Physical Attractiveness and "External Validation"...

[Bristolius]

Were you once misled...?

 

A used car salesman once told me that he liked me. I felt used.

[ThaWholigan]

It's not the need to adhere to external validation that I'm arguing, it's the fact that how you view yourself, whether it's colored by external validation or not, has no standing in other people's subjective view of your physical attractiveness. It simply doesn't matter. It might be rainbows and butterflies in your own head whether you feel attractive or not, but in the real world, no one is going to ask you whether you think you're attractive before deciding whether they think you're attractive.

 

When's the last time you, before judging a random woman's physical attractiveness in your mind, approached the woman and asked if she felt attractive...? When you look at a picture of a celebrity, do you have to write them an email and ask if they think they are attractive...? Or can you tell they are physically attractive without that knowledge?

 

The point is, people don't care whether you think you're attractive when they are judging just physical attractiveness...overall attractiveness, certainly, but not physical, which is so very often the benchmark of initial interest.

I thought we already agreed all of that?

 

I get your point, just that my additional point is that in the end, it shouldn't make you want to kill yourself.

[Star Gazer]

No, it doesn't. You misunderstand. It is not the actual money or goods themselves, but the value associated with them. Just because money or goods aren't traded doesn't mean there's no value to them. The market determines the value of any goods, services, or currency, just as society, media, and social culture determine the value of appearance and personality.

 

Ten dollars hidden away in a mayonnaise jar under the bed is worth exactly the same as ten dollars you hand to the Wal-Mart cashier. This sort of negates your requirement that something must be spent, traded, or otherwise relinquished to have value.

 

Lawyered.

 

Like attractiveness, intelligence isn't something that can you spend it or even give away. You will always have it.

 

I could believe and tell Stephen Hawking that he's stupid, that doesn't mean he is.

 

Just like I could believe and tell John Doe that he's unattractive, that doesn't mean that he is.

 

Attractiveness is entirely subjective.

[Star Gazer]

Ten dollars hidden away in a mayonnaise jar under the bed is worth exactly the same as ten dollars you hand to the Wal-Mart cashier. This sort of negates your requirement that something must be spent, traded, or otherwise relinquished to have value.

 

Lawyered.

 

No, YOU misunderstand. Ten dollars hidden away in a mayonnaise jar under the bed has the ABILITY to be spent, traded, or otherwise relinquished. THAT is why it has "value."

 

Attractiveness, UNLIKE $10 in a mayonnaise jar, CANNOT be spent, traded, or otherwise relinquished. Thus, it has no value.

 

Consider YOURSELF "lawyered." (My lord, I felt creeped out saying that. WHO SAYS THAT?!?!)

[Star Gazer]

Yep. Notice how everyone else except the owner of a company decides the worth of that company...

 

Wrong. The owner decides what it's worth when he agrees to sell it and accepts a certain amount. That is the worth of the company to the owner.

[Star Gazer]

Exactly, but there is no sense in pretending that you, yourself determine your value on the dating market.

 

If you truly believe that, ES... therein lies your problem.

[Star Gazer]

Why would I derive validation of myself as a person' date=' on the basis of you agreeing or not agreeing with me is a bit of a mystery to me.[/quote']

 

Agreed. And the same goes for deriving validation of yourself as a person on the basis of someone finding you attractive.

[somedude81]

Somehow I missed this thread.

 

Yup, it doesn't matter what you think you look like. It's all dependent on how others see you.

 

Though most people can if they are on one side of the extreme or not. In other words, I can look in a mirror and know that I'm not good looking, but I'm not ugly either. I'm just neutral.

[Star Gazer]

Somehow I missed this thread.

 

Yup, it doesn't matter what you think you look like. It's all dependent on how others see you.

 

I don't mean any disrespect when I say this, but the only people I'm seeing saying that it doesn't matter what value you place on yourself, only how others see you, are those who are lonely, romantically unhappy people (including people who many people would find attractive). I think that's very telling.

[somedude81]

I don't mean any disrespect when I say this, but the only people I'm seeing saying that it doesn't matter what value you place on yourself, only how others see you, are those who are lonely, romantically unhappy people (including people who many people would find attractive). I think that's very telling.

