movingonandon Posted February 4, 2009 Posted February 4, 2009 I agree. The question is, why all this affection and chemistry that all of us here claim to have for our SOs dies almost immediately after we say "I Do"? Because for most women marriage is an end in itself, not means to solidify the relationship so it could thrive even more. So once they get it, they start having "headaches" every other day, put on some "extra" pounds, etc. and worst of all - succumb to the "Well, I walked him down the isle, he's got nowhere to go, I can relax now." mindset.
Shygirl15 Posted February 4, 2009 Posted February 4, 2009 Because for most women marriage is an end in itself, not means to solidify the relationship so it could thrive even more. So once they get it, they start having "headaches" every other day, put on some "extra" pounds, etc. and worst of all - succumb to the "Well, I walked him down the isle, he's got nowhere to go, I can relax now." mindset. It is the same for men as well, M. Flowers stop, no more dinner dates, suprise gifts etc, get cranky all the time etc etc, so yeah, I'll ocassionally fake a headache because nothing seems to please him anyway, so why bother. Bottom line, the only way to keep a relationship alive is NOT to get married, we all agree?
Trialbyfire Posted February 4, 2009 Posted February 4, 2009 Because for most women marriage is an end in itself, not means to solidify the relationship so it could thrive even more. So once they get it, they start having "headaches" every other day, put on some "extra" pounds, etc. and worst of all - succumb to the "Well, I walked him down the isle, he's got nowhere to go, I can relax now." mindset. You don't learn much, do you? It's always the opposite genders fault... Marriage/relationships take two to tango. There are no angels or demons in 99% of the cases, unless there's substance abuse or mental illness involved. I don't know if you run around with blinders but I've seen a lot of obese, married men around, who dress like absolute pigs. Let me guess, it's the wives fault for not dressing them...
PinkKittyKat Posted February 4, 2009 Posted February 4, 2009 I'm familiar with both "types" of attraction. Most of my exes were either of average or below average appearance. It was their personalities that made me view them in a new light. Unfortunately, when we started having problems, all of a sudden I was only able to see their appearances at "face value", which to me, wasn't really that attractive. My current bf is reeeeeallly hot. Model hot. He is so incredibly attractive that I used to constantly wonder what he's doing with me. (I know now it's because he feels the same way about me! ) We have so much in common and enjoy all the same things. But it helps that there is such a high physical compatibility. The first time I saw him after high school was a shock. He used to be a short, chubby-ish kid with glasses, TERRIBLE clothes and frizzy hair. He walked up a few years ago in his low rise bootcut jeans, partially unbuttoned black shirt, and I was just floored. He grew taller, slimmed down, got some amazing arms, a jawline to die for, amazing hair, olive skin.... his coworkers and friends always tease him and call him a GQ model. People stop him on the street and ask him if he's famous. He has to tell waitresses/baristas/random girls to "not bother him while he's with his gf". I basically wonder what he's doing with a plain little goth girl. Hahaha. Stupid part is that all my OLD exes were the "What is HE doing with HER!" syndrome. I have been asked to model, both in "arty" shoots and softcore porn shoots. I have been lusted after openly by most of the male members(and some females) of my social group. Somehow, none of this ever seems to penetrate my opinion that I am fairly unattractive. My best friend says that I'm FINALLY dating a guy good looking enough for me. LOL So I can't complain too much, and I doubt i'll stop being attracted to him any time soon. Even when we have fights, I mentally curse him for being so devilishly handsome. Which is the complete opposite from all my other exes. :love:Curse his devilish handsomeness!
Shygirl15 Posted February 4, 2009 Posted February 4, 2009 My guess is that, like TBF said, one or both partners stop putting in the romantic effort necessary for the relationship to thrive and the attraction to continue. Yes. and this normally happens soon after people get married. It's very rare to see equal efforts from both ends. It's always one person putting more efforts while the other just relaxing, and that can be very frustrating.
Star Gazer Posted February 4, 2009 Posted February 4, 2009 My point. If attraction requires effort... it's not attraction. Your love is bought and paid for by attention and affirmation. Take that away and you have nothing but memories. You're one who clearly believes attraction is based solely on appearance. I do not agree with that perspective.
Untouchable_Fire Posted February 4, 2009 Posted February 4, 2009 Not going to happen. Sorry, kiddo. Kiddo? What do you think your older than me? I doubt it. If you don't want my help when it all goes wrong... that's your choice. Hey, maybe I'm wrong or someday your attraction won't be a pay to play situation.
