Yes. Yes we have.
I didn't say Pensive said "women are attracted to jerks," all I said was the a woman brought up the whole jerks and women thing. That's all. Neely may have really got the ball rolling, but the topic has already been mentioned.
Printable View
Yes. Yes we have.
I didn't say Pensive said "women are attracted to jerks," all I said was the a woman brought up the whole jerks and women thing. That's all. Neely may have really got the ball rolling, but the topic has already been mentioned.
'Jerk' is an American expression seldom used in the UK and I was surprised that Neely used it. It's probably due to watching too many Woody Alan films. I always knew no good would come of it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mutatis-Mutandis
:lol: Maybe. It's not a word I would normally use. I think I must have just subliminally picked it up from the previous posts. In my defence I did later use the word 'dickhead' - (also not usually a word I use unless angry occasionally, but it's not an Americanism at least)... I still of course fully standby the sentiment of my original points...because they are true!Quote:
Originally Posted by Emil Miller
~
R e m i n d e r
Please keep in mind that this Forum is open to people from different age groups and social/cultural/eligious backgrounds.
Off-topic posts have been and will be deleted without further notice.
~
Sure, just add two inches........ to my height.Quote:
Originally Posted by Delta40
:lol:
I am sorry but I can't stop laughing at how my use of the word 'jerk' has initiated all this argument! Maybe I should be careful of inviting wrath of all men next time by calling any man a jerk (even when he rightfully deserves so!)Quote:
Yes. Yes we have.
I didn't say Pensive said "women are attracted to jerks," all I said was the a woman brought up the whole jerks and women thing. That's all. Neely may have really got the ball rolling, but the topic has already been mentioned.
Or I could just defend myself by saying I never made a generalization like women go for jerks/men go for gold-diggers. I merely shared a personal experience.
Women don't always list these qualities as their preference. Several women are very open about liking glamor, beauty or wealth as well. No matter how much of a carbon copy of each other women may sound to some men, just like men, women actually tend to differ from each other as well and have different priorities. So I don't really see why we would need to doubt any women for their views on this thread.Quote:
Originally Posted by Neely
I have to agree with Mutatis.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pensive
In about 20 minutes I will be having drinks at a wine bar. How many women(an) and to what degree I am able to Attract them will be 90 % dependent on how much Agency, Social Dynamic, Sheer Popularity, and perceived Leadership Qualities I display. Although I adore women, I am sooooo hyper aware of this reality-all men are, as can be seen from our input in the thread.
I speak of the laws of Attraction not the things that maintain a healthy relationship(we should not confuse, as I think we already have done)). As a paradox, many of the above qualities are not conducive to a healthy relationship - from a woman's perspective.
I hang out with women more than men (platonic or not) because they tend to have interests more similar, leaning heavy to the arts - and I do adore them. But I pay close attention to what they do and much less to what they say - with respect to this Topic.
There still are women who actually do what they say! :pQuote:
Originally Posted by tonywalt
I, along with virtually every guy here, have to attract women - we Need to attract women. Again, I talk of attraction, not qualities looked for in a relationship.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pensive
That's why you don't here any guys on here complaining that women just use us because we have a nice a@@ or good biceps, and that's what they mostly care about.
Pensive, you have to ask me - why would I say all this if it was not my learned by trials and errors experience.
On the other hand, when I have been in a gay bar - the criteria for attraction is MUCH MUCH MUCH MUCH(jaw droppingly) different. I dare say my situation would be a damn sight easier in that world, as for how much I could attract.
That's refreshing.Quote:
Originally Posted by tonywalt
Well, I've come to the conclusion, by what all the women have said here, is that women aren't shallow (men are) and women don't date jerks, and the only reason we said that they do is because we're insecure losers and don't get any women.Quote:
Originally Posted by tonywalt
I know one thing. If it wasn't for the fact that I'm not sexually attracted to men, I'd have no problem being a homosexual.
............