Yup, it means that they're ugly

 

What did you think of my last sentence, the one you didn't include in the quote?

 

What if I said that when I look at a mirror I see (insert your favorite male celeb) instead of what I really am. There would be a dissonance between what I perceive and what reality is.

[Star Gazer]

Yup, it means that they're ugly

 

Nope. Like I said, some of the people saying that what matters is what people think of you, not what you think of yourself, are folks many would consider attractive. I submit that it's their beliefs about themselves and their focus on the external that is hanging them up.

 

What did you think of my last sentence, the one you didn't include in the quote?

 

What if I said that when I look at a mirror I see (insert your favorite male celeb) instead of what I really am. There would be a dissonance between what I perceive and what reality is.

 

Who says what "reality" is when it comes to something so personal and subjective as attractiveness? To some, you'll be the cat's meow. To others, not so much. To most, somewhere in between. When I look in the mirror, most of the time I think, "Damn girl, you're looking gooooood!" Who's anyone to tell me I'm not? And why should I give a second thought to anyone who doesn't agree with me?

 

There are billions of people on this planet, most of which you and I wouldn't find attractive, yet all those people are having rabidly wild, hot, passionate, loving sex with someone who does find them insanely and irresistibly attractive. Again, attractiveness is personal and subjective. There is no "reality" about it.

 

I and I alone define my worth. NO ONE ELSE.

[USMCHokie]

No, YOU misunderstand. Ten dollars hidden away in a mayonnaise jar under the bed has the ABILITY to be spent, traded, or otherwise relinquished. THAT is why it has "value."

 

Attractiveness, UNLIKE $10 in a mayonnaise jar, CANNOT be spent, traded, or otherwise relinquished. Thus, it has no value.

 

Generally speaking, you might define "value" as any sort of metric used to determine something's worth in relation to something else.

 

So if you apply it to a free market, each good and service (hereinafter, product) available in that market is assigned a particular dollar amount based on what that market deems from the totality of its characteristics as its worth relative to all other products. A product has that value relative to other products regardless of whether an actual transaction took place. An oil change is still worth $30 whether someone gets an oil change or not.

 

Likewise, in the world of dating, the "products" are people. And with each person, we inherently assign a "value" to that person relative to other people. That value may not have a unit of measure, like dollars, but we use characteristics like physical attractiveness, personality, intelligence, etc. to measure a person's worth relative to other people. And the transactions of buying and selling can be analogized to relationships. We assess the relative value of people against each other, and when we've found a transaction we want (the meeting of the minds, so to speak), then a relationship is formed (i.e., the transaction is completed).

 

If physically attractiveness truly had no value as you proffer, then a legitimately grotesque person would be no different from a supermodel. Yet why are they seen differently in society? Why would anyone favor the more attractive person if attractiveness had no value was not used to compare the worth of two people? This is no different with personality, intelligence, career, education, or any other characteristic of a person. Does having a job hold any value over being unemployed?

 

It may be groteque, but it works.

 

Your turn.

 

Consider YOURSELF "lawyered." (My lord, I felt creeped out saying that. WHO SAYS THAT?!?!)

 

It's actually a prominent joke from How I Met Your Mother...Marshall says it all the time.

 

 

Agreed. And the same goes for deriving validation of yourself as a person on the basis of someone finding you attractive.

 

Of course. This thread was focused on purely physical attractiveness and nothing else. I made no conclusions of how external validation might affect how you would view yourself as a whole.

[Star Gazer]

Likewise, in the world of dating, the "products" are people. And with each person, we inherently assign a "value" to that person relative to other people. That value may not have a unit of measure, like dollars, but we use characteristics like physical attractiveness, personality, intelligence, etc. to measure a person's worth relative to other people. And the transactions of buying and selling can be analogized to relationships. We assess the relative value of people against each other, and when we've found a transaction we want (the meeting of the minds, so to speak), then a relationship is formed (i.e., the transaction is completed).

 

When it comes to RELATIONSHIPS, I don't see people as "products," and I wholly disagree that "we" inherently assign a "value" to a person relative to other people. Normal people with hearts, who look at people as unique individuals who can't and shouldn't be compared to anyone else don't do that. I certainly don't assess value of people against each other. That's a dishearteningly disgusting way of looking at and relating to people.

