Not Dating Unattractive Men...To me it's called "Being Realistic"

[RationalLioness]

I'd like to start off by saying that I'm not easily offended. I can't remember the last time I was. But being called shallow makes me laugh whenever it happens and usually because the people who are trying to be antagonistic or give their opinion fail to realize that for some people, the reasons for not being with someone is NOT entirely superficial.

I just want to point it out.

It's not shallow to not want/be unable to sleep with an unattractive wo/man.

Sex is important for many people in and out of relationships. It's meant to bring pleasure to the individuals indulging in the act. Since it's purely sex, there is no need to learn of a person's personality or get to know them better.

Many people who are single make the choice of who they want to sleep with and I highly doubt that they'd go fooling around with someone that doesn't rev their engine.

Some people just don't want to sleep with another person that doesn't physically excite them. Some people will give them a chance. Neither of these people are wrong in my opinion. It's their choice.

But there are people like me who CAN'T be with someone who doesn't sexually excite this. We aren't able to perform. It's like a man who sees a wo/man that he is NOT attracted to and his penis doesn't get up. Same difference.

I think most people understand this point very well and there is not much argument there. So why don't people attribute the same logic to the next point...

It's not necessarily shallow to not want/be unable to be in a relationship with an unattractive wo/man.

For some reason, the same points aforementioned doesn't seem to compute when this point is made.

Yes, there are people who base the whole relationship they have with someone on physicality and that's it. I don't feel that's right and is shallow (to me) but that is their choice. I also realize that the word "shallow" can be subjective, but it usually all comes ot the same point: superificial.

But when people like me are called shallow--people who want someone that has looks and personality--it tells me that--ironically--the individual saying that is only looking at the shallow surface of the issue and not realizing that there are underlying reasons as to why we feel the way we do.

I've already stated that I can't sexually function with an unattractive man as well as that sex is important to many people in and out of relationships. So why do I continuously get wo/men telling me to give these men a chance even when KNOWING those reasons?

-Once you get to know a wo/man better, they become more attractive.

This is one of the many arguments I get to try and give "an unattractive man a chance". The problem is I already did this...and it didn't work. He wanted sex and I was unable to give him what he wanted. His personality was amazing but I felt no sexual want of being with him.

There are some men who are okay with being in realtionships like this. But I'm not and I would want sex. So it would be a doomed relationship from the start. The majority of men--I would think--want to have sex in their relationship. Why should they suffer in one when they're not going to get it? Why am I going to put them through that?

I also don't feel that sex is obligatory in a relationship. I shouldn't lie there for the guy to be satisfied while I'm not getting any myself. It should work both ways.

I should say that even if there is a good-looking guy, if his personality is repulsive, sex isn't going to happen either. I wouldn't even be around the guy.

Blegh!

- There are many wo/men who are in relationships with people they aren't attracted to.

And? Just because others are doing something, I should do it? I should simply settle for what I don't want?

Yes. There are sapiosexuals who are turned on by intelligence. There are others who are turned on purely by personality. Are these people shallow because a lot of them are turned on by certain aspects of a person? I wouldn't think so. It makes sense that you want to be sexually excited to someone that you plan on being in a relationship with.

I'm turned on by men's bodies (and it's not even that simple). End point.

-You may be missing out on finding the person you were meant to be with.

So I should give every guy that comes my way a chance just because I may be passing over the person that I am meant to be with...even though there's a possibility that I'm not meant to be with anyone?

And with those guys, he and I would be suffering through a sex-less relationship which is most assuredly doomed from the start?

Sounds like this proposition isn't a good one.

-You're searching for a "Hollywood Hottie"....

I'm glad you know me so well....not. I know that I can't get men like this:

They're still nice to look at it. I'm not even going after that high of a number (9-10). I'm staying within my range (which I consider to be 7-8).

So let's stop with the dumbass-umptions. :)

This is why I call it "being realistic"....

If I were to do as so many people suggest--and I've continuously pointed it out--the relationship would start failing from the beginning.

I would have to lie to the man in some form about him being attractive enough for me. I would think that the man would assume that if a woman is interested in him, she finds him physically appealing (not all men). Since relationships are built on a foundation of trust, lying to him wouldn't be a great start.

He'll eventually want to have sex...which I can't give him. No fellatio, cunnilingus, handjob--not even kissing. How many men would like to be in such a relationship? Unless if they're asexual or eunachs, I would think most wouldn't want to be. I would also think that most would be hurt that their girlfriend didn't find them attractive and wish they would have told him in the beginning so he didn't have to waste his time.

