This is a very interesting take. Your logic makes sense, but I disagree with it. Shallow seems to be used because looks/body is just that; you see them and you're attracted or you're not, that's it. Whereas personality/intelligence goes far deeper than a base desire for physical attraction.
Yeah I think, since reading another comment here, I have changed my mind that valuing intelligence and confidence is as shallow as valuing looks. Even so though I still think it's just as unfortunate for someone to be rejected on their lack of intelligence or confidence, than on their looks, since they don't have control over either. And that it's just as unfortunate that there's no solution to it. Attraction is important, you can't choose who you're attracted to, and people without those attractive traits can't choose to have them.
All attractive qualities in a partner are just as shallow as each other
← View full post
This is a very interesting take. Your logic makes sense, but I disagree with it. Shallow seems to be used because looks/body is just that; you see them and you're attracted or you're not, that's it. Whereas personality/intelligence goes far deeper than a base desire for physical attraction.
--
JellyBeanBandit
4 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
1
1
Yeah I think, since reading another comment here, I have changed my mind that valuing intelligence and confidence is as shallow as valuing looks. Even so though I still think it's just as unfortunate for someone to be rejected on their lack of intelligence or confidence, than on their looks, since they don't have control over either. And that it's just as unfortunate that there's no solution to it. Attraction is important, you can't choose who you're attracted to, and people without those attractive traits can't choose to have them.