Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What are you talking about? Mrs. Clinton can be considered above average here. IMO she was quite a looker in college.
I personally feel she has a beauty to her. But there's no way you've missed the way the media absolutely, positively tears that woman apart on how non-beautiful she is.
Well, actually it's a good point. Men (here on C-D) say they want women who travel and know languages, and are smart and interesting to talk to, sweet, and kind. There are lots of women out there, and I mean here in the US (for some reason, there's an erroneous belief that American women aren't cosmopolitan, don't travel and are monolingual). But how many guys would ask out C. Clinton or Amy Carter? Brainy, fun, well-travelled, educated women are all around, but the guys aren't approaching them. Because their main priority turns out to be "hot" women (that reptilian brain again, darn it!).
I personally feel she has a beauty to her. But there's no way you've missed the way the media absolutely, positively tears that woman apart on how non-beautiful she is.
I disagree with them, they are wrong.
They also do the same thing to Mrs. Obama, but Michelle looks great.
I disagree with them, they are wrong.
They also do the same thing to Mrs. Obama, but Michelle looks great.
I agree with the Mrs. Obama comment. I find her absolutely beautiful. There's just something about her. She's elegant, she is lovely. But I have seen her looks ripped apart in every possible way. I have literally seen her called a monkey. I saw a lot of that here on CD particularly in the months leading to pres. election time, actually (the "monkey" reference). I can not tell you how this makes me cringe and makes me ashamed for humankind in general...to say a woman looks like an ape because she is not their personal definition of beautiful.
When it comes to looks, women are 100% fair game to be publicly humiliated, jeered at and even racially denigrated, for their sin of not having been born media-standard beautiful (whatever the hell that is).
So yeah. I'd say women certainly are discriminated against for looks they can't help, so to speak (basic looks). And it's not even just a case of not being attracted to those looks, it's a very real all-out attack, almost an anger and disgust with the woman for not having been born beautiful.
I would have to respectfully disagree. If the above assertion were true regarding women's preferences with online dating, then women would be filtering for men's income, occupation and educational attainment. So then the short, fat, balding late-career MDs and PhDs would be getting all of the hits. I do not see this happening. Instead, my impression is that the more shallow women are looking for the "hotter" guys, while the less shallow ones are looking for stepfathers for their children.
When it comes to online dating, most of the handsome men with photos get the majority of the replies that's for sure. But don't think women do not care about men's income and occupation, especially the older age groups who want to settle down and raise a family.
Well, actually it's a good point. Men (here on C-D) say they want women who travel and know languages, and are smart and interesting to talk to, sweet, and kind. There are lots of women out there, and I mean here in the US (for some reason, there's an erroneous belief that American women aren't cosmopolitan, don't travel and are monolingual) that fit that bill. But how many guys would ask out C. Clinton or Amy Carter? Brainy, fun, well-travelled, educated women are all around, but the guys aren't approaching them. Because their main priority turns out to be "hot" women (that reptilian brain again, darn it!).
Sorry, but I don't understand the point of your post.
Is it to show that men are hyprocrites? I don't remember a lot of posts saying that men don't value looks. As a male I do believe we value looks more than women. However women are more shallow overall when you factor in other traits that attract women.
Are women marrying Hugh Hefner for his physical looks? His humor? Personality?
Everything in my post refutes that, did you not even read the post?
Biologically speaking, fit, tall, strong, young, vigorous, intelligent men with leadership capabilities are the better bet in a woman's opinion and hence those are the men who really do turn us on, and who always will.
Stumpy little guys with no hair up top and poor musculature (a sign of a lack of activity/fitness/hardiness) are not.
Again, biologically speaking.
It is only society that makes things somehow different (using currency rather than actual survival skills) and that is a relatively new concept in the history of mankind. Hence we women are forced to go against our biology to find "good providers" in today's society.
Again. Did you read the post? At all?
The bottom line: you can make as much money as you want, but we are still inwardly going to turn to jello when that cute young guy walks by. And that's biology and not "a choice" as you stated.
Just like you.
Go figure.
Thank you. This just means that women DO care about looks just as much as men. The "men are more shallow" nonsense needs to stop because height is a part of looks. As much as it pains me to say it, us short guys will barely ever turn a woman on as much as our taller brethren.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JerZ
When it comes to looks, women are 100% fair game to be publicly humiliated, jeered at and even racially denigrated, for their sin of not having been born media-standard beautiful (whatever the hell that is).
So yeah. I'd say women certainly are discriminated against for looks they can't help, so to speak (basic looks). And it's not even just a case of not being attracted to those looks, it's a very real all-out attack, almost an anger and disgust with the woman for not having been born beautiful.
...and so are short men. As it is, we are some of the last people who are allowed to be discriminated against. It's just never an issue because, you know, nobody cares.
I woud agree height is a huge dealbreaker for women and men cant change it where women can lose the weight..Plus lets not act like women are breaking down fat mens doors either...
I think men are attracted to alot more diverse group of women then vice versa..In my socia circle all the women even married ones seem to fawn over my one friend..
"Having an idea women" or "liking small breasts" is different than stating a cutoff point in breast size whereby you absolutely, positively cannot find a woman attractive if she doesn't make the cut.
Exactly lol at people who can't see the difference
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
