carhill Posted October 8, 2009 Posted October 8, 2009 For me, as someone who always wanted children and couldn't have them, it's easy. The butt-ugly daughter who's intelligent. I would prefer a legacy of someone who could very possibly change the world and evolve its species. Beauty is subjective and transitory. I've lived the life of someone who isn't conventionally attractive. In many ways it's been a gift, a gift of revelation. No worries about hangers-on and agendas. Very freeing actually. Perhaps there still is a young mind to mold. Life isn't over yet.
Rudderless Posted October 8, 2009 Posted October 8, 2009 Of course I have had to overcome weaknesses in dating myself. I find things about myself that's unattractive to the opposite sex and throw it out. Now before anyone says well you're a jerk! Of course on this forum I'm a different person to real life. This is a place for me to learn. Like attracts like whilst true generally applies to who a person can KEEP. A beautiful woman but dumb woman can attract more men but can't keep any of them. She will write off all the nice and not outgoing men and naturally pick the most outgoing men that will not find her personality attractive. Initial attraction and keeping someone are different. If initial attraction was the holy grail there wouldn't be unhappy beautiful women out there. Right, so why are you inventing these huge problems for ugly women in the world of dating when they don't exist and then suggesting they have to do something special to overcome them? Sure, some things are an advantage when it comes to CHOICES but the level of disadvantage you are making out is to be so signifcant that it's major. This is similar to having some kind of disorder. Being butt ugly doesn't stop you from finding someone in a natural way without having to go to extreme lengths to compenstate. Your message isn't inspirational it's rather like a backhanded compliment.
Author Hkizzle Posted October 8, 2009 Author Posted October 8, 2009 Right, so why are you inventing these huge problems for ugly women in the world of dating when they don't exist and then suggesting they have to do something special to overcome them? Sure, some things are an advantage when it comes to CHOICES but the level of disadvantage you are making out is to be so signifcant that it's major. This is similar to having some kind of disorder. Being butt ugly doesn't stop you from finding someone in a natural way without having to go to extreme lengths to compenstate. Your message isn't inspirational it's rather like a backhanded compliment. Lol, see, this is interesting. I post two types of women, and if you read through the post there are only people that come out and protect the ugly women. No one comes out and protects the dumb beautiful women. No one feeling sorry for the dumb beautiful girl? Anyone? Going once, going twice? See the slight bias here? It just shows you people are not using logic to interpret an otherwise purely intellectual premise, but driven by idealism that's fed to you by society and thus developed a bias.
carhill Posted October 8, 2009 Posted October 8, 2009 Your OP wasn't eliciting feelings of sorrow for one woman or the other, but rather whom one would prefer to have as a daughter. I don't feel 'sorry' for either 'type'.
Rudderless Posted October 8, 2009 Posted October 8, 2009 Lol, see, this is interesting. I post two types of women, and if you read through the post there are only people that come out and protect the ugly women. No one comes out and protects the dumb beautiful women. No one feeling sorry for the dumb beautiful girl? Anyone? Going once, going twice? See the slight bias here? It just shows you people are not using logic to interpret an otherwise purely intellectual premise, but driven by idealism that's fed to you by society and thus developed a bias. The difference is that you've skewed your own scenario so that the butt ugly woman to be irrecoverably ugly, whereas the butt dumb woman you refer to has the remarkable characteristics of being able to "learn";. So it's acutally your problem, not everyone elses.
TaraMaiden Posted October 8, 2009 Posted October 8, 2009 Just to play devil's advocate on this, how much do you think the fact that you're both limited in your physical attraction qualities plays into you guys both finding one another "beautiful"? Or was that your point? That was my point.
Author Hkizzle Posted October 8, 2009 Author Posted October 8, 2009 Your OP wasn't eliciting feelings of sorrow for one woman or the other, but rather whom one would prefer to have as a daughter. I don't feel 'sorry' for either 'type'. Well yeah I started using the word "sorry" because Rudderless was trying to point out I was implying there's something wrong with ugly women. I was just trying to point out that it was interesting he didn't seem to think I was discriminating against the beautiful woman. I always start posts without any personal attacks, and just lay out an interesting CONTROVERSIAL premises. Then all the people get butt hurt. This is part of the problem why there are so many problem is the US in my opinion. So many people get butt hurt so easily. I remember watching Bruno and Sasha Baron Cohen brings on stage a black baby and they ask what the baby is called, and he says "I gave him a traditional afro-american name.........OJ". Seriously some people need to lighten up and try to learn something, rather than getting driven by these ideals that are biased and not objective in the beginning.