Go us!Quote:
Originally Posted by Darcy88
Naturally generalisations are just that, but like I said before I have seen it too many times. I don't doubt the women on the poll believe in their views, I just know that in a practical and realistic setting, humour or blue eyes or intelligence just doesn't cut the mustard in the crowd Vs the, shall we say, confident/arrogant alpha male types, no way.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pensive
I think I agree, I love making lists so when I took this poll I took my time and thought about everything I picked carefully before. After I did that though and just a few days ago I decided to stop making lists like this because if I look at my track record my ex boyfriends didn't fit in that category.Quote:
Originally Posted by Neely
Chemistry is probably the one thing that matters.... I say this after thinking a lot about me and looking at my best friend and my brother, both of them are in a relationship with someone they never would have described before as ideal.
at the moment my 'list' only has someone with similar views on life and willing to listen to me talk about odd things, I tend to do that and most people look at me like I'm crazy.
You've mentioned this "blue eyes" thing several times now. Calidore included that in the poll because of this response of mine in the original thread:Quote:
Originally Posted by Neely
I'm just as shallow as you think all carbon-copy men are. Actually, that's the funny thing: your view isn't just narrrow-minded in regards to women (as Pensive very well stated, "no matter how much of a carbon copy of each other women may sound to some men, just like men, women actually tend to differ from each other as well and have different priorities"), it also pigeonholes men. There's no room for Calidore or Loka in your worldview (that's two of the five men who have weighed in on this topic if I'm remembering everyone), they proclaim to be much more drawn to non-physical traits which makes them "self-deluded," but hey! Men aren't self-deluded! Men know what's going on in their mind, it's women who are self-deluded!Quote:
Originally Posted by JuniperWoolf
So yeah, I wouldn't say you particularly dislike women (unlike Mutatis, which was an unpleasant surprise), I'd say you're sexist in regards to both men and women, and that you base your worldview on stereotypes while ceasing to acknowledge the numerous examples which contradict them. I mean, you could have at least said in your original post eight pages ago that all of it was broad generalization, it's ignorant to just say "WOMEN do THIS, and MEN do THIS!!!" like all behaviors and preferences can be predicted depending on the subject's body.
Also, many of your generalizations aren't correct. I'd say that women do feel a strong sexual attraction to "bad boy" types, that seems to fit (although I still contend that this is merely sexual and that people choose long-term mates based on shared traits and not based on whether or not said mate is a "bad boy," this is also supported by science). However, humor does matter to sexual attraction: it's a large part of charm, and I'd very much argue that "charm" counts for as much if not more than "confidence" (both of which I might add are non-physical attributes, so could being attracted to confidence really be considered shallow?).
First thing. I mention blue eyes because eyes is fourth on the poll behind humour, intelligence and kindness, as well as it being such a cliché thing ('tall, dark and handsome' is another. I don't mention them in reference to some other thread that I haven't even read I don't think!?! In you think I mention blue eyes as some weird cross reference to you then there is even more delusion going on.Quote:
Originally Posted by JuniperWoolf
Secondly, my points are not narrow-minded, I'm not sexist and I don't hold a world view based on rigid stereotypes - though experience of the world counts for a lot in my opinion. Naturally generalisations are just that, like I said, but I stand by my points because this is overwhelmingly my experience as it obviously is with other men. The polite and respect chap who sits in the corner just does not attract women like the centre of attention/alpha male character - I can't believe you can think otherwise.
This deluded insistence on women being primarily attracted to humour, intelligence and politeness (and eye colour) can be really annoying for men whose past experience tells them otherwise.
Yes, and this poll is a conglomeration of traits mentioned by people in the previous thread, "blue eyes" being one that I myself contributed in the post which I just now quoted, and as you've brought it up several times as an example of female delusion I thought I'd clarify. Also, calm down, you sound somewhat hysterical.Quote:
Originally Posted by Neely
That's obviously not where I take issue, seeing as how I posted the following:Quote:
Originally Posted by Neely
My entire point was summed up in my post here:Quote:
Originally Posted by JuniperWoolf
Quote:
Originally Posted by JuniperWoolf
Why would you care? And also, if it's WOMEN who do this, then why have two of the five MEN who have weighed in on this topic (again, according to my memory) also mentioned being primarily and initially attracted to non-physical attributes such as intelligence? If it's what WOMEN do, and MEN aren't delusional like WOMEN, then why did 40% of MEN in these threads do the same thing? See, your insistance is based on a broad generalization to which you cease to acknowledge exceptions, and is sexist to both men and women. Generalizations are sexist, just like they are racist when you say "Asians are good at math," or "Jews love money."Quote:
Originally Posted by Neely
And also, humor is sexually attractive. A person is made exponentially more attractive if they are witty, charming and funny. I have no idea why you don't see it, it's very evident in daily life and has been discussed at length in this very thread. I don't write this with the explicit intent of offending you, but the fact is your own sense of humor isn't exactly shining, so if your own "personal experience" has told you that women don't fall for a sense of humor, this might be the explanation.
