GoodOnPaper Posted March 10, 2013 Posted March 10, 2013 As a stuggling guy you get mixed messages here..if you cant attract women they say lower your standards to less attractive women who may not excite you all that much but then you have people saying its not fair to the women if you settle for someone you arent that attracted to but settle for because its all you can get As a struggling guy it seem as if you youre damned if you do and damned if you dont I agree. No one seems to be addressing the core question that results. Should a struggling guy only try to date women he's "really" attracted to, even if it means months or years between asking women out, or take advantage of more frequent dating opportunities with women for whom he feels luke-warm attraction to? To me, doing the latter isn't any different than a woman indulging in a ONS in between relationships -- there doesn't seem to me much complaining about that on LS.
man_in_the_box Posted March 10, 2013 Posted March 10, 2013 The difference is between it being a ONS and a potential relationship that lasts for years and will cost both of you a significant portion of your life.
Eggplant Posted March 10, 2013 Posted March 10, 2013 It really isn't. It only is because people have hypothetical views of what perfect relationships should be. For instance, I have been totally gaga/nuts/crazy in love with three women in my life. One dated me, and the other two friendzoned me. The one who dated me gave me so much less respect and support than other women who have dated me and of the two who friendzoned me, one is lazy and unreliable and the other is ditzy, whimsical, impulsive, and a cheater. Yes, that is emotional love for you. Of the other women I have dated, was I maybe not as crazy into them. Maybe. But they were supportive, reliable, fun, and attractive. When you 'settle' you're not really 'settling'. When you follow your heart and loins, that's when you really settle. So you have never had the experience of being totally "gaga/nuts/crazy in love" with a woman who was reciprocally totally "gaga/nuts/crazy in love" with you. I hate to tell you, but this fantasy does happen once in a while, (it's happened for me) and missing out on it in life is really depressing. If you settle for a woman and marry her, one day you may meet another woman that loves you and you her, but you will have already committed to another woman. Then what?
man_in_the_box Posted March 10, 2013 Posted March 10, 2013 For instance, I have been totally gaga/nuts/crazy in love with three women in my life. One dated me, and the other two friendzoned me. The one who dated me gave me so much less respect and support than other women who have dated me and of the two who friendzoned me, one is lazy and unreliable and the other is ditzy, whimsical, impulsive, and a cheater. I can affirm this. If I got the women I've fallen in love with I'd be neck-deep in relationship troubles if I look at how they and their boyfriends ended up.
JuneJulySeptember Posted March 10, 2013 Posted March 10, 2013 (edited) So you have never had the experience of being totally "gaga/nuts/crazy in love" with a woman who was reciprocally totally "gaga/nuts/crazy in love" with you. I hate to tell you, but this fantasy does happen once in a while, (it's happened for me) and missing out on it in life is really depressing. If you settle for a woman and marry her, one day you may meet another woman that loves you and you her, but you will have already committed to another woman. Then what? See. The problem is messages like this. Telling people they should kill themselves rather than go a life without being totally emotionally in love with someone who is emotionally in love with you. BTW, the one. She was emotionally in love with me. She used to grab me and make out with me and tell me she loved me all the time in public. The rest was a disaster. She's so much better as a friend. I'll tell you what happens when I get married. I don't let myself know another woman to the extent that I can get emotionally involved with her. And if I do, I realize it's just emotional. That is what works for me. Rational, cold, rational. Good luck with your relationships. But please don't me that mine are 'settling' because I don't have this silly emotional urge to want to rip their clothes off every single day. Edited March 10, 2013 by JuneJulySeptember
Wesker Posted March 10, 2013 Posted March 10, 2013 but laid if you do I never could get into the heavy stuff so I guess I'm damned if I don't When it comes to getting laid, I'd rather pay for a hot hooker/escort than settle for someone and try to get roused up. 2
Eggplant Posted March 10, 2013 Posted March 10, 2013 I'll tell you what happens when I get married. I don't let myself know another woman to the extent that I can get emotionally involved with her. And if I do, I realize it's just emotional. That is what works for me. Rational, cold, rational. Good luck with your relationships. But please don't me that mine are 'settling' because I don't have this silly emotional urge to want to rip their clothes off every single day.You're right, you shouldn't lie down and die, but work with what life gives you. If you don't think emotional intimacy is a big deal, then you're much freer than I am. I was like you are. But then I got a taste, and now I've come to the realization that I can't not have it, at least in the beginning of the relationship. Good luck.
xxoo Posted March 10, 2013 Posted March 10, 2013 It's not as if deep emotional love and attraction is red flag. It is often the foundation of a solid relationship. Other times, it just floats a shaky relationship for a while before it self-combusts.
Necris Posted March 10, 2013 Posted March 10, 2013 I don't get the whole lowering your standards thing, I've tried that but just because a girl may seem goofy and weird to you, or unattractive in some way doesn't mean she will be attracted to you, she still often has options and still she has her own ideal of the guy she wants to be with, and if you aren't that guy you'll be rejected just like with every other woman. I never understood how people think this would be helpful in anyway.
Revolver Posted March 10, 2013 Posted March 10, 2013 I wouldnt advise any man to lower his standards for a relationship. As I've said before, IMO lowering of standards is the root of most cheating. 1
USMCHokie Posted March 10, 2013 Posted March 10, 2013 I don't get the whole lowering your standards thing, I've tried that but just because a girl may seem goofy and weird to you, or unattractive in some way doesn't mean she will be attracted to you, she still often has options and still she has her own ideal of the guy she wants to be with, and if you aren't that guy you'll be rejected just like with every other woman. I never understood how people think this would be helpful in anyway. A lot of people base their interest in another on that other person's interest in them. By opening yourself to less attractive women, you are opening yourself to receiving interest by more people, thus increasing your chances of being interested in a woman. Now if men and women did this simultaneously, you'd have less attractive people opening themselves to being interested in one another...
