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.
Location: RI, MA, VT, WI, IL, CA, IN (that one sucked), KY
41,936 posts, read 37,178,375 times
Reputation: 40641
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoAmericaGo
I believe people that place little to no value on physical attraction are identified as demisexual. With admittedly not being an expert in the field of human sexuality — I would wager a guess that demisexual is a category a very small minority of people fall into.
You are incorrect. That is not what a demisexual is. At all.
Needing an emotional connection to feel sexual attraction is in now way, shape, or form, the same as not placing value on physical attraction.
I know some demisexuals. One of my oldest childhood friends identifies as one. She very much cares about physical attraction. Very much.
I guess shrinking your pool by improving yourself is all based on the assumption that once YOU'RE better you don't see the value of where you were. So you got a Master's degree, you won't "settle" for anyone with a Bachelor's...if you fixed your nose, you won't settle for someone with a receding hairline...if you're 20 pounds overweight you won't settle for someone who is 30 pounds overweight.
Must that be automatic? You "improving" yourself doesn't ever come along with increased empathy and acceptance of others?
Unless YOU DECIDE to have fewer choices, you won't. You have the same pool to pick from. Same pool. YOU ARE DECIDING not to. It's not a natural, or inevitable, or even usual end result of "bettering" oneself. It's a conscious decision to do so. And one anyone can make, whether they are "better" or not. A person who is overweight, or broke, or whatever can make the same limiting choices. It has NOTHING to do with "bettering" oneself.
Nothing about being "better" makes is harder to meet people. And nothing at all requires or even encourages a person who "bettered" themselves to change what they're looking for in potential partners. NOTHING.
Well, no, I disagree. Aren't you in a STEM field? Maybe this will make sense: Do you think someone on Neil DeGrasse Tyson's level of knowledge and expertise would find a flat-earther attractive? Maybe until the person opens their mouth and demonstrates how ignorant they are.
I say that as people learn more, grow more, and broaden their minds more, there is a natural evolution away from people who do not care for learning or who choose to remain willfully ignorant. It is not even a matter of getting a PhD. It is a matter of being willing to learn and valuing knowledge. I once had a partner who did not finish undergrad, and was in anything but an "intellectual profession," but he could talk circles around people when it came to philosophers and writers from the Age of Enlightenment, and he was a big fan of Voltaire.
Likewise, as people get more into fitness and health, there is a natural evolution away from people who sit on the couch eating McDonald's and playing video games. One issue I have is that I am a very health-conscious eater and a vegetarian. I am WELL aware that we all make our choices in what we put into our bodies, but when I see someone devouring a whole bucket of fried chicken, I actually feel a bit ill. He could be absolutely gorgeous to look at but the minute he does that, I am repulsed, and I cannot overcome that. This is not a choice. I will not give that man a chance because I am now grossed out by him.
Also consider that when people engage in self-improvement, it is because there are things they don't like about themselves. They are ignorant, so they take it upon themselves to go to school or educate themselves another way (reading, joining discussion groups, etc.). They're overweight, so they eat better, go to the gymn, and lose weight. They're broke, so they put themselves on a budget and start saving money, they get training in something more lucrative, or they take on a "side hustle."
Now if people engage in self-improvement because there is something about themselves they do not like--being ignorant, overweight, or broke--it is absolutely understandable that they would not find ignorance, overweight, or financial mismanagement attractive in other people either. There is a bit of truth to the notion that the things we dislike most in others are the things we dislike about ourselves.
People also tend to take on the traits of those around them. If you socialize with people who eat unhealthy food, chances are pretty high you will eat unhealthy food, too. If your friends are splurge spenders, they will encourage you to "live a little" and buy something that you really like but that would derail your progress in saving money. In terms of a life partner, that is the person you spend the most time with outside of work. I have mentioned that some of my exes complained that I made working out a priority. I also had an ex who would complain that I did not want to dine out all the time like he did. Well, no, when you work hard to lose 20 pounds, you don't want to compromise your health or let someone else even indirectly sabotage your efforts. There are a lot of men out there who don't want their women to slim down and so on because they are worried other men will find them attractive and their partner will leave them. It is a dysfunction, but it happens. We all have the right to rule such people out, and indeed, it is absolutely natural to want to preserve our own growth and progress rather than compromise it for a relationship, and the older we get, the more true that becomes.
Have you had relationships? It sure doesn't sound like it. Really, it doesn't. You have it all backwards, I think.
Can you explain what I have backwards?
I **think** what you are arguing is that people fall in love with traits like honesty, loyalty, etc and that traits like physical attraction, intellectual compatibility, financial compatibility, spiritual compatibility, etc are essentially irrelevant once this love is established. Am I correctly inferring what you are saying?
