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 just had a question...This is based on my experience, and it has been irking me.
Why is it that when a man rejects a woman because he doesn't like how she looks or isn't attracted, no one thinks less of him for it...
But when a woman rejects a man because she doesn't like how he looks or isn't attracted, she's labeled shallow or immature or something negative?
It's like women are always supposed to look past those things and see only a man's heart or success, but that requirement is never put on men except as an afterthought ("Are you attracted to her?" always comes first). They're allowed to just like what they like visually, with personality traits being an afterthought.
Granted, a lot of women AREN'T as fixated on appearances as men are to begin with, but it kind of bugs me that I'm not allowed to be that way if I want to without being judged so negatively.
No one thinks less of a man for only liking girls he thinks are pretty, but if a girl only likes "pretty boys", seldom is she labeled positively. It's not just men doing the labeling, it's women, too.
I just hate having the feeling that I can't say what I really want without being ostracized or looked at funny because I said "A nice body, good hair, and pretty blue eyes" and didn't say "A good job and stability" or something. They're not mutually exclusive...
Whereas a man is perfectly fine to express he likes petite women with long hair or something (whatever he likes).
I am just trying to understand the reasoning of why a woman who wants a man she's actually attracted to is viewed as immature, while it's not so for a man?
I could be wrong, I don't think it's shallow or immature though. I don't want to have sex with someone who doesn't make me want it - otherwise it's just a duty, not a passion.
All humans are shallow. Men want the best looking women, women want the most socially dominant men. This is how biology works. It's shallow but all humans are.
Location: Mableton, GA USA (NW Atlanta suburb, 4 miles OTP)
11,334 posts, read 26,086,242 times
Reputation: 3995
Who is doing this labeling?
To me, the reasons for people liking or not liking other people is their own business. I don't pretend to understand it. Believe me, I've tried, and it doesn't work. So I've just given up. :-)
Looks and chemistry are important to a degree for both men and women. In that respect, it is not any shallower than anything else, such as intelligence, charm, or integrity. It is just one of a variety of things that lead to attraction. The problem becomes self-defeating if one is so focused on just one or two things at the exclusion of others that are equally important to a relationship. This applies to both men and women
It totally depends on "why" not that you happen to have a preference at all
Could you explain this a bit more? I've never heard a man being asked "why" he likes thin or curvy women...it seems like it would be just raw attraction in most cases anyway.
All humans are shallow. Men want the best looking women, women want the most socially dominant men. This is how biology works. It's shallow but all humans are.
So...the problem arises when a woman goes against the grain and wants the best looking man instead of the most "socially dominant"? Is that what you're saying?
So...the problem arises when a woman goes against the grain and wants the best looking man instead of the most "socially dominant"? Is that what you're saying?
No. The best looking guy usually is the most socially dominant. But if there's two guys and the less physically attractive is more dominant, he gets the women. Biology will never change. All humans are shallow.
I don't think that anybody ever labeled my daughter as 'shallow', because she had physical preferences in men (over 6'-4", blond-to-the-roots, with a substantial nose, and built). And I don't recall ANYBODY whom you'd consider socially acceptable criticizing women for having physical preferences in men.
Yes, there are certain low-class/primitive/low-IQ subcultures where women are supposed to be packaged as sex objects, while the men are only required to be thuggish. But, here in AMERICA, those are mere subcultures.
I don't think that anybody ever labeled my daughter as 'shallow', because she had physical preferences in men (over 6'-4", blond-to-the-roots, with a substantial nose, and built). And I don't recall ANYBODY whom you'd consider socially acceptable criticizing women for having physical preferences in men.
Yes, there are certain low-class/primitive/low-IQ subcultures where women are supposed to be packaged as sex objects, while the men are only required to be thuggish. But, here in AMERICA, those are mere subcultures.
Maybe I've just had bad luck, but I have totally been called shallow for it.
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.