 

People as products. Trading up. GIGS at it's finest.

 

Just remember, comparison is the thief of joy. It explains why you're sad.

[USMCHokie]

To some, you'll be the cat's meow. To others, not so much. To most, somewhere in between. When I look in the mirror, most of the time I think, "Damn girl, you're looking gooooood!" Who's anyone to tell me I'm not? And why should I give a second thought to anyone who doesn't agree with me?

 

....

 

Again, attractiveness is personal and subjective. There is no "reality" about it.

 

I am not arguing that attractiveness is not subjective. I am merely stating that attractiveness as it relates to dating is not measured by you, but by others.

 

Let's go back to the Stephen Hawking example you provided earlier. Let's say that the person you want to date must be intelligent. However, you think he's stupid. He may genuinely believe that he's intelligent, and the whole world may genuinely believe he's intelligent, but whose opinion matters on whether he gets a date with you? Yours, and only yours. All the internal validation in the world on his part will not get him a date with you.

[Star Gazer]

I am not arguing that attractiveness is not subjective. I am merely stating that attractiveness as it relates to dating is not measured by you, but by others.

 

Let's go back to the Stephen Hawking example you provided earlier. Let's say that the person you want to date must be intelligent. However, you think he's stupid. He may genuinely believe that he's intelligent, and the whole world may genuinely believe he's intelligent, but whose opinion matters on whether he gets a date with you? Yours, and only yours. All the internal validation in the world on his part will not get him a date with you.

 

But that doesn't make him stupid. His intelligence isn't actually measured by me. What I think of him does not change how intelligent he is, and it shouldn't change his perception of how intelligent he is.

 

Your premise is that his intelligence is determined by what *I* think of him. Obviously, that's not the case. Nor is that the case with attractiveness.

[USMCHokie]

When it comes to RELATIONSHIPS, I don't see people as "products," and I wholly disagree that "we" inherently assign a "value" to a person relative to other people. Normal people with hearts, who look at people as unique individuals who can't and shouldn't be compared to anyone else don't do that. I certainly don't assess value of people against each other. That's a dishearteningly disgusting way of looking at and relating to people.

 

People as products. Trading up. GIGS at it's finest.

 

Just remember, comparison is the thief of joy. It explains why you're sad.

 

I'm not necessarily talking about holding up two cans of soup in the grocery store and comparing nutrition facts...

 

But do you not compare someone you date with the archetype of that man you would want date? E.g., employed, funny, good teeth, etc.? I find it hard to believe that you view each individual person fully isolated from all others...seems like a lot of reinventing of the wheel...

 

For example, how would you know that dating an unemployed man was unfavorable? Perhaps you would compare it to a past negative experience dating an unemployed man and know you don't want to repeat that same mistake? Or perhaps you'd compare it to others' accounts of dating unemployed men and learn from their mistake? If you truly treated every guy you dated individually and in pure isolation from one another, then you'd have no problem dating a string of unemployed men, as there's no value, either positive or negative, you'd associated with unemployment, and you wouldn't compare it to the merits of employment.

[Star Gazer]

I'm not necessarily talking about holding up two cans of soup in the grocery store and comparing nutrition facts...

 

"Not necessarily" but you sure sound like it. Perhaps comparing compensible female evening entertainment would be a better analogy.

 

But do you not compare someone you date with the archetype of that man you would want date? E.g., employed, funny, good teeth, etc.? I find it hard to believe that you view each individual person fully isolated from all others...seems like a lot of reinventing of the wheel...

 

I do not measure the "value" of a potential relationship partner against the "value" of another potential relationship partner, and I certainly don't compare their "values" in terms of their attractiveness. I just don't view people that way, as tradeable, spendable, relinquishable. They either are compatible with me, or they're not. You can't treat human beings and relationships with human beings like they're a commodity on the open market or a potential employee who you'll compensate for the work they perform. Well, you CAN do that...but don't expect to be happy.

 

As I've stated probably a hundred times on LS, I don't shop for a particular type of man. I shop for a particular type of relationship, and when I find the right relationship with a man, he's the right man.

[USMCHokie]

Your premise is that his intelligence is determined by what *I* think of him. Obviously, that's not the case. Nor is that the case with attractiveness.