AlektraClementine Posted February 4, 2009 Posted February 4, 2009 I really hope that there is no truth this "everything falls apart after marriage" theory. I fully intend to marry the man I'm with now. For me, the idea of marrying him motivates me to start looking at myself in wifely terms. It causes me to identify those areas I wish to improve upon before entering into the marriage. I am learning to cook. I'm taking more care in scheduling and routine around my house. Taking a more proactive approach to cleaning up messes (in my life) as well as paying close attention to our sexual needs. Mine and his. I think it all boils down to contribution. I realize I'm taking a left turn here on the subject but just follow me if you will. If my SO began cooling off in terms of affection, emotional support, getting lazy about the relationship, I know that it would turn me off. First emotionally and intellectually, then what comes next? Sexually. So for me, the attraction to my SO is a big mixture of things. Physical probably impacts it the least. Have you ever heard the expression..."Men learn to love the woman they are attracted to and women become more and more attracted to the person that they love"? I hate to promote something so gender specific but I wonder how much, if any, truth there is to it.
Trialbyfire Posted February 4, 2009 Posted February 4, 2009 I'm really, really getting to be a firm believer that everyone has their language of love. If you do things for someone, do they appreciate it? Maybe, maybe not because it might be meaningless in their language of love. If you both come from similar backgrounds, values, etc, you might find that you have compatible languages of love, where the things you do to say "I love you", are intuitive, understood and appreciated by both people. So Alektra, if the things you're doing are what he appreciates, then that's great! But make certain you're doing it for yourself, as a form of self-improvement, as well. This way, if he doesn't appreciate it, what actions are meaningful to him?
Untouchable_Fire Posted February 4, 2009 Posted February 4, 2009 You're one who clearly believes attraction is based solely on appearance. I do not agree with that perspective. No, I agree with you on that. Sexual chemistry is built on multiple variables, and appearance is just one part.
AlektraClementine Posted February 4, 2009 Posted February 4, 2009 I'm really, really getting to be a firm believer that everyone has their language of love. If you do things for someone, do they appreciate it? Maybe, maybe not because it might be meaningless in their language of love. If you both come from similar backgrounds, values, etc, you might find that you have compatible languages of love, where the things you do to say "I love you", are intuitive, understood and appreciated by both people. So Alektra, if the things you're doing are what he appreciates, then that's great! But make certain you're doing it for yourself, as a form of self-improvement, as well. This way, if he doesn't appreciate it, what actions are meaningful to him? Great point! And I agree 100%. The cool thing is that I AM doing all of the aforementioned things for me. It's an inspiration that has come over me. My feelings for my SO were most definitely a catalyst of sorts however, I feel great about myself and the way I've been living my life lately. As far as his needs are concerned? I support him in his life and his path, I provide love and affection in the language I have come to know he can read and appreciate, and I scratch his back for him when he's had a long day;) You know what I have found? The more "plugged in" we both become, the more BOTH of our needs get met. It's a novel concept really.
Isolde Posted February 4, 2009 Posted February 4, 2009 I hate to promote something so gender specific but I wonder how much, if any, truth there is to it. There may be a grain of truth to the quote, but I don't like that it implies women can't or shouldn't be just as visual as guys are. Women are not these magical creatures that can see past all things that are imperfect, we are human too. Sorry it's just a bit of a pet peeve with mine--this idea that women are not superficial at all is on par with the fantasy that we don't pee or whatever. I admit that I'm somewhat more visual than your average woman. I don't really see a need to apologize for it. It doesn't mean I need to date a model, it just means I have an idea of what I'm attracted to. There are model like guys I find completely unattractive, but that's still a visual thing. Does this make sense?
Untouchable_Fire Posted February 4, 2009 Posted February 4, 2009 There may be a grain of truth to the quote, but I don't like that it implies women can't or shouldn't be just as visual as guys are. Women are not these magical creatures that can see past all things that are imperfect, we are human too. I admit that I'm somewhat more visual than your average woman. I don't really see a need to apologize for it. It doesn't mean I need to date a model, it just means I have an idea of what I'm attracted to. There are model like guys I find completely unattractive, but that's still a visual thing. Does this make sense? There is a reason you are more visual than other women. I suspect that it is for the same reason teenage boys tend to chase after the top percentiles of attractive girls. How did you feel growing up? Did everyone treat you like a beauty queen?