Author Hkizzle Posted October 8, 2009 Author Posted October 8, 2009 The difference is that you've skewed your own scenario so that the butt ugly woman to be irrecoverably ugly, whereas the butt dumb woman you refer to has the remarkable characteristics of being able to "learn";. So it's acutally your problem, not everyone elses. Well the question wasn't biased. My answer was my personal choice. Simply because I had to pick one! I can't pick both! And if I pick one I need to give a reason. Carhill gave his own, and very valid choice. Why didn't you give him crap huh, for not approving the beautiful woman?
Rudderless Posted October 8, 2009 Posted October 8, 2009 Well the question wasn't biased. My answer was my personal choice. Simply because I had to pick one! I can't pick both! And if I pick one I need to give a reason. Carhill gave his own, and very valid choice. Why didn't you give him crap huh, for not approving the beautiful woman? Ah, but you see it was not the beautiful woman you were talking about it was the "butt dumb" woman, who remarkably has enough cognitive ability to discriminate between types of men which makes her not butt dumb at all. The intelligent woman you talk of however, is irrecoverably "physically unnattractive" to the opposite sex. The very fact that you've skewed it by referring to one primarily as beautiful and the other as butt ugly, rather than referring to one as "butt dumb" and the other one as "intelligent" tells us all what your own bias is buddy.
Author Hkizzle Posted October 8, 2009 Author Posted October 8, 2009 Ah, but you see it was not the beautiful woman you were talking about it was the "butt dumb" woman, who remarkably has enough cognitive ability to discriminate between types of men which makes her not butt dumb at all. The intelligent woman you talk of however, is irrecoverably "physically unnattractive" to the opposite sex. The very fact that you've skewed it by referring to one primarily as beautiful and the other as butt ugly, rather than referring to one as "butt dumb" and the other one as "intelligent" tells us all what your own bias is buddy. haha, ok fair point. I guess I shouldn't bend the rules at all. She needs to be she dumb so doesn't understand even basic concepts. But come on, even Forest Gump understands basic concepts and he's mentally challenged. I guess if we bend the rules slightly in the other direction I should remove the word "butt" and just have the word ugly, which doesn't mean horrendously ugly. However, my neighbour used the word Butt, hence I repeated it here in the OP.
Rudderless Posted October 8, 2009 Posted October 8, 2009 haha, ok fair point. I guess I shouldn't bend the rules at all. She needs to be she dumb so doesn't understand even basic concepts. But come on, even Forest Gump understands basic concepts and he's mentally challenged. I guess if we bend the rules slightly in the other direction I should remove the word butt and just have the word ugly, which doesn't mean horrendously ugly. However, my neighbour used the word Butt, hence I repeated it here in the OP.Right, so if we're talking in those terms now, in the same way in which a dumb woman is not so dumb she can't learn basic concepts, the ugly woman isn't ugly enough not to be able attract a handful of men. Hence, I have no reason to have a preference between either.
Author Hkizzle Posted October 8, 2009 Author Posted October 8, 2009 Right, so if we're talking in those terms now, in the same way in which a dumb woman is not so dumb she can't learn basic concepts, the ugly woman isn't ugly enough not to be able attract a handful of men. Hence, I have no reason to have a preference between either. Well, I never said the ugly woman couldn't attract any men. I was just pointing out RELATIVE weaknesses. Both weaknesses in this case can be complimented with a strength. The thing is the strength has to be utilised correctly, and this is where the strategy part comes in.
