Do looks make a big difference for us?

Post Reply New Topic

Being the weird guy here will make you invisible because we're all weird

So I am an attractive Aspie. I'm tall, slim, well-proportioned and pretty, good skin/hair/teeth (and genetics). When I was in my teens and early 20s, I was approached by a few modelling scouts but when I tried to pursue that, I wasn't able to photograph well (awkwardness and stuck inside my head) and my social anxiety held me back.

I did however make friends easily because people wouldn't mind the fact that I was shy and reserved, they just liked having a "hot girl" around to add to their own popularity. Also I think there's a bit of an advantageous stereotype about quirky, shy and/or reserved girls who are smart and really attractive. Like in the Taylor Swift music video for "You Belong With Me" ...lol, or The Princess Diaries or whatever movie that is, where the nerdy girl with glasses gets made over and stuns people.

Because of this, I learned a lot more social skills and basic life skills - other girls would do my makeup and hair and teach me how to dress, or where to look for ideas on how to be more attractive and sociable. People would invite me to parties and gatherings just because I was attractive and different. Though I did often get teased playfully for my quirks, it did give me a lot more confidence in myself, not just thinking "I'm a failure" but just like "I'm a bit different but a cool kind of different" - and it wasn't until my mid 20s that a string of social failures made it too difficult to ignore that my "differences" were also hinderances.

So I think I am definitely an outlier in some regards - I can charm/entertain people, I have good manners and hygiene from a strict upbringing, and I know how to dress well and do makeup. I play on these things now as an adult in order to pass as NT. But people who get to know me do see me for who I am, and the autistic traits I have do play a marked role in my life

In terms of men, I had to learn how to pick the ones that were more decent from the ones who were just playing me around and trying to get in my pants. This took a lot of failure and I didn't really have my first relationship until I was 21 (though I'd been trying since I was 14). So long as you pick a decent guy, there are plenty who will proceed with dating and commitment because of the unique traits that an Aspie can bring to the table. But the world is also full of short-sighted or narrow-minded people, or people who either intentionally or unintentionally stigmatise differences. Then again, some people embrace and seek out "different" because sometimes different is successful and refreshing.

These days I am pretty good at screening people early on to get an idea of their views and ethics. I'm also pretty good at getting men to fall for me once I find one that I want to pursue something with...I think by virtue of being honest and relatively innocent, having a strong moral code and excessive empathy/sensitivity, for some men it triggers their protective instincts? And those things for me are also Aspie traits that can get me into trouble or see me being manipulated by the wrong people.

Last part of my ramble, it helps that I am intelligent and have actively sought to improve my understanding of others. I'll never be NT, but I do read psychology articles regularly and research neuroscience and various mental disorders in my spare time. I think it helps me to understand and identify certain things about how others work and what they may be thinking/feeling. My communication skills could use some improvement, but overall I manage to compensate for my Aspie traits (though it is really hard work at times)

Not to mention that your view of their attractiveness is psychologically tied to their interest in you (meaning if they are talking to you, then you're naturally going to see them as more attractive).

Add in that 'attractiveness' varies by culture, and even in a culture varies by the individual, and even the individual isn't sure how attractive someone is without input from outside sources, and the entire experiment of trying to judge someone's attractiveness is as solid as buying a lotto ticket and expecting to win the jackpot.

Pics or it’s not true.

<—PM. *wink*

Haha, I wouldn't do that because some people can get a bit mean and find reasons to cut you down or pick at flaws

I was out with my Aspie friend tonight who has a tendency to do this, and on our way to a NYE party he goes "Your face is not that bad" and I'm like ???? "Are you saying my face is good or my face is not bad?" and he's like "Your face is really good"... He does try to cut me down to size, and sometimes points out flaws and says like "Some people might not like this/that about you"

But then on our way home: "This guy's staring at you. That guys staring at you. Why are they staring at you? It's making me angry"
I'm like "Yeah, I know. I can see it out of the corner of my eye"
"How does it make you feel getting stared at all the time?"
I'm like, ohhhh nope. I'm not talking about this. I've made that mistake once already today

My wife pointed out that I was more attractive that I valued myself. She wished she could have been more attractive to match me. Its not just guys that are attracted to an hourglass shape.

I think that being able to know and ignore unwritten social rules is an Aspie trait. And it is related to our difficulties in socializing. Weirdly enough, Apies often have trouble ignoring written rules that NTs have no trouble ignoring. My driving has gotten a lot better since I've made these realizations.

Interestingly, I think being Aspie can actually delude/prevent some people from realising how others see them in terms of physical attractiveness. I've actually met two Aspie guys who think they're much less attractive than they are (although my opinion on that may be skewed, as I tend to develop attraction based on emotional bonding rather than physical features)

Not true, while there may be some cultural variances, there’s an innate instinct in perceiving what’s attractive and what’s not.

For example obesity is seen as unattractive in almost all cultures of the world; it doesn’t matter if there’s a remote primitive tribe that finds it attractive - fact is most of the world finds obesity unattractive, same when it comes to height of men.

And yet in medieval Europe obesity was the ultimate sign of attractiveness among most nations...so much for some remote primitive tribe. Also Mona Lisa was considered very attractive for her time, today not so much. This argument also fails to take into account that throughout most of evolutionary history animals haven't taken physical attractiveness into account, they've mated predominately by locality followed by ease of access. The problem with elimination in an argument isn't that it doesn't take the whole picture into account, it's that many times one eliminates so much they don't even know what the picture they're arguing even looks like since they've framed it so small they've cut out 90% of the painting itself.

All your post is wrong, all of it.

it’s a myth that obese women were the ideal beauty in the past covilizations, just check the statues of beauty goddesses in ancient Greece, Rome, and Middle East.

This post explains best this myth:

https://www.reddit.com/r/fatlogic/comme ... ttractive/

^ the reddit guy’s argument was strong because he provided visual evidences, why do you want to be blind by believing a fake history(faked by an agenda) and bury your head in sand instead?

Check all paints and arts from ancient green, all women despicted were NOT obese.

ALL women in anicent Egypt arts were NOT obese.

Women in ancient Chinese paints were NOT obese.

Most women in Medieval paints were NOT obese.

These arts and statues are real reflections of these ancient civilizations.

Both books include pictures as well since that's your standard.
And you're creating a strawman since I never argued those representations didn't exist. They certainly do, but you can't deny there were fat women depicted in art either, well you could, but you'd have to deny every fertility goddess and claim Peter Paul Rubens never existed. 2nd, the ancients rarely depicted women outside of fertility gods, most representations were actually male, it's ~5 to 1 in ancient Greece. Also of note, your 'sexuality is purely biology' argument completely glosses over those cultural aesthetics and changes in them over time. Example: look at the few ancient Greek statues left and notice the male's penis is actually very small. That's because aesthetically the Greeks viewed a small penis as preferential to a large one. They also have larger shoulders/chest and smaller quad muscles than normal if we're looking at proportions, they also had rounder faces than the pronounced jawlines of today. Those were what were aesthetically pleasing to the Greeks, that's sexually what they wanted in males, and it has nothing to do with biology but their culture. As for bias of the two works I presented you, sure there's bias because there's bias in everything, but those two works have a hell of lot less bias than you're going to find on a reddit post with no peer review, editing, and to be honest logic.