Location: RI, MA, VT, WI, IL, CA, IN (that one sucked), KY
41,936 posts, read 37,178,375 times
Reputation: 40641
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoAmericaGo
Can you explain what I have backwards?
I **think** what you are arguing is that people fall in love with traits like honesty, loyalty, etc and that traits like physical attraction, intellectual compatibility, financial compatibility, spiritual compatibility, etc are essentially irrelevant once this love is established. Am I correctly inferring what you are saying?
No, not at all. Not even close.
You really haven't been in love, that's clear. It feels like you haven't ever had real chemistry either.
Location: RI, MA, VT, WI, IL, CA, IN (that one sucked), KY
41,936 posts, read 37,178,375 times
Reputation: 40641
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seija
Well, no, I disagree. Aren't you in a STEM field? Maybe this will make sense: Do you think someone on Neil DeGrasse Tyson's level of knowledge and expertise would find a flat-earther attractive? Maybe until the person opens their mouth and .
That's the thing. If they never spoke to them, they couldn't know if there was chemistry or if they're attracted in the first place.
That's why someone being objectively good looking and attractive are completely different things. Objectively good looking people are all over, people I think are good looking to me are all over, it isn't attraction. Never was, never will be. Different words with different meanings.
Well, no, I disagree. Aren't you in a STEM field? Maybe this will make sense: Do you think someone on Neil DeGrasse Tyson's level of knowledge and expertise would find a flat-earther attractive? Maybe until the person opens their mouth and demonstrates how ignorant they are.
I say that as people learn more, grow more, and broaden their minds more, there is a natural evolution away from people who do not care for learning or who choose to remain willfully ignorant. It is not even a matter of getting a PhD. It is a matter of being willing to learn and valuing knowledge. I once had a partner who did not finish undergrad, and was in anything but an "intellectual profession," but he could talk circles around people when it came to philosophers and writers from the Age of Enlightenment, and he was a big fan of Voltaire.
Likewise, as people get more into fitness and health, there is a natural evolution away from people who sit on the couch eating McDonald's and playing video games. One issue I have is that I am a very health-conscious eater and a vegetarian. I am WELL aware that we all make our choices in what we put into our bodies, but when I see someone devouring a whole bucket of fried chicken, I actually feel a bit ill. He could be absolutely gorgeous to look at but the minute he does that, I am repulsed, and I cannot overcome that. This is not a choice. I will not give that man a chance.
Also consider that when people engage in self-improvement, it is because there are things they don't like about themselves. They are ignorant, so they take it upon themselves to go to school or educate themselves another way (reading, joining discussion groups, etc.). They're overweight, so they eat better, go to the gymn, and lose weight. They're broke, so they put themselves on a budget and start saving money, they get training in something more lucrative, or they take on a "side hustle."
Now if people engage in self-improvement because there is something about themselves they do not like or feel needs improvement--being ignorant, overweight, or broke--it is absolutely understandable that they would not find ignorance, overweight, or financial mismanagement attractive in other people either. There is a bit of truth to the notion that the things we dislike most in others are the things we dislike about ourselves.
I think you beautifully stated this.
Anytime I embarked on something to improve myself it was because I DID NOT like that trait about myself. For example, I hated being broke and not having the things I wanted in life to feel at peace (not materialistic, but I hated not knowing if I could pay my bills or own a house or have a car/fix my car, etc). Thus, instead of wallowing in feeling helpless about my financial journey, I took years upon years of my life to better my financial situation. So yes, as far as potential relationship partner, I am very turned off by someone who chooses to spend recklessly and continue in a cycle of poverty…assuming they could choose to make better decisions.
That's the thing. If they never spoke to them, they couldn't know if there was chemistry or if they're attracted in the first place.
That's why someone being objectively good looking and attractive are completely different things. Objectively good looking people are all over, people I think are good looking to me are all over, it isn't attraction. Never was, never will be. Different words with different meanings.
I don’t think anyone will disagree with you that *physical attractiveness* and being an *attractive person* are both independently real things. However, I believe *most* people seek to find some satisfying blend of the two.
Location: RI, MA, VT, WI, IL, CA, IN (that one sucked), KY
41,936 posts, read 37,178,375 times
Reputation: 40641
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoAmericaGo
I don’t think anyone will disagree with you that *physical attractiveness* and being an *attractive person* are both independently real things. .
That is not remotely what I said. At all.
You can not help but changing the conversation, your points, and even misrepresenting what others said.
Later.
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.
