Should men who are average looking, settle, or should they wait around for a love..?

[AHardDaysNight]

That may never come?

 

I ask you this, because a poster in a different thread said that I shouldn't go after my second choice, if my first choice would reject me.

 

How in the world does this make sense?

 

First off, I'm condemning myself to being rejected, if I go after my first choice. So I'm a bad guy.

 

Secondly, I go after a girl who's also average looking and chubby, and don't get rejected. I'm therefore not lonely, but I'm still the bad guy, because I only went after that girl because she was my second choice.

 

How am I supposed to not be the bad guy in this? Where, exactly, would I win and not be a loser?

[phineas]

always have a back-up plan.

[AHardDaysNight]

always have a back-up plan.

 

This doesn't help me, man. I don't know how this relates to the question I asked?

[Kamille]

What? I don't think I get it. How are you a bad guy in scenario one?

 

How would you feel if a woman told you she was only dating you because she couldn't do better? (in essence, that she was settling for you?)

 

Anyway, I would hate to think a guy was dating me because he couldn't do better. Just because one girl rejected you doesn't mean there isn't another girl out there who will be as totally into you as you are into her.

 

Not to mention, just because you think you would be settling if you were dating girl B doesn't mean there isn't a guy out there who would consider girl B to be his first choice.

 

Reverse the genders, and it still all holds true.

 

"Settling" belittles the "settlee" and shows a part of arrogance on the part of the settler.

[OneFootOut]

What? I don't think I get it. How are you a bad guy in scenario one?

 

How would you feel if a woman told you she was only dating you because she couldn't do better? (in essence, that she was settling for you?)

 

Anyway, I would hate to think a guy was dating me because he couldn't do better. Just because one girl rejected you doesn't mean there isn't another girl out there who will be as totally into you as you are into her.

 

Not to mention, just because you think you would be settling if you were dating girl B doesn't mean there isn't a guy out there who would consider girl B to be his first choice.

 

Reverse the genders, and it still all holds true.

 

"Settling" belittles the "settlee" and shows a part of arrogance on the part of the settler.

 

Great answer, no one should settle for someone they don't absolutely love and adore and WANT to be with. That's not fair to either party.

[ascendotum]

There is no right or wrong answer to this. Its up to the individual. Do what YOU think is best outcome for you (and also hopefully your partner). Do what you think is in your best interests and not what other people on the www tell you, in this respect. I know examples of men from both sides, and its not for me to tell them they are wrong, though I have advised a good mate who settled for a woman who was settling for him he was wrong, but he says he was happier than being single, and for him thats what counts.

Waiting for love is clearly not working for you..so if you really want an answer...settle! (also settle on an avatar)

[Yamaha]

The only way you settle is if you date someone that you aren't attracted to both physically and emotionally. If you date just to have someone then you are settling.

 

Settling does not mean girl A said no so now I have to date girl B. Are you only interested in one person in a world of 6.8 billion? Can you only love one person in your lifetime?

 

Ther are plenty of perople you can have a relationship with and to not pick the 1st one on your list is not settling.

[fortyninethousand322]

I wonder how many people have naive or overly fairy tale like notions of how people choose their partners. Many people (most? all?) settle on something sometime in their lives. Choice of college, choice of workplace, who they're dating, what kind of car they drive, etc. Does that mean people aren't proud of where they went to school or what their job is? No, not at all.

 

Take for example a good friend of mine who's getting married in a few weeks. When he started dating his fiance she was one of two women he was dating. At the time he much preferred the other girl. But, after a few dates she went cold and wouldn't call him back (i.e. she lost interest). So, he started dating his second choice since she was calling him back and did seem interested in him. He loves her dearly and wouldn't trade her for any girl in the world. But, he did technically "settle" for her.

 

So, by all means "settle" if by "settle" you mean go with your second or third choices (if you do truly like them). Just don't date someone because NO ONE would have you and don't marry someone you don't really care about just because you want someone in your life.

 

**I may or may not end up following this advice so take it with a grain of salt.**

[AHardDaysNight]

The only way you settle is if you date someone that you aren't attracted to both physically and emotionally. If you date just to have someone then you are settling.

 

Settling does not mean girl A said no so now I have to date girl B. Are you only interested in one person in a world of 6.8 billion? Can you only love one person in your lifetime?

 

Ther are plenty of perople you can have a relationship with and to not pick the 1st one on your list is not settling.

