edgewaters
hibernating
Joined: Aug 17, 2006
Age: 40
Posts: 2426
Location: Ontario
|
 Posted: Mon May 07, 2012 12:03 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| rabbittss wrote: | | While I see what you are saying. The fact I asked *Her* out and not her friend, or a girl who looked like her friend, is the missing clue. Once you have that, you can easily gain the rest of the information needed. |
How? It's a single point on a scale. She has no idea where she even is on that scale, except that she's above some certain minimum. There is absolutely no way to even guess where anyone else could possibly place. Perhaps from just general intuition, she could have guessed that her friend occupied a less desirable position, but there's no way to tell whether it met the minimum or not. Theoretically, it would even be possible for her friend to be higher on the scale - it stands to reason that you'd be aiming somewhere around the middle.
Most women don't think in terms of the chunky scale or whatever you want to call what you're operating by. They think more along the lines of personalities that will get along, chemistry, that sort of thing. The concept of some sort of hierarchical scale of partners based on physical attributes is generally alien to them (outside of cardboard representations, i.e. in the real world), and generally its an idea most women would be repulsed by. You've got to appreciate she'd have to assign qualities (that she considers extremely negative) to your personality, to even grasp your scale criteria. Maybe she didn't think of you that way. |
|
| Back to top |
|
DW_a_mom
Ignoring the To-Do List
Joined: Feb 23, 2008
Posts: 9295
Location: Northern California
|
| Posted: Mon May 07, 2012 12:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| edgewaters wrote: |
Most women don't think in terms of the chunky scale or whatever you want to call what you're operating by. They think more along the lines of personalities that will get along, chemistry, that sort of thing. The concept of some sort of hierarchical scale of partners based on physical attributes is generally alien to them (outside of cardboard representations, i.e. in the real world), and generally its an idea most women would be repulsed by. You've got to appreciate she'd have to assign qualities (that she considers extremely negative) to your personality, to even grasp your scale criteria. Maybe she didn't think of you that way. |
Agreed.
_________________
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 |
|
| Back to top |
|
Kurgan
I'm always right
Joined: Apr 07, 2012
Age: 24
Posts: 1681
Location: Norway
|
| Posted: Mon May 07, 2012 5:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
| edgewaters wrote: | | rabbittss wrote: | | While I see what you are saying. The fact I asked *Her* out and not her friend, or a girl who looked like her friend, is the missing clue. Once you have that, you can easily gain the rest of the information needed. |
How? It's a single point on a scale. She has no idea where she even is on that scale, except that she's above some certain minimum. There is absolutely no way to even guess where anyone else could possibly place. Perhaps from just general intuition, she could have guessed that her friend occupied a less desirable position, but there's no way to tell whether it met the minimum or not. Theoretically, it would even be possible for her friend to be higher on the scale - it stands to reason that you'd be aiming somewhere around the middle.
Most women don't think in terms of the chunky scale or whatever you want to call what you're operating by. They think more along the lines of personalities that will get along, chemistry, that sort of thing. The concept of some sort of hierarchical scale of partners based on physical attributes is generally alien to them (outside of cardboard representations, i.e. in the real world), and generally its an idea most women would be repulsed by. You've got to appreciate she'd have to assign qualities (that she considers extremely negative) to your personality, to even grasp your scale criteria. Maybe she didn't think of you that way. |
Many men are repulsed by the chemistry crap as well (you're either attracted to someone or you're not—science of matter has nothing to do with it). |
|
| Back to top |
|
MXH
TomCat
Joined: Jul 29, 2010
Age: 22
Posts: 12465
Location: Here i stand and face the rain
|
| Posted: Mon May 07, 2012 6:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
| DW_a_mom wrote: | | edgewaters wrote: |
Most women don't think in terms of the chunky scale or whatever you want to call what you're operating by. They think more along the lines of personalities that will get along, chemistry, that sort of thing. The concept of some sort of hierarchical scale of partners based on physical attributes is generally alien to them (outside of cardboard representations, i.e. in the real world), and generally its an idea most women would be repulsed by. You've got to appreciate she'd have to assign qualities (that she considers extremely negative) to your personality, to even grasp your scale criteria. Maybe she didn't think of you that way. |
Agreed. |
i think this is incorrect, while personality does play a role I do notice most women start off of physical looks and then hope theres personality behind them |
|
| Back to top |
|
edgewaters
hibernating
Joined: Aug 17, 2006
Age: 40
Posts: 2426
Location: Ontario
|
| Posted: Mon May 07, 2012 6:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Kurgan wrote: | | Many men are repulsed by the chemistry crap as well (you're either attracted to someone or you're not—science of matter has nothing to do with it). |
Pheromones.
But I think the term is not entirely literal, refers to social processes as well. |
|
| Back to top |
|
edgewaters
hibernating
Joined: Aug 17, 2006
Age: 40
Posts: 2426
Location: Ontario
|
| Posted: Mon May 07, 2012 6:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
| MXH wrote: | | i think this is incorrect, while personality does play a role I do notice most women start off of physical looks and then hope theres personality behind them |
There's a lot of information conveyed in things like posture, interaction, etc. Plus they gather information about people indirectly, through social networks.
