rabbittss
Phoenix
Joined: Dec 30, 2011
Posts: 1348
|
 Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 8:11 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| DW_a_mom wrote: |
Actually, the question is a fail. By and large, although exceptions may exist, women do not pick men based on physical features.
|
Sorry, but pull the other one, it's got bells on. |
|
| Back to top |
|
DogsWithoutHorses
mockingbyrd
Joined: Apr 06, 2012
Posts: 1145
Location: New York
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 8:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I would date a shorter guy if my height didn't bug him. It's been my experience that a portion of shorter guys feel emasculated or something and start throwing little digs at my appearance and getting annoyed when I wear heels. And that attitude is not cute.
I'm just shy of 6' which makes it a little challenging to date guys much taller than me (also to buy jeans)
Though my current S.O. is around 6'5" (we promise not to destroy Tokyo)
Good hands, broad shoulders, kind face, and good hygiene are all preferable.
I'm usually not very attracted to someone physically until I know them personally. I can look at a hot guy (let's say a Michael Fassbender or an Alexander Skarsgard) and see that they're hot, but I don't have the physical reaction to seeing them that I would at seeing a crush or S.O.
_________________
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. |
|
| Back to top |
|
DogsWithoutHorses
mockingbyrd
Joined: Apr 06, 2012
Posts: 1145
Location: New York
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 8:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| DW_a_mom wrote: | | The_Face_of_Boo wrote: | | blue_bean wrote: | Attractive: Facial hair (purely preferential), smarts, inner-strength, good principles and morals, stable.
Unattractive: Tattoos (I could date someone with them but I'm repelled by guys that flaunt them like they've got nothing else), materiality, smaller waists than me, pretentiousness, ego's, emotional fragility/weakness. |
All in bold are not physical features.
Fail.
You'll be thrown to the crocodiles. |
Actually, the question is a fail. By and large, although exceptions may exist, women do not pick men based on physical features.
Not the ones a guy is born with, anyway. Things like haircuts and clothing choices enter the picture because they tell you something about who the guy is, and who he is, inside, is THE most important feature. |
You can't make a generalization about a whole gender and be correct. People just aren't standardized that way.
If you personally don't put much stock in physical appearance that's fine, express your personal opinion, but you don't get to speak for all women.
_________________
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. |
|
| Back to top |
|
DW_a_mom
Ignoring the To-Do List
Joined: Feb 23, 2008
Posts: 9299
Location: Northern California
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 8:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| DogsWithoutHorses wrote: |
If you personally don't put much stock in physical appearance that's fine, express your personal opinion, but you don't get to speak for all women. |
And didn't I already put that qualifier in there? I did not say ALL.
But given that I've known at least a few thousand women over my lifetime and had just as many conversations with other women about men, I do think I've got a pretty idea as to what MOST think.
Just read this thread: most of the comments are NOT about innate physical features, and you will note I ALSO limited my comment to the types of things men are BORN with, because I know that MOST women, as far as I can tell, DO care about things like grooming.
Also ... I chose the words "do not pick by" on purpose, because it isn't like most women don't notice physical features or have some preferences, but I think it is important for the men who read this thread to understand the difference: most women don't PICK based on those; it is the other stuff that is USUALLY the deal maker or breaker.
_________________
Mom to an amazing AS boy (plus a non-AS daughter). Have at least a few AS genes myself, although probably more NT than AS.
---
Think of the greening of my name as an emeritus thing; I used to be a moderator but am retired and have no authority to act
Last edited by DW_a_mom on Wed Apr 25, 2012 10:38 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
DogsWithoutHorses
mockingbyrd
Joined: Apr 06, 2012
Posts: 1145
Location: New York
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 8:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| DW_a_mom wrote: | | DogsWithoutHorses wrote: |
If you personally don't put much stock in physical appearance that's fine, express your personal opinion, but you don't get to speak for all women. |
And didn't I already put that qualifier in there? I did not say ALL.
