Is this a reaction to my comment? You ought to read my other two comments above, for explanation.
I'll cheer, as well, for people who prefer to appreciate their lovers' personality, more than appearance. But that does not mean it's fair to pressure women to never desire male (visual) beauty. Read my reply to cuppycake1228.
I said people enjoy both appearance, *and* personality. But rules don't dictate which one a person must enjoy more- (people cannot help what they're attracted to. Romance/sexuality is for enjoyment, not rules).
And I gave OP advice on appearance, in case he (or any other reader) wanted it. With too many gals making themselves pretty for guys, there ought to be guys who do the same. Even if you think it's superficial, it's still sexist. But my advice was not to pressure OP specifically. I don't socially outcast people for not being pretty. But, just because a girl can't help be unattracted to certain guys, does not mean she's "summing him up on physical appearance." Just like a gay man who's not attracted to a woman, does not mean he's rude for making assumptions about her gender.
It's in human nature to search for the genetically strongest partner. Pleasant facial features are percieved as being a sign of good health, so it makes sense that they matter to most people.
This is pretty much a moronic statement. Evolve your mind, we are not cavemen? Contrary to what people would like believe, we will always be "human" with innate responses/desire for the best possible person to "mate" with. Being attracted to another person will always be uncontrollable, as to who/why you're attracted to someone. Based on first impressions, lacking any knowledge as to what someone's personality entails.
But attraction in terms of "dating", who you choose to engage in longer term commitments with, is much different. There are plenty of people the majority will always have an uncontrollable desire for, based on looks alone, but for most, the attraction and desire can subside, given the person can not be your type emotionally/personality wise, or just have generally unappealing factors, to them. Yet that still doesn't change the fact that this "type" of person would have a good majority's attention based on a first glance/receive the first pick in terms of opportunity, to get to know them better etc.
Attraction is human nature, it will always be. This doesn't mean one is living like a caveman, so to speak, or not evolved, mentally. It just makes one human. It's funny when looks comes into play, online, because everyone wants to simply sound the most righteous in their responses, with a "Look past looks, like I do", attitude. Which is not only a sanctimonious attitude (as everyone is "guilty", if you want to call it that) of being attracted to someone incredibly good looking, sexually. Of course factors can change the outlook, ultimately, if the person has internally unappealing traits, but it doesn't change the fact that given the opportunity, most would attempt to court this "type" of person, whether sexually or engage in conversation. Based on looks alone.
It's easy to sound like a incredibly moral/appropriate person online, or if one only has the means of dating unconventionally attractive people, only, due to their own looks. But it does not make it true or correct, everyone wants the BEST they can possibly attain. Everyone. If THEY claim otherwise, they are the ones' lying. Nobody wants 30% or less, looks, 70% compatible. Even 10% looks, 90% compatible. Everyone would like the best of both worlds, if they can attain that. 100% in the "looks" department, 100% compatible with you. It's not as complex as people like to make it, for the sake of debate or sounding so incredibly moral/having the best responses or attitude.
Girls: Reaction to unattractive male's moves on you?
← View full post
You sad people, summing people up on physical appearance. How about getting to know someone for who they really are?
--
Satanic_Cereal
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
1
1
-
shortandtothepoint
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Is this a reaction to my comment? You ought to read my other two comments above, for explanation.
I'll cheer, as well, for people who prefer to appreciate their lovers' personality, more than appearance. But that does not mean it's fair to pressure women to never desire male (visual) beauty. Read my reply to cuppycake1228.
I said people enjoy both appearance, *and* personality. But rules don't dictate which one a person must enjoy more- (people cannot help what they're attracted to. Romance/sexuality is for enjoyment, not rules).
And I gave OP advice on appearance, in case he (or any other reader) wanted it. With too many gals making themselves pretty for guys, there ought to be guys who do the same. Even if you think it's superficial, it's still sexist. But my advice was not to pressure OP specifically. I don't socially outcast people for not being pretty. But, just because a girl can't help be unattracted to certain guys, does not mean she's "summing him up on physical appearance." Just like a gay man who's not attracted to a woman, does not mean he's rude for making assumptions about her gender.
--
WokeUpScreamingFilmNoir
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
If it was for you specifically, I would have replied to you directly. I understand the basics of a comment section.
--
Satanic_Cereal
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Ok, I'll stop bitching at you. Pretend my comment was somewhere else, rather than in your thread.
--
WokeUpScreamingFilmNoir
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
I'm not much for pretending.
It's in human nature to search for the genetically strongest partner. Pleasant facial features are percieved as being a sign of good health, so it makes sense that they matter to most people.
--
WokeUpScreamingFilmNoir
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Evolve your mind. We are not cavemen.
--
DumBelle
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
This is pretty much a moronic statement. Evolve your mind, we are not cavemen? Contrary to what people would like believe, we will always be "human" with innate responses/desire for the best possible person to "mate" with. Being attracted to another person will always be uncontrollable, as to who/why you're attracted to someone. Based on first impressions, lacking any knowledge as to what someone's personality entails.
But attraction in terms of "dating", who you choose to engage in longer term commitments with, is much different. There are plenty of people the majority will always have an uncontrollable desire for, based on looks alone, but for most, the attraction and desire can subside, given the person can not be your type emotionally/personality wise, or just have generally unappealing factors, to them. Yet that still doesn't change the fact that this "type" of person would have a good majority's attention based on a first glance/receive the first pick in terms of opportunity, to get to know them better etc.
Attraction is human nature, it will always be. This doesn't mean one is living like a caveman, so to speak, or not evolved, mentally. It just makes one human. It's funny when looks comes into play, online, because everyone wants to simply sound the most righteous in their responses, with a "Look past looks, like I do", attitude. Which is not only a sanctimonious attitude (as everyone is "guilty", if you want to call it that) of being attracted to someone incredibly good looking, sexually. Of course factors can change the outlook, ultimately, if the person has internally unappealing traits, but it doesn't change the fact that given the opportunity, most would attempt to court this "type" of person, whether sexually or engage in conversation. Based on looks alone.
It's easy to sound like a incredibly moral/appropriate person online, or if one only has the means of dating unconventionally attractive people, only, due to their own looks. But it does not make it true or correct, everyone wants the BEST they can possibly attain. Everyone. If THEY claim otherwise, they are the ones' lying. Nobody wants 30% or less, looks, 70% compatible. Even 10% looks, 90% compatible. Everyone would like the best of both worlds, if they can attain that. 100% in the "looks" department, 100% compatible with you. It's not as complex as people like to make it, for the sake of debate or sounding so incredibly moral/having the best responses or attitude.