That's part of why aspies have so much trouble. I don't think there's are any physical characteristics associated with AS (I could be wrong though). |
|
| Back to top |
|
Kurgan
I'm always right
Joined: Apr 07, 2012
Age: 24
Posts: 1681
Location: Norway
|
| Posted: Mon May 07, 2012 6:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| edgewaters wrote: | | Kurgan wrote: | | Many men are repulsed by the chemistry crap as well (you're either attracted to someone or you're not—science of matter has nothing to do with it). |
Pheromones.
But I think the term is not entirely literal, refers to social processes as well. |
If feromones were relevant, all the dating challenges in the world would be a perfume bottle away. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Kurgan
I'm always right
Joined: Apr 07, 2012
Age: 24
Posts: 1681
Location: Norway
|
| Posted: Mon May 07, 2012 6:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
| MXH wrote: | | DW_a_mom wrote: | | edgewaters wrote: |
Most women don't think in terms of the chunky scale or whatever you want to call what you're operating by. They think more along the lines of personalities that will get along, chemistry, that sort of thing. The concept of some sort of hierarchical scale of partners based on physical attributes is generally alien to them (outside of cardboard representations, i.e. in the real world), and generally its an idea most women would be repulsed by. You've got to appreciate she'd have to assign qualities (that she considers extremely negative) to your personality, to even grasp your scale criteria. Maybe she didn't think of you that way. |
Agreed. |
i think this is incorrect, while personality does play a role I do notice most women start off of physical looks and then hope theres personality behind them |
I once posted a picture of me flexing muscles on an open social network community. I got 15 winks in one day + numerous letters. I then changed to a picture where I did not and girls hit on me much less. Allthough I wasn't really buff back then, I was ripped like Tyler Durden. |
|
| Back to top |
|
rabbittss
Phoenix
Joined: Dec 30, 2011
Posts: 1348
|
| Posted: Mon May 07, 2012 7:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
| edgewaters wrote: | | rabbittss wrote: | | While I see what you are saying. The fact I asked *Her* out and not her friend, or a girl who looked like her friend, is the missing clue. Once you have that, you can easily gain the rest of the information needed. |
How? It's a single point on a scale. She has no idea where she even is on that scale, except that she's above some certain minimum. There is absolutely no way to even guess where anyone else could possibly place. Perhaps from just general intuition, she could have guessed that her friend occupied a less desirable position, but there's no way to tell whether it met the minimum or not. Theoretically, it would even be possible for her friend to be higher on the scale - it stands to reason that you'd be aiming somewhere around the middle.
Most women don't think in terms of the chunky scale or whatever you want to call what you're operating by. They think more along the lines of personalities that will get along, chemistry, that sort of thing. The concept of some sort of hierarchical scale of partners based on physical attributes is generally alien to them (outside of cardboard representations, i.e. in the real world), and generally its an idea most women would be repulsed by. You've got to appreciate she'd have to assign qualities (that she considers extremely negative) to your personality, to even grasp your scale criteria. Maybe she didn't think of you that way. |
I don't believe that fairytale wishy washy crap. Girls all have the "less hot" friend who they take with them places to make themselves look better. Thought granted it may be subconscious, You can see it all the time. Some girls even make it a point to ONLY associate with unattractive girls so they are the BEST looking in the group.
I think what you seem to be missing is, if I asked her out, the logical assumption is I found her to be attractive and therefore another girl who is at least as attractive as her would be the ideal replacement. not a girl who is multiple levels below her. |
|
| Back to top |
|
MXH
TomCat
Joined: Jul 29, 2010
Age: 22
Posts: 12465
Location: Here i stand and face the rain
|
| Posted: Mon May 07, 2012 7:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Kurgan wrote: | | MXH wrote: | | DW_a_mom wrote: | | edgewaters wrote: |
Most women don't think in terms of the chunky scale or whatever you want to call what you're operating by. They think more along the lines of personalities that will get along, chemistry, that sort of thing. The concept of some sort of hierarchical scale of partners based on physical attributes is generally alien to them (outside of cardboard representations, i.e. in the real world), and generally its an idea most women would be repulsed by. You've got to appreciate she'd have to assign qualities (that she considers extremely negative) to your personality, to even grasp your scale criteria. Maybe she didn't think of you that way. |
Agreed. |
i think this is incorrect, while personality does play a role I do notice most women start off of physical looks and then hope theres personality behind them |
I once posted a picture of me flexing muscles on an open social network community. I got 15 winks in one day + numerous letters. I then changed to a picture where I did not and girls hit on me much less. Allthough I wasn't really buff back then, I was ripped like Tyler Durden. |
Yep, i had signed to a site that has member of the oposite sex judge you to enter. My good quality picture which i feel portrayed a bit of my personality was denied yet the one where i was shirtless and posing made it in. I then added the other picture and theres quite thr diference in ratigs |
|
| Back to top |
|
The_Face_of_Boo
A savage
Joined: Jun 17, 2010
Age: 31
Posts: 9272
Location: Beirut ,Lebanon
|
