Author Els Posted May 10, 2010 Author Posted May 10, 2010 Oh, no, not initial stages. As I said, beyond the first glance (because it's meaningless to compare factors when you have no idea of the person's personality, intelligence, etc yet), but prior to exclusivity. As for health, only you can decide whether your motivations are health or beauty, so I hope people will be honest. For example, a person who has a little bulk but isn't overweight is healthier than the size 0 model.
Rorschach Posted May 10, 2010 Posted May 10, 2010 Oh, no, not initial stages. As I said, beyond the first glance (because it's meaningless to compare factors when you have no idea of the person's personality, intelligence, etc yet), but prior to exclusivity. As for health, only you can decide whether your motivations are health or beauty, so I hope people will be honest. For example, a person who has a little bulk but isn't overweight is healthier than the size 0 model. This is true but a little bulk is closer to what I find attractive than a size 0 model anyway. I just want somebody to go to the gym a couple times a week and watch what they eat more or less, thats good enough.
Stockalone Posted May 10, 2010 Posted May 10, 2010 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. 1. Male 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. To be honest, I don't understand the question, especially your distinction between physical appearance and physical attraction. I am either attracted to a woman's physical appearance or not. If I am not attracted to a woman, I won't approach her or accept a date if she approaches me. You said you need to find the man at least average, as far as his physical appearance goes. How does that equal to a 3/10 and not a 10/10? If you have a minimum requirement, isn't the importance always high, no matter what? I need physical attraction as well as being compatible in terms of personality, intelligence, etc.. They aren't negotiable and in my opinion have nothing to do with each other. They are seperate issues. Hence, both are 10/10 for me, high priority. To answer question 2.: I'll have to rate physical appearance as a 10/10 as far as initial attraction is concerned. Physical attraction can't be substituted by anything else. A woman's physical appearance is, at least under normal circumstances, the first impression and the sole reason that makes me approach her. Without that initial attraction, everything ends there. I'll never know what kind of person the woman is when I don't talk to her. Oh, no, not initial stages. As I said, beyond the first glance (because it's meaningless to compare factors when you have no idea of the person's personality, intelligence, etc yet), but prior to exclusivity. I agree with Rohrschach here. If I am dating her, I already find her physically attractive. The woman already passed that test, so to speak. Now, it's about determining whether or not I like her personality, if we get along well, etc. Which I'll also have to rate as a 10/10. It's also high priority.
gypsy_nicky Posted May 11, 2010 Posted May 11, 2010 1. transexual.... I mean male 2. 10/10. Although I don't have a certain type, this definitely counts. I will not go for women who are obese (I'm not fat). I usually stick to my kind-average (5's to 6.5's). The 7's and 10's I don't bother with because I have enough on my hands dealing within my scale
Author Els Posted May 11, 2010 Author Posted May 11, 2010 1. Male To be honest, I don't understand the question, especially your distinction between physical appearance and physical attraction. I am either attracted to a woman's physical appearance or not. If I am not attracted to a woman, I won't approach her or accept a date if she approaches me. Let me try to clarify. I don't know about others, but for me at least, physical attraction is a broad scope encompassing voice, smell, the way he smiles, the way he walks, etc. It is a more subjective matter, whereas 'physical appearance' is slightly more objective. In my case, if a man has a perfect 'appearance' but speaks in a broken English accent, he would have a low 'physical attraction' to me. Maybe someone else has a thing for men that smell a certain way, so Brad Pitt who doesn't smell like that would have a high 'physical appearance' but low 'physical attraction' to her. Does that make sense? I suppose I would quantify 'physical appearance' as 'what you can tell from someone's photo, assuming the person is of average photogenicity'. You said you need to find the man at least average, as far as his physical appearance goes. How does that equal to a 3/10 and not a 10/10? If you have a minimum requirement, isn't the importance always high, no matter what? I understand that this is very abstract and difficult to quantify. Thank you for bringing this to light - I never really understood HOW difficult to quantify it was til now. Basically, think of it as a priority scale for someone with a stereotypically 'good' appearance - for women, that might be slim but curvy, nice hair, well-shaped boobs and ass, nice skin, etc. 10 would mean that having someone with a stereotypically good appearance is 'top priority', not 'equal priority with others'. 7 or so might mean that it shares top priority with a few other key traits, hence it is not really 'top' priority anymore. 5 or so might mean that it's in the middle of the priority table, with several other traits ranked above it. I rated mine 3 not only because I only need an average-looking person, but also because other traits are essential to even cause me to take a second look at his appearance. I do not find any man physically attractive unless he is also intelligent, witty, and 'gets me', among other things - it is only after he passes THAT threshold that I even bother to notice how he looks like. Probably I am the opposite of people who say someone has to look good physically before they will even notice the person's intelligence. It goes the other way round for me. To answer question 2.: I'll have to rate physical appearance as a 10/10 as far as initial attraction is concerned. Physical attraction can't be substituted by anything else. A woman's physical appearance is, at least under normal circumstances, the first impression and the sole reason that makes me approach her. Without that initial attraction, everything ends there. I'll never know what kind of person the woman is when I don't talk to her. Yes, your answer certainly makes sense, thank you. However, I am a little saddened - you would not even make friendly conversation with a person unless they're a good-looking woman? How do you get friends then? Or you consider it impossible for a relationship to develop from an initial friendly no-further-motives conversation?
lino Posted May 11, 2010 Posted May 11, 2010 Male 10/10 - 99.9% of the time If I don't feel like I want to have sex with the woman then we probably aren't going to be anything more than friends. I believe most people are like this but not many of them are willing to admit it. I have no problem admitting that. I especially love the people who say 'Oh looks aren't that important to me' and then you find out they're with a very physically attractive partner... However, I am a little saddened - you would not even make friendly conversation with a person unless they're a good-looking woman? How do you get friends then? Or you consider it impossible for a relationship to develop from an initial friendly no-further-motives conversation? I know the question wasn't aimed at me but I'll give my answer because I think I can relate to what Stockalone saying. When I'm making friends, looks mean 0/10 for me be it male or female friends. A valuable friend is a valuable friend, no matter what they look like. When I'm looking for a partner/lover/more than a friend, female of course, then looks mean 10/10. This is because I will eventually want to have sex with this person and if I'm reluctant to touch her intimately and not turned by her physically then the sex is just never going to happen.