Isolde Posted February 4, 2009 Posted February 4, 2009 There is a reason you are more visual than other women. I suspect that it is for the same reason teenage boys tend to chase after the top percentiles of attractive girls. How did you feel growing up? Did everyone treat you like a beauty queen? You're insinuating that I'm superficial and juvenile? I have never been treated like any such thing. I said I was somewhat more visual than most of my friends--it is just one of my personality traits or tendencies and not something I am about to apologize for as I am ALSO picky on personality. Some of my strongest crushes were on guys that were not hot at all--but I was still visually attracted to them. There is a subtle difference between going only for handsome guys, and going for what you are personally attracted to! Guys do the latter and I think girls should be able to do the same and relationships would break up less often. At any rate, and far more importantly, I think it's ideal when you're not attracted by looks alone or personality alone but just attracted to the whole person on a level you can't break apart into components. Therefore, both "learning to be attracted to the one you love" and "loving the one you are attracted to" are the wrong way to go about it.
Untouchable_Fire Posted February 5, 2009 Posted February 5, 2009 You're insinuating that I'm superficial and juvenile? I have never been treated like any such thing. I said I was somewhat more visual than most of my friends--it is just one of my personality traits or tendencies and not something I am about to apologize for as I am ALSO picky on personality. At any rate, and far more importantly, I think it's ideal when you're not attracted by looks alone or personality alone but just attracted to the whole person. Therefore, both "learning to be attracted to the one you love" and "loving the one you are attracted to" are the wrong way to go about it. No, that is not what I am insinuating. I have a guess that by having a BF who is more attractive... it will make you feel more attractive. Which I am thinking is your issue here. You can get over this particular hump if you can solidly identify it. I can't quite put m/y finger on where it comes from or exactly what it is.... but you should put some thought to it. Once you do I am sure that you will find some of the things you are attracted to are more to shore up insecurity. This often creates mismatching chemistry. Make sense
Isolde Posted February 5, 2009 Posted February 5, 2009 No, that is not what I am insinuating. I have a guess that by having a BF who is more attractive... it will make you feel more attractive. Which I am thinking is your issue here. You can get over this particular hump if you can solidly identify it. I can't quite put m/y finger on where it comes from or exactly what it is.... but you should put some thought to it. Once you do I am sure that you will find some of the things you are attracted to are more to shore up insecurity. This often creates mismatching chemistry. Make sense I see what you're saying, but... 1) I tend to be attracted to guys that are somewhat of my PHYSICAL opposites but NOT my personality opposite. 2) Sometimes people are just attracted to what they're attracted to for reasons that have less to do with insecurity and more to do with genes and all that good stuff. And being visual isn't really a hump as long as you don't take it to an extreme (only dating a certain hair color, etc.) 3) I don't feel unattractive, but I like being around boys I find attractive--not blindingly so (no, that makes me uncomfortable), but cute, and I think that's normal, not pathological. I would only worry in a case where someone went for a certain type to the extent that they ignored chemistry. BTW, as I said before, I do NOT want to date guys that are significantly better looking than me. I would probably not enjoy that UNLESS our personalities were amazing together.
Untouchable_Fire Posted February 5, 2009 Posted February 5, 2009 1) I tend to be attracted to guys that are somewhat of my PHYSICAL opposites but NOT my personality opposite. 2) Sometimes people are just attracted to what they're attracted to for reasons that have less to do with insecurity and more to do with genes and all that good stuff. And being visual isn't really a hump as long as you don't take it to an extreme (only dating a certain hair color, etc.) 3) I don't feel unattractive, but I like being around boys I find attractive--not blindingly so (no, that makes me uncomfortable), but cute, and I think that's normal, not pathological. I would only worry in a case where someone went for a certain type to the extent that they ignored chemistry. BTW, as I said before, I do NOT want to date guys that are significantly better looking than me. I would probably not enjoy that UNLESS our personalities were amazing together. 1. You can be the hottest girl on the planet, know it, and still need validation of it. 2. Insecurity has a biological basis. The idea that your genetically predestined to find one type of guy attractive is crazy. You are genetically designed to be flexible. For 90% of our genetic evolution we have had very limited choices in our mates. For God sakes men turn to each other and sheep when there are no women around. We are supposed to be flexible, its in our DNA. 3. Yes, you gravitate towards the medium attractive guys because of rejection fears from the really attractive men, and the ugly guys can't really make you feel pretty. Bottom line is not that you are attracted to the wrong guys. More or less is that your problem is that you don't feel worthy of the men you find attractive. To use a guy term... you get twitterpated. Right?
Isolde Posted February 5, 2009 Posted February 5, 2009 Bottom line is not that you are attracted to the wrong guys. More or less is that your problem is that you don't feel worthy of the men you find attractive. To use a guy term... you get twitterpated. Right? No, I do feel worthy.
Star Gazer Posted February 5, 2009 Posted February 5, 2009 No, I do feel worthy. No you don't. You said you feel as though they have more power over you. That, in essence, means you think you are beneath them.