 

Thanks. That's what I thought, but I was confused by her statement that I was being unfair to the girl.

 

This was a hypothetical situation, but I just didn't understand how I was being the bad guy.

[ascendotum]

Also is an average guy in a relationship with an average girl your definition of settling for the guy?

Do you think an average woman is not settling if she dates you?

[AHardDaysNight]

Also is an average guy in a relationship with an average girl your definition of settling for the guy?

Do you think an average woman is not settling if she dates you?

 

Like I've said before, I would be fine with her settling if it was because she saw the person inside, not the outside.

 

The same would work in reverse.

[ShannonMI]

That may never come?

 

I ask you this, because a poster in a different thread said that I shouldn't go after my second choice, if my first choice would reject me.

 

How in the world does this make sense?

 

First off, I'm condemning myself to being rejected, if I go after my first choice. So I'm a bad guy.

 

Secondly, I go after a girl who's also average looking and chubby, and don't get rejected. I'm therefore not lonely, but I'm still the bad guy, because I only went after that girl because she was my second choice.

 

How am I supposed to not be the bad guy in this? Where, exactly, would I win and not be a loser?

You're not the bad guy if girl #1 rejects you and you go for girl #2. You WOULD be a bad guy however if you told girl #2 that she was your second pick and you are settling with her. No one wants to be second best. I wouldn't imagine you would do that, so no worries.

[Wolf18]

I don't think a woman "settling" for me is belittling. Over time two people can grow in love. Considering what most women call "settling" these days, I think the better term for it would be "coming back down to earth". You can either be used for sex by the guys above your league, or "settle" for a guy who will care and dedicate himself for you.

[The Tiger]

Aren't you a twenty-some year old virgin? Stop overanalyzing it and go after whichever one will take you.

[AHardDaysNight]

Well, right now I have no dating prospects.

 

But if I did, I probably would go after the more average looking girl, because she'd be more likely to be receptive.

[Ruby Slippers]

I think most people settle in some way. We all want the best partner we can get, but it's rare that people think they have found THE person who is a better match for them than anyone else on Earth. Some people do feel that way, and for as long as that relationship lasts, they are lucky.

 

An analogy is that you might want an expensive gourmet feast, but can only afford a decent, modest meal. You can spend the meal complaining about the feast you're missing out on, or savor the meal that you've got. If you're truly savoring what you have, you won't feel like you're settling at all.

 

The attitude that you bring to life and whatever it gives you is 100% up to you.

[USMCHokie]

I'll wait for someone who gives me the za-za-zoom.

[neverendingheartache]

no settling , u will end up resenting her and you will always be thinking to yourself "i could have done better" .she will never satisfy you and you will always be unhappy . if it feels like a settling to you , don't do it coz the relationship will be doomed and then there will be no settling after all. it will just be a waste of your time.

[somedude81]

I tried the setting thing before and it didn't turn out good. Still she was the only girl I've ever kissed

 

Not really worth it being with a girl if I'm not attracted to her at all.

 

As for women, I'd be happy if one settled for me.

[grkBoy]

Define "settling"

[verhrzn]

There's a big difference between going "Girl A and Girl B are both awesome, let me talk to Girl A, NOPE, she rejected me, okay Girl B what's up?" Obviously you can't go for both of them at the same time, but as long as you don't consider Girl B any less awesome than Girl A, and were just as interested in her (and just happened to choose Girl A cause ONE of em had to be first) I think it's a-ok.

 

But if you're choosing Girl B because you think you could never GET Girl A.. aka, settling for second best out of fear of rejection, low self-esteem, lack of confidence, etc.-then yes, you ARE a bad guy, if nothing else because you're keeping her selfishly. YOU don't necessarily want her... you'd drop her if a better option came along... and she could be out there finding someone who DOESN'T consider her second-best or second-choice.

 

It's a subtle but important difference.

[tradewinds]

You should never settle for less than what you want. Take the woman part out, if you want something really bad do you settle or do you come up with a plan to get it?

Find out what these women are really attracted to. I think you would be surprised. If it's just money, I wouldn't bother.

They surely don't want some guy who thinks they are out of his league.

My friend, who is very average, gets hot chicks all the time. Why? He talks to them! He plays games (I don't mean total head games) with them that make him interesting. He will walk right up and politely introduce himself, perhaps paying a very small complement, and then kind of show little interest (like he doesn't need them). More often than not, they turn right around and start talking to him. He is very sincere too and not a fake. Girls love him!