This is why I feel it's better to not date unattractive men--it would be a waste of both of our times and the man should be with someone who can sexually perform honestly whether or not they're truly physically attracted to him. It's not because he's SO repulsive that it sickens me (I'm not exceptionally beauitful myself by any means..lol. Don't take this as insecurity though--I believe I'm pretty). It's because I don't want to hurt him in the long run and he doesn't deserve someone stringing him along.

You are free to disagree. That's fine. I just wanted to put this out there, because it seems that a lot of people think that unattractive wo/men should be given a chance by anyone without realizing that it may be detrimental for them.

They should be given a chance by people who don't really care about looks, someone who finds them exceptionally amazing in personality, or even someone that finds them sexy/hot/cute (remember, beauty is in the eye of the beholder).

[PhoenixRisingDK]

This is hilarious, and I'll tell you why.

Your sexual appeal and market value is reaching it's peak.
In just a few years, your desireability will start declining - first slowly... then more and more rapidly.

Approaches get farther and farther in between, your bits are saggy or hanging, or replaced with fakes.
And then, when you're in your mid 40's, you'll still be writing bitter blogs about how there are no men worth anything.

95% of women sharing your views are aiming WAY out of their own leagues - they ain't all that, they just think they are.
Because let's be honest,... humans are fucking ugly.
But men don't need to slap on war-paint by the bucket, to conceal it, they can just hit the gym instead.

The men you desire are as rare in between, as a woman with the brains to understand that attraction is made up of different internal and external factors... not just how you conceal your natural uglyness.
Some guy said 20%... it's even less...5% max.

And the majority of these sirloin steaks, will be working dead end jobs, because they were busy pumping iron and hunting cumrags, while everybody else was getting smarter and building carreers.
None... zero percent, of the jocks from my last year at school has amounted to anything... but at least they look good huh?
And they're still pumping iron and brainless hoes, and get dumped over and over and over... because they have no future.
They're losers with no skills, working dead end jobs, and no women want them for more than a bang or two.

So it seems your kind are facing quite the predicament.
And you can choose to either wisen up, or write stupid blogs for the next 20+ years, defending your dumb-ass choices, unless you're extremely lucky to score way out your leagues.

That, baby-doll, is being realistic!

And this is exactly why 'geeks' like me, working $100.000 jobs, embrace the more plain and shy wallflower girls.
They're smarter, more intelligent, more pleasant company, and generally have A LOT more to offer.

[ManaX]

Interesting.

[Joshua2332]

Such a stupid post. Somebody is upset. I pump iron, didn't go to school and make 65k a year at 22. ZERO debt, ZERO stress, yet I don't go hunting for p*ssy as you described above. However, I don't have the need to put other people down like you are attempting to do. Me going to the gym is called a hobby. I guarantee the guys who are ripped don't do it for women. Proof read your posts from now on.

[PhoenixRisingDK]

Well, congratulations on catching a break.
I can guarantee you, a lot of my schoolmates envy you.
Sorry if my life story is offensive to you, I can't do anythnig about that.
Nevertheless, that's how it went down.

Point is, attraction is more than just looking good.
Thousands of guys hit the gym every day, and never become more attractive because of it.
Sure, they may get ribbed, but there are more factors to attraction than dressing up, working out, and doing make-up.
And if people can't comprehend beyond that, they ARE shallow.

There's quite a substantial number of really great guys and gals out there, who are ordinary, or beyond average at best, never getting the fraction of attention they deserve, because of superficial bullshit like this.

They're more than just biceps, six-packs, and tits and ass.
Aren't you?

[RationalLioness]

Wow. You have no rationale at all. There was nothing superficial about this post and if you comprehended what I wrote, it would have been clear that I said that personality must be a factor.

Your case is one that shows that the adage "age comes with wisdom" isn't true. :/

[PhoenixRisingDK]

Guess we'll just have to read your blog in 20 years, to find out.

I get it... this is 'your' take, and how 'you' feel, and you can't change that.
But that doesn't make it a universal truth.

And I can promise you, IF you're so lucky to find THAT guy who just 'gets you'; the one you just click with on a deep emotional level, your soulmate, those abs ( or lack of), won't mean diddly squat.
And by your approach, you're narrowing your options substantially.

I'm not saying 'bang anything'... just broaden your horizons, just a tad.
Because tits ass, abs and biceps don't last forever... and then you're stuck with a guy that only has whatever is left (and vice versa)... it better be good, right?

[RationalLioness]

Let's insert some common sense... lol.

1) I don't write blogs. Funny how people try to make asinine assumptions. And this is my first Take.

2) When did I ever say that it wasn't better to have a good man? Again, if you read what I stated, I said that I want someone that I can have sex with because I'm attracted to him---sex is important in many relationships--and his personality is great.