The whole "women like bad boys" is just another more clever and giggle inducing way of saying they are naturally and chemically attracted to Alpha males, who have the pick of the litter and typically, with exception, will use that power to have a plurality of women- making them a bad boy.
That's all there is to know about bad boy attraction. If your loner or socially awkward or shy to a fault you can be a Bad Boy - all by your damn self.
Yes, that is about the bottom line of it. Of course, some women would have us believe, not likely, that what they primarily are attracted to is humour, intelligence and politeness???Quote:
Originally Posted by tonywalt
Of course this makes the likes of Ken Dodd really hot stuff!!
Corr hot stuff for you there ladies!
http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/200...12_228x280.jpg
Humour, intelligence and politeness all in one!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C4znpOdPRrg
Thank me later...
I never dated a guy that didn't make me laugh. Even if he was good looking, who wants the company of a whinger?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neely
This is one of the stupidest things this reader has ever read. This reader, simply put, is one of the lamest, un-baddest guys ever- and to use understatement: women have never been a problem.
Be careful about misogynistic attitudes and even more careful with how you think of yourself.
J
Edit: Meant to clip some of tony's post in with the quoted one. Condemn both equally.
Yes, also don't forget that this is not a thread about your ideal man, but rather what first attracts. Overall and generally speaking, I just can't buy the argument that the majority of women initially seek humour, intelligence and kindness and thereby ignore the confident and attractive 'alpha male' type, because this is simply not true. If Brad Pitt walked into a bar would he be totally ignored by the women in there? Would the ugly man in the corner reading an advanced chemistry textbook be mobbed instead? For this is what is being implied here.Quote:
Originally Posted by Helga
Just what are you on about? Ken Dodd has a great sense of humour, is the very hub of kindness and actually is very intelligent - the ideal man?Quote:
This is one of the stupidest things this reader has ever read. This reader, simply put, is one of the lamest, un-baddest guys ever- and to use understatement: women have never been a problem.
Be careful about misogynistic attitudes and even more careful with how you think of yourself.
Exactly, humour falls under social dynamic and it's probably the biggest key on the ring in attraction. Sorry, I should have spelled it out. I am not talking about what is good in a relationship, but rather what "attract..first".Quote:
Originally Posted by Delta40
so you're saying a sense of humour cannot compensate for physical attributes in an attract first context?Quote:
Originally Posted by tonywalt
Humor and intelligence do set women on fire as far as attraction goes. Wit is an essential element of charm. The smart and humorous average looking man will have the advantage over the sullen/arrogant/humorless but absolutely gorgeous man. Both will have great luck with women. Confidence really helps. A guy with wit and confidence will outdo a handsome man who lacks these characteristics and shines only superficially.
I was watching Hustle lastnight and the guys reckon the best pick up was to pull out the handkerchief and start gently sobbing because a woman cannot resist a man who cries since it awakens all her maternal instincts....:yikes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Darcy88
Exactly, hell yea, it's 110 times more important that what I guy looks like. It's part of the social dynamic.Quote:
Originally Posted by Delta40
Yea, it awakens her maternal instincts. It depends on what instinct you are hoping to awaken within her......Quote:
Originally Posted by Delta40
lol. Play it right and she'll make you feel all better!Quote:
Originally Posted by tonywalt
Hm, maybe, but it's too easy - candy from a baby. Weak crying guy at the bar trick - every guy does it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Delta40
Don't worry Tony, since moral conscience wasn't on the poll, it can't be a first attraction for women but mind you do it intelligently and with a sense of humour :devil:Quote:
Originally Posted by tonywalt
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neely View Post
This deluded insistence on women being primarily attracted to humour, intelligence and politeness (and eye colour) can be really annoying for men whose past experience tells them otherwise.
