utterer of lies Posted September 25, 2012 Posted September 25, 2012 So they point out this bias and pretend that shallow people don't exist which in fact, they do. How you deal with people like that is entirely up to the individual but some people need to stop hiding behind the preferences tag and admit there are people out there who are extremely superficial. Of course shallow and superficial people exist. That doesn't change the fact that most of the behavior that people here label shallow and superficial is perfectly normal and healthy. It's a good thing to have a set of minimal standards or requirements you expect from a partner. These standards can be anything, having and education or a nice personality, or "she needs big boobs". Everybody can to decide for themselves what makes them happy and what they need in a partner. 1
MrCastle Posted September 25, 2012 Posted September 25, 2012 A lot of what's said on here, is backlash at people who make that claim. They're written off as being bitter, or maybe if they met the requirements of these shallow people, they wouldn't call them shallow. So they point out this bias and pretend that shallow people don't exist which in fact, they do. How you deal with people like that is entirely up to the individual but some people need to stop hiding behind the preferences tag and admit there are people out there who are extremely superficial. No, it's not. People get pissed off because of 'preferences' because it means some potential partners (that they are interested in) have a preference that says "not you." A girl who publicly (or OLD) acknowledges that she wants men above a certain height says "You can't have me" to all short guys. Etc. That's why they get angry. Honest people will admit that everyone has preferences. You should just accept that you can't be the dream partner of everybody you desire. (ten characters)
utterer of lies Posted September 25, 2012 Posted September 25, 2012 I'm an advocate of preferences. I'm opposed to restrictions/filters based on immutable traits, without valid reasoning. Why? It's not your life, it's theirs. It's not your decision, it's theirs. "It's so wrong, I want them to change and accept my opinion". -> No!
MrCastle Posted September 25, 2012 Posted September 25, 2012 Of course shallow and superficial people exist. That doesn't change the fact that most of the behavior that people here label shallow and superficial is perfectly normal and healthy. It's a good thing to have a set of minimal standards or requirements you expect from a partner. These standards can be anything, having and education or a nice personality, or "she needs big boobs". Everybody can to decide for themselves what makes them happy and what they need in a partner. But that's what I'm saying, it's not "normal and healthy", it's shallow and superficial. I don't understand how you can have both. If shallow and superficial exist (these are negative traits, not positive ones) then how do you define it? At what point do they cross over from "preferences" to "shallowness"? I laid out in my initial post what I feel the difference is, but no one else has defined what they take shallow to mean.
ThaWholigan Posted September 25, 2012 Posted September 25, 2012 But that's what I'm saying, it's not "normal and healthy", it's shallow and superficial. I don't understand how you can have both. If shallow and superficial exist (these are negative traits, not positive ones) then how do you define it? At what point do they cross over from "preferences" to "shallowness"? I laid out in my initial post what I feel the difference is, but no one else has defined what they take shallow to mean. I already did.
