Jump to content

Men are less shallow, deep down we all know this, and yet we don't get any credit for

danmorisson

By danmorisson
in Dating

 Share
While the thread author can add an update and reopen discussion, this thread was last posted in over a month ago. Want to continue the conversation? Feel free to start a new thread instead!

Recommended Posts

udolipixie Established Member

udolipixie

Posted
Posted
:mad: Can other users hack your account because those "Edits" are mine.

 

LMFAO @ myself I misquoted.

serial muse Established Member

serial muse

Posted
Posted
:mad: Can other users hack your account because those "Edits" are mine.

 

No - you're just missing the start quote tag there. The endquote tag is visible.

 

Edited to say I see you figured that out already. ;)

OnyxSnowfall Established Member

OnyxSnowfall

Posted
Posted
Tell me about it. People SURE like to type words. Lots and lots of words.

 

u n ptp r juz jealouz

 

u aint able b typin all fast n shet

 

i b typin 93 wpm, u juz jealouz foo

 

also aint got no attention spanz eitha none so u juz jealouz we got whachu dont none have, y else u care so much huh lawlz keep tryin bro

 

Thieves, by the way --- I have not seen the movie into The Wild, though I have read the book by Jon Krakauer. To be honest, I've been tempted to just take off into the wild at several points in my life though :lmao: My little dream is to purchase property within a lush forest and then to own cabin by a stream, somewhere between desolation and civilization lol.

 

Music has also sexually aroused me before too haha. I know what you're referring to :love:

 

I agree the source of beauty itself is an enigma. Many things will be by extension of our obliviousness to *what* our existence is truly for and about I think.

 

And I agree that truths can be very complex. I think some are unnecessarily so (religion does come to mind there), but others are elusive for different reasons. Physics is easier to acknowledge than the interpersonal realm (IMO) --- while both have their fair shares of unanswered questions and are littered in paradoxes (tangent lol, but some of these were fun to ponder and seek answers for http://www.thefreeresource.com/paradox-what-is-a-paradox-and-a-list-of-paradoxes)... the contradictions of the self can be hidden under an array of masks that can be changed at will... it seems to come back to perception nonetheless... it's probably off-topic LOL, but I enjoyed this thread :lmao:

OnyxSnowfall Established Member

OnyxSnowfall

Posted
Posted
Only for Halloween ;).

 

Well I'll be sure to change my username after Halloween then :lmao:

 

(I'll have you know that Onyxsnowfall came into existence when I decided to all too cleverly rape the concept of the yin and the yang [and or simply... contrast] with my love of snow though :mad:)

AHardDaysNight Established Member

AHardDaysNight

Posted
Posted

I am so tired of these threads. They are ongoing and ridiculous!

ptp Established Member

ptp

Posted
Posted
Well I'll be sure to change my username after Halloween then :lmao:

 

(I'll have you know that Onyxsnowfall came into existence when I decided to all too cleverly rape the concept of the yin and the yang [and or simply... contrast] with my love of snow though :mad:)

 

Oh great you are emo with eastern philosophies....that's like the worst kind of emo :lmao:.

 

*just kidding*

 

Anyway in my mind you look like this while typing your verbose posts.:p

Easyguy14 Established Member

Easyguy14

Posted
Posted
Men were engineered to seek sex. No complications. But women seem to have a problem admitting that they were engineered to seek good genes. We're not that much different from animals btw.

 

in fact we're the highest specie of the animal kingdom order. that explains why a man sees a woman looking feminine he instantly wants to bed her. he doesn't really think about her name, where she's from. none of that in the moment of lust. this is the same case with animals but since we could talk and communicate different ways, it brings us up a notch.

Wolf18 Established Member

Wolf18

Posted
Posted

Being sexually attracted to a much larger portion of women than vice a versa does make you less shallow. After the sexual attraction element is taken care of, then it all comes down to personality. Ask any man, an average looking woman who cooks , does dishes and nurtures will always have the love of a man over some very hot ice queen that works in some cut throat career.



 

With women on the other hand it's the other way around. They enjoy the personalities and company of many men, but only get wet to a very small %. This makes you shallow.

The Tiger Member

The Tiger

Posted
Posted

Onyx just makes herself look bad with those ridiculous, book-length posts.