But given that I've known at least a thousand women over my lifetime and had just as many conversations with other women about men, I do think I've got a pretty idea as to what MOST think.
Just read this thread: most of the comments are NOT about innate physical features, and you will note I ALSO limited my comment to the types of things men are BORN with, because I know that MOST women, as far as I can tell, DO care about things like grooming.
Also ... I chose the words "do not pick by" on purpose, because it isn't like most women don't notice physical features or have some preferences, but I think it is important for the men who read this thread to understand the difference: most women don't PICK based on those; it is the other stuff that is USUALLY the deal maker or breaker. |
1000 is nowhere near most of the 3635000000 women there are in the world. You don't get to speak for all, most, or even many, just you.
Look at the thread about female appearance there are a lot of non-physical things mentioned there too. People like all kinds of things about their partners, if anyone was really exclusively interested in looks they'd get a real doll and be done with it.
Don't get all defensive and start riding the caps lock because I pointed out you overstepped. I'm not attacking you personally, I'm trying to be helpful so you don't make assertions that are impossible to back up or just aren't true.
If you replace "most women" with "me" or even "many women I know seem too" you would be more right.
_________________
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. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Bun
Bunnymen
Joined: Jan 09, 2012
Posts: 3250
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 8:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ^ *applause* |
|
| Back to top |
|
DW_a_mom
Ignoring the To-Do List
Joined: Feb 23, 2008
Posts: 9299
Location: Northern California
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 9:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| DogsWithoutHorses wrote: | | DW_a_mom wrote: | | DogsWithoutHorses wrote: |
If you personally don't put much stock in physical appearance that's fine, express your personal opinion, but you don't get to speak for all women. |
And didn't I already put that qualifier in there? I did not say ALL.
But given that I've known at least a few thousand women over my lifetime and had just as many conversations with other women about men, I do think I've got a pretty idea as to what MOST think.
Just read this thread: most of the comments are NOT about innate physical features, and you will note I ALSO limited my comment to the types of things men are BORN with, because I know that MOST women, as far as I can tell, DO care about things like grooming.
Also ... I chose the words "do not pick by" on purpose, because it isn't like most women don't notice physical features or have some preferences, but I think it is important for the men who read this thread to understand the difference: most women don't PICK based on those; it is the other stuff that is USUALLY the deal maker or breaker. |
1000 is nowhere near most of the 3635000000 women there are in the world. You don't get to speak for all, most, or even many, just you.
Look at the thread about female appearance there are a lot of non-physical things mentioned there too. People like all kinds of things about their partners, if anyone was really exclusively interested in looks they'd get a real doll and be done with it.
Don't get all defensive and start riding the caps lock because I pointed out you overstepped. I'm not attacking you personally, I'm trying to be helpful so you don't make assertions that are impossible to back up or just aren't true.
If you replace "most women" with "me" or even "many women I know seem too" you would be more right. |
And you are forgetting the context in which I originally posted: to someone being snarky and who probably started this thread for dubious reasons.
But, honestly, I'm puzzled. I've never seen a woman defend so strongly what I've always seen as a male myth that most women are superficial in selecting who to date. And I don't think most women are that superficial. I'll stand by it. You are correcting me for claiming that most women aren't so superficial as to place huge amounts of significance on innate physical appearance in choosing who to date, which means you take issue with the concept ... and I don't get it.
Still ....
Here is my edit to the first post, and I've already made it: "In my experience ...."
(ps - I had meant to say a "few" thousand, which is actually a statistically relevant sample, although it will skew due to my age and social circles.)
_________________
Mom to an amazing AS boy (plus a non-AS daughter). Have at least a few AS genes myself, although probably more NT than AS.
---
Think of the greening of my name as an emeritus thing; I used to be a moderator but am retired and have no authority to act
Last edited by DW_a_mom on Wed Apr 25, 2012 10:40 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
nebrets
Velociraptor
Joined: Feb 27, 2012
Posts: 456
Location: Orion–Cygnus Arm of the Milky Way galaxy.