Rudderless Posted October 8, 2009 Posted October 8, 2009 Well, I never said the ugly woman couldn't attract any men. I was just pointing out RELATIVE weaknesses. Both weaknesses in this case can be complimented with a strength. The thing is the strength has to be utilised correctly, and this is where the strategy part comes in. Or arguably, one weakness can be removed entirely via plastic surgery and he other weakness could be removed by an expensive private education system
GrayClouds Posted October 8, 2009 Posted October 8, 2009 With looks like mine it would be impossible to have a ugly daughter and with my brains dumb is out of the question too
BlueHarvest Posted October 8, 2009 Posted October 8, 2009 Hkizzle said: Now before anyone says well you're a jerk! Of course on this forum I'm a different person to real life. This is a place for me to learn. Underlined=Good. You are right, this is a place to learn. Bold=Bad. Wrong, just because this is the internet does not give you the right to be a "jerk" or toy with people's emotions Hkizzle. I'm not going to get into it with you again, I'm not even going to respond to your post should you choose to post a response to this. My point is YOU do not have the right to choose this forum as your little play thing where you bounce your "ideas" off of others. There comes a certain point, and this point is quite undefinable, where people CAN ask hypothetical questions in a forum. It helps people with "what if" situations all the time. However, your questions quite often evoke senses of anger and hatred from people simply due to your own biased viewpoint and, whether you want to admit it or not, your questions show this bias very easily. Now this image I'm linking while meant to make people laugh has such a simple great truth about it, it's astounding. http://www.engren.se/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/dickwadtheory.jpg Please consider this. Do you want to know why there are a good number of regular forum goers including myself who are frustrated with you? Becuase this is a DATING ADVICE forum. People who come here are asking for help, they are looking for empathy, yes some may need "tough love" but nothing even close to what you are eliciting. Your version of tough love goes over the boundaries of anything I've seen here, and no...that's not something to be proud of. I've participated in "e-fights" in forums before, in fact I got into one with you about a month ago. The fact of the matter is...it's easy for people on a forum to be an E-Thug or E-Jerk. It takes nearly no effort at all. However it TAKES alot of work for people to empathize, and offer sage advice to complete strangers. People like carhill are respected even when they pose a controversial question because they do so in a respectful manner. I've been part of loveshack for a little over a year now. I've had my share of arguements, even been disciplined by the moderators, heck even the site directors talked to me at one point. My point is, I've grown a little on forum protocol and I do my best to try and work with ANYONE. Hence the reason I have unignored you and attempted to at the very least not form any emotions when reading your posts. However that is something very hard to do as this forum is pretty much ALL about emotions. I'll finish off my little essay here with one final quote: "Those who talk alot, rarely talk about anything useful. And those who know anything useful, rarely talk." Just think about it please.
tinktronik Posted October 8, 2009 Posted October 8, 2009 I would say that good looking people do have an easier time at certain things but would have to go with ugly but intelligent, then if she was interested in plastic surgery I would see what I could do to help.
alphamale Posted October 8, 2009 Posted October 8, 2009 I would say that good looking people do have an easier time at certain things but would have to go with ugly but intelligent, then if she was interested in plastic surgery I would see what I could do to help. no, i think the OP meant that ugly is F-Ugly, as in not correctible by surgery. in other words hideous
tinktronik Posted October 8, 2009 Posted October 8, 2009 no, i think the OP meant that ugly is F-Ugly, as in not correctible by surgery. in other words hideous Oh Alpha... everything is correctable by surgery at least to some degree. But in the case of that hypothetical [as in people would faint at the sight of her] then I would choose pretty but dumb.
Author Hkizzle Posted October 8, 2009 Author Posted October 8, 2009 no, i think the OP meant that ugly is F-Ugly, as in not correctible by surgery. in other words hideous Oh bloody hell, I get enough flack as it is without you putting words into my mouth! lol
whiteberry Posted October 8, 2009 Posted October 8, 2009 It seems that no guys really answer the question. maybe because that was difficult for them to admit that they would really want to choose the beautiful but dumb lady.
Author Hkizzle Posted October 8, 2009 Author Posted October 8, 2009 It seems that no guys really answer the question. maybe because that was difficult for them to admit that they would really want to choose the beautiful but dumb lady. Well, for a daughter, and we would want our daughter to be happy. That's different from a partner. I think a few guys did answer the question.....no?
SoulSearch_CO Posted October 8, 2009 Posted October 8, 2009 I'm going to go with intelligent and ugly. Because you can always fix your looks, but you can't fix stupid. I'm surprised you don't know that.
Author Hkizzle Posted October 9, 2009 Author Posted October 9, 2009 I'm going to go with intelligent and ugly. Because you can always fix your looks, but you can't fix stupid. I'm surprised you don't know that. Ya I thought about that one too. ACtually I know quite a few women that are natural beauties but because they know how to wear the right clothes, apply the right make up and haircut, they look pretty good.
New_Life08 Posted October 9, 2009 Posted October 9, 2009 Yeah, dumb can be changed. Ugly...not so much.
Recommended Posts