jobaba Posted March 25, 2012 Posted March 25, 2012 One of them, forgive me for saying so, has the features reminiscient of a 60-year-old despite working out everyday, having a slim body and good skin. I don't think she's ever had a man ask her out. Which is really a pity, because she's one of the most good-hearted, kind, understanding, and helpful people I know. She genuinely goes out of her way to help people and is willing to even be nice to the people that are incredibly nasty, pulls more than her weight in everything and just gives without expecting to receive in return. So I think it's the guys' loss, for not wanting her. If I was single and a man, I think I would be able to look past her face to the golden heart beneath - I hope so, at least. Send her my way ... next time I'm available that is. I'm also pretty sure she's not too bad. PM me a pic and I'll let you know. I'm pretty sure there's no way of us even remotely knowing anybody in common based on your description of your situation.
jobaba Posted March 25, 2012 Posted March 25, 2012 Most women look best around 16-23. I would say most girls that age who are not overweight and do not have skin problems, etc, are at least moderately attractive in that age range or could be with proper clothes, makeup, etc. Wow. Are you 21 years old? No way. Maybe for the few women who develop early, but mid to late 20s I'd say is easily the peak period if not longer. Asian women and black women tend to look younger and can keep their peak looks until well into their late 30s. 3
joystickd Posted March 25, 2012 Posted March 25, 2012 I don't hate ugly girls. People often try to point out that men have a requirement of not wanting to date ugly girls (never mind the fact that women don't want ugly guys) The point of this thread is actually trying to see how common ugly girls are, and if not wanting to date them, actually matters. Damn get off your a$$ and go talk to some women. You seem to find every reason under the sun not to do it. Women are not going to one day just fall in your lap. You got to put in the work
Els Posted March 25, 2012 Posted March 25, 2012 Send her my way ... next time I'm available that is. I'm also pretty sure she's not too bad. PM me a pic and I'll let you know. I'm pretty sure there's no way of us even remotely knowing anybody in common based on your description of your situation. I'd feel really bad sending her picture to you based on a description of 'ugly girl' >.> I'm sorry, but it's just not the sort of thing I do. However, if you ever show up in the area and prove to be a decent guy, I'd happily introduce you to her.
Professor X Posted March 25, 2012 Posted March 25, 2012 I'd feel really bad sending her picture to you based on a description of 'ugly girl' >.> I'm sorry, but it's just not the sort of thing I do. However, if you ever show up in the area and prove to be a decent guy, I'd happily introduce you to her. Elswyth, gimme HotS already............ :love::love::love:
Els Posted March 25, 2012 Posted March 25, 2012 Elswyth, gimme HotS already............ :love::love::love: ROFL how is that related?!?!?! :lmao:
123321 Posted March 25, 2012 Posted March 25, 2012 This is something I just thought of. Truly beautiful and truly hideous people are rare, one researcher put it at around 3% each, but as you noted other factors can have an influence. There are IMO a lot of potentially decent looking people around though. 2
Author somedude81 Posted March 25, 2012 Author Posted March 25, 2012 This thread has absolutely nothing to do with me meeting people. The whole point I'm trying to make, is that people who can actually be considered ugly are very rare. So the next time you hear a guy saying he doesn't want an ugly girl, basically means he's only ruling a very small number of the population. Simply because there are not a lot of ugly women out there to pass over. I see where OP is going & I have to agree with him to a point. I've met very few women that i'd consider un-bangable if you take out the weight factor. That's what I mean. Actually, the number of men who would fit this description - someone who's completely un-fixable short of plastic surgery - is quite low as well. It's rare I see a guy and just think "damn..:sick:" Most PEOPLE are at least marginally attractive or have the potential to be with non-surgical adjustments. So to answer your question, no, I don't think it matters I you choose to not date the teeny fraction of the population that's truly, physically hopeless. Somebody else who understands what I'm getting at. I like this thread. It confirms a tidbit a knowledge that was very helpful to me the last time I was single (before this time, when I'm single but not on the market yet): 'when talking to a guy, assume he thinks you're cute'. And I don't mean that in a 'women have all the power' way (because that's a ridiculous statement), more in a 'flirt away ladies, flirt away'. To me it was actually a positive thing. And that's what I've been saying all along. I believe that the vast majority of women are at least cute. And if they're not, all they need to do is lose some weight and they would be. Do you make a distinction between un-bangable and not attractive enough for a relationship? (I ask because other posters have suggested some men do and because of the way you've phrased it -- sincere question, I honestly have no idea). I don't know about phineas, but once I determine a girl attractive enough for sex, which the vast majority of healthy weight women are, she's attractive enough to date. The only difference is that her personality matters for a relationship.