utterer of lies Posted September 25, 2012 Posted September 25, 2012 But that's what I'm saying, it's not "normal and healthy", it's shallow and superficial. I don't understand how you can have both. If shallow and superficial exist (these are negative traits, not positive ones) then how do you define it? At what point do they cross over from "preferences" to "shallowness"? I laid out in my initial post what I feel the difference is, but no one else has defined what they take shallow to mean. There is no clear border between shallowness and preference. Everyone sees the border somewhere different, probably also based on how much they are affected by that preference and how well they can accept their flaws (or what others perceive as flaws). It's healthy because you set your own boundaries. If someone's only preference is "thin with great ass", many women get angry. But they don't have to date that guy, because he doesn't meet their proclaimed preference of "being interested in more than the body". And if they still want to date him, they should probably be more honest to themselves about their own preferences. 1
Lonely Ronin Posted September 25, 2012 Posted September 25, 2012 But that's what I'm saying, it's not "normal and healthy", it's shallow and superficial. I don't understand how you can have both. If shallow and superficial exist (these are negative traits, not positive ones) then how do you define it? At what point do they cross over from "preferences" to "shallowness"? I laid out in my initial post what I feel the difference is, but no one else has defined what they take shallow to mean. it can't be defined, as it's a case by case issue. what one person thinks is shallow another might be perfectly fine with. based on my personal experiences the person who calls someone else shallow does so for one of two reasons. Either they can't live up to the requirement, or it's a requirement they don't personally value. 2
MrCastle Posted September 25, 2012 Posted September 25, 2012 I also should have added, (although I kinda did already) that another big part of this shallowness thing is how little they care about non-physical traits. We all have physical preferences, my ideal girl (physically) is a short brunette with a great ass. Now, if I had two girls to choose from, a brunette with a great ass, and a flat blonde, but the blonde and I had better chemistry, and the blonde was a better, more quality person overall, then I'm picking the blonde. Because I know although I really would have wanted the brunette physically, her and I were not a match. If we take a brunette with a great ass and a flat blonde and everything else is equal in terms of personality/intangibles, then for sure I'm picking the brunette, because that is my physical preference, but I don't let my physical preferences be the be all/end all of my dating life. I've had blondes, brunettes, red heads, tall girls, skinny girls, curvy girls, older women, younger women, latinas, whites, blacks, etc because I've opened myself up and dated who I felt was my better match overall. My physical preference is just a guideline. I start out looking for girls that fit that preference, but if I don't find a good match, I'll go after others. I don't blow out anyone and everyone who doesn't fit my physical preference to a tee.
silicone Posted September 25, 2012 Posted September 25, 2012 The thing with height, is that there isn't an abundance of females who are willing to break the "tall guy" trend that they and their peers have. This causes extreme frustration, barred insecurity and general disdain. However, I have high standards, and I'm not willing to compromise them, but I've always seemingly managed to attract attention from females who are as sexually respectful, so to say.
Lonely Ronin Posted September 25, 2012 Posted September 25, 2012 it can't be defined, as it's a case by case issue. what one person thinks is shallow another might be perfectly fine with. based on my personal experiences the person who calls someone else shallow does so for one of two reasons. Either they can't live up to the requirement, or it's a requirement they don't personally value. And just so I'm 100% crystal clear, I'm not just talking about physical preferences, I'm talking about preferences in general.
utterer of lies Posted September 25, 2012 Posted September 25, 2012 I also should have added, (although I kinda did already) that another big part of this shallowness thing is how little they care about non-physical traits. Who are you to tell other people what traits they should care about in a partner?
MrCastle Posted September 25, 2012 Posted September 25, 2012 Who are you to tell other people what traits they should care about in a partner? I'm not, I'm just saying if you're superficial, that's not exactly a good thing. If we're going just strictly by the definition of superficial, isn't that when you only judge someone on physical appearance? I'm going by what the common belief is. I don't think anyone has said "she only wants smart, caring guys, geez, what a superficial bitch"
utterer of lies Posted September 25, 2012 Posted September 25, 2012 I'm not, I'm just saying if you're superficial, that's not exactly a good thing. If we're going just strictly by the definition of superficial, isn't that when you only judge someone on physical appearance? I'm going by what the common belief is. I don't think anyone has said "she only wants smart, caring guys, geez, what a superficial bitch" I've been called superficial because one of my preferences is "she has a Master's Degree or PhD".
LittlePrince Posted September 25, 2012 Posted September 25, 2012 I've been called superficial because one of my preferences is "she has a Master's Degree or PhD". and they were right.
utterer of lies Posted September 25, 2012 Posted September 25, 2012 and they were right. Maybe. I don't care, it's my preference to choose
MrCastle Posted September 25, 2012 Posted September 25, 2012 I've been called superficial because one of my preferences is "she has a Master's Degree or PhD". Dictionary definitions: Shallow: lacking depth; superficial Superficlal: Concerned with or comprehending only what is on the surface or obvious; shallow. These things, in my opinion, are not up for debate. Which is why this whole conversation is so confusing and seems to be going in circles. This idea of shallowness is not a matter of opinion. There are very black and white definitions to these terms, and there are people who fit these terms. They exist, as you and others have agreed. My issue, when I first came into this thread, was the idea that these people are made up. Bitter people who didn't fit a certain physical mold all decided that they were just gonna call any person who rejected them shallow. That belief to me, is unfounded and disingenuous. Shallow people do exist. Just because you may have a bias doesn't mean you're wrong. I'm a diehard Yankees fan. The red sox suck this year. You might say I have a bias by saying that since the red sox are our biggest rivals but if you check the red sox record this year, I'm not lying. So just because there may be bitter people that are only saying what they're saying because they got rejected, doesn't make the person who rejected them any more or less shallow.