 

The worst part is that no one is going to believe ANYONE that says they they don't care about physical appearance. That has nothing to do with shallowness or intelligence; it is humanly impossible not to care about appearance to some degree.

 

Whether you choose to disregard someone's ugly because they have other qualities that YOU hold in higher esteem is a personal choice and does not make you better or worse than someone who values good looks. I think it's stupid to "not respect" someone who puts value on looks.

 

Like I said, you DO care about someone's looks whether or not you choose to act upon those feelings. Saying that someone who values looks is shallow and someone who values intelligence or a nice personality is not shallow is arbitrarily stupid.

 

What if someone is really smart and has deep thoughts but has a terrible personality (like the Unabomber) or what if someone has the nicest personality in the world and behaves like a saint but is as dumb as a sea sponge and doesn't care about anything of intellectual value?

 

I'm sure that just by looking at Onyx's past dating history one could reveal the hypocrisy of her words. Even if NOW she is "enlightened" I'm sure once upon a time she was just as shallow as the average humans that she looks down on.

OnyxSnowfall Established Member

OnyxSnowfall

Posted
Posted (edited)
Onyx just makes herself look bad with those ridiculous, book-length posts.

 

The worst part is that no one is going to believe ANYONE that says they they don't care about physical appearance. That has nothing to do with shallowness or intelligence; it is humanly impossible not to care about appearance to some degree.

 

Whether you choose to disregard someone's ugly because they have other qualities that YOU hold in higher esteem is a personal choice and does not make you better or worse than someone who values good looks. I think it's stupid to "not respect" someone who puts value on looks.

 

Like I said, you DO care about someone's looks whether or not you choose to act upon those feelings. Saying that someone who values looks is shallow and someone who values intelligence or a nice personality is not shallow is arbitrarily stupid.

 

What if someone is really smart and has deep thoughts but has a terrible personality (like the Unabomber) or what if someone has the nicest personality in the world and behaves like a saint but is as dumb as a sea sponge and doesn't care about anything of intellectual value?

 

I'm sure that just by looking at Onyx's past dating history one could reveal the hypocrisy of her words. Even if NOW she is "enlightened" I'm sure once upon a time she was just as shallow as the average humans that she looks down on.

 

First of all, I've been arguing that it's silly to value physique / external beauty ABOVE ALL ELSE. EVEN if it's only initially. NOT that physique has *no* value/merit whatsoever. Go back and reread if you really care like you seem to :p

 

It is not insane to believe that some people do not value it greatly --- sorry if that's so far from your own desires that it seems implausible. Ultimately it doesn't matter if you believe it, because I will continue on hardly valuing physique while you will continue on believing it's impossible (you seem really quite entangled in self-projections and justifications)

 

At least I'm not trying to tell you that YOU don't enjoy external beauty :lmao:

 

Second. I have already mentioned my superficial bane! I have not tried to sugar coat it nor deny it. WHERE have I said I am NOT shallow, even in just this thread alone? Exactly, no where... LoL.

 

I think it's a little teensy bit beyond me trying to say I'm not shallow and others are (even vice versa) :rolleyes: (I don't even think it's possible to be that black and white for ANYONE... even "depth" has a freaking surface).

 

Anyway, I seriously can't begin to try to help you understand the difference between external beauty and intelligence. God, just do a google search --- LoL.

 

Finally.

 

Let me get this straight... you think it's stupid that I think it's stupid when people extol external beauty above all else --- you probably think I've found you stupid and you've taken offense ------- now, do you honestly think *you*, someone who I likely don't respect (in that aspect), can somehow change my opinion and or influence me over it? I mean, why bother? :love: --- or maybe you just hope to plant it for lurkers etc? Heh.

 

Even if I was capable of finding everything about someone stupid, the chances of me being affected by them trying to turn it around on me are just extremely low. There's nothing to value there. It's basically: "Of course this stupid thing finds this stupid... it's stupid!" gasp. Just saying, you may want to rethink your strategies of helping someone "see the light" or, whatever it is you'd like to see "change" (I post partly for my own self, so it's not paramount that I try to appease people with short attention spans --- if I'm to be addressing them, though, it is something to consider).

Edited by OnyxSnowfall
The Tiger Member

The Tiger

Posted
Posted

I'm not arguing on behalf of myself.

