TheLoneSock Posted October 19, 2009 Posted October 19, 2009 I don't put any woman on a pedestal, it's unbecomming of a man to do so. Women in my opinion are always #2 to a man, it's nature's law. However, I rarely see women like i described, and when I do they are so unapproachable and nasty that it's impossible to get with them. Getting a girlfriend who isn't fat, ugly , or incredibly dumb who doesn't already have a boyfriend/hundreds of suitors in line for her is like finding a needle in a haystack. I don't see how someone's attitude can make women who are decent looking and have an interesting personality (instead of the cookie cutter , predictable personality virtually every woman I know has) appear or disappear. Lol this response reaks of bull**** dude. You get exactly what you deserve in the end. Ok cognac, fine, you are hopeless. You're right, you're ****ed. Sucks to be you. Go ahead and post your life story here: http://www.fmylife.com/
cognac Posted October 19, 2009 Posted October 19, 2009 You guys are letting the fact that men do the persuing misconstrue your feelings about your own attractiveness. In other words you are taking rejection personally. You are looking at the whole game wrong.[/Quote] Lack of success with women = lack of physical attractiveness. PERIOD. Men are hunters, they chase. It might seem like women have the control because they get to say yes or no, but that is not the case. You are the one that puts out the initiative, you have control, you control the vibe. You have the POWER to get things for yourself, you are a hunter, you can provide for yourself. Would you rather be on the other end? At the mercy of another person's initiative? Having only to choose from whoever decides to knock on your door A good analogy would be- if you were to go grocery shopping, would you rather be able to walk the aisles in search of your food, or would you rather have to sit by a conveyer belt and choose from whatever food is sent to you down the line? Your answer to that question is extremely important.[/Quote] This is NOT true. These days women do the pursuing as well. I have witnessed women opening to very good looking men, flirting with strangers who are the female idea of attractive, etc. It's a myth that women don't pursue, atleast not where I live. I am perfectly content with the way I look, I would personally be attracted to a woman who looks not to different from me and more important shares my personality/humor and who isn't a complete square or just another dumb sheep. Problem is women in my league can always date one better. A better analogy would be , would you rather go to a supermarket where you can't afford anything (the case of most average looking men) except the moldy bread , or would you be happy with not only having many members of the opposite sex showing their interest daily, but also having the ability to do the same if you see something you really like. This site is a perfect example. There are many examples of girls being upset because "he didn't call me", "the guy I like won't persue me, ugh!", "how do I attract a hot guy?". That is NOT control of the tempo in dating, by any standard.[/Quote] This has nothing to do with it. They can easily show their interest. I can bet that virtually any woman can ATLEAST have sex with the man of their dreams if they offer themselves up boldly. Furthermore there are plenty of attractive women in their 30's and beyond that are still waiting for Mr. Right. Women do not get to do the hunting, they have to wait for what comes to them on most occasions.[/Quote] That has more to do with their ridiculous expectations than it does the reality of the matter that mr right has come and gone numerous times. These are the new type of women like "Sex in the city" women who are very "successful" and have an overinflated sense of self and would never be happy with any man.
cognac Posted October 19, 2009 Posted October 19, 2009 Fair point theyres positive and neagatives both ways..And i would say the fact women dont intiate but get hit on can be a positive in that they get hit on by enough guys they they have more to choose from in terms of filtering who will and wont be evne a possiblity to be with.. Allot of guys do like the hunt though.. For somebody like me whos not great at initaiton a convo with random women and i dont have the greatest self esteem in terms of my looks it would be so much easier for me if women were more agressive..Even a few women hitting on me would get my confidence up enough to get me in a positive mood and make me feel a little betetr about mself in terms of image to the opposite sex and make it easier for me to approach knowing i at least have some chance to suceed.. Not to mention the fact that most men don't approach women unless they get some kind of indication that the said woman is interested (eye contact, etc). What with the guys who never get any invitations from women to flirt or be hit on?
pinkie Posted October 19, 2009 Posted October 19, 2009 "These are the new type of women like "Sex in the city" women who are very "successful" and have an overinflated sense of self and would never be happy with any man." Seriously? Well maybe youre right. Not a man who wouldn't even open a door for her anyway. She'd be smarter than that.