phineas Posted March 25, 2012 Posted March 25, 2012 Do you make a distinction between un-bangable and not attractive enough for a relationship? (I ask because other posters have suggested some men do and because of the way you've phrased it -- sincere question, I honestly have no idea). I do. But I won't sleep with a woman if she tells me she is looking for a relationship & I don't want one with her.
jobaba Posted March 25, 2012 Posted March 25, 2012 (edited) So the next time you hear a guy saying he doesn't want an ugly girl, basically means he's only ruling a very small number of the population. Ehh. I'm not so sure about that one. I've known some good looking successful guys and they put women in the 'ugly' bin pretty quickly. I mean, if you asked them in earnest they might think those women are not hideous per se, but they definitely think they could do better and would not have sex with them. One of my high school friends was in a fraternity. And he used to tell me stories of stuff his brothers used to do to fat girls and ugly girls. Needless to say, that was far from my college experience so I didn't witness it, but I believe that stuff happens. Edited March 25, 2012 by jobaba 5
Author somedude81 Posted March 25, 2012 Author Posted March 25, 2012 Eh, I'm not exactly a good looking successful guy, so that doesn't apply to me. Though sucks that some men are such jerks. They deserve the udolpixis of this world.
Els Posted March 25, 2012 Posted March 25, 2012 The interesting thing about this thread is that its partner http://www.loveshack.org/forums/romantic/dating/318890-dont-you-hate-when-short-women-require-tall-men-24.html ... is full of bashing against women's preferences. Perhaps the conclusions that we can derive from these threads are that: 1) People will like what they like, no matter how illogical or strange it sounds to you, and 2) There WILL be people who bash you for your preferences, simply because they disagree with them 2
Author somedude81 Posted March 25, 2012 Author Posted March 25, 2012 This thread doesn't have anything to do with bashing women's preferences. How did you even think of that? Though point 2 does somewhat apply. Though basically saying that being bashed because I don't want ugly girl is pretty ridiculous, simply because they are so rare.
Els Posted March 25, 2012 Posted March 25, 2012 This thread is you talking about women bashing men for their preferences (ie no 'ugly' girls, whatever that means to the individual man). That thread is men bashing women for their preferences (ie no short guys). See the connection? Also, no, SD, you don't not want an 'ugly' girl. You don't want a girl with a breast size below C, or who has hair above shoulder length, or who is above 30 years of age. There is quite a significant difference there, to most of us, especially given that there are supermodels with any of the above, thus making the two not synonymous. 2
Kamille Posted March 25, 2012 Posted March 25, 2012 Somedude, why would you admit you think pretty much every girl has a redeeming quality (at least in the looks department) and yet still hang on to this idea that there's a "universal standard of beauty" which disqualifies you from dating? The thing I like most about this thread is that everyone, guy or girl, has said 97% of the population has what it takes to be attractive enough to at least a few people of the other gender. Any reason why this would not also apply to you? 3
Author somedude81 Posted March 25, 2012 Author Posted March 25, 2012 This thread is you talking about women bashing men for their preferences (ie no 'ugly' girls, whatever that means to the individual man). That thread is men bashing women for their preferences (ie no short guys). See the connection? Ah, you mean they are parallel to each other. Yes, that thread is bashing women for their preferences and this thread is to defend men for being bashed on our preference. Also, no, SD, you don't not want an 'ugly' girl. You don't want a girl with a breast size below C, or who has hair above shoulder length, or who is above 30 years of age. There is quite a significant difference there, to most of us, especially given that there are supermodels with any of the above, thus making the two not synonymous. I don't not want an 'ugly' girl? That's one of them there double negatives. Yes I don't want an ugly girl, but getting into more detail than that is going to drive the thread off-topic.
