Els Posted May 10, 2010 Posted May 10, 2010 This was just born out of curiousity, due to the number of men (and women) claiming that men and women place equal importance on physical appearance. So, this will attempt to see how true that claim is. I understand that LS is in no way a sample reflective of the real world, and also that there are many variables in what people consider 'good physical appearance', but I don't doubt it will provide some interesting findings as well. So, post your answers in the format below, and I'll collaborate them at the end of the thread. Feel free to add posts containing additional comments and discussion, but please adhere to the format for purposes of answering. 1. Gender 2. Rate the importance of your partner's physical appearance on the scale of 0-10. With 10 being 'top priority' and 0 being 'I don't give a damn'. Please elaborate on your answer, as per my example below. Also, for purposes of standardization, let's leave out such things as confidence, manner of speech, manner of walking, etc etc, as those come too close to the grey boundary of personality. Try to stick to purely 'physical appearance', as in looks, figure, and dress style. I'll go first. 1. Female 2. 3/10 - Physical appearance does nothing for me by itself, as I am never physically attracted to any man without first knowing him. Physical attraction for me is something that begins with an intellectual and/or emotional attraction, and only later in the relationship do I find him physically attractive to me. However, in order for the physical attraction to occur during the course of the relationship, he must be above a certain level of appearance. Namely, that he should at least look average. Thus, as I well know that physical attraction is important for sexual attraction, which is in turn ESSENTIAL, I would say that I require a man who is at least 'average' in terms of physical appearance.
shadowofman Posted May 10, 2010 Posted May 10, 2010 1. Male 2. (0)3/10 - I do not require an attractive physical appearance in order to love someone, even deeply. However, I am not likely to even get to know someone unless I can bare the sight of them (I know this sounds superficial, but I said "likely"). However, in order to even want to have sexual relations, I have to be physically attracted based on physical appearance.
tami-chan Posted May 10, 2010 Posted May 10, 2010 1. Female 2. 8/10 for the initial contact. Having said that I would still want to get to know a guy even if I did not initially find him physically attracted. Physical attraction is not enough...a handsome face really does not have longevity. Someone with wit and smarts does.
shadowofman Posted May 10, 2010 Posted May 10, 2010 oops.. what I meant was... 3/10 to love them 10/10 to want the sex with them
Author Els Posted May 10, 2010 Author Posted May 10, 2010 oops.. what I meant was... 3/10 to love them 10/10 to want the sex with them Would you not say your relationship would be doomed from the start, though, if you did not want to have sex with your partner? What is the purpose of love in this case?
shadowofman Posted May 10, 2010 Posted May 10, 2010 Would you not say your relationship would be doomed from the start, though, if you did not want to have sex with your partner? What is the purpose of love in this case? There is never a purpose for love. It is an uncontrollable reaction. I wouldn't enter into monogamy with this person. Love and sex are different things.
Kaplan Posted May 10, 2010 Posted May 10, 2010 Hey, this experiment doesn't take into consideration people (like me) with unrealistically high standards! What I mean to say is this: the question is about the importance of physical appearance over personality, but we're only rating the physical part. Shouldn't we be making a ratio of Physical-to-Personality? What if I want to say 10/10 for looks and 10/10 for personality? Or do we assume that whatever is left over from 10 is personality (e.g. 3/10 for looks = 7/10 for personality)?
DreamerGirl27 Posted May 10, 2010 Posted May 10, 2010 1st, I am female. it is 10/10 for me on looks and intelligence. I want someone I am EXTREMELY physically attracted to and that doesn't happen often. I have a set standard of what I like, and it is not the norm for today's society. (I like guys with long hair...most don't have long hair anymore...not since the 60's lol) but if their personality sucks, I wouldn't like that either. I need a 10 out of 10 for both looks, personality, love, and sex. This is why I am single. I'm the pickiest thing on the face of the planet.
Kaplan Posted May 10, 2010 Posted May 10, 2010 1st, I am female. it is 10/10 for me on looks and intelligence. I want someone I am EXTREMELY physically attracted to and that doesn't happen often. I have a set standard of what I like, and it is not the norm for today's society. (I like guys with long hair...most don't have long hair anymore...not since the 60's lol) but if their personality sucks, I wouldn't like that either. I need a 10 out of 10 for both looks, personality, love, and sex. This is why I am single. I'm the pickiest thing on the face of the planet. Exactly. What do us picky people do who demand 10s out of everything? We're screwing up the averages.