TheLoneSock Posted October 19, 2009 Posted October 19, 2009 (edited) Lack of success with women = lack of physical attractiveness. PERIOD. You got that backwards- and even then it's not set in stone. Lack of success with women can be the result of many things, lacking physical attraction is just one of them. This is NOT true. These days women do the pursuing as well. I have witnessed women opening to very good looking men, flirting with strangers who are the female idea of attractive, etc. It's a myth that women don't pursue, atleast not where I live. It's fact that men do the majority of the persuing. Just because you have witnessed something doesn't make it a blanket idea. Just because you aren't that guy, and girls don't openly flirt with you in such an obvious way doesn't mean you should be upset about it. I am perfectly content with the way I look, I would personally be attracted to a woman who looks not to different from me and more important shares my personality/humor and who isn't a complete square or just another dumb sheep. Problem is women in my league can always date one better. No you're not. You're not secure with yourself on the inside either. You're lying to yourself. This has nothing to do with it. They can easily show their interest. I can bet that virtually any woman can ATLEAST have sex with the man of their dreams if they offer themselves up boldly. You keep talking in extremes as if they are an every day thing. Get real. That has more to do with their ridiculous expectations Maybe your expectiations are too high. You get what you deserve. Have you seen "Year One"? I can totally picture you as the character Oh. These are the new type of women like "Sex in the city" women who are very "successful" and have an overinflated sense of self and would never be happy with any man. Lol what would you ever want with these women anyway? Your personality screams negativity, self doubt, cynicism and hypocricy. And you don't even see it! Edited October 19, 2009 by TheLoneSock
gypsy_nicky Posted October 20, 2009 Posted October 20, 2009 (edited) This thread is becoming skewed. Attractiveness is now very important for men too when getting noticed by women. But its NOT broken down into body parts like some posters here think it is. The most important indicator of attractiveness is the face. The body comes second. Ive found that the 1-10 scale also applies to us but I think it is more harsh because unlike women we cannot play up our looks like they can (makeup can really change a 5 to an 8). On the good side, if your a guy and your an 8, you'll stay that way and maybe get to a 9 or 10 with proper grooming and weight control. Sweet. (the perplexed feeling I got with the 1-10 scale came mostly from the women's side because they can play up their looks more so than men) Body comes second. Unlike some guys here are led to believe, the body will only factor in if your too fat, too skinny, or too buffed. It is better to be skinny but its even better if your weight matches your physique/height and you have medium muscle tone (around 6-10% bf). Height is not a problem as long as your not too short (below 5'5) or too tall (past 6'5). BUT being taller would be more better for men than women (masculinity). If you would look at the male celebrities known for their appearance, they're not very tall at all (Newman, Brando, Dean, Pitt, Depp, Cruise). None of them go past 5'11. There is also other variations that come with height. If you have a handsome face and your too short-your likely to pull women of your height only or shorter. But you will get most of them because your face is attractive. Edited October 20, 2009 by gypsy_nicky
AD1980 Posted October 20, 2009 Posted October 20, 2009 This thread is becoming skewed. Attractiveness is now very important for men too when getting noticed by women. But its NOT broken down into body parts like some posters here think it is. The most important indicator of attractiveness is the face. The body comes second. Ive found that the 1-10 scale also applies to us but I think it is more harsh because unlike women we cannot play up our looks like they can (makeup can really change a 5 to an 8). On the good side, if your a guy and your an 8, you'll stay that way and maybe get to a 9 or 10 with proper grooming and weight control. Sweet. (the perplexed feeling I got with the 1-10 scale came mostly from the women's side because they can play up their looks more so than men) Body comes second. Unlike some guys here are led to believe, the body will only factor in if your too fat, too skinny, or too buffed. It is better to be skinny but its even better if your weight matches your physique/height and you have medium muscle tone (around 6-10% bf). Height is not a problem as long as your not too short (below 5'5) or too tall (past 6'5). BUT being taller would be more better for men than women (masculinity). If you would look at the male celebrities known for their appearance, they're not very tall at all (Newman, Brando, Dean, Pitt, Depp, Cruise). None of them go past 5'11. There is also other variations that come with height. If you have a handsome face and your too short-your likely to pull women of your height only or shorter. But you will get most of them because your face is attractive. I agree face is the most important..While women like to look at six pack abs ad nice bodies its not a prequesite for most and if they arent attracted to you facially a nice body will not help unlike allot of us men can deal with an ok face if the body is great...