3) I never said it was a "universal truth". I said it was "realistic". Going after someone that you're attracted to with a great personality is what many people want. But "settling" for someone that you're really not interested in can bode problems for the relationship later on.

You know how many wo/men are in sexless marriages? A LOT. Many are suffering because their wife/husband aren't into them. Some of them have NEVER been into them in the beginning and they can take it anymore. Why would I want to put a man through that? I wouldn't.

4) Where I am at is fine. I just need a change of venue.

[Nades]

Mmmm. There are some that can hit the gym and be smart. There are some that cannot. He does have a point when he says you should broaden your horizons. There’s nothing wrong with going with that model guy but an average attractive guy could offer more to you than that model. I didn’t read much of this blog or take or whatever they call it. But if your not approaching these model guys then you shouldn’t have the audacity to post this.

[Ozanne]

Just for the record, the guy chosen for the picture in the myTake is sooooo unattractive to me. For real. I can't stand that look. I find nothing appealing about it at all.

With that said - beauty is in the eye of the beholder. So if *I* find a trait attractive, it doesn't mean someone else will. All too often in my life, I will see one physical trait on a guy I just absolutely love and will run with it, while my female friends will say, "Eww.. you like him?" They don't see what I do. So to me, that particular guy at that time IS my 9-10. No one else's, but who cares? No one is going to influence my opinion of what a 10 is.

So when I was younger, at a bar getting hit on by what other girls seemingly thought were 10s and I found them to be pretty-boy douchebags, does that mean I'm the shallow one? I don't find him attractive, therefore not interested.

Shallowness is always mistaken for preferring a type, and when the popular, spoon-fed type is Brad Pitt or Angelina Jolie (or whoever it is these days) then I'm sorry but people like me find Brad Pitt to be too doll-faced to find attractive and since he's not my type, I don't get called shallow. But if a woman finds Brad Pitt attractive and not other types, then she's called shallow.

So you are right - this is a good myTake and people need to learn that types are personal and we will find who we find attractive based on what makes us tick, individually. If it's not the quintessential good-looks that we're spoon-fed, then we should only be so lucky to not be labeled as shallow.

For years I was attracted to Penn Jillette. Unless a guy was huge, had little round glasses, and a big mouth - I didn't find anyone else attractive. Was that shallow? No. If you have a type, the people who bark the loudest are usually the people who don't fit in to the type you like. :)

[RationalLioness]

I couldn't have said it as eloquently... lol. Thank you.

[Northeast106]

@Ozanne you should get MHO for this, well stated.

[RationalLioness]

I wish I could. But I can't.

[Watermelonoma]

The problem i have with this is that you haven't left much room for having a person grow on you at all. Sure, I tend to not pursue girls im not attracted to, but I don't get into relationships with these attractive girls either if her physical appearance is the main pull factor. When you disagree with statements like "Once you get to know a wo/man better, they become more attractive." it makes me wonder what you rank higher in your significant other. Most people only hae a set window of time in their lives when they are at their peak in terms of attractiveness, and that's it. Even during those peaks, a person can have many unattractive moments. God forbid, your marriage partner got into some automobile accident and became somewhat disfigured. By what you said, you would probably leave the person because their personality would have never grown on you.

@nalaa had some interesting insights on what being shallow/superficial means, but i think id take it one step further. I think its shallow to demand things from other people that you yourself do not possess or would not do.

The thing is... if im being honest... i don't really want to end up with a girl who thinks like this. if my personality, the very core of my being can't grow on a girl, i don't want to end up with her, because that kind of girl is a liability to me, not an asset. It's great that she found me physically appealing in the beginning.. and thats what I'd expect, but the emphasis on having the object of your sexual desire gets old. I don't want a girl who can't allow my personality to make me into a more attractive being in their eyes. The gems of the world... the true 10/10's are not women who value the flesh above the spirit... but the ones who value the spirit of the man above the flesh.

Women like the one in this video what i look for ultimately:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DrubRdzb46E

^ The only kind of women who i consider out of my league are women like this

[RationalLioness]

You didn't read. I just stated that I was with a guy, allowed his personality to grow, and nothing happened. It's not going to change.

Everything else you said is subjective. Whether or not you think that someone is asking higher than they are... doesn't mean they are.

[Watermelonoma]

i did read. I know you've been with a guy and allowed his personality to grow and it didn't work for you. The fact that it doesn't work for you (along with much of the stuff you stated in the take) is also subjective. But my subjective opinion, in response to your subjective opinion, is that people who can't allow a persons personality to become more important than the way they look aren't marriage material to me... because they become more of a liability in my life and not an asset. That's just my two cents on the matter. Not saying the take was shit or anything like that, but I have some fundamental disagreements with your ranking orders in terms of what makes someone worth pursuing romantically

[RationalLioness]

That isn't subjective. It's objective. If it was subjective, it could have been easily changed. It can't.