Author Els Posted May 11, 2010 Author Posted May 11, 2010 I understand that too, but he did say 'A woman's physical appearance is, at least under normal circumstances, the first impression and the sole reason that makes me approach her' and also 'Without that initial attraction, everything ends there. I'll never know what kind of person the woman is when I don't talk to her' . So I interpreted that to mean that physical appearance is only top priority at the initial stage for him, but not when he already knows the person.
Stockalone Posted May 11, 2010 Posted May 11, 2010 (edited) Let me try to clarify. I don't know about others, but for me at least, physical attraction is a broad scope encompassing voice, smell, the way he smiles, the way he walks, etc. It is a more subjective matter, whereas 'physical appearance' is slightly more objective. In my case, if a man has a perfect 'appearance' but speaks in a broken English accent, he would have a low 'physical attraction' to me. Maybe someone else has a thing for men that smell a certain way, so Brad Pitt who doesn't smell like that would have a high 'physical appearance' but low 'physical attraction' to her. Does that make sense? I suppose I would quantify 'physical appearance' as 'what you can tell from someone's photo, assuming the person is of average photogenicity'. Thanks for clarifying, even though I still have trouble with the distinction. I would count the way a woman smiles or walks as part of her physical appearance. Because that is something I can see in a real-life setting before I even talk to her. And based on her physical appearance (what I can see), I determine if I am attracted or not. That happens pretty much instantaneously, and on a subconscious level. I look at a woman and then it's either a yes or a no in my mind. I understand that this is very abstract and difficult to quantify. Thank you for bringing this to light - I never really understood HOW difficult to quantify it was til now. Basically, think of it as a priority scale for someone with a stereotypically 'good' appearance - for women, that might be slim but curvy, nice hair, well-shaped boobs and ass, nice skin, etc. 10 would mean that having someone with a stereotypically good appearance is 'top priority', not 'equal priority with others'. 7 or so might mean that it shares top priority with a few other key traits, hence it is not really 'top' priority anymore. 5 or so might mean that it's in the middle of the priority table, with several other traits ranked above it. Stereotypically "good" appearance is tricky, in my opinion. Models or hollywood actresses are usually considered to be the epitome of physical beauty. Yet there are A LOT of them I wouldn't date even if I could, because I am not attracted to them, and often don't even find them attractive. On the other hand, I was attracted to women I met in a store or the library, even though "objectively", they would not be considered to be on the same level as a model or a movie star. However, I am only interested in what I find attractive, an objective (agreement by consensus) attractiveness level doesn't help me when my subjective perception is different. So, finding someone with a stereotypically good appearance is not a priority for me at all. That said, the woman I like aren't considered ugly by most standards either. As far as my own standards go, finding a woman I am attracted to is still a 10/10 priority. As I said, I don't really understand the "as long as he is average" approach you mentioned. For me, it's either a yes or no. I rated mine 3 not only because I only need an average-looking person, but also because other traits are essential to even cause me to take a second look at his appearance. I do not find any man physically attractive unless he is also intelligent, witty, and 'gets me', among other things - it is only after he passes THAT threshold that I even bother to notice how he looks like. Probably I am the opposite of people who say someone has to look good physically before they will even notice the person's intelligence. It goes the other way round for me. Yes, we are different in that regard. I need to be attracted to the woman before I approach her. Why would I try to date a woman I am not attracted to? That makes no sense to me. Yes, your answer certainly makes sense, thank you. However, I am a little saddened - you would not even make friendly conversation with a person unless they're a good-looking woman? How do you get friends then? I hardly ever make friends, and the ones I have, are male. If you ignore LS for a moment, I almost never talk to women (who aren't family or the wives/gf's of my friends) anymore. I'll be polite and make small talk when approached at a friend's party, birthday, or wedding, etc. But other than that, I lead a solitary life and keep to myself. Or you consider it impossible for a relationship to develop from an initial friendly no-further-motives conversation? To be honest, in real life, I can't think of a situation where I would have a no-further-motives conversation with a woman that isn't a co-worker, a gf of a friend, etc. When I talk to a woman I don't already know, it's because I am attracted to her. If I like her when we start talking, I want to get to know her better and of she is interesting, date her. Edited May 11, 2010 by Stockalone
Author Els Posted May 11, 2010 Author Posted May 11, 2010 Again, thank you for the clarification. I am quite curious about why you aren't interested at all in having women as platonic friends, but that would deviate from the original topic and probably spark a huge debate which would ensue in the thread being closed down.
Stockalone Posted May 11, 2010 Posted May 11, 2010 Again, thank you for the clarification. I am quite curious about why you aren't interested at all in having women as platonic friends, but that would deviate from the original topic and probably spark a huge debate which would ensue in the thread being closed down. Oh, there are many reasons. But in a nutshell, I tried it once and failed miserably. I still miss her, though. I don't think that will derail your thread.
Recommended Posts