CaliGuy Posted October 23, 2008 Posted October 23, 2008 You've been interested in her for a YEAR. She had interest first? Really? No, you struck when you had the chance. You may not control who you're attracted to, but you CAN control your actions. People in long-term relationships are often attracted to other people, only difference is a decent person NEVER acts on it. "Look, but don't touch." But here? YOU chose to make your interest known, and YOU kissed her. Honesty, CG... I've never been more disappointed in an LSer in all my time here. This is someone else's thread and is off topic. If you want to chastise me, do it on the thread I started on this issue.
CaliGuy Posted October 23, 2008 Posted October 23, 2008 Posts don't exist in a vacuum. It's completely relevant to the subject of this thread. He's claiming he himself is "well-balanced." I challenge that. And you, being an Attorney and all, should know that I am not on trial in THIS thread on a different issue. This thread is about being balanced and my issue in the OTHER trial has little to do with the subject. It isn't about ME, it's about men in general. We've heard your opening statement on my thread. I suggest you make your case and closing statement there
flc Posted October 23, 2008 Posted October 23, 2008 Instead of denying facts and bitching about how unrealistic and materialistic I am, why don't you take a look at yourselves and make necessary changes, because like or not, these criterias are what most women are looking for. If anything, I'm doing you all a favor by giving you a female perspective on what we're looking for in a soulmate and you'all should thank me. I have no reason to make changes I am having no problems finding attractive well balanced women to date and have relationships with. So I don't need your favors and the women I am with are not looking for Prince Charming they are looking for a real human being.
jadedone Posted October 23, 2008 Posted October 23, 2008 Most of the well balanced men are overlooked because they are not good looking and rich.
Author Shygirl15 Posted October 23, 2008 Author Posted October 23, 2008 Most of the well balanced men are overlooked because they are not good looking and rich. They are not well balanced, then.
CaliGuy Posted October 23, 2008 Posted October 23, 2008 They are not well balanced, then. LOL, that's hilarious. Your looks or wealth have absolutely nothing to do with being well balanced.
Trimmer Posted October 23, 2008 Posted October 23, 2008 Most of the well balanced men are overlooked because they are not good looking and rich. They are not well balanced, then. Heh heh... I think we may be getting an idea of why you aren't having luck finding an acceptable man. I don't know whose balance needs adjustment - are you sure it's all those men around you, or ???
LoveDeluxe78 Posted October 23, 2008 Posted October 23, 2008 LOL, that's hilarious. Your looks or wealth have absolutely nothing to do with being well balanced. I'm female and I completely agree with this! I think well-balanced is definitely more about your inner qualities and strength than wealth and looks! I know PLENTY of men who are wealthy and/or good looking and SOOOOO far from being well-balanced!!! On the other hand, and I could care less about wealth since I'm an independent woman with her own career, you do have to be attracted enough to a person in order to date them, and while a man may be well balanced enough, but if you're not attracted to them, then that may not work out dating wise! However, to say that wealth and good looks are necessary in order for someone to be well-balanced is a bit outrageous!!! By your argument, it would also follow logic that if a woman is not good looking or, what would be the gender stereotype equivalent of a man being wealthy, perhaps a good homemaker, that she isn't well balanced?
Taramere Posted October 23, 2008 Posted October 23, 2008 Dating is becoming boring, boring, boring with each passing day .. Appears like well balanced men do not exist anymore, unless you want to date their fathers. They're either: - clingy/needy or emotionally guarded - bad boy/cocky types or doormats - totally clueless or think they know too much This is all there's left ladies, so take you pick! Some people are just at their worst when placed in an unfamiliar situation with an unfamiliar person. It can bring out shy, insecure behaviour or irritating bravado, and you won't necessarily be seeing the person as their close friends and family see them. People do sometimes need a bit of time to relax and bloom in new company. Ever watched a friend you care about behaving like a bit of a wanker in unfamiliar surroundings? Ever been that person yourself, and wondered what the hell you're doing/saying? For all the talk on this board about being a well balanced person, it's a state that most people probably have to work pretty hard towards; maybe achieving it for only temporary bursts of time. Life is after all filled with people, situations and stressors that can throw us off our poise. Good friendships and relationships involve the participants helping eachother to achieve balance and their potential as people, rather than starting off with an expectation of perfection. We're all flawed. A balanced partner is probably nothing more than someone whose faulty psychological make-up bounces nicely off our own.
