get female attention as opposed to having women just throw themselves at them.

Right. The vagina-bearers can choose anyone they want, because everyone is automatically desirous of their spell. Said women only want the best looking partners and they consider nothing else. Compatibility, common interests, personality, sense of humour, and respect don't enter the equation because they're irrelevant.

Exactly.

And I think looks are important, and can definitely provide more initial opportunities for relationships to develop, but they don't predict how long a relationship will last, or how supportive and rewarding any aforesaid relationship may be.

I've found the people how perpetually bang the, "Looks are the only thing that matters!" drum are mentally stuck in high school.

Actually I don't think so. Seemed to be more about people having more success with people on a similar level of attractiveness.

Don't know I entirely agree with the whole premise because I don't even understand how one is supposed to determine where they are on the attractiveness scale, IDK if me and my boyfriend are at a similar level or if one of is lower down or higher up on the scale. But I would not say the overall theme is 'women have vaginas and can get any guy they want'.