In the context of relationships, who's is more likely to date outside their physical preference? (how to, marrying)
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.
I'm serious. These guys are serious arrogant jerks. As a matter of fact, one thing that I'm making a dealbreaker in the future (possibly my only one) is that if a woman likes one of those guys, I won't touch her with a 10 foot pole.
They may settle for it, but I've never heard them say it. A lot of my guy friends, that's what they really want. That's what they're shooting for. A woman might have a guy chase her, she doesn't feel it at first, is lukewarm, then eventually caves in.
Uh, no. Average and mediocre looking guys could only dream of getting the hottest chicks. The ones that do maybe sing lead in some hip, trendy band or some crap or are dentists. So, the ones who are saying they want a nice, down to earth gal obviously aren't chasing after Kate Middleton/Upton/Beckinsale/Moss, take your pick, thank you.
I've heard them say it a ton of times. Weird how that works. Most of the guys I grew up around and worked with wanted 'a hot chick' and that was their only requirement. I've seen them ignore 'decently cute, level headed, chill' women firsthand. Hell, if men were really looking for that I'd have a line a mile long chasing after me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bg7
He's secretly gay. Scientifc fact. He may not know it yet though.
Doubtful. He has quite a few gay friends and would have no issues coming out if that were the case.
True. If you are balding, under 6'0, etc...good luck!
If you're 5'11", 5'10" or even 5'9", you can still be considered hot if you have a handsome face. Once you get into the 5'8" and 5'7" range, you're noticeably short and thus not sexually attractive to 90% of women, no matter how good of facial features and hair you have.
"Balding" is a very loose term. Roger Federer has a receded hairline, but looks good because he still has enough thick, wavy hair to style appropriately. Anderson Cooper has a quasi-combover that looks good on his sparkly light grey hair. Daniel Craig has lost like 60% of his hair on top, but still looks good. I think that most guys can lose 1/2 their hair on top and still look good if they style the remaining 1/2 well. The problem is when you lose almost all of it on top. That makes you look radically disfigured.
In summary, if you're 5'9"+ and haven't lose all you're hair, you can still look good as a guy.
If you're 5'11", 5'10" or even 5'9", you can still be considered hot if you have a handsome face. Once you get into the 5'8" and 5'7" range, you're noticeably short and thus not sexually attractive to 90% of women, no matter how good of facial features and hair you have.
"Balding" is a very loose term. Roger Federer has a receded hairline, but looks good because he still has enough thick, wavy hair to style appropriately. Anderson Cooper has a quasi-combover that looks good on his sparkly light grey hair. Daniel Craig has lost like 60% of his hair on top, but still looks good. I think that most guys can lose 1/2 their hair on top and still look good if they style the remaining 1/2 well. The problem is when you lose almost all of it on top. That makes you look radically disfigured.
In summary, if you're 5'9"+ and haven't lose all you're hair, you can still look good as a guy.
What is up with all this stupid threads? What is the point? All this does is give an outlet for bitter guys to come on here and bash women."YES! THAT'S TRUE! WOMEN ARE SHALLOWER THAN MEN! ALL WOMEN CARE IS LOOKS! IT ISN'T MY FAULT THAT WOMEN DON'T LIKE ME - I'M NOT TALL ENOUGH/MUSCULAR ENOUGH/HOT ENOUGH/ETC.!!!"
There is no point. Because here's the thing - every PERSON is different. For instance, I don't have a physical type. I never had preferences OR requirements for physical looks. Do I represent all women? No. NOBODY DOES!
If you're 5'11", 5'10" or even 5'9", you can still be considered hot if you have a handsome face. Once you get into the 5'8" and 5'7" range, you're noticeably short and thus not sexually attractive to 90% of women, no matter how good of facial features and hair you have.
Can you please provide the factual evidence you have to back up this claim? Are you sure its 90% and not 89%? How can you be sure its 90%? What if I'm 5 foot 8.5 inches tall? Does that mean that as I'm outwith the 5'8" range women will automatically find me attractive?
The limiting beliefs that men have on this forum about looks and height really are amazing.
No wonder you've got no success with women, a cardbox has more positivity & self esteem than you do.
As NilaJones said: "But there's a certain subset of men who are desperate to believe that women's lack of interest is really not due to the guys' emotional issues." Using your lack of looks aor height is an excellent excuse to incorrectly blame your lack of success with women. The only person your kidding on is yourself.
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.