 

I value physical beauty, but I also value intelligence and personality quite highly and probably have a better track record of acting this way than most people.

 

I'm arguing from the point of view of common sense and science. I don't understand what you mean when you say that you can't help me understand the difference between physical beauty and intelligence.

 

Do you think that someone intelligent is automatically better than someone who is beautiful? Like I said, intelligence does not necessarily make someone a good person so I don't know why you are so high on it. Intelligence is partially determined by genes just like beauty so it doesn't necessarily speak well of someone's character if they are intelligent.

 

Of course it's good if someone wants to learn and better themselves by acquiring knowledge but that does not necessarily make them a good mate in and of itself.

 

Forgive me if I'm wrong about you but you seem to be a pseudo-intellectual snob who wants to pat herself on the back because she knows that beauty is not skin deep.

OnyxSnowfall Established Member

OnyxSnowfall

Posted
Posted (edited)

Do you think that someone intelligent is automatically better than someone who is beautiful? Like I said, intelligence does not necessarily make someone a good person so I don't know why you are so high on it. Intelligence is partially determined by genes just like beauty so it doesn't necessarily speak well of someone's character if they are intelligent.

 

Where have I been so high over intelligence? I was drawing from your example. Must I repeat everything? I almost feel like I should quote myself :eek: --- I already stated I valued personality, traits, talents, etc. I don't even think I mentioned "intelligence" here... although it *is* something I do value (along with creativity).

 

You are taking my teasing towards Nexus far too seriously AND personally --- I will just assume you're not Nexus on a new account :laugh:

 

Forgive me if I'm wrong about you but you seem to be a pseudo-intellectual snob who wants to pat herself on the back because she knows that beauty is not skin deep.

 

*pats her back... pat pat pat ... strokes it... mmm... ahhh...* ohhh sooo good ;)

 

(by the way, your arrogance at the beginning was charming too, you're so confident you have a better track record at that than *most* people --- beautiful :D)

Edited by OnyxSnowfall
udolipixie Established Member

udolipixie

Posted
Posted
*pats her back... pat pat pat ... strokes it... mmm... ahhh...* ohhh sooo good ;)

:lmao:

 

Also I am :love: by the wit

The Tiger Member

The Tiger

Posted
Posted
Where have I been so high over intelligence? I was drawing from your example. Must I repeat everything? I almost feel like I should quote myself :eek: --- I already stated I valued personality, traits, talents, etc. I don't even think I mentioned "intelligence" here... although it *is* something I do value (along with creativity).

 

You are taking my teasing towards Nexus far too seriously AND personally --- I will just assume you're not Nexus on a new account :laugh:

 

What is "traits"? Aren't personality, talents, intelligence, looks, etc. all traits?

 

Anyway, things like personality, talent, etc. are all things that can be determined strongly by genes so you're just placing value on things that are as out of a person's control as physical appearance.

 

I don't think my statement was arrogant. I've always placed a high level of importance on intelligence and personality when choosing a partner. You were the one assuming that I cared a lot about appearance.

Nexus One Established Member

Nexus One

Posted
Posted (edited)

But it seems you tend to read into things and run with them, while I should choose my words more carefully.

 

I disagree. I could list some of your quotes that are just plain assumptive and snappy. You made all sorts of assumptions about me. You started out by saying you think people like me are stupid and that you don't respect them, due to me saying that initially, in the very first phase of the attraction process appearance tends to be most important.

 

I suspect it's easy for you to think that way since you're not a guy and you're not looking at it from a male perspective. We guys most of the time have to make the approaches. When it comes down to it hardly any girl/woman is going to do that, there are some, but they're exceptions to the rule. For the most part women are passive in that regard. So as a guy you have to pay attention if you see someone you like, if there's someone you find attractive, then get to know them and go from there. Most guys do it like this, because it's the most practical and straight forward way to go about it.

 

You also made a snappy remark regarding my likes for the ballerina physique. It's clear from the way you said that. And I suspected that when I made clear what type of women I like you would likely bring that down in one way or another, but I posted it anyway.

 

I'm not even clear what we're attempting to convey anymore --- I think what I have gathered is that you stated your preferences may not be shaped by your biology, but that your biology insists that something be shaped. And this is what I tend to lean towards, anyway.