I'm not unpacking the rest of your psycho babble because life is too short - I'm talking about the Jews, Asians and hysterics et al: ('Generalizations are sexist, just like they are racist when you say "Asians are good at math," or "Jews love money.") :confused: please point out my racist/anti-Semitism in this thread, anyway, I'll answer this one...Quote:
Why would you care?
I care because it is somewhat irritating to pretend that the majority of women are initially attracted to such traits in men as: intelligence, humour, kindness and eyes, and supposedly reject, good looks and 'alpha male' confidence and everything that comes with that - even fame, status or money? Are we supposed to genuinely believe that? Do you genuinely think so? Is it just me, Tony and MM etc who are mad then?
I personally care because this is actually an insult to all men who possess at least an element of kindness, humour and/or intelligence and see time and time again that this is not so. What tosh.
Has it occurred to you Neely that heaps of women out there don't even have their radar on? That they're not even looking for a guy so when it does switch on its because of some guy that has finally penetrated through to them and it wasn't because of his alpha male characteristics, fame or money? I honestly don't know how you're limiting women - whether by age, demographics or what but you're doing a great job at stereotyping women across the board and Juniperwoolf's point about generalisations was well made.
I don't dislike women, this thread just got me riled up. I guess I should have included an emoticon to indicate a lack of complete seriousness with some of my comments (I thought Juniper, of all people, could figure that out--I guess that's an unpleasant surprise, too).
I can't say there isn't a certain bitterness in me if it's channeled, though (it was channeled here, obviously). I'm witty and have a sense of humor. I've made women laugh before. But I know better than most anyone that looks do indeed matter. Humor and charm may be the top of your list, but I can't help thinking anyone (man or woman) who doesn't acknowledge that looks matter is a liar.
All I've commented on is what I've observed in my own life, and that's that it seems like a lot of women date a-holes. So do men. It's usually not the person they end up with, because they realize the guy, or woman, is an a-hole. I've also noticed a lot of these women/men are usually not too bright, which is the opposite of the women on here. I think the women on here may not be the best representation of the average woman. That's a compliment--I feel like I need to point that out.
All the generalization I've made about women are the same ones I make about men. I don't think men and women are completely the same, but when it comes to relationships and attraction, I don't think we're that different. I think women can be just as shallow as men. That's not a sexist statement. It's the opposite. If my generalizations are wrong, then they're wrong for both sexes. Still, the opposite-sex bashing hasn't been all one side. There've been some snide comments made about men on here by women; maybe not as many, but there has. It goes both ways. In my life, I've heard women complain about men way more than vice-versa (men are pigs, insensitive, slobs, etc). Men's discussions on women usually boils down to "I don't understand."
And, one last thing. I think a lot assumed, including me, that these polls about what initially attracted someone to the opposite sex were strictly about physicality, because that is what out initial attraction is based on. I guess for some it was implied that the question "What attracts you first" included a bit of conversation with that person, or something. Still, I can't believe that when a woman, any woman, sees a physically attractive man from across the room, they're not attracted to him until they find out he has a good since of humor.
Edit: FB hasn't helped my views, either. I just logged on and saw yet another meme complaining about men, and it was the third thing down in the newsfeed, organized by most recent posts. This one said, "You're just like a penny. Worthless and found in everyone's pants." I see multiple posts like this daily (I almost never see a guy post similar things about women). My response to these has always been the same--quit dating guys like that (of course they come back with "all guys are like that"). I recently posted this mini-rant on FB: "What's with all this sappy relationship bull**** posts women are making? You want a good guy. We get it. Maybe you should stop dating *******s; that'd probably help." Five women liked it.
You're right on the dot. Looks defiantly matter, they just aren't the only thing that matters. And there isn't much of a definitive trait set for attractiveness either. Although, mythbusters might be on to something. I've always found myself more attracted to women with rounder faces and piercing eyes. Which is probably why I'm so into mexican girls.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mutatis-Mutandis
But it's true that people like to think looks don't matter, and women are more pressured then men to think that way. After all, you don't wanna be a skank and have a preference, god forbid.... /sarcasm
I had a friend once tell me, though he is a guy and not gay nor bi, that I'm good to have sex with, but would go a little better for dating. As funny as it was, he pretty much hit spot on. I haven't had a relationship lasting longer then two months in a long time. But I've had more partners in the last year then I'm proud of.
