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.
Well, it an be difficult to have a frame of reference to compare yourself to, and if no one else is telling you, then what do you have to go on? What is the standard? I'm not thin or muscular. Never have been, never will be. I've always been stocky. I like that I still have all of my hair, and I think I've always had just the right amount of body hair. Is that good or bad? I don't know, it seems to depend on who you ask.
As for guys and this has always been a theory of mine. I feel the reason We think men think more highly of themselevs is because its not really socially acceptable for men to be insecure in public(or in general). So guys either hold it in or act arrogant in public while deep down feeling insecure.
And if you're a guy, and you play your cards right, then you can make the women feel guilty like it's her fault you went soft so you have the upper hand AND she'll try harder next time.
No. Dating has next to nothing to do with looks. The fact that so many people think it does is why there are so many disgruntled posters on here. That and this obsession with categorizing the genders in useless ways and assuming that the individuals that they are interacting with adhere to those categorizations.
Dating has everything to do with looks, at least from the man's point of view. No one approaches someone and asks them out on the "Hmm, they are not attractive, but I bet they have a great personality. Think I want to ask them out." The very first thing one is influenced by, is looks. You can deny all you want, doesn't make it any less true. Is it fair or right? No, but it's the nature of the beast. Once you start dating, personality comes into play. And even after you get to know someone, men and woman will put up with more from someone who they deem "hotter".
Start an online profile with no picture and see how many hits you get.
We men can only keep up our sexual "drive" and "energy" along with our "Cannons ready to fire" for so long, eventually it just burns and tires us out. My ex would require over anhour of foreplay at times before she was in the mood for the penis invasion and then get pissed and upset that I had already gotten tired and flaccid because I personally can't maintain my sex drive that long, I just got worn out. I then had to explain why I was so tired like a damn parent telling her child about the basics of sex and babies.
So glad that relationship ended.....
My ex was like that...so I'd take care of him then all of a sudden he was 'too tired' to do anything for me.
No. Dating has next to nothing to do with looks. The fact that so many people think it does is why there are so many disgruntled posters on here. That and this obsession with categorizing the genders in useless ways and assuming that the individuals that they are interacting with adhere to those categorizations.
I agree that dating has way less to do with looks than people think, although attraction has something to do with it, and dating has something to do with attraction.... So there's a connection there, but it's less direct, and good-looks can be circumvented by other means of creating attraction.
The vibes someone gives off will always trump appearance in creating the kind of attraction that gets dates. A beautiful person who is not very friendly or open in demeanor can get pegged a snob or shallow or something else unfair. An ugly person who is extremely charming can become attractive quickly to others.
I do think grooming makes a difference, but again, that's more about advertising personality than the aesthetic appeal in itself.
Dating has everything to do with looks, at least from the man's point of view. No one approaches someone and asks them out on the "Hmm, they are not attractive, but I bet they have a great personality. Think I want to ask them out." The very first thing one is influenced by, is looks. You can deny all you want, doesn't make it any less true. Is it fair or right? No, but it's the nature of the beast. Once you start dating, personality comes into play. And even after you get to know someone, men and woman will put up with more from someone who they deem "hotter".
Start an online profile with no picture and see how many hits you get.
Physical attraction is more than looks though. Someone doesn't have to be aesthetically appealing to be deemed attractive. Most people simply don't bother to note the difference though (especially men).
Demeanor can influence how attractive people find you, and that can be picked up unconsciously & nearly immediately.
Looks do matter of course...but I don't think they matter to women as much as they do to men. Maybe I have a skewed view on things because the biggest male 'players' I know are under 5'5 so that's what I see.
I don't regard my height as a problem--perhaps I'm stupid and it is a bigger problem to more women than I'm aware of.
However, I'm not as short as 5'5" but even I recognize very few men (grown adult men no longer physically growing in height) standing under 5'5" can be successful with women, can be womanizers or "players."
Not that it's impossible but very unlikely.
But before feminism its was never impossible for a woman to have monetary, political, or professional power given there were say... Queens and female plantation owners.
It's also not impossible--in theory--as the Republicans say... for a person to come to the United States with only a couple quarters in their pocket, and with no need of labor unions, feminists, or Democrats work their way into being worth many millions of dollars.
Democrats, liberals, and feminist refuse to use statistical outliers as representative of what most or all can achieve unless a) its a male unsuccessful in attracting female mates or b) it helps their ideology and goals.
Let us apply the female outlier of the woman that can beat up 50% of grown men on earth. Should not we lift our noses at female victims of domestic violence dating or married to men, after all, there exists a few women that could actually beat than man up and beat up half the men on earth? If she is getting beat up we can blame her for failing to learn how to fight, for having great character flaws.
But that would be as ridiculous as to point at lottery winners, or successful casino gamblers, or men standing under 5'5" that are extremely successful with women.
Physical attraction is more than looks though. Someone doesn't have to be aesthetically appealing to be deemed attractive. Most people simply don't bother to note the difference though (especially men).
Demeanor can influence how attractive people find you, and that can be picked up unconsciously & nearly immediately.
Good posting. Most unattractive guys would never agree with this though lol
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.