 

No, my premise which you quoted is that his intelligence as related to dating is measured by you. His intelligence as a dateworthiness factor is measured by you, external to him.

 

If you were deciding whether you wanted to date a guy, do you ask him how smart he thinks he is, or how handsome he thinks he is, or how funny he thinks he is? No, you'd see what he looked like, observe his actions, listen to what he says, and then make an assessment, external to him, of whether he gets a date with you.

[USMCHokie]

I do not measure the "value" of a potential relationship partner against the "value" of another potential relationship partner, and I certainly don't compare their "values" in terms of their attractiveness. I just don't view people that way, as tradeable, spendable, relinquishable. They either are compatible with me, or they're not. You can't treat human beings and relationships with human beings like they're a commodity on the open market or a potential employee who you'll compensate for the work they perform. Well, you CAN do that...but don't expect to be happy.

 

Alright, great. We can stipulate all of the above.

 

But like I said in my "Sorry, But LS is Not the Real World" thread, how many people out there are as righteous as you? We would be lucky to have 1% of the world think and approach social situations as you do (and I mean that genuinely), but the world isn't all peaches and cream. So when someone on LS receives guidance or information from folks like yourself who actually have the right idea, they think the whole world operates like that. Unfortunately, it doesn't, and so they come back here with a "the f*ck" look on their face (like this: ) and question everything everyone has offered (like this: and sometimes like this: ).

 

Unfortunately, many folks of this world do operate socially like it were a free market.

[Star Gazer]

No, my premise which you quoted is that his intelligence as related to dating is measured by you. His intelligence as a dateworthiness factor is measured by you, external to him.

 

If you were deciding whether you wanted to date a guy, do you ask him how smart he thinks he is, or how handsome he thinks he is, or how funny he thinks he is? No, you'd see what he looked like, observe his actions, listen to what he says, and then make an assessment, external to him, of whether he gets a date with you.

 

Your premise is as follows:

 

My premise is that physical attractiveness is entirely an externally derived characteristic. It doesn't mean sh*t whether you think you're attractive when it comes to dating...it only matters whether those outside you think it. And that is the reason why so many people instinctively look outward for feedback on how attractive they are...because it's the ONLY place you can get it.

 

My point is, NO... attractiveness, like intelligence, is NOT "an entirely externally derived characteristic." External feedback is NOT the "ONLY" place you can determine whether or not you're attractive.

 

It's called a mirror and your own eyes. THAT is your feedback.

 

HTF would you ever be able to rely on the outward feedback from others to ascertain your attractiveness? Some women HATE Asian guys. If you relied on their feedback, you'd think you were hideous. Some women like Asian guys. If you relied on their feedback, you'd think you were God's gift. How do you reconcile all that conflicting feedback, if that feedback is the ONLY source of determining your attractiveness? You don't. You can't.

 

Everyone is going to have a different opinion of each and every characteristic you have - from your attractiveness, to your intelligence, to your sense of humor, to your personality, to your integrity and trustworthiness. Some women will think you score highly on these characteristics. Some will think you score poorly. And some women will go from thinking you scored high to changing their mind and deciding you score low.

 

You just can't rely on what other people think of you in forming these conclusions. ALL THAT MATTERS is what you think of yourself.

 

Your goal should be to find the person who AGREES with you. The rest? F**k 'em.

[Star Gazer]

Alright, great. We can stipulate all of the above.

 

But like I said in my "Sorry, But LS is Not the Real World" thread, how many people out there are as righteous as you? We would be lucky to have 1% of the world think and approach social situations as you do (and I mean that genuinely), but the world isn't all peaches and cream. So when someone on LS receives guidance or information from folks like yourself who actually have the right idea, they think the whole world operates like that. Unfortunately, it doesn't, and so they come back here with a "the f*ck" look on their face (like this: ) and question everything everyone has offered (like this: and sometimes like this: ).

 

Unfortunately, many folks of this world do operate socially like it were a free market.

 

I don't think I'm righteous, and I don't think I'm in the gross minority either. I think you're right that LS portrays a very demented view of the way things actually are... but it's YOU, not me, that is presenting it. You're keeping an unhealthy inertia going among the lonely and unhappy.