 

Yes, that's basically what I think. It started out as a discussion about that and we misunderstood each other somewhat, but in between you made some snappy remarks, which in my opinion shifted what you were trying to say. I wasn't insulted, as I took it as an intellectual discussion, but that doesn't mean those snappy remarks weren't there.

 

I don't like it that you look down on people who differ from your opinion on this point. I don't mind if you think little of me because of it, but just that attitude of being on a high horse and judging people from it trying to bring them down. And you mentioned you were comfortable up there doing that. It's like you don't see the irony in what you're saying. On one side you say beauty goes beyond the physique, with which I agree, but then you start talking like that. Doesn't really support your case in my opinion, even though you're right.

 

I suspect, like you said, you had some bad experiences in your life in regards to the beauty thing. But like I said, those experiences are not necessarily applicable to other people.

 

I can't comprehend someone truly believing they know the personality of someone they've never met... not to mention those involved in the entertainment industries).

 

The women I mentioned were examples of the types of women I like. I bolded that part especially, because I knew some people might misinterpret that fact. Of course I don't know them myself, in my opinion you're trying to bring it down just like you tried with your snappy comment about ballerinas, but this time in a more subtle way. I could be wrong, but that's how it comes across.

 

Not that I mind you're saying any of that stuff Onyx, but you will have me reacting to your post if you then say you choose your words (more) carefully. I don't agree with that based on the examples I provided in this post. C'est ca.

 

You do sound like you need a break.

 

In more ways than one.

Edited by Nexus One
OnyxSnowfall Established Member

OnyxSnowfall

Posted
Posted (edited)
What is "traits"? Aren't personality, talents, intelligence, looks, etc. all traits?

 

I should have specified: character traits.

Personality could be considered a collection or combination of varying traits (many variable!), though.

Aptitude is a monster all of its own.

 

Now.

 

you're just placing value on things that are as out of a person's control as physical appearance.

 

This is beyond redemption.

 

I'm certain this will be harder for me than it will be for you, but this is the last time that I can grace you with my reply :laugh:

 

PHYSICAL APPEARANCE IS NOT OUT OF A PERSON'S CONTROL... surely some basic elements are. Even paltry features. But my entire madness is founded on the idea that, especially in these modern times, physique is mostly DECEPTIVE. Are you with me? I would hold your hand if I could, and would have from the very beginning, because rehashing this nearly brings me to tears (you should be ashamed :mad:)

 

Therefore. It brings me to the other conclusion --- that "traits" can be refined... and that people can add specific ones to their repertoire... or eliminate them, even. (Meanwhile, they're too busy warring with time and they will not win).

 

Cliche, but the brain itself is an organ that can indeed improve with "exercise" and even with "diet". While we all can't be brilliant musicians and or scientific prodigies (etc), we CAN "master" some areas. Humans harbor this potential. Whether they choose to flesh it out at all is something else altogether.

 

...

 

There are fundamental properties that our current technology has yet to dominate --- and perhaps it never will. But there is a LOT that is in a person's control... in regards to their behavior, abilities, physical image, etc.

 

Anyway, I don't even know what you're getting at. I see MORE merit in prizing intelligence or kindness over physique, but if it is at the great expense of other "traits" as well, then it does become iffy. With that said, one cannot have a strength without a weakness and I at least have concluded that the "pros" to external beauty are not worth their "cons" --- also, let me know when having great physical beauty itself will cure cancer; replenish resources; solve issues without creating more; and or feed people (not cannibalism either you sicko, and there's going to have to be a lot of oral sex, I don't think it could sustain much) kk? --- and that there are far better "traits" to not only invest in, but to support and to involve myself with.

 

People have the right to determine what and or who deserves their respect... and what or who doesn't. They could be enslaved and forced to do things against their will, but notions like respect will always be theirs --- if it pleases you to look down upon me (for whatever, but as far as this goes) for looking down upon those who primarily value physique then so be it.

 

Nexus seems to take things extremely literal, as do you. Maybe you came into existence because he felt outnumbered :laugh:

 

Alas, there is some dwarf of truth in my more asinine posts.