USMCHokie Posted March 10, 2013 Posted March 10, 2013 I wouldnt advise any man to lower his standards for a relationship. As I've said before, IMO lowering of standards is the root of most cheating. Here's one for you. How does one establish "standards"...? 1
JuneJulySeptember Posted March 10, 2013 Posted March 10, 2013 Here's one for you. How does one establish "standards"...? Easy. When people say standards, the vast majority of people are talking about looks and to a lesser extent career and salary.
JuneJulySeptember Posted March 10, 2013 Posted March 10, 2013 A lot of people base their interest in another on that other person's interest in them. By opening yourself to less attractive women, you are opening yourself to receiving interest by more people, thus increasing your chances of being interested in a woman. Now if men and women did this simultaneously, you'd have less attractive people opening themselves to being interested in one another... Exactly. When people say settle, they are talking 75% lookswise. Let's face it. So, if you look like William Hung (do you?), and you are interested in hot tall blondes, lowering your standards will help you succeed.
USMCHokie Posted March 10, 2013 Posted March 10, 2013 Easy. When people say standards, the vast majority of people are talking about looks and to a lesser extent career and salary. Is it really that easy...? Could you define your minimum standard of physical attractiveness? And how did you decide that'd be your minimum? Where did your baseline come from?
man_in_the_box Posted March 10, 2013 Posted March 10, 2013 I don't think you can actively change your standards but they sure are not written in stone. They are dynamical and different aspects of it become important through different phases of your life.
tbf Posted March 10, 2013 Posted March 10, 2013 As a stuggling guy you get mixed messages here..if you cant attract women they say lower your standards to less attractive women who may not excite you all that much but then you have people saying its not fair to the women if you settle for someone you arent that attracted to but settle for because its all you can get As a struggling guy it seem as if you youre damned if you do and damned if you dontWhat would you say to a guy who's only interested in Megan Fox?
USMCHokie Posted March 10, 2013 Posted March 10, 2013 So, if you look like William Hung (do you?)... For all intents and purposes, yes.
USMCHokie Posted March 10, 2013 Posted March 10, 2013 I don't think you can actively change your standards but they sure are not written in stone. They are dynamical and different aspects of it become important through different phases of your life. I believe that one's standards are created and developed based on external feedback of who is attracted to him, and it's something that begins to develop as a kid. It also evolves are you grow older, eventually peaking at some point in your life, then coming back down as you lose your own physical attractiveness. But I merely speculate. 1
man_in_the_box Posted March 10, 2013 Posted March 10, 2013 Actually that's a more specific definition of what I've already tried to get across and I fully agree.
SteveC80 Posted March 10, 2013 Posted March 10, 2013 Is it really that easy...? Could you define your minimum standard of physical attractiveness? And how did you decide that'd be your minimum? Where did your baseline come from? I think its inherent.i dont go out of my way to not be attracted or attracted to someone its a natural reaction.i can tell right away if i have any attraction to a girl and if theyres any shot of me antign to get to know her for a possible romantic relationship
JuneJulySeptember Posted March 10, 2013 Posted March 10, 2013 Is it really that easy...? Could you define your minimum standard of physical attractiveness? And how did you decide that'd be your minimum? Where did your baseline come from? I don't really think about it the minimum. But it's not high. I work differently though. Women don't approach me, or flirt with me, or hit on me. So, when I decide whom to approach and ask out, it will be because I've talked to them as well. Now, if the woman is real cool, and totally physically unattractive, AND likes me, then I'm in a pickle. I can't recall the last time I've been in that situation though. In fact, I can tell you it hasn't For all intents and purposes, yes. Then you have some work to do.
ThaWholigan Posted March 10, 2013 Posted March 10, 2013 I think its inherent.i dont go out of my way to not be attracted or attracted to someone its a natural reaction.i can tell right away if i have any attraction to a girl and if theyres any shot of me antign to get to know her for a possible romantic relationship This post I made earlier applies: Me personally, I think this varies by the individual. There are people who are primarily stimulated on a visual level (i.e. specific physical attributes - which may also vary by the individual - physiological factors etc). There are also those who are stimulated on intellectual level, those on a material level and those on an emotional level - and of course most people have varying levels of all those factors and some matter more than others. I have a combo of things I am attracted to - I am physically attracted to women primarily, but I also love women who are intellectual and women who are passionate. If I run into a woman with all 3 (I know one girl like that), it's a wrap . But yeah, it varies from person-to-person in my observation. Another poster kinda wondered why people don't think like him and focus on intellectual stimulation - but it doesn't work like that for everyone, we all have our modes that work for us....to deny them wouldn't be the best thing in the long run. A happy medium should suffice.
USMCHokie Posted March 10, 2013 Posted March 10, 2013 Then you have some work to do. Some might say...
JuneJulySeptember Posted March 10, 2013 Posted March 10, 2013 Some might say... William Hung is a fabrication. The ultimate symbol of unattractiveness created by a society that loves to laud the strong and piss on the weak. If babies were born in an alternate universe where movie billboards had William Hung's face on it and he was playing the role of Tyler Durden and banging Angeline Jolie, then all women there would get wet over him (and you ). Because that's what we are. Lemmings. Why do you think William was able to become a celebrity? So. Sad.
Recommended Posts