cognac Posted October 20, 2009 Posted October 20, 2009 This thread is becoming skewed. Attractiveness is now very important for men too when getting noticed by women. But its NOT broken down into body parts like some posters here think it is. The most important indicator of attractiveness is the face. The body comes second. Ive found that the 1-10 scale also applies to us but I think it is more harsh because unlike women we cannot play up our looks like they can (makeup can really change a 5 to an 8). On the good side, if your a guy and your an 8, you'll stay that way and maybe get to a 9 or 10 with proper grooming and weight control. Sweet. (the perplexed feeling I got with the 1-10 scale came mostly from the women's side because they can play up their looks more so than men) Body comes second. Unlike some guys here are led to believe, the body will only factor in if your too fat, too skinny, or too buffed. It is better to be skinny but its even better if your weight matches your physique/height and you have medium muscle tone (around 6-10% bf). Height is not a problem as long as your not too short (below 5'5) or too tall (past 6'5). BUT being taller would be more better for men than women (masculinity). If you would look at the male celebrities known for their appearance, they're not very tall at all (Newman, Brando, Dean, Pitt, Depp, Cruise). None of them go past 5'11. There is also other variations that come with height. If you have a handsome face and your too short-your likely to pull women of your height only or shorter. But you will get most of them because your face is attractive. I disagree. I think height is more important than facial attractiveness. If I had a dime for every time a woman said "cute, but too short" or "I wish he was taller" I'd have enough to just pay them to let me pork them. Most women would rather date a tall guy with a thousand flaws than a short guy with a thousand positives.
carhill Posted October 20, 2009 Posted October 20, 2009 LOL, or a guy with no hair Try changing your perspective to that which thanks them for not wasting your time with such superficial judgments. By them walking on by, you are left free to entertain and pursue more compatible women
AD1980 Posted October 20, 2009 Posted October 20, 2009 I disagree. I think height is more important than facial attractiveness. If I had a dime for every time a woman said "cute, but too short" or "I wish he was taller" I'd have enough to just pay them to let me pork them. Most women would rather date a tall guy with a thousand flaws than a short guy with a thousand positives. Maybe theyre just being nice and dont want to tell you they re not attracted to you at all reagrdless of height.. You make it see mlike an ugly tall guy will get women throwing themslves at him AS long as were not talking extremes as long as youre decent lookign you should have no problems getting women.. If your very short 5'5 and under then yes its gonna be slim pickings for you more then likely..
gypsy_nicky Posted October 20, 2009 Posted October 20, 2009 AD, when you say an 'ok' face are you referring to a 5-6? I think were equally as attracted to the face as women. Hence why women of average looks usually hoard men around her level or lower. It's rare to see a guy from the upper looks dept date down. Also you have to think of female insecurity. I usually hear them complaining handsome men are a$$**les but you also get that they felt terribly insecure around them.
AD1980 Posted October 20, 2009 Posted October 20, 2009 AD, when you say an 'ok' face are you referring to a 5-6? I think were equally as attracted to the face as women. Hence why women of average looks usually hoard men around her level or lower. It's rare to see a guy from the upper looks dept date down. Also you have to think of female insecurity. I usually hear them complaining handsome men are a$$**les but you also get that they felt terribly insecure around them. I dont know numbers are hard to gauge ok meaning kinda plain not ugly not gorgeous just kinda average And while face is improtant to us men an average face with a great body can help allot
Recommended Posts