But that's fine. I don't have a ranking order by the way... looks ans personality like many people want.

[lovingme87]

I live your opinion on this. Makes you think. I do understand where she's coming but I'm the type who will pick personality over looks. Like you said looks can fade over time. Majority of the time they do. For instance I'm not as beautiful as I was in my early twenties to me. My fiance still loves me and has stuck with me through weight gain and it all. If he just loved me for my looks probably would of took off. Good point.

[Watermelonoma]

@lovingme87

precisely. =) Your husband is what i would view as an asset, because despite your guaranteed shortcomings over time where looks are concerned, you can sleep easy knowing that your personality grew on him well enough that even with the loss of your physical luster, he has a burning passion for you that never dies. A liability for me is a girl who no matter what, can't accept me if my looks went into decline, even if my personality remained stellar. That is who I'd rather live the rest of my life with

[loveisbeautiful]

If God did in fact create all people, he really did break the mold when he made me lol. See, I'm different then you and most people when it comes to looks. For instance the picture of that guy you have in this take, does nothing for me. I'm not attracted to him in the slightest. In the words of Shania Twain "That don't impress me much". I'm a person very in tuned to my emotions, so me it has to be a vibe thing, not a looks thing. I've just never really cared much about that or most of things people care about in relationships. Also, my idea of attractive is probably different then most. That's okay though.

I won't say I agree with this completely, but I do get the point and I do agree everybody is different and should respect that. However, I would also like to point out that looks, sex and great personality isn't how love is formed or relationships. I don't think people get that sometimes an interest in someone just happens and there's no reason for it. It just is, because relationships aren't formed on logical thinking they're formed on feelings and a connection.

[RationalLioness]

Lol. I know there's more to relationships than that and everyone is looking for something different, but I wouldn't ever try to shame you for it. :)

[loveisbeautiful]

I agree that everyone is looking for something different and I wouldn't try shame anyone either.

[gray_sailor]

I found your myTake to be mostly non-controversial. Mostly that is except for the title of the myTake. That title sort of burned the house down here on GaG for about the last week.

I've been thinking about it for a while and I think I came up with at least a partial explaination for people's reaction to the title and by extension, the whole myTake.

I don't ever use the adjective 'attractive' to describe personalities. That is a word I only associate with physical features. The word I use to describe a personality as being desirable is 'charming'.

She has an attractive body.
She has a charming personality.

I suspect that something similar is happening to a lot of people that reacted badly to your take. If, as with me, you only use the word attractive to refer to physical things like bodies, then your title comes off as biased against plain looking people. I recognize that attractiveness can cover a wide variety of features. It's just that the common usage of the term (at least among men) isn't used to refer to personalities. Hope that helps explain things a bit.

[DaniJ]

I see your point, and I can relate to most of this article, but there is one major flaw in your reasoning. You assume that we are looking for romance. In that case, it is unlikely that you would find it in someone physically unattractive. Nothing could be less true in my case however. I was not looking for romance. In fact, I'd just given up looking. I found him incredibly unattractive when I first met him. He is already 7 years older than me, and since he started balding at 16, he looks twice my age. He has thick, coke bottle glasses, barely any hair left on his head, facial hair (which is usually a turn off for me) and he's pretty scrawny. Nothing about him was attractive. Instead what I noticed was that we could practically read each others minds, we are so alike. Everything from the way we feel about certain issues in the world to song lyrics and TV shows. We would come up with the same ridiculous puns at the same time.
You mentioned being told that people seem more attractive over time, and that has certainly been true in my case. The traits that used to be turn offs are now endearing things about him.
I'm certainly not saying you should go date ugly guys. I'm just saying that if you keep an open mind and don't go looking for the romance, it may end up finding you. Attractive or not.

[Rawrzz]

Being sexually attracted to a person is kinda a necessity, yeah. Women are usually less inclined this way than men, given they usually look at the whole picture of the males' value: attractiveness, wealth, social status, experience, intelligence, personality, fit status, health. We hear about women going for really ugly or old guys because they have so much status or wealth or resources that they don't have to be attractive--his offspring will be guaranteed a much higher likelihood of survival and reproduction with all those resources, not to mention how the female would be protected and more than provided for.

Whereas men mostly look at attractiveness and personality--with a big emphasis on attractiveness and likelihood of sex. Not to make males out to be superficial, but really, biologically, that's the directive, "Fuck them all. No. No, really. Fuck them all." Hell, I think my dick is getting hard right now.