 

And Nexuussssss, I really didn't mean anything snappy when I remarked on the entertainment industries. Sorry it came across that way. As far as the running with things goes... you claimed *I* thought you were more likely to cheat, because I enjoyed one of *Thieves* replies (that didn't seem to me to even mean that)... I didn't expect you to think you were running off with things, based solely on how far you took them. You totally need those "breaks". That's all... :B

Edited by OnyxSnowfall
The Tiger Member

The Tiger

Posted
Posted

OBVIOUSLY beauty can be altered. If it couldn't, then what would be the point of exercise, make-up, plastic surgery, etc. and obviously intelligence can be increased by learning.

 

But, just as obvious, some people are born naturally more beautiful, intelligent, artistic, nice, etc. my point is that just as some people are born so ugly that despite their best efforts they will still be viewed as physically unattractive to the opposite sex, the same can be said for all other traits. Maybe not everyone CAN be the artsy douche that I'm sure you swoon for.

 

And since when will intelligence itself cure cancer, replenish resources, or solve issues? Wasn't the unabomber intelligent? Or Hitler, Stalin, etc? Didn't our application of science create the scarcity of resources?

 

Beauty may not do the world a great deal of good but it'll never do it a great deal of harm either.

 

You can single out any trait and say that that trait by itself is not very good. A very nice but slow-witted person may be tricked into doing something inappropriate. A very creative but misguided person may write crappy books like Atlas Shrugged or The Fountainhead. Etc.

 

What I'm trying to tell you is that your personal choice to disregard appearance when choosing mates does not invalidate the practice of valuing physical appearance for EVERYONE.

 

YES we all have the choice to respect or not respect whomever we want, but that does not mean that your choice cannot be immature or misguided. What if I chose to not respect black people because they, on average, have a higher rate of crime? What if I choose not to respect athletes because they'd rather do exercise than read a book? Do these seem like legitimate reasons to not respect someone to you?

 

You might say, YES, those are legitimate reasons to not respect someone because those are someone's opinions and they are entitled to them. But then you should have to turn around, apply that logic to yourself, and see that people have the right to value appearance over other traits.

Nexus One Established Member

Nexus One

Posted
Posted
Maybe not everyone CAN be the artsy douche that I'm sure you swoon for.

 

You didn't have to go there. That's below the belt.

OnyxSnowfall Established Member

OnyxSnowfall

Posted
Posted (edited)
You didn't have to go there. That's below the belt.

 

:lmao:

 

Not really. I might have felt a little something if it were true --- but, eh, I'm doubtful.

 

(My partner is not artsy and I do swoon over him heh).

Edited by OnyxSnowfall
Nexus One Established Member

Nexus One

Posted
Posted
:lmao:

 

Not really. My partner is not artsy (and I swoon over him :o... he does appreciate my interest in it and encourages it though).

 

I wasn't referring to the artsy part, I was referring to the 'douche' part.

 

That being said, is photography your job? Or do you have a creative job? Or is it a hobby?

ScreamingTrees Established Member

ScreamingTrees

Posted
Posted

You might say, YES, those are legitimate reasons to not respect someone because those are someone's opinions and they are entitled to them. But then you should have to turn around, apply that logic to yourself, and see that people have the right to value appearance over other traits.

 

I think that it's a bit stupid for someone to really hold a lot of stock in physical qualities to SUCH AN EXTENT like that, anyway, simply because these things fade over time and in this day and age these qualities are biologically deceitful, if you want to think of us all as shallow to even the slightest extent and primal at our core.

 

It's surely not going to provide any benefits to your offspring, is it? Isn't that biologically why we'd all rather choose an aesthetically "beautiful" partner? Hopefully your KIDS don't ask you for plastic surgery a few years down the road when their faces are starting to take shape.. You could look to your significant other for the "after" shot. :lmao:

The Tiger Member

The Tiger

Posted
Posted
I think that it's a bit stupid for someone to really hold a lot of stock in physical qualities to SUCH AN EXTENT like that, anyway, simply because these things fade over time and in this day and age these qualities are biologically deceitful, if you want to think of us all as shallow to even the slightest extent and primal at our core.

 

It's surely not going to provide any benefits to your offspring, is it? Isn't that biologically why we'd all rather choose an aesthetically "beautiful" partner? Hopefully your KIDS don't ask you for plastic surgery a few years down the road when their faces are starting to take shape.. You could look to your significant other for the "after" shot. :lmao:

 

I guess it depends on the age. I don't think the majority of youngish people out there have gotten plastic surgery and you can't diet & exercise your way to a pretty face or long legs.