Author somedude81 Posted March 25, 2012 Author Posted March 25, 2012 (edited) Somedude, why would you admit you think pretty much every girl has a redeeming quality (at least in the looks department) and yet still hang on to this idea that there's a "universal standard of beauty" which disqualifies you from dating? The thing I like most about this thread is that everyone, guy or girl, has said 97% of the population has what it takes to be attractive enough to at least a few people of the other gender. Any reason why this would not also apply to you? Hell if I know. I'd date me. You ever saw my picture granny? Edited March 25, 2012 by somedude81
Author somedude81 Posted March 25, 2012 Author Posted March 25, 2012 Does Nancy Pelosi count? Damn, age does some funny things to women. Check this out. Sundries: When They Were Young Aside from her eyebrows needing a trim, Hillary was CUTE. Nancy was pretty as well.
jobaba Posted March 25, 2012 Posted March 25, 2012 Damn, age does some funny things to women. Check this out. Sundries: When They Were Young Aside from her eyebrows needing a trim, Hillary was CUTE. Nancy was pretty as well. Hillary is still a babe. I'd do her so quick.
xxoo Posted March 25, 2012 Posted March 25, 2012 The whole point I'm trying to make, is that people who can actually be considered ugly are very rare. So the next time you hear a guy saying he doesn't want an ugly girl, basically means he's only ruling a very small number of the population. Simply because there are not a lot of ugly women out there to pass over. If that is true, why even qualify it? Why mention something that is so rare to encounter? When a guy says something like that, it sounds like he is encountering and passing over commonly enough to bring it up.
Necris Posted March 25, 2012 Posted March 25, 2012 It all depends on how you define the term ugly. Everyone has a different personal standard of beauty some girls are attractive to some men but not attractive to others. With that said I will be lying if I said I'd be with a girl just on her "personality" if I am not physically attracted friendship is as far as it will go, and I don't believe in "settling" either, I have to feel some level of attraction. I also do not hold it against women when they judge me on my looks its just natural. Now I will say my standards aren't as high as some men, a woman looking like one of these girls can be attractive to me as long as she is into me and has a likeable personality, but to some men they may not want her. Unfortunately for me women tend to not feel attracted to me at all so I have actually never been in a relationship with a woman my entire life.
dasein Posted March 25, 2012 Posted March 25, 2012 Studies have shown that what we perceive as objectively "ugly" is a matter of poor symmetry measured against a norm. Symmetry signals genetic health and less likelihood of genetic defects. In all likelihood it is hardwired to an extent in all of us to seek symmetry with the hope of producing healthy offspring. As far as the thread topic, how many "ugly girls" there are, or "ugly people" has so much cultural content as to be impossible to answer. IME and dating pool over the years, no matter how "ugly" a woman may be, if she is not OW, she will not lack for male attention, if in some cases only sexual attention.
Professor X Posted March 25, 2012 Posted March 25, 2012 ROFL how is that related?!?!?! :lmao: It's not, I was just at work, bored :love: still, about a month to it though, at least 1
Disenchantedly Yours Posted March 25, 2012 Posted March 25, 2012 Damn, age does some funny things to women. Check this out. Sundries: When They Were Young Aside from her eyebrows needing a trim, Hillary was CUTE. Nancy was pretty as well. Age does funny things to women AND men. Young Al Pacino - I would date him in a second Old Al Pacino - No longer datable 1
Imajerk17 Posted March 25, 2012 Posted March 25, 2012 I'd love to sit around and engage in more Lovable Loser paralysis analysis, but I got a date, can't be late, hey! The girl's gonna do me...
Recommended Posts