Though, I dislike the assertions that males are superficial. Pretty much everyone is at the end of the day--it takes effort and willpower and intelligence to become something other than base instincts. And even then, those instincts will still exist.

I didn't read the whole thing, but I think I got the point. People always spout this bullshit, "It's the inside that *REALLY* matters." Ahh, well, no. Maybe I'll say, "Okay, go date one of the ugliest people that exist, then."

Outside is what attracts, first. Then personality plays a role in whether or not one wants to stay with that person. Then, further, common interests or goals or beliefs will keep those two together longer, after the oxytocin and dopamine has been all used up on that initial stage puppy love.

People who say they look at personality more than looks are often just deluding themselves or lying to make themselves look good. Especially males. Of course, looking at personality for someone you want to *be* with for a long time, yeah, that makes sense. But still eying other candy.

[AlwaysBelieving]

Good take. Say if I met a gal online and we got along well and were able to converse. I met her IRL and I wasn't attracted to her physically, there's just something in me that wouldn't allow it to go any further. If that's me being shallow, so me it.

For that reason, I've mainly left online dating. Because the one I do get along with intellectually, I wasn't physically attracted to. This isn't to say I'm going to place physically attrativeness as the sole deciding factor. I guess that may be some people thinking that I "want it all." That may be, I've just learned (rather the hard way) that if you settle for what you want, you usually get less than what you settled for.

I also understand that I'm not going to be desireable to every gal. Just the same as no gal can or will be attractive to every guy. Take supermodels for an example (this is JUST an example), do a lot of guys think they're hot? Sure they do. Do some say "they need to eat a sammich"? of absolutelly. Take into the fact that these models are to sell a certain "look" / feeling / desire and then you get into it even more.

It's not being PC to other people, it's just more understanding and tolerance. And not just on the surface (being PC), but at the c0re as well.

Sorry for the jumping around, my mind just tends to do that.

[TedStar]

As long as you attract whoever you're attracted to then carry on living. The reasons behind who you are attracted to may be shallow or deeper. In your case it is both shallow in that you sound like you're more likely to longterm date a guy who has better looks> personality. That is shallow because I believe that choosing a longterm partner is about the time you spend not fucking which is 90+ % of the time you spend together. Might as well have friends and fuckbuddies lol. Now the depth of your situation is that for some reason you can't add personality to a persons attractiveness so therefore it is important that they be physically attractive to you. I may have missed your point (tell me if I have

If you pick something based on one or minimal characteristics it is shallow in my opinion @nalaa described it well. I don't understand how people get offended by being called shallow. Generally speaking choosing a relationship partner based on look s is shallow as there generally is a lot more to being a boyfriend/husband/wife/girlfriend than how you look. Now for picking a fuckbuddy choosing based on looks is not necessarily shallow as their appearance is why they got chose and their only criteria more often than not

Interesting take though. I'm still thinking about it

[YourFutureEx]

I want her to reply to your opinion.

[Song4TheBroken]

You are 100% correct mate. This entire take was just her trying to justify being shallow.

[Falling4UTC]

Lol it is funny how a lot of guys are easily offended by this. It is just you saying your opinion, and they can't say anything to change it. Whoever you are attracted to is who you are attracted to. And that is by all means okay.
I liked a guy that I thought was much more attractive than me and I couldnt stop liking him. I then discovrred he wasn't a good person so I dropped that crush. Sure, physical attractivness plays a major role for anybody. I just wish some people would have personality as a factor.
But honesly, everyone has their own preferences and people have to respect that. I love your take. Having your own preferences isn't shallow at all, and I wish people wouldn't find that so offensive.

[RationalLioness]

I as well. I don't understand why a lot of them think that "rating" me is going to make me change what I feel or think about myself.

I don't care... haha. I like who I like. :)

[Rincewind]

"Lol it is funny how a lot of guys are easily offended by this."
The problem is, men who only go for women who are skinny and have massive tits are labelled as being shallow and expecting too much. Girls are equally as offended by men having a particular preference.

The thing is, you are initially interested in a person by the way they look so yes, "Having your own preferences isn't shallow at all, and I wish people wouldn't find that so offensive"

People need to be less sensitive.

[RationalLioness]

No. a lot of men are usually called shallow because that's ALL they seem to talk about when the speak of women.

A lot of women will say looks and then talk about his personality or simply personality. That's the issue. It's not a double standard here.

[Falling4UTC]

@Rincewind I dont necessarily find that offensive unless they don't care for personality. It is okay to have preferences, but you have to respect someone and recognise them as a person, not as an object.
But I totally agree, people take things too far. Why be sesitive it just causes more problems, right?