So looks do matter, although no one looks exactly the same. And everyone is attracted to someone. I even have a friend who has a preference to "ugly" men.
And why wouldn't looks matter? We are still animals, and still have a sex drive. Yea sure sex is wonderful, but we still have instinct. Do you really want to breed children who won't be fit or have a good chance at reproducing themselves? Even if you say it wouldn't matter, it would.
Our species got this far for a reason.
Personally I think most people are pretty damned hot. But there are certain features that I find to be a turn off. I would imagine it's like that for you ladies here as well. Am I right?
However the same logic suggests intelligence, skill and other not so physical traits are just as important, but that sort of thing won't be an initial attraction in most cases.
How on earth did you get to be a teacher? Alright, let's unpack this slowly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Neely
Stereotypes are dehumanizing. This is so because stereotypes strip people of their individualism, they imply that one person from one group is the same as any other from that group, which humans are not.
To make this point clear I offer a commonly socially recognized example (understand that word): it is dehumanizing and socially unacceptable to make a generalized statement about race, such as "Asians are good at math."
You have throughout this thread been making generalized statements about women, ie. "women are self-deluded," "women lie about their attractions," "all women are attracted to the same kind of man," ect.
Your comments are very sexist, and they are dehumanizing to women.
Well so maybe a few women weren't attracted to your physicality or character enough to return your advances even though you think that your kindness, intelligence, and humor should have been enough for them (which is debatable). You realize they're allowed to say "no," people do have the right to choose their own mates. That doesn't mean you get to lash out at an entire population due to your bitterness at previous romantic rejection, that's just selfish and ignorant.Quote:
Originally Posted by Neely
That’s true, it’s more socially acceptable for women to stereotype men than it is for men to stereotype women (they still do it, but at least it's not tolerated outright, eg. commercials in which men are portrayed as incompetant children). I think that’s because men have been dominant without question up until about fifty years ago. It’s the same thing with say, for example, black people in the United States. It’s much more socially acceptable for a black person to say something derogatory towards a white person than vice versa. I dislike it, because the rush you get with the "my tribe vs. yours" feeling is addictive and destructive, and retaliation vicious circle blah blah blah.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mutatis-Mutandis
No one made that claim, of course everyone is attracted to attractive people (the women on this forum have gone on at length about various celebrities that they find attractive so obviously they're not trying to convince anyone that they're blind), but their level of attraction would increase very much once they talk to him and discover that he's a pleasure to be around, whereas were she to discover that he had a personality trait which she found very unattractive (let’s say, for example, he’s socially inept in a way that makes her uncomfortable) her attraction would very much decrease. That's obvious, right? Attraction for most people, men and women, is a combination of physical and non-physical traits, like a balancing act.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mutatis-Mutandis
I really personally think that the whole attractiveness business is much much deeper then all of this sometimes it is simply not that simple to explain why one is attracted to another.
Just to take a detour from the tedious and knuckleheaded 'argument' going on in this thread, stereotypes are bad because, on exposure (through any of their many manifestations), they affect a person's self-perception. Humans are multi-faceted and we put on various fronts (i.e. personalities) to suit situations we find ourselves in.Quote:
Originally Posted by JuniperWoolf
Pedalling a stereotype (as Neely is gleefuly doing) will breed more stereotypical behaviour, as people pander to the dominant stereotype within their social or professional groups in order to fit in. In short, it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.
It sounds simplistic, in fact it sounds very simplistic, but this is how our brain works.
Something as trivial as watching an air-headed young women or a babbling man (as you mentioned) on an advert can influence a person's behaviour and alter their expectations of themselves in the short term. But of course adverts, films, music, music videos, magazines, and the bombardment of these images in popular culture, as well as the peer-pressure thus created, means that we are subjected to a constant stream of harmful stereotypes (which are being reinforced at every turn), and which put our identity under threat.