 

I think I'm a normal person who doesn't view potential relationship partners as tradeable, expendable, or measurable by some weird "value," and at least amongst my friends, I know my views on this are common.

[USMCHokie]

My point is, NO... attractiveness, like intelligence, is NOT "an entirely externally derived characteristic." External feedback is NOT the "ONLY" place you can determine whether or not you're attractive.

 

It's called a mirror and your own eyes. THAT is your feedback.

 

Ok, but how do your eyes know what is attractive? Does social culture and popular media, the other kids at school when you were growing up, family, etc., i.e., external sources, not play a pivotal role in your view of what is attractive? Where does that baseline come from? Humans simply cannot exist in a vacuum...and how we grew up as kids has an immeasurable impact on what we believe and become as adults...

 

How do you reconcile all that conflicting feedback, if that feedback is the ONLY source of determining your attractiveness? You don't. You can't.

 

That's completely up to the individual, as I explained earlier in this thread. Some people take the average of the feedback and fall somewhere in between, while others flip flop to the extremes just as their feedback flip flops. Again, as I explained above, a baseline had to have been established, and that baseline inherently must come from somewhere...

 

And when people receive nothing but negative feedback from an early age, they will instinctually set their internal baseline at that level...so the only way to affect that baseline is through external sources...that's why it seems so difficult to empathize with the Loveable Losers with such low baselines when your own personal baseline is much higher...you don't require external feedback to raise your internal baseline...but you might not understand that they do...

[USMCHokie]

I think you're right that LS portrays a very demented view of the way things actually are... but it's YOU, not me, that is presenting it. You're keeping an unhealthy inertia going among the lonely and unhappy.

 

Just presenting a different perspective is all, one that will be commonly encountered but is often ignored on LS in favor of more romanticized perspectives with bunny rabbits frolicking in the strawberry pastures...

 

But good game.

[Star Gazer]

Ok, but how do your eyes know what is attractive? Does social culture and popular media, the other kids at school when you were growing up, family, etc., i.e., external sources, not play a pivotal role in your view of what is attractive? Where does that baseline come from? Humans simply cannot exist in a vacuum...and how we grew up as kids has an immeasurable impact on what we believe and become as adults...

 

I am far from what society and the fashion industry says is gorgeous. I just look in the mirror, and decide whether I like what I see for myself. I'm not going to compare myself to anyone else, and I sure as sh*t am not going to allow anyone to "assess my value" by comparing my attractiveness to that of someone else.

 

That's completely up to the individual, as I explained earlier in this thread. Some people take the average of the feedback and fall somewhere in between, while others flip flop to the extremes just as their feedback flip flops.

 

I don't think emotionally healthy people with a good self-concept do either of these things. To the contrary, the opinions of others as to their attractivess does not affect their own opinion of their attractivess. They are not so weak as to let others' opinions of them change their own.

 

And when people receive nothing but negative feedback from an early age, they will instinctually set their internal baseline at that level...so the only way to affect that baseline is through external sources...that's why it seems so difficult to empathize with the Loveable Losers with such low baselines when your own personal baseline is much higher...you don't require external feedback to raise your internal baseline...but you might not understand that they do...

 

And what about the kids who didn't have positive external feedback about their attractiveness growing up? (I didn't.) Who were called ugly by bullies (I was) and yet who always looked in the mirror and saw a decently pretty girl looking back at her (I did)?

[USMCHokie]

I am far from what society and the fashion industry says is gorgeous. I just look in the mirror, and decide whether I like what I see for myself. I'm not going to compare myself to anyone else, and I sure as sh*t am not going to allow anyone to "assess my value" by comparing my attractiveness to that of someone else.

 

I don't think emotionally healthy people with a good self-concept do either of these things. To the contrary, the opinions of others as to their attractivess does not affect their own opinion of their attractivess. They are not so weak as to let others' opinions of them change their own.

 

And what about the kids who didn't have positive external feedback about their attractiveness growing up? (I didn't.) Who were called ugly by bullies (I was) and yet who always looked in the mirror and saw a decently pretty girl looking back at her (I did)?

 

And good on you. I have no reason to argue any of these points about you, as I genuinely believe them to be true about you. But it doesn't mean this mentality and attitude doesn't exist. Like I said before, you are in the minority here.