And exactly what the @Take Owner said
I do notice it is very rare guys speak of personality, but if they do talk abot personality, that is someone you want in your life.

[Rincewind]

@Falling4UTC

"No. a lot of men are usually called shallow because that's ALL they seem to talk about when the speak of women. "

"But honesly, everyone has their own preferences and people have to respect that. I love your take. Having your own preferences isn't shallow at all, and I wish people wouldn't find that so offensive."

well a lot of men are only attracted to a woman by the way she looks, and couldnt care less about her personality, so who are you to call a man shallow because of his preferences?

"A lot of women will say looks and then talk about his personality or simply personality. That's the issue. It's not a double standard here."

there clearly are double standards here because a man can be shallow just because he will choose his partner based on looks, but again "everyone has their own preferences and people have to respect that"

[RationalLioness]

Because that's the definition of shallow--"lacking depth". If he's only with the girl for her looks and nothing else, that's shallow. Same for a woman. I wasn't advocating that.

If that's what he likes, that's it. It doesn't make it NOT shallow. And no, there's no double standard here.

[Falling4UTC]

Well I am not calling anyone shallow honestly. I just think that is why other people tend to call others shallow, due to talking mainly about physical appearence besides personality. I searched up the definition of shallow and it is "liking someone only for their looks and not taking personality in as a factor." Therefore, by definition, the people who dont have personality as a factor is named shallow.

Preferences is what they like in a girl. In my opinion, I dont mind it people have preferences as long as they tale personality into account.

[Falling4UTC]

Yeah there were multiple answers when I searched the definition of shallow up. He one talking about looks only was the one I found most accurate

[been_waiting]

@ricewind all take owner is saying is that she won't date someone she finds unattractive and you're comparing the very human tendency to only pursue attractive mates to a guy who only wants a girl with a body type that's nearly impossible. Lol.

[been_waiting]

@rincewind

[kheserthorpe]

Wanting to find the person you're dating sexually attractive is normal, and you're not doing anyone a favor dating people you're not attracted to.

As long as people you find attractive want to date (not just hook up in the case of women) you, your standards are not an issue.

If nobody you find attractive wants to date you, you need to get more attractive.

I will say there is a bit of an unrealistic virgin move to only be attracted to like 0.25% of the population. In those cases I do suspect they'd find a decently attractive person in real life, if they actually sleep with them, is more fun then jerking off to a 10 on a screen. But that aside, you gotta find them desirable.

[RationalLioness]

Makes sense.

[heavensgift2girls]

It is only realistic when you actually can draw the types of people you are attracted to. The fact is that unattractive people often have to settle for unattractive partners or they remain alone.

I have no problem with people only dating who they are attracted to, but when they keep getting angry and ranting they can't find anyone because their standards are too high they need to accept people will tell them to lower their standards. It is typically during these rants by people that think they are hotter than they are, that they get told to settle for a less attractive partner.

[RationalLioness]

Of course. But the problem that I'm speaking about is people who consider it "shallow" for those of us who don't date unattractive guys without realizing that there are very serious issues with what they're saying.

What guy would like to get into a relationship with ZERO sex? Or she finds him unattractive? Or she's sleeping with him out of pity which is why she looks like she doesn't enjoy herself or that she lies to him about him being hot for his self-esteem? All issues.

[heavensgift2girls]

I personally believe any truly attractive trait is now called shallow. If I want an honest answer about what someone finds attractive, I specifically have to ask someone for the traits they find attractive that would be considered shallow. Then they will finally tell you what they want in a partner. Otherwise they pretend to be deeper than they are, and end up describing the boring friend that they would never want to have sex with.

Less attractive people don't have the same options. That is just a fact of life for a lot of people. If they want things like companionship, they have to accept they won't be attracted to their partners, and their partners won't be attracted to them. Even unattractive people, don't want to date unattractive people. So there are people that tolerate zero sex, go to prostitutes, tolerate cheating partners, or have other less than ideal arrangements.

[Bluemax]

Yes!

I for one would LOVE to see an end to the word "shallow" as it applies to whom we find attractive!

Furthermore, giving someone the proverbial chance I feel is probably the insensitive thing to do. Refusing someone up front is generally the compassionate thing to do.

Question though. What would you do, rationallioness, if you were (heaven forbid) in an accident which rendered you disfigured? Now your appearance is no longer in the 7 to 8 range, but we'll say the 3-4 range. What do you do now?

[RationalLioness]

I'd go after the 3-4. I can't expect people to still be attracted to me.

[Bluemax]

Hmm. I thought you said you can't be attracted to someone in that range. Why would that change if you found yourself physically unattractive?