samspade Posted October 23, 2008 Posted October 23, 2008 I'm female and I completely agree with this! I think well-balanced is definitely more about your inner qualities and strength than wealth and looks! This is true... I don't want to pile on the OP. There is nothing wrong with looking for a man who is on a steady career track and not financially irresponsible. Women want their men to be providers (no matter how independently wealthy a woman is, it's biological for them to seek protection from a man). So I don't know if by "good income" she meant Daddy Warbucks, or just able to hold down a decent job, but from an evolutionary (and practical) standpoint, a dirtbag who can't keep a job is not going to make an ideal mate for a woman or seed for her offspring.
Author Shygirl15 Posted October 23, 2008 Author Posted October 23, 2008 I really don't understand why is it when people openly admit that they are looking for good looking mates with successful careers and/or financially stable, are being labelled as materialistic and unrealistic. Look, I don't want to feel like I have to settle with someone. I'm physically attractive, have a good career and I'm taking good care of my finances, and I want a partner who can offer the same. I don't want to get dragged down into someone's debts. Now, I agree that inner qualities are also very important, but that's not the first thing that attracts us to someone. Some guys who have claimed in other threads that "men are visual" are now dismissing the physically attractive requirement on this thread just to win the argument. Or perhaps this requirement only applies when its the guys who are looking, and not the ladies???
LoveDeluxe78 Posted October 23, 2008 Posted October 23, 2008 I really don't understand why is it when people openly admit that they are looking for good looking mates with successful careers and/or financially stable, are being labelled as materialistic and unrealistic. Look, I don't want to feel like I have to settle with someone. I'm physically attractive, have a good career and I'm taking good care of my finances, and I want a partner who can offer the same. I don't want to get dragged down into someone's debts. Now, I agree that inner qualities are also very important, but that's not the first thing that attracts us to someone. Well of course, I agree you don't want to dragged down by someone's debts, I can understand that, but at the same time, you do realize most attorneys are about $150K in debt paying off their student loans right? lol So I think it's more about having a steady job, goals, ambition, then just being wealthy alone! As for looks, I guess I do see your point now in that you were talking about men TO DATE....so while I know plenty of well balanced men who are not high on the attractive scale, guess that wouldn't make a difference if a person was not attracted to them!!!!
Author Shygirl15 Posted October 23, 2008 Author Posted October 23, 2008 I'm female and I completely agree with this! I think well-balanced is definitely more about your inner qualities and strength than wealth and looks! I know PLENTY of men who are wealthy and/or good looking and SOOOOO far from being well-balanced!!! How do you define well-balanced, LoveDeluxe? Because it looks like everyone has their own definition here..
CaliGuy Posted October 23, 2008 Posted October 23, 2008 I really don't understand why is it when people openly admit that they are looking for good looking mates with successful careers and/or financially stable, are being labelled as materialistic and unrealistic. Look, I don't want to feel like I have to settle with someone. I'm physically attractive, have a good career and I'm taking good care of my finances, and I want a partner who can offer the same. I don't want to get dragged down into someone's debts. Now, I agree that inner qualities are also very important, but that's not the first thing that attracts us to someone. Some guys who have claimed in other threads that "men are visual" are now dismissing the physically attractive requirement on this thread just to win the argument. Or perhaps this requirement only applies when its the guys who are looking, and not the ladies??? The problem is you are equating their financial success to being a successful, well-balanced man and nothing could be further from the truth. One other thing I would mention is that with wealth in a man comes even higher expectations on his S/O. In other words, if you want to be with a successful, wealthy man you had better be smoking hot. Because with wealth and success a man can pretty much dictate what woman he wants. Sad, but true. The inner success of a man determines how well-balanced he is. The outer success can often be associated with a lust for money or power. Neither of which are commonly associated with good, well balanced men. They're just jerks with cash. Cheers.