I sound like a true bleeding heart liberal here, which is not good for MY self-esteem, but the truth is you can't deny the huge scientific consensus in publication right now, and it is being expanded and fortified as I type.
I always find it fascinating that people will accept the notion that the images presented in commercials and ads have this profound impact upon the individual and even influence their behavior... which would seem logical... otherwise corporations wouldn't be investing billions in these very advertisements... and yet when the issue of the impact of violence in film or tv or music or video-games is raised, there's an absolute denial of any link.:sosp:
Returning to the topic at hand... Neely simply seems to be suggesting... and perhaps not doing as good of a job of it as he is capable of... (Neely! lay off those Belgian Ales before posting!)... that women are no less attracted... first and foremost... by appearances than men. We are all visual beings and our visual perceptions are probably the first upon which we base our opinions of another person. A sense of humor, stellar personality, wit, intelligence, etc... these are all things that take a bit longer to discern. Neely suggested that perhaps women are being less than honest or kidding themselves when they suggest "kindness", "humor", "intelligence", and "eyes" as the first thing that attracts them. I somewhat concur. These may be important attributes... and in the long run more important than appearance... but are they really what first grabs your attention? I can't speak for others... but I suspect that some may indeed choose attributes other than the visual so as to not appear shallow (Perhaps men are more willing to appear like dogs... after all that's how we're often portrayed anyway.). I can't help but remember how Alex was taken to task as being inherently shallow and a bad person for admitting that his perceptions of a person are based first of all upon appearances... including dress.
I will also say, in Neely's favor, that it may be difficult not to imagine that something as "shallow" as material wealth is a major factor in sexual attraction... especially when one of the first questions many women will ask in the bar/nightclub situation is "So, what do you do?" This is followed with a clear recognition that answering "I'm a doctor" or "I'm a lawyer" or "I'm an investment banker" is far more likely to impress than declaring "I'm a school teacher" or "I'm unemployed at the moment". Of course, this could also be the result of the context. One might presume that women on the prowl for a wealthy husband may frequent the nightclubs more often than they hang out in the book stores, library, etc...
Most stereotypes have a degree of truth to them... which is why they arose in the first place. Both of my Asian studio-mates are quite good in math... having taken advanced classes in the subject. Their families... and those of a great many Asians... place the highest value upon education and absolute respect for educators. But ultimately such stereotypes may not represent anywhere near the majority of the group the purport to represent (women, Blacks, Asians, etc...). JBI dashed a great many illusions about the highly motivated Chinese with his observations of Chinese students during his stay in China. My Korean studio-mate, contrary to the stereotype of the passive Asian women, is a stay-at-home-husband in contrast to his physician wife... and contrary to the stereotype of women hunting for rich husbands, he consciously sought out a wealthy wife by scoping out the pool and gym at the university where many med-students worked out, with the full recognition of the fact that medical students are often so overworked that they have little or no social life. As sleazy as it sounds, it's worked out for him as they've been married over 15 years now,
{edit}
Ha, ha, I did have a few beers and it was not far off 2.00am, never a good idea you are correct.Quote:
(Neely! lay off those Belgian Ales before posting!)
As to your other points (I don't have time to answer fully or it will end up being 2.00am or something, but in short yes I agree with the bulk of your points). I also wonder if some people have merely picked out traits that they find attractive, as opposed to what first attracts. I still think there is a difference between what say and actually do though, in many situations too, not just with this topic - for both sexes. I'm still not buying the fact that looks don't feature strongly though no chance. (Did not one female poster mention workmen with tops off or something earlier too? Good sense of humour they had was it???) I like the parallel between this and Alex's fashion comments yes.
Anyway, apologies if my ramblings (astute observations) have offended 'the feminist crowd'. I must learn that there is just no arguing with women because they know best, all of the time, in all things...:hat: So as way of apology, I've found you something you should enjoy.:devil:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTiBK...feature=relmfu
At first I'm attracted to wavy hair, brown eyes (they're so soulful), and a guy's laugh. Certain musicians. Not necessarily famous guys but the lead singer of a local band and the guitar player of a rock a billy band are two of the sexy men I've ever seen. And hands, I like manly hands (and no I can't describe it) and proportionate wrists.