Perhaps you'd like to look at a question I posed earlier today. It pertains to confidence, which I know figures largely in the scheme of attraction. You can find it here:
www.girlsaskguys.com/.../q1440477-ladies-really-just-how-important-is-confidence

[Bluemax]

If you say, "I'd go after the 3-4," this implies it's a matter of choice, therefore you CAN date people you're not attracted to. You simply choose not to. There's a difference between being unable to do something and unwilling to do something.

[RationalLioness]

When did I say I couldn't date someone I was attracted to? I explained in the post that I did and it didn't work out well. I can't have SEX. If the person was willing to forgo any sexual relationship for a purely emotional one, I wouldn't mind it.

[Bluemax]

Well, isn't an emotional relationship without sex what most people would call friendship?

Furthermore, would YOU be willing to forgo sex if all that was offered to you in life were 3s and 4s?

[RationalLioness]

Not to asexual people. They can still have meaningful intimate relationships without physical intimacy.

If I was in a horrific accident as you proposed, I would. I would no longer be interested. Seeing as I will be healthy hopefully, then I see no reason to do so.

[Bluemax]

Yes, that's of course true about asexuals, but most people in the world aren't asexuals. I'm assuming you're not an asexual. Am I correct?

Why do you think a horrific accident would change your sexuality? I know one such person and her sexuality wasn't changed a bit. Why would your sexual desire change if you were in an accident?

[RationalLioness]

There are also people with low sex drives or people who feel that sex isn't truly important in a relationship. The point is that it does not mean that an emotional relationship is purely a friendship and not a more intimate one.

It wouldn't change my sexuality. I would still be straight. But I would have no desire for sex I am completely certain. To go from being pretty to horrendous would definitely change ME--I wouldn't want to have sex with anyone. Period.

[Bluemax]

I'm sorry, when I said "sexuality" I didn't mean orientation. I should have clarified that.

"The point is that it does not mean that an emotional relationship is purely a friendship and not a more intimate one."
Yes, I agree that's true for some. I don't believe that's true for most.

That's interesting that you think it would change your libido to have sex with other people. It would not be that way for me at all. I'm assuming you're not an asexual now and that you like and desire to have sex with other people as of now. Am I correct?

[RationalLioness]

Yes. But if I'm amputated or burned in some way, nothing anyone would say would change how I would feel about myself. I wouldn't feel attractive in any way.

[Bluemax]

I think I understand where you're coming from. If you don't feel yourself attractive, then you don't feel you would want to be with anyone else sexually. Am I (more or less) correct?

[RationalLioness]

More or less.

[Bluemax]

Is your sex drive partially based on how attractive you believe yourself to be?

[RationalLioness]

No. I just wouldn't want to have sex with ANYONE because I would feel that someone is repulsed by me if I were to be disfigured. Doesn't matter what they say.

I would still have my libido, but I wouldn't truly want to have sex with anyone because of it.

[Bluemax]

Interesting. I wonder how many others feel similarly.

[ShaeNielson]

I agree with this very much. People have got to stop being so hurt over this. What is attractive to one, can be unattractive to another, so just because I fin someone unattractive, doesn't it mean my friend will too.
You can't force women to want to be with you, by guilt tripping them and telling them how shallow and wrong they are. I mostly see this hypocrisy in somewhat unattractive men, who feel like a drop dead gorgeous woman is a horrible being, because she doesn't want to be with him.
But at the same time, he have no problem making fun of "ugly girls" and would never be with one.

You have to be attracted to each other, otherwise it won't work. That's life, suck it up.

[RationalLioness]

Yes. Attractive guy with a great personality.

[taujun]

In my experience women are no where near as judgmental about looks as men are. I sometimes don't give a damn about what I look like and still am able to attract women through charisma alone.

Women (by my observation) seem to gravitate towards men with leadership qualities, freedom, power, and high social status above all else. Men on the other hand (on average) really couldn't give a damn whether a girl was rich and famous or not, they only judge a woman off of appearance.

This makes sense biologically because a man needs to be aroused to get a woman pregnant, but a woman can get pregnant in the absence of sexual arousal, so of course a man needs to be turned on by a woman's appearance, in order to reproduce.

[RationalLioness]

I'm so glad you said it was in your experience. Mine is opposite. Men are the same in our scenarios but in my experience, women--unless if they're desperate or insecure--aren't going to screw someone they're not into physically.

I don't want a man with a lot of power or high status personally. That shit's annoying to me. If I can live comfortably with the guy, that's great.

[lovingme87]

I agree 100%. Looks are good to have in a mate but definitely not number one on my list. Can you be there when I need you? Can you be a protector and provider if I have children for you? Are you loving yet strong? That's what I look for.