Read a book on dating, it might help. Happy hunting!

[xxoo]

That may never come?

 

I ask you this, because a poster in a different thread said that I shouldn't go after my second choice, if my first choice would reject me.

 

How in the world does this make sense?

 

First off, I'm condemning myself to being rejected, if I go after my first choice. So I'm a bad guy.

 

Secondly, I go after a girl who's also average looking and chubby, and don't get rejected. I'm therefore not lonely, but I'm still the bad guy, because I only went after that girl because she was my second choice.

 

How am I supposed to not be the bad guy in this? Where, exactly, would I win and not be a loser?

 

Throw your net wide, and date women of all types. Along the way, you will CONNECT with one (or a few). When you connect with a woman, her attractiveness will increase in your eyes. She may be average, and you may be average, but you will be crazy about each other....feel great spending time together....and desire each other madly. Win.

[grkBoy]

I'm still not sure what "settling" means in this discussion, but I do feel one thing applies to men and women:

 

If "finding someone" is a priority to you, and "dying alone" is not an option in your mind, then you need to pick from your available dating pool.

 

Some can call this settling, but I see it as thinking realistic. How you define your dating pool is up to you, but I aim this statement mainly at men and women who keep holding out for some "above average" person to mate with them, and then lament later on how they never found some person...blaming the opposite sex for not presenting them with one.

 

If you can be perfectly happy growing old and dying alone, then you can hold out as much as you like, because you're willing to be alone before you get with someone you're not totally into.

 

However, if you're the man or woman who really wants to be married and having kids by a certain age, or you honest cannot fathom the idea of growing old alone...then you're stuck with what's available to you.

 

So if you're the single guy in a town where all the women are fat single moms with low IQs, you get two options if "dying alone" is not a thought in your mind:

 

1) Pick one of those women

2) Go longer distance and be prepared to move even

 

Same with women. IRC333 has mentioned many times about hot women who move into his little town and yet reject pretty much all the single men while seeking some guy who might not exist. If she's willing and happy in the idea of growing old alone, then leave her be. However, if she's really wanting a husband and kids, she can either pick someone from the town, or expand the distance and be ready to move to a new space if she finds the ideal man.

 

"Settling" is how you look at it, but people think it means you let go of the fantasy. I think it means when you get with someone whom you have zero attraction to, just so you "have someone". It's not settling when you pick someone who is maybe 80% of what you want, but you're honestly happy and love him/her. The other 20% comes easily at that point.

[fortyninethousand322]

I'm still not sure what "settling" means in this discussion, but I do feel one thing applies to men and women:

 

If "finding someone" is a priority to you, and "dying alone" is not an option in your mind, then you need to pick from your available dating pool.

 

Some can call this settling, but I see it as thinking realistic. How you define your dating pool is up to you, but I aim this statement mainly at men and women who keep holding out for some "above average" person to mate with them, and then lament later on how they never found some person...blaming the opposite sex for not presenting them with one.

 

If you can be perfectly happy growing old and dying alone, then you can hold out as much as you like, because you're willing to be alone before you get with someone you're not totally into.

 

However, if you're the man or woman who really wants to be married and having kids by a certain age, or you honest cannot fathom the idea of growing old alone...then you're stuck with what's available to you.

 

So if you're the single guy in a town where all the women are fat single moms with low IQs, you get two options if "dying alone" is not a thought in your mind:

 

1) Pick one of those women

2) Go longer distance and be prepared to move even

 

Same with women. IRC333 has mentioned many times about hot women who move into his little town and yet reject pretty much all the single men while seeking some guy who might not exist. If she's willing and happy in the idea of growing old alone, then leave her be. However, if she's really wanting a husband and kids, she can either pick someone from the town, or expand the distance and be ready to move to a new space if she finds the ideal man.

 

"Settling" is how you look at it, but people think it means you let go of the fantasy. I think it means when you get with someone whom you have zero attraction to, just so you "have someone". It's not settling when you pick someone who is maybe 80% of what you want, but you're honestly happy and love him/her. The other 20% comes easily at that point.

 

This is true, but it doesn't make the situation any less frustrating for some people. I mean, while I'm no great judge of my own looks I think I'm somewhere around above average, I keep in shape, I'm college educated, smart and witty, friendly, a good person, etc. Is it too much to hope for someone with similar attributes?