| Posted: Mon May 07, 2012 8:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| MXH wrote: | | Kurgan wrote: | | MXH wrote: | | DW_a_mom wrote: | | edgewaters wrote: |
Most women don't think in terms of the chunky scale or whatever you want to call what you're operating by. They think more along the lines of personalities that will get along, chemistry, that sort of thing. The concept of some sort of hierarchical scale of partners based on physical attributes is generally alien to them (outside of cardboard representations, i.e. in the real world), and generally its an idea most women would be repulsed by. You've got to appreciate she'd have to assign qualities (that she considers extremely negative) to your personality, to even grasp your scale criteria. Maybe she didn't think of you that way. |
Agreed. |
i think this is incorrect, while personality does play a role I do notice most women start off of physical looks and then hope theres personality behind them |
I once posted a picture of me flexing muscles on an open social network community. I got 15 winks in one day + numerous letters. I then changed to a picture where I did not and girls hit on me much less. Allthough I wasn't really buff back then, I was ripped like Tyler Durden. |
Yep, i had signed to a site that has member of the oposite sex judge you to enter. My good quality picture which i feel portrayed a bit of my personality was denied yet the one where i was shirtless and posing made it in. I then added the other picture and theres quite thr diference in ratigs |
Also it's noticeable how predictable the outcome on this website, based on the first hour of rating you can guess the final outcome (same), as if the whole bunch has the same taste in looks. |
|
| Back to top |
|
MXH
TomCat
Joined: Jul 29, 2010
Age: 22
Posts: 12465
Location: Here i stand and face the rain
|
| Posted: Mon May 07, 2012 9:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Yep, that part was very true. It seems your ration only goes down with time, never up |
|
| Back to top |
|
The_Face_of_Boo
A savage
Joined: Jun 17, 2010
Age: 31
Posts: 9272
Location: Beirut ,Lebanon
|
| Posted: Mon May 07, 2012 12:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| MXH wrote: | | Yep, that part was very true. It seems your ration only goes down with time, never up |
With that pic
i got those results:
And i bet it won't change much.
I did according to hyper's link, i didn't smile, I am looking away but .... Lol |
|
| Back to top |
|
DW_a_mom
Ignoring the To-Do List
Joined: Feb 23, 2008
Posts: 9295
Location: Northern California
|
| Posted: Mon May 07, 2012 12:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| MXH wrote: | | DW_a_mom wrote: | | edgewaters wrote: |
Most women don't think in terms of the chunky scale or whatever you want to call what you're operating by. They think more along the lines of personalities that will get along, chemistry, that sort of thing. The concept of some sort of hierarchical scale of partners based on physical attributes is generally alien to them (outside of cardboard representations, i.e. in the real world), and generally its an idea most women would be repulsed by. You've got to appreciate she'd have to assign qualities (that she considers extremely negative) to your personality, to even grasp your scale criteria. Maybe she didn't think of you that way. |
Agreed. |
i think this is incorrect, while personality does play a role I do notice most women start off of physical looks and then hope theres personality behind them |
We're tasking quite specifically here about match making, and he is right about how women match make. How we select mates, that has been beaten to death, and a lot of it may be subconscious. In that case, it varies.
_________________
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 |
|
| 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: Mon May 07, 2012 12:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| rabbittss wrote: | | edgewaters wrote: | | rabbittss wrote: | | While I see what you are saying. The fact I asked *Her* out and not her friend, or a girl who looked like her friend, is the missing clue. Once you have that, you can easily gain the rest of the information needed. |
How? It's a single point on a scale. She has no idea where she even is on that scale, except that she's above some certain minimum. There is absolutely no way to even guess where anyone else could possibly place. Perhaps from just general intuition, she could have guessed that her friend occupied a less desirable position, but there's no way to tell whether it met the minimum or not. Theoretically, it would even be possible for her friend to be higher on the scale - it stands to reason that you'd be aiming somewhere around the middle.
Most women don't think in terms of the chunky scale or whatever you want to call what you're operating by. They think more along the lines of personalities that will get along, chemistry, that sort of thing. The concept of some sort of hierarchical scale of partners based on physical attributes is generally alien to them (outside of cardboard representations, i.e. in the real world), and generally its an idea most women would be repulsed by. You've got to appreciate she'd have to assign qualities (that she considers extremely negative) to your personality, to even grasp your scale criteria. Maybe she didn't think of you that way. |
I don't believe that fairytale wishy washy crap. Girls all have the "less hot" friend who they take with them places to make themselves look better. Thought granted it may be subconscious, You can see it all the time. Some girls even make it a point to ONLY associate with unattractive girls so they are the BEST looking in the group.
I think what you seem to be missing is, if I asked her out, the logical assumption is I found her to be attractive and therefore another girl who is at least as attractive as her would be the ideal replacement. not a girl who is multiple levels below her. |
no, they don't. wow. just wow.
_________________
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 |
|
|
|