[RestlessYouth_]

God I really hate most of the men on this site. A woman says she wants to date a man she's actually sexually attracted to and all of a sudden she's a shallow whore who will never find love. There's honestly no need for this take because they wouldn't "get it" if it hit them with a brick. Keep doing you honey, date who you want and no need to feel bad or explain anything.

[RationalLioness]

LOL. I haven't been on GaG long, but is this how the majority of them tend to be? I thought I could help and explain, but it's not going over so well. :)

[RestlessYouth_]

Girl yes! It's what's stopped me from coming here often. They can't seem learn the difference between someone you're attracted to, and only wanting to date Models with Bill Gates money. The lack of complex thought in their minds is a serious problem. I used to want to do the same but talking to a lot of them is worse than talking to a brick wall.

[been_waiting]

For fucking real. These guys are ridiculous

[Riggers]

Its the same for both Genders. People dont like unnatractive people, Thats just how we function mentally as humans, It dosent make people assholes or shallow, It just makes us Human.

For attracive people, This is good, For people like me, It means you are etternally fucked.

Thats just how the world work's im afraid !.

[RationalLioness]

Ooh. It's not "don't like". I can befriend them. But I can't have sex with them. And you're not fucked. You're attractive. It's weird to say because you're 16 though.

[Bonnie12I27I12]

i personally dont think that wanting someone who is attractive is shallow because everyone has their own type of "attractive". i might find a guy who is 6'2, blond, blue eyed, and thin perfect while my best friend may think he's the ugliest thing ever and prefer someone who is 6'4, brown eyed, and muscular. you can find that "perfect" looking person. our differences in opinions actually makes it easier for us to find someone who is "perfect" looking because we find different things to be "perfect"

[Prof_Don]

I agree with you... I feel that primal urge to want to sexually defile your partner, is pivotal for the relationship lasting long term.

The person doesn't have to be a 9 or 10... but the person has to be attractive ENOUGH to that person, to have that urge to power fuck that person. :)

[RationalLioness]

YES.

[Prof_Don]

Can you believe that someone voted DOWN my opinion? That person must have never power fucked someone before! :-P

[RationalLioness]

Lmao!!!

[ManuelMarquez]

@Prof_Don you remind me of raptists, which most do what they do for power and control and since you mentioned power before ''fuck'' it is scary since it seems you only have sex with a woman to have power over her.

[RationalLioness]

@ManuelMarquez

No. He's not talking about that. He's saying that he feels that in order for a relationship to survive, you must have that lustful desire to just bang the hell out of a woman for both HIS and HER pleasure.

[Prof_Don]

@ManuelMarquez Bro u seriously got me all wrong. It's a joke! I know the @Asker knows that i'm not talking about rape or "controlling" her.

I'm not one of those male GaG misogynists that troll around the site.

[ManuelMarquez]

@Prof_Don sorry for misunderstanding you.

[xxxHolicxxx]

Also, you decide what you find attractive. Whoever is attractive to you, might not be attractive to another person. People can't decide who you should 'give a chance', it's totally personal. Which therefore also means you're not shallow. You don't necessarily want someone who is deemed hot by everybody, you have to be attracted to him (as a person) and only you decide who that person is.

[RationalLioness]

Exactly. It's common sense. So why do a lot of people not get that?

[xxxHolicxxx]

Because people like to bitch about stuff so they can feel superior. Also, because they are quite simple minded. They think because you say the sun is round, every round thing is the sun. And clearly they judge their partners by certain criteria if they think that you are doing it. You can't help who you are attracted to.

[mistninja314]

Great take and I agree with you completely you're not SHALLOW at all IMHO ^_^... You have my respect since you kept it real unlike most people on this site when it comes to this subject,

i1127.photobucket.com/.../...f.com-add-text_15.gif

[mistninja314]

Like I always say "If you don't have any EYE CANDY why would I be interested in your store?" yeah I'm an EYES MAN I must admit. So if you can't turn me on visually... why would I want to date you?

People have called me SHALLOW a lot for just having standards for what I expect in a woman. I mean shouldn't we all? (Nice body or cute face atleast)

[mistninja314]

yeah I must admit that I'm an EYES MAN. So if you can't turn me on visually... why would I even want to date you?*

[Yc2K15]

I think it's crazy that anyone is dating someone because "it's ok to". Your points are great but it's hard to tell what direction you are heading. Perhaps you haven't found a true love? You never know what they are gonna look like, it doesn't matter if it's right.

[RationalLioness]

I thought it was obvious? Never settle for something you don't want.. lol

[Yc2K15]

Yeah but shit. Why wouldn't you? Doesn't everyone do that? What is wrong with people?