 

Either way, any trait can be deceitful. I forgot what Nobel Prize winner it was who said "if you want to make more Nobel Prize ask my father, my son is a guitarist." when they were collecting the DNA of Nobel Prize winners for some science project thingy.

 

Any trait can be acquired or improved with effort and bad genes can be overcome. On top of that, even having good genes does not guarantee that they will be passed on to your children.

 

And yes, putting value on beauty and NOTHING else is stupid because looks will fade, but as long as you don't go after total dunces then you could still enjoy beauty and have a nice girl.

Thieves Established Member

Thieves

Posted
Posted

Oh, dear. Still going? :D Had a nice nap, though.

 

With women on the other hand it's the other way around. They enjoy the personalities and company of many men, but only get wet to a very small %. This makes you shallow.

 

Amazing. :lmao:

OnyxSnowfall Established Member

OnyxSnowfall

Posted
Posted (edited)
I wasn't referring to the artsy part, I was referring to the 'douche' part.

 

That being said, is photography your job? Or do you have a creative job? Or is it a hobby?

 

ah, I figured artsy = douche :o

 

Photography is one of my hobbies (I've done non-profit side shoots for weddings and portfolios though! lol). I can't afford the lens and equipment that it would take in order for me to aim towards the type of professional photography I am most interested in (nature - particularly macro), but even if I could afford such, I think there's some part of me that fears my passion for it would become tainted and or ruined somehow... if I *had* to do it and or relied upon it... (which is mostly what's behind my apprehension to pursue it seriously... I'm pretty sure I could find a way to acquire everything if I needed to).

 

Painting is more my forte, and I've done different kinds of art commissions in the past. Initially it was wonderful, but then my innate inspirations were getting devoured... I was devoting too much time to creating things I didn't care for. What I naturally spew forth does not appease the majority of people :lmao: (in my area) --- rather, they almost all say something along the lines of, "Oh gosh, you have so much talent and skill; why are you wasting it by making art like THAT? Won't you make me a pretty landscape / flower / building?" Heh, I did tattoo designs for awhile as well - but that got old very quickly. I think I just prefer to be able to spend my time having the freedom to dilly and dally into what I want... photography is certainly different... but I still fear getting boxed up into something and for the sake of things I can't appreciate... I think these things will always be on the side for me... but that I will continue to explore and hone them through-out my life...

 

The long-term job I am aspiring towards is something I am passionate about --- I'm attending college and slowly but surely working towards my B.S...(and from there, a M.S) but that is an altogether different type of passion --- one I have little qualms conforming for :o

Edited by OnyxSnowfall
somedude81 Established Member

somedude81

Posted
Posted

PHYSICAL APPEARANCE IS NOT OUT OF A PERSON'S CONTROL... surely some basic elements are. Even paltry features. But my entire madness is founded on the idea that, especially in these modern times, physique is mostly DECEPTIVE.

 

Therefore. It brings me to the other conclusion --- that "traits" can be refined... and that people can add specific ones to their repertoire... or eliminate them, even. (Meanwhile, they're too busy warring with time and they will not win).

 

There are fundamental properties that our current technology has yet to dominate --- and perhaps it never will. But there is a LOT that is in a person's control... in regards to their behavior, abilities, physical image, etc.

 

Anyway, I don't even know what you're getting at.

The most obvious physical trait that is out person's control, that affects how attracted a woman is to a man, is height.

 

There is nothing a man can do to get taller except a very expensive and very painful surgery and even then the gains are minimal.

 

As for the deceptive part it's not that acceptable for a man to wear heels to increase his height so it has to be done subtly. I have lifts in my shoes that make me an inch and a half taller when versus going barefoot. But the problem with that is that the gains are minimal. It only gets me up to 5' 7.5 which is still very short.

 

Now I know some people are going to want to post after me and say that height isn't important and that they in fact no some short dude who has no problems getting women. Save it, they are the lucky ones. For every short guy that can get women, there are at least three more who can't.

 

Everybody knows that women greatly value height. Anybody who thinks otherwise just has to remember,

 

"Tall, dark and handsome."

 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...