CommitmentPhobe Posted October 23, 2008 Posted October 23, 2008 I don't want to feel like I have to settle with someone. I'm physically attractive, have a good career and I'm taking good care of my finances Ah...... another great catch that just can't find a partner. Sounds like that great musician that can't find a great audience
Yamaha Posted October 23, 2008 Posted October 23, 2008 As for looks, I guess I do see your point now in that you were talking about men TO DATE....so while I know plenty of well balanced men who are not high on the attractive scale, guess that wouldn't make a difference if a person was not attracted to them!!!! So , what type of attraction are we talking about here? Are you talking about the 1-10 scale or if the guy is confident and that you have a connection? Attraction comes in many forms...
LoveDeluxe78 Posted October 23, 2008 Posted October 23, 2008 As for looks, I guess I do see your point now in that you were talking about men TO DATE....so while I know plenty of well balanced men who are not high on the attractive scale, guess that wouldn't make a difference if a person was not attracted to them!!!! So , what type of attraction are we talking about here? Are you talking about the 1-10 scale or if the guy is confident and that you have a connection? Attraction comes in many forms... For me, it's definitely a connection, but chemistry has to be there too! With that said, you don't have to be totally Mr. Hot Stuff 10 on the scale, you just have to meet a certain minimum level of attractiveness and with each person, it varies! And...the more confident and a decent, good person a guy is, the more I'm going to be attracted to him even if he wasn't on the upper range of my scale!
LoveDeluxe78 Posted October 23, 2008 Posted October 23, 2008 How do you define well-balanced, LoveDeluxe? Because it looks like everyone has their own definition here.. I know, that's why we're all disagreeing! lol And again, we'll just speak of well-balanced men for dating, so for me, he would have to be: 1. Caring, honest, trustworthy, loyal - but these are a given 2. True Confidence - no arrogance or too much insecurity 3. Strong sense of who he is as a person - emotionally and mentally balanced 4. Passionate about life and the people in his life 5. Multi-faceted - has many interests, open to learning and trying new things 6. Ambitious - career is not as important as how passionate he is about what he does, whether he is hardworking, financially responsible (DOES NOT HAVE TO BE WEALTHY), etc. 7. Sense of humor 8. Good sense of values I know, it seems like I'm asking for a lot right? But I think these are traits everyone is looking for in some sense. Since we are talking about dating, yes, I'd have to be attracted to him, so physical appearances do matter, but that all depends on whether there is chemistry between you and that person.... Oh yeah, and he'd have to be OPEN to a relationship or at the stage in his life where he is looking for one! I've dated men with all of the above qualities, but they weren't looking for something more or maybe it was the other way around, when I wasn't looking for something more serious!
Author Shygirl15 Posted October 23, 2008 Author Posted October 23, 2008 Well of course, I agree you don't want to dragged down by someone's debts, I can understand that, but at the same time, you do realize most attorneys are about $150K in debt paying off their student loans right? lol So I think it's more about having a steady job, goals, ambition, then just being wealthy alone! As for looks, I guess I do see your point now in that you were talking about men TO DATE....so while I know plenty of well balanced men who are not high on the attractive scale, guess that wouldn't make a difference if a person was not attracted to them!!!! Oh, I see. I can see you jumped and replied without reading the thread perhaps? First off, I'm not sure who who threw in the term "wealthy" in the first place because all I said was "financially stable/good income", so I'm not sure how to respond about the wealthy thing you're talking about. 2nd, any sensible person knows that good career does not guarantee financial stability. Your example of an attorney in debt is quite right. However, there are also some guys with good careers and financial status to match with. Am I unrealistic to look for these? Again, how do you define well balanced? An IT Engineer, who rates 7 physically, financially stable (say makes $200K, no overwhelming debts), divorced, has kids, kind hearted, loving, faithful, insecure, is balanced well enough for me to date. Well balanced for me is when the negatives and positives characteristics balance themselves out, or positives a little higher than negatives. I'm not looking for a flawless man. But again, even these type of men are still hard to find these days.