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 10:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ZX_SpectrumDisorder wrote: | | Girls, could you go out with a guy shorter than you? |
So long as it is not too much shorter, as I am already on the short side. So a qualified yes.
_________________
__ /(. . ) |
|
| Back to top |
|
nebrets
Velociraptor
Joined: Feb 27, 2012
Posts: 456
Location: Orion–Cygnus Arm of the Milky Way galaxy.
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 10:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| HisDivineMajesty wrote: | Unfortunately, I seem to meet more negative criteria than positive ones.  |
Well the good news is that the most frequently cited things are things you can do/change even if they are difficult. Bathe daily and hit the gym (or other diet and or exercise activity) often enough to not be fat, but not so often that you are have the excessive muscle bulk/definition of a body builder on steroids. Most of the other physical stuff seems to vary from person to person.
Side note: The_Face_of_Boo, do you actually raise crocodiles? If so that is cool.
_________________
__ /(. . ) |
|
| Back to top |
|
DogsWithoutHorses
mockingbyrd
Joined: Apr 06, 2012
Posts: 1145
Location: New York
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 11:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| DW_a_mom wrote: | | DogsWithoutHorses wrote: | | DW_a_mom wrote: | | DogsWithoutHorses wrote: |
If you personally don't put much stock in physical appearance that's fine, express your personal opinion, but you don't get to speak for all women. |
And didn't I already put that qualifier in there? I did not say ALL.
But given that I've known at least a few thousand women over my lifetime and had just as many conversations with other women about men, I do think I've got a pretty idea as to what MOST think.
Just read this thread: most of the comments are NOT about innate physical features, and you will note I ALSO limited my comment to the types of things men are BORN with, because I know that MOST women, as far as I can tell, DO care about things like grooming.
Also ... I chose the words "do not pick by" on purpose, because it isn't like most women don't notice physical features or have some preferences, but I think it is important for the men who read this thread to understand the difference: most women don't PICK based on those; it is the other stuff that is USUALLY the deal maker or breaker. |
1000 is nowhere near most of the 3635000000 women there are in the world. You don't get to speak for all, most, or even many, just you.
Look at the thread about female appearance there are a lot of non-physical things mentioned there too. People like all kinds of things about their partners, if anyone was really exclusively interested in looks they'd get a real doll and be done with it.
Don't get all defensive and start riding the caps lock because I pointed out you overstepped. I'm not attacking you personally, I'm trying to be helpful so you don't make assertions that are impossible to back up or just aren't true.
If you replace "most women" with "me" or even "many women I know seem too" you would be more right. |
And you are forgetting the context in which I originally posted: to someone being snarky and who probably started this thread for dubious reasons.
But, honestly, I'm puzzled. I've never seen a woman defend so strongly what I've always seen as a male myth that most women are superficial in selecting who to date. And I don't think most women are that superficial. I'll stand by it. You are correcting me for claiming that most women aren't so superficial as to place huge amounts of significance on innate physical appearance in choosing who to date, which means you take issue with the concept ... and I don't get it.
Still ....
Here is my edit to the first post, and I've already made it: "In my experience ...."
(ps - I had meant to say a "few" thousand, which is actually a statistically relevant sample, although it will skew due to my age and social circles.) |
I did see that you were responding to snark, but for the standards of that poster it was relatively harmless and goofy. I suspect he started this thread to undercut criticism of the female thread but since the mods seem to be cool with both of them I'm not going to get into that argument with the originator of either thread.
I see it as more misogynistic to deny women their individuality and speak of them in group terms.
Not to mention that the idea that women aren't interested in aesthetics is a defense MRA's use when they try to claim that men are only attracted to hot women and hot women should be content with someone who is nice enough regardless of what they look like. It's the line of thinking that women shouldn't be just as interested in looks as men are that leads to women who express their standards or reject men they find physically unattractive (well within their rights) to being labeled superficial. Some people care about looks, physical attraction can be important to sexual relationships regardless of gender.
