aileD Posted June 1, 2017 Posted June 1, 2017 I would pick #1 A marriage/love relationship differs from friendship in one category: sexual attraction. Number 1 is a lover Number 2 is a friend 2
Author JuneJulySeptember Posted June 2, 2017 Author Posted June 2, 2017 I understand you were posing a hypothetical question i see nothing wrong with you choosing to portray two different subjects in a hypothetical question...after all it is your hypothetical.....and its interesting to me....i had to really think based on the two choices you gave.....where i HAD to pick one choice.....i actually prefer limitations on a multiple choice hypothetical... one of the deeper reasons for me picking number one is....i have found in the past men accomodate to me....they do this i have found to lull me into a false sense of security by liking everything i like, doing everything i do they cant keep that up forever, ...and then later down the track...are completely different.....they fake it.... i would prefer a guy who says hey....you do your thing deb ill do mine and at the end or the day we talk about what we have done....i used to feel i needed to be with someone exactly like me...and have come to figure out one nuts enough to be nutty.....i actually need balance and sometimes that balance is hearing and understanding a different opinion....a different activity.....so i can actually grow and not be a vegetable and stagnate...i dont expect a guy to understand my vegetable dance.....or even to want to participate being cauliflower but i do expect that guy to still be attracted to my different ways.....and to love me regardless if i feel like being a carrot for a little while....and for that guy to understand if i do a veggie dance for him...i must really love him.....to play the fool for him.....or to specifically know...when i do a veggie dance its because i feel he hasnt listened to me when i was actually being serious....and therefore im not listening to him ill be broccoli instead in the form of interperative dance..........its a payback dance.... now that would probably annoy the hell out of most people..but a guy who respected my differences ....would probably laugh....men and women are different we are meant to be different.....we cant click on every level.....another poster wrote about making a relationship stronger. with differences and its true........it also does add spice ...and a sense of renewal and of coming together developing compromises....etc......deb Yes, that is interesting. Thanks for the feedback. Perhaps it is good to have some differences. I tend to think people want somebody who matches them as close as possible. It makes some sense what you say. 1
Popsicle Posted June 2, 2017 Posted June 2, 2017 I'd pick #1. At least we can have fun for a little while.
Ariadne Posted June 2, 2017 Posted June 2, 2017 Mate number 2. I don´t see why you wouldn´t find him attractive.
Ariadne Posted June 2, 2017 Posted June 2, 2017 Mate #1: Very physically attractive. So, which one do you pick? Oh, if you are a guy then you have to go for mate 1. Physical attraction seems to be the most important.
DarrenB Posted June 2, 2017 Posted June 2, 2017 I get that a decent R/S isn't always just about intimacy, but... if you were to be with someone that you weren't actually physically attractive to, you're essentially missing out on all of the more connective activities of a relationship. For instance, if you weren't physically attractive to them then having intercourse wouldn't be something that you would preferably enjoy or do, same goes for kissing and cuddling and all that malarkey. I could go on for a while but I'll refrain from doing so and leave my two-pence at that. And BTW, I'd go for #1
Southern Gent Posted June 2, 2017 Posted June 2, 2017 I don't know why, but after reading the OP's choices, and the first few posts, the song "I Want it All", by Queen, keeps playing in my head! 2
MuddyFootprints Posted June 2, 2017 Posted June 2, 2017 If he smells good, number two. Or should I say the second option.
basil67 Posted June 2, 2017 Posted June 2, 2017 Yes. I think that's fair. Although for me, I don't know how much of a distinction I'd make between the person actually becoming attractive and enjoying their company that much that I didn't care what they looked like. Just for the record, I myself have never dated or even met a woman where we clicked at every level, either romantically, as a rejection, or even platonic. I've hard enough finding one woman who has any kind of serious interest in sports. Let alone all of the other junk I like. So, that's not something to be taken lightly. I actually can't make a distinction between a person becoming attractive and enjoying their company so much that I don't care. I am so much about the cerebral attraction that looks really don't come into the equation. I have never dated someone who shares all my interests. But I don't think that clicking on every level is that important. I have no interest in sport and my husband has no interest in my craft and love of history. I see no problem in having individual pursuits if there are enough similarities in other areas.
Fresnite Posted June 2, 2017 Posted June 2, 2017 Well It's a proven fact you can be interested in someone once you find out they are interested in you. Also building up that intellectual and emotional relationship can increase attraction too. But honestly ask yourself would you rather have an physically attractive husk? Or an intellectually and emotionally attractive core?
dichotomy Posted June 2, 2017 Posted June 2, 2017 (edited) My family has always called it right (ones they loved or hated) - even when they told after the fact and I was like "Wait why didn't you say something before hand?!" Also frankly (and I may catch heat for this) as a guy - I would never go for a woman who was SO attractive - or rather - SO much more attractive then ME. Edited June 2, 2017 by dichotomy
Recommended Posts