Isolde Posted February 5, 2009 Posted February 5, 2009 No you don't. You said you feel as though they have more power over you. That, in essence, means you think you are beneath them. Ah, SG, it's a subtle difference. I feel like they have more power over me objectively, but I think I'm worthy subjectively.
Author LoveLace Posted February 5, 2009 Author Posted February 5, 2009 Untouchable I hardly think that finding a hot guy is going to "fix" anything about me. I don't feel anything about me needs to be fixed. But yes when I date people I like to think they are hot or at least pretty darn cute, aside from good personality, because I need to have some level of phsyical attraction like anyone else. But if your single and lonely insecurities come and go and without that I wouldn't be normal. I am simply trying to understand why the mutual attraction is rare for me to come by. It's not always the guy who isn't as attracted to me, sometimes its the other way around, so this is not soley about the fact I might feel slightly unattractive at times.
movingonandon Posted February 5, 2009 Posted February 5, 2009 You don't learn much, do you? It's always the opposite genders fault... Marriage/relationships take two to tango. There are no angels or demons in 99% of the cases, unless there's substance abuse or mental illness involved. I don't know if you run around with blinders but I've seen a lot of obese, married men around, who dress like absolute pigs. Let me guess, it's the wives fault for not dressing them... True, of course it works both ways, and it's not about "faults", but differences that would be stupid to ignore. So as far as general trends or likelihoods are concerned, I'm probably right --> marriage is the holy grail for women (whether they would admit it openly or not ), and mostly an unnecesary gamble for men, thus the former are more likely to alter their behavior than the latter. The biggest marital frustration I've heard from men is that things change dramatically - and in many cases not in a good way - after they get married . (You don't see many men sitting around bitching about "when is my girlfriend finally going to marry me?", "will she ever marry me?", etc.) Another trend: women are a lot more likely to terminate LTRs than men (often for vague or even frivolous reasons - just read the breakups section or survey your friends), hence the gamble analogy above.
movingonandon Posted February 5, 2009 Posted February 5, 2009 I really hope that there is no truth this "everything falls apart after marriage" theory. I fully intend to marry the man I'm with now. For me, the idea of marrying him motivates me to start looking at myself in wifely terms. It causes me to identify those areas I wish to improve upon before entering into the marriage. I am learning to cook. I'm taking more care in scheduling and routine around my house. Taking a more proactive approach to cleaning up messes (in my life) as well as paying close attention to our sexual needs. Mine and his. I think it all boils down to contribution. I realize I'm taking a left turn here on the subject but just follow me if you will. If my SO began cooling off in terms of affection, emotional support, getting lazy about the relationship, I know that it would turn me off. First emotionally and intellectually, then what comes next? Sexually. So for me, the attraction to my SO is a big mixture of things. Physical probably impacts it the least. Have you ever heard the expression..."Men learn to love the woman they are attracted to and women become more and more attracted to the person that they love"? I hate to promote something so gender specific but I wonder how much, if any, truth there is to it. That's the spirit, spread the word! THAT's going to be a healthy marriage! (Not the one where there is "Why aren't we married yet?" fuming.) If for some reason things don't work out (which of course I hope they do ), gimme a call at 1-800-MOV-INGO .
Star Gazer Posted February 5, 2009 Posted February 5, 2009 Have you ever heard the expression..."Men learn to love the woman they are attracted to and women become more and more attracted to the person that they love"? Makes perfect sense to me.
Trialbyfire Posted February 5, 2009 Posted February 5, 2009 True, of course it works both ways, and it's not about "faults", but differences that would be stupid to ignore. So as far as general trends or likelihoods are concerned, I'm probably right --> marriage is the holy grail for women (whether they would admit it openly or not ), and mostly an unnecesary gamble for men, thus the former are more likely to alter their behavior than the latter. The biggest marital frustration I've heard from men is that things change dramatically - and in many cases not in a good way - after they get married . (You don't see many men sitting around bitching about "when is my girlfriend finally going to marry me?", "will she ever marry me?", etc.)Considering how many unmarried women are on LS, funny that it's only a few posts about getting married, just like there are only a few posts about men not wanting to get married. You're welcome to draw your own conclusions based on a few threads or you can look at the entirety... Most mature people are aware that it takes time to find the right life partner, if at all. Btw, I personally feel that marriage benefits the man, far more than the woman and see no need to hurry towards marriage, unless it's what we both want, which is a lifetime commitment to each other. It had damn well be the perfect relationship before I'll fall back into that trap!!! Another trend: women are a lot more likely to terminate LTRs than men (often for vague or even frivolous reasons - just read the breakups section or survey your friends), hence the gamble analogy above. Women are just more emotionally intelligent. We know when to pull the trigger, instead of hitting our heads against brick walls, over and over again.
Recommended Posts