Don't put words in my mouth I'm correcting you for making a claim that *most* women are *anything* based on only your personal experience. That kind of statement is inherently false no matter what you are asserting.
I comment any time I see these kinds of generalizations (likely to the annoyance of many regular posters here), so again it's not about you or what you said, it's how you said it.
I appreciate that you made an edit.
_________________
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. |
|
| Back to top |
|
hyperlexian
loves the man who typed too much and ran outta spa
Joined: Jul 22, 2010
Age: 41
Posts: 21969
Location: with bucephalus
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 11:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bumble wrote: | Don't really rate attractiveness on physical features
When I read a book I am more interested in the content than the cover....
Substance! |
^^^this.
_________________
on a break, so if you need assistance please contact another moderator from this list:
http://www.wrongplanet.net/postp5043493.html#5043493 |
|
| Back to top |
|
Bloom
Deinonychus
Joined: Mar 16, 2012
Posts: 332
Location: On the OTHER Wrong Planet. The nicer one...
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 11:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hmmm! Interesting topic! I like that it does not say "What features are REQUIRED or DEAL BREAKERS for dating." So I'll play! 
I find these features (most) attractive:
Swimmers build. Too much bulk is just scary... though I have recently found a couple of muscly guys physically appealing for some reason.
I find I have little preference for eye colour, though contrasting, deep eyes are very appealing. Dark colours, for instance.
Taller than I is a preference, for sure. I'm 180cm, so it's pretty hard to find taller men.
Soft lips!
Working hands >.>
Facial hair!
Body hair!
mmm.... body hair... Actually, nothing is more attractive than chest hair
Foreskin.
I'll not mention unattractive. I find most "unattractive" things can be overcome. I will say that foul odors, tastes, sounds, and verbiage will always be a dealbreaker, sadly. Of course, most of that can be fixed... But I hate the idea of "fixing" someone if they don't think they need to be fixeded!
Of course, I was ONCE caught putting Rogaine on my guys chest while he was sleeping....
ONCE!
I Swear... |
|
| Back to top |
|
hyperlexian
loves the man who typed too much and ran outta spa
Joined: Jul 22, 2010
Age: 41
Posts: 21969
Location: with bucephalus
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 11:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| rabbittss wrote: | | DW_a_mom wrote: |
Actually, the question is a fail. By and large, although exceptions may exist, women do not pick men based on physical features.
|
Sorry, but pull the other one, it's got bells on. |
that's what studies demonstrate, but it's not universal among all women.
_________________
on a break, so if you need assistance please contact another moderator from this list:
http://www.wrongplanet.net/postp5043493.html#5043493 |
|
| Back to top |
|
hyperlexian
loves the man who typed too much and ran outta spa
Joined: Jul 22, 2010
Age: 41
Posts: 21969
Location: with bucephalus
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 26, 2012 12:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
i don't really think most people of either gender PICK people based on physical appearance, in the sense that they will only date people with certain exact characteristics each and every time. i know that such people do exist, but it doesn't seem to be the majority. i think there are general "types" that a person may gravitate towards but it is rarely cut and dried.
EDIT: i moved the off-topic photo discussion to one of the picture threads:
http://www.wrongplanet.net/postt1097.html
_________________
on a break, so if you need assistance please contact another moderator from this list:
http://www.wrongplanet.net/postp5043493.html#5043493 |
|
| Back to top |
|
ZX_SpectrumDisorder
Phoenix
Joined: Feb 25, 2012
Posts: 1608
Location: Ireland
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 26, 2012 5:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
Speaking for myself, appearance is a factor, but it's a part of the attraction required to make me pursue another as a romantic partner.
I've been out with girls that I considered very physically attractive, but the substance just wasn't there, so I ended the relationship. Unfortunately, I've known girls I haven't been physically attracted to, but have the other qualities and they've been friend-zoned. I don't think I'm alone in that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