Yamaha Posted October 23, 2008 Posted October 23, 2008 For me, it's definitely a connection, but chemistry has to be there too! With that said, you don't have to be totally Mr. Hot Stuff 10 on the scale, you just have to meet a certain minimum level of attractiveness and with each person, it varies! And...the more confident and a decent, good person a guy is, the more I'm going to be attracted to him even if he wasn't on the upper range of my scale! Since most people decide within a few minutes if they want to date the person or just be friends, how do you find out if they are a decent, good person? ( or is it just a feeling )
Author Shygirl15 Posted October 23, 2008 Author Posted October 23, 2008 My dear LoveDeluxe, let's be realistic. How do you develop chemistry with someone without being physically attracted to them first? Can you clarify that?
Yamaha Posted October 23, 2008 Posted October 23, 2008 Oh, I see. I can see you jumped and replied without reading the thread perhaps? First off, I'm not sure who who threw in the term "wealthy" in the first place because all I said was "financially stable/good income", so I'm not sure how to respond about the wealthy thing you're talking about. 2nd, any sensible person knows that good career does not guarantee financial stability. Your example of an attorney in debt is quite right. However, there are also some guys with good careers and financial status to match with. Am I unrealistic to look for these? Again, how do you define well balanced? An IT Engineer, who rates 7 physically, financially stable (say makes $200K, no overwhelming debts), divorced, has kids, kind hearted, loving, faithful, insecure, is balanced well enough for me to date. Well balanced for me is when the negatives and positives characteristics balance themselves out, or positives a little higher than negatives. I'm not looking for a flawless man. But again, even these type of men are still hard to find these days. I think your narrrowing the playing field quite a bit with your requirements but if you are willing to wait periods without a bf then that is your choice. I would ask what you feel you bring to the table to get your "well-balanced" man?
Author Shygirl15 Posted October 23, 2008 Author Posted October 23, 2008 One other thing I would mention is that with wealth in a man comes even higher expectations on his S/O. In other words, if you want to be with a successful, wealthy man you had better be smoking hot. Because with wealth and success a man can pretty much dictate what woman he wants. Cali, I can see the whole thing has shifted from "financially stable" to "wealthy". These are two separate status. I'm not looking for wealthy, just someone stable enough not to drag me into whatever debts they accumulated before they met me. I believe we all do not want this happening to us now, do we?
LoveDeluxe78 Posted October 23, 2008 Posted October 23, 2008 My dear LoveDeluxe, let's be realistic. How do you develop chemistry with someone without being physically attracted to them first? Can you clarify that? Oh I've felt strong chemistry with guys I haven't been COMPLETELY attracted to at first sight before so for me, it's happened!
Trimmer Posted October 23, 2008 Posted October 23, 2008 I really don't understand why is it when people openly admit that they are looking for good looking mates with successful careers and/or financially stable, are being labelled as materialistic and unrealistic. Look, I don't want to feel like I have to settle with someone. I'm physically attractive, have a good career and I'm taking good care of my finances, and I want a partner who can offer the same. I will strongly defend your right to seek whatever kind of partner you are attracted to, and I won't judge you for the type of man you seek. Where I get my hackles up is that you are judging men that don't meet your requirements (including attractive?) as "not balanced," as if they (we) don't meet some universal, balanced standard, and then further deign to grace us with your sage advice (which we should be thankful for) as to how we should all change to meet your needs. I understand what you are looking for and I wish you good luck, but I can't have a lot of sympathy (woe is you) that the world is not beating a path to your door to make the search easier for you. As I said, you may well find the perfect man, but don't you know it - he'll probably be looking for the perfect woman.
Recommended Posts