Author Els Posted May 10, 2010 Author Posted May 10, 2010 There is never a purpose for love. It is an uncontrollable reaction. I wouldn't enter into monogamy with this person. Love and sex are different things. Yes, that's true. For purposes of this thread I don't necessarily mean only 'love' though, but rather how far physical appearance affects your requirements for a 'partner', a 'relationship'. With that in mind, would you like to re-answer? Hey, this experiment doesn't take into consideration people (like me) with unrealistically high standards! What I mean to say is this: the question is about the importance of physical appearance over personality, but we're only rating the physical part. Shouldn't we be making a ratio of Physical-to-Personality? What if I want to say 10/10 for looks and 10/10 for personality? Or do we assume that whatever is left over from 10 is personality (e.g. 3/10 for looks = 7/10 for personality)? Unfortunately, if a ratio was forced I suspect almost everyone except obvious trolls would set personality at a higher ratio to appearance, or equal, so that defeats the purposes of this thread. No, the question isn't about the importance of physical appearance over personality, by the way. It's about physical appearance vs all other factors, not only personality.
Kaplan Posted May 10, 2010 Posted May 10, 2010 Unfortunately, if a ratio was forced I suspect almost everyone except obvious trolls would set personality at a higher ratio to appearance, or equal, so that defeats the purposes of this thread. No, the question isn't about the importance of physical appearance over personality, by the way. It's about physical appearance vs all other factors, not only personality. Yeah, I thought of that also. That people would just choose personality over physical appearance and ruin everything. Although, if they did that, it would indicate that they were trying to demonstrate their personality . . . which would indicate that they assumed other people would value personality over physical appearance . . . indicating that personality is more important . . . man, this is complicated. Ok. Here's mine: 1. Male. 2. 5/10. I decided half is physical appearance. I don't know if that's the right way to divide it mathematically, because it isn't really a mathematical thing. But physical appearance is important because I know I'm not going to fall in love with a woman I'm not attracted to physically. At the same time, no matter how exciting she might be to me when I first see her, if she doesn't have the personality to go with the pretty face I'm not going to have any feelings for her.
Author Els Posted May 10, 2010 Author Posted May 10, 2010 PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE ANSWERING The rating /10 is no reflection of the 'type' of person you want, ie if you rate it 5/10 that does NOT mean that the 'minimum' appearance you would consider is 5/10 (which is, I personally believe, an extremely juvenile way of classifying appearance, but I digress). It is solely a rating of 'priority', with 10 being top priority, 5 being middle priority, and 1 being low priority. As an example, a person (ie Kaplan and Dreamergirl) wants great looks but also great personality, intelligence, etc. In that case, even though they may want a (I shudder to use this classification) 10/10 person, I would honestly say their true answer is actually 7 or so, as opposed to 10, because appearance evidently isn't the main or top priority - it shares top priority with a few other things. On the other hand, if someone prioritizes appearance over personality, intelligence, etc, then their true answer would be 10, even if a 9/10 person would do for them. I hope you guys understand. I didn't realize the popular misconception of my thread til Kaplan posted.
Author Els Posted May 10, 2010 Author Posted May 10, 2010 Yeah, I thought of that also. That people would just choose personality over physical appearance and ruin everything. Although, if they did that, it would indicate that they were trying to demonstrate their personality . . . which would indicate that they assumed other people would value personality over physical appearance . . . indicating that personality is more important . . . man, this is complicated. Ok. Here's mine: 1. Male. 2. 5/10. I decided half is physical appearance. I don't know if that's the right way to divide it mathematically, because it isn't really a mathematical thing. But physical appearance is important because I know I'm not going to fall in love with a woman I'm not attracted to physically. At the same time, no matter how exciting she might be to me when I first see her, if she doesn't have the personality to go with the pretty face I'm not going to have any feelings for her. You totally got my point. Thank you.
flc Posted May 10, 2010 Posted May 10, 2010 Male 7/10 - The person needs look physically attractive to me, but personality also needs to be a 7 no reason you can't have both
Rorschach Posted May 10, 2010 Posted May 10, 2010 Anybody who says looks don't matter is completely 100% lying. Long term I'll agree that looks don't matter as much as personality. But nobody gives anybody the time of day if they don't find them attractive. Thats the same for everybody, as a pursuer I'm not even going to talk to you (at least from a 'interested' stand point) if you aren't attractive, that said if a girl comes off as dumb as a stump or after one date it becomes fairly obvious we aren't compatible I'm not about to stay with her just because she's attractive. 1. male 2. 10/10
Author Els Posted May 10, 2010 Author Posted May 10, 2010 I agree that 99% of people put appearance at some degree of importance. The question here is what degree. Some people here have proved that they will actually talk to the person, however.