Lonely Ronin Posted September 25, 2012 Posted September 25, 2012 I'm going by what the common belief is. I don't think anyone has said "she only wants smart, caring guys, geez, what a superficial bitch" I think this is an error, because the words shallow, & superficial originally had nothing to relationships. The word Bit** is the same way. However at some point in history all 3 words became slang terms for trying to put someone down. I mean I know a woman who will only date intelligent men, and she is called shallow. You know who gives her the most crap about it, female friends who are either dating or married to normal or below average intelligence men (imo).
Quiet Storm Posted September 25, 2012 Posted September 25, 2012 I think shallowness and superficiality are common traits. I believe that most people do have physical preferences, so that would make these traits normal. As for it being unhealthy...it depends. If your preferences are such that you significantly limit your dating pool and you are unhappy being alone, then it could be unhealthy. If you are using your preferences to filter out those that are unnattractive to you, and being alone until you find a mate doesn't bother you, that could be considered healthy. I think it could even be unhealthy to be in a relationship with someone that you are not physically attracted to, unless sexual attraction is not important to you. 3
LittlePrince Posted September 25, 2012 Posted September 25, 2012 Maybe. I don't care, it's my preference to choose and you've come a long way, baby.
HopelessRomantic76 Posted September 25, 2012 Posted September 25, 2012 . I think it could even be unhealthy to be in a relationship with someone that you are not physically attracted to, unless sexual attraction is not important to you. Sexual attraction is not always just about physical attraction 1
Titanwolf Posted September 25, 2012 Posted September 25, 2012 Why? It's not your life, it's theirs. It's not your decision, it's theirs. "It's so wrong, I want them to change and accept my opinion". -> No! Excuse me, I didn't say I wanted them to change and I didn't say it was wrong. I said I am opposed to it, meaning I am in disagreement with it. It's not my place to say what is right and what is wrong as whole, but I reserve the right to disagree with the way some people think. If they care enough to explain their restriction to me and I care enough to listen, fair enough, I may change my stance after hearing the explanation. If they don't, it's no skin of my back as it is their life and I have better things to concern myself with... 1
ThaWholigan Posted September 25, 2012 Posted September 25, 2012 Sexual attraction is not always just about physical attraction That is true actually. For some people, it is just about physical, for others it's mental, for people like me, it's both plus a whole lot more
utterer of lies Posted September 25, 2012 Posted September 25, 2012 Excuse me, I didn't say I wanted them to change and I didn't say it was wrong. I said I am opposed to it, meaning I am in disagreement with it. It's not my place to say what is right and what is wrong as whole, but I reserve the right to disagree with the way some people think. If they care enough to explain their restriction to me and I care enough to listen, fair enough, I may change my stance after hearing the explanation. If they don't, it's no skin of my back as it is their life and I have better things to concern myself with... That's better.
El Brujo Posted September 26, 2012 Posted September 26, 2012 Life is rough when you stand 5'7. Try being 6'6" sometime. You'll wish you were 5'7".
O'farrell Posted September 26, 2012 Posted September 26, 2012 Try being 6'6" sometime. You'll wish you were 5'7". my whole life I wanted to be 6'6 because it seemed like every great basketball player was that height. I highly doubt being 6'6 is that bad. Women like you, Id be dunking like crazy. The only reason I ever wanted to be tall was to dunk when I was younger lol. Now that I know height is important you bet your ass I want to be 6'6. It isn't as ideal as 6'2 but Ill take it over 5'7.
Recommended Posts