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 don't want to stereotype gender here but I have noticed that men seem more rigid about their physical type. Most men I know show a definite pattern in the type of women they date. And it's usually based on the woman they lost their virginity with. They seem to imprint on that type and are drawn to it forever after.
If a guy deviates from that type, yeah it's probably a fluke. Most guys are drawn back to their original type though.
This seems to be a guy thing though. I know I tend to look at personality more and how I feel around a guy. If I feel relaxed and happy with him.
So jmo the type thing is true from what I've observed.
you are correct, it's called "romantic imprinting" it's more common in men where their first mostly positive romantic experience causes them to try to replicate said experience for the rest of their life, it also works in reverse the first really negative experience will cause most guy's to avoid her type for life.
While with women "social imprinting" is more common. though some women "romantically imprint" it's just a lot more rare.
romantic imprinting? Never heard of it. I don't see myself as having a type. I've dated Brazilians, Frenchwomen, Californians, Germans, Italians, South Africans, Australians, Spaniards, Swedes, Norwegians, Finnish, Icelandic, Hungarian, Saudi Arabian Turkish, Iranian, Iraqui, Pakistani, Indian women.
I'll date pretty much just about anyone, even including women who are religious, which I'm not, and from cultural backgrounds vastly different from my own. The only similiarities between each of these women is they are physical fit, pretty, bubbly, highly talkative, highly physical, and are brimming with energy. But that's exactly the way that I am. Why would I date women who aren't my female counterpart?
It would only result in unhappiness. I do love South American women. I would say they are my weak spot.
Last edited by BrentwoodfamilyMart; 08-09-2021 at 04:18 AM..
romantic imprinting? Never heard of it. I don't see myself as having a type. I've dated Brazilians, Frenchwomen, Californians, Germans, Italians, South Africans, Australians, Spaniards, Swedes, Norwegians, Finnish, Icelandic, Hungarian, Saudi Arabian Turkish, Iranian, Iraqui, Pakistani, Indian women.
Life is short and youth is even shorter. I feel what is left of my youth leaving my body with every second that goes by, so I gotta make the most out of the remaining youth I have left in me.
Tho I disagree that a lot of ppl marry opposite their type. If they do....they are settling & they are never going to feel totally happy IMO. If he wasn’t attracted to Asian women before, that wouldn’t suddenly change like magic.
Disagree. I met someone that was not my type. I took the chance found love and we have been together for over eleven years. I certainly didn't settle. Being focused only in type is rather shallow.
How awful would it be to pass up on the right person because you didn't think they were your type.
Like most people I have a "looks" type: brown hair and eyes, no tan, no tatts, 6', slim and trim, handsome.
However very few men I've dated came anywhere close to that. Short, tall, blond, brown, ginger, cute, not cute but interesting looking, etc etc.
Mainly I have a personality type that's far more appealing than looks.
High energy, educated, alpha qualities, confidence, funny, good attitude, not neurotic, go-getter, well-liked, honest, capable of real emotional connection.
Most of the men I've been serious about have those qualities in common no matter what they looked like.
Location: As of 2022….back to SoCal. OC this time!
9,297 posts, read 4,651,742 times
Reputation: 7618
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hankrigby
Disagree. I met someone that was not my type. I took the chance found love and we have been together for over eleven years. I certainly didn't settle. Being focused only in type is rather shallow.
How awful would it be to pass up on the right person because you didn't think they were your type.
Tho if she’s the right person after 11 yrs.....then she is your type! It’s the principle behind ppl saying they married somebody that isn’t their type that is weird to me. It sounds condescending....like saying you weren’t attracted. Like if you married somebody named Renee (I don’t know the name of your wife)...& said, “Renee is not really my type” when you talk about her. BUT you say, “well...Jane, now there’s a woman that’s my type”. But then why did you marry Renee? IMO it’s like saying you don’t find that person attractive to say somebody isn’t your type...especially after being married to them for years.^^ It’s not like ppl look to date ppl that aren’t their type.
AND...nobody should focus “only” on type ofc. An attraction is only the beginning. When I was dating, if I knew a man wasn’t my type & I wasn’t attracted to him tho, I thought it a waste of my time & his to go on a date or get to know him better. IMO...if you aren’t attracted, you aren’t attracted.
Location: As of 2022….back to SoCal. OC this time!
9,297 posts, read 4,651,742 times
Reputation: 7618
Quote:
Originally Posted by RubyandPearl
I never feel instant attraction, no matter how good looking he is.
Ofc attraction isn’t all about looks....tho it’s part of chemistry. BUT saying somebody isn’t your type is the same thing as saying you aren’t attracted to them IMO.
edit:
Quote:
Originally Posted by RubyandPearl
Since I'm more attracted to personality than looks
Everybody is tho, compatibility is what’s important. Things like communication, honesty & mutual respect too. BUT looks & chemistry are a natural part of the process at the start. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Last edited by TashaPosh; 08-10-2021 at 08:54 AM..
Ofc attraction isn’t all about looks....tho it’s part of chemistry. BUT saying somebody isn’t your type is the same thing as saying you aren’t attracted to them IMO.
edit:
Everybody is tho, we need to find compatibility. Things like communication, honesty & mutual respect too. BUT looks & chemistry are a natural part of the process at the start. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
That is in your opinion. I have met people I am not attracted to at first, but over time found them very attractive. I rarely (if ever) meet someone and think they are attractive immediately. That is just now how I work. Some people may be able to have chemistry due to looks, but I don’t think everyone can. I have met both men and women who say that attraction for them is much more about personality than looks.
There can be aspects of someone’s looks that would be a dealbreaker (like head/face/neck tattoos or certain facial piercings), but there is nothing that is something that makes me attracted to a guy immediately.
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.
Tho if she’s the right person after 11 yrs.....then she is your type! It’s the principle behind ppl saying they married somebody that isn’t their type that is weird to me. It sounds condescending....like saying you weren’t attracted. Like if you married somebody named Renee (I don’t know the name of your wife)...& said, “Renee is not really my type” when you talk about her. BUT you say, “well...Jane, now there’s a woman that’s my type”. But then why did you marry Renee? IMO it’s like saying you don’t find that person attractive to say somebody isn’t your type...especially after being married to them for years.^^ It’s not like ppl look to date ppl that aren’t their type.