BubbleFreak Posted May 10, 2010 Posted May 10, 2010 1. Female 2. 9/10 for initial attraction Like others have said, I initially have to be physically attracted to someone (it's just as important as several other factors). If this rating applied to my current relationship it would be more like 1/10 since I am already in love with him and his looks would no longer change anything. I'd still love him even if his face fell off.
WalkInThePark Posted May 10, 2010 Posted May 10, 2010 (edited) - Female - If a man is physically unattractive to me, he stands no chance. As I said in another thread: either he is f!ckable or he is not. That has nothing to do with the fact that he is objectively handsome. He can be the most handsome man on earth but some physical features do it for me and others don't. Has nothing to do with colour of hair or colour of eyes or height. And I don't need to be immediately smitten with someone. But I know right from the start if there is a possibility that I will feel lust for this person. At the same time, I have to be physically attracted but there also has to be a connection on an intellectual or emotional level. Edited May 10, 2010 by WalkInThePark
Ihavenoidea Posted May 10, 2010 Posted May 10, 2010 Male 10/10 - If you aren't attractive to me I wont even bothering coming up to you. Beauty always fades in time and appearance isn't as important during the relationship and over time but like I said I wont even go up to you unless your attractive to me. I dont know anyone who has a relationship with someone else that they aren't attracted to.
USMCHokie Posted May 10, 2010 Posted May 10, 2010 Elswyth...I can save you some time and just give you your results right now... The vast majority of members will say that during the initial meeting and early dating phase, physical appearance is very important (i.e., 9 or 10 out of 10). However, as the relationship matures, the priority on physical appearance slides further down the scale (3 or 4 out of 10 or as Bubblefreak says, 1/10...), as personality and non-physical traits play an increasingly larger role...and as looks naturally diminish over time... Since your poll simply addresses how important physical attraction is, I will say that it depends on that time constraint...i.e., how far along you are into the relatonship... As I like to say, physical attractiveness gets you into the door, but personality keeps you in the house...
shadowofman Posted May 10, 2010 Posted May 10, 2010 Ok, so if physical is sharing the rating as a ratio. 5/10. 50% of my relationship is appearance. 30% personality. 20% common interest. This is hard.
BubbleFreak Posted May 10, 2010 Posted May 10, 2010 Since your poll simply addresses how important physical attraction is, I will say that it depends on that time constraint...i.e., how far along you are into the relatonship... QUOTE] You have it spot on.
Engadget Posted May 10, 2010 Posted May 10, 2010 For me there obviously needs to be some physical attraction, but personality always equaled it or even outweighed looks. I dated a girl who was...very overweight with a cute face, but we clicked personality wise.
Author Els Posted May 10, 2010 Author Posted May 10, 2010 (edited) Again, please note that I said 'physical appearance'. Physical attraction may have to do with many things such as smell, voice, etc, which isn't related. USMChokie = My bad. I meant when deciding whether or not to be someone's bf/gf. Before 'going steady', or exclusivity. Also, from the results obtained, I've noticed that there are a few people who didn't actually say 9 or 10. I would, frankly, be very surprised (and would possibly avoid the USA in the future! ) if appearance was top priority for the majority of people even during the initial stage (before 'going steady'). Edited May 10, 2010 by Elswyth
Rorschach Posted May 10, 2010 Posted May 10, 2010 Again, please note that I said 'physical appearance'. Physical attraction may have to do with many things such as smell, voice, etc, which isn't related. USMChokie = My bad. I meant when deciding whether or not to be someone's bf/gf. Before 'going steady', or exclusivity. Also, from the results obtained, I've noticed that there are a few people who didn't actually say 9 or 10. I would, frankly, be very surprised (and would possibly avoid the USA in the future! ) if appearance was top priority for the majority of people even during the initial stage (before 'going steady'). Well for me Initial stage (IE just going up and talking to somebody) 10/10 thats literally ALL there is to go on when you first decide to talk to somebody. However from the first date and on 1/10, because I'm obviously already physically attracted to them, thats why i talked to them in the first place, so I don't care about that anymore thats already been sorted out. Now it's all up to personality and compatibility. Although I will mention thats someones desire to be healthy and take good care of their body (which has a side effect of staying attractive) is a personality trait I highly desire as its something thats become very important to me. So while it may not necassarily be their attractiveness, that personality trait I consider important and effects attractiveness. Just as an example if I met an attractive girl, got to know her, and liked her but she always ate fast food and put absolutely no effort in when it came to taking care of herself that would be a turn off to me. Its a sign of laziness and lack of self-respect to me, and its probably going to result in that person gaining a large amount of weight when their metabolism naturally slows with age.
Recommended Posts