Jun and Sancho, interesting points, both of you.
Printable View
Jun and Sancho, interesting points, both of you.
Strength of character lies in your thoughts and deeds, not your clothing
"Strength of character" is not something that can be discerned at first. Whether you wish to admit it or not, we are all visual beings. There is a reason for the old adage, "A picture is worth..." well, you all know the rest. The seductiveness of the visual is the reason for thousands of years of iconoclasts... especially among the Jews, Muslims, and Christians... the "People of the Book" who put such value in the written word. We still are faced with such iconoclasts to this day... those who recognize the power of the image... the photograph... the 30 seconds of prime-time... the Hollywood blockbuster. I greatly suspect that those who deny any interest in something as "shallow" as the visual appearance of another human being... especially a potential love interest... are simply fearful of being honest.
I'll sum it up quite succinctly.
Order of areas on women I find attractive: Face (eyes, smile, teeth, etc. all included), butt, breasts, stomach/navel, legs, hair, small of back. I don't really care what they're wearing, unless it's a Nickleback shirt. That's a deal breaker.
Some of us are just sluts who would sleep with anyone with a pulse.
Although, I think saying one's taste do not conform to the majority opinion of beauty is not the same as saying they don't care about looks, or that one thinks looks are secondary to other features for the choosing of sexual partners is saying that looks don't matter at all. E.g. I'm probably more likely to make a pass at someone who looks ordinary but doesn't act like a tool than someone with great looks but exudes an air of douche where ever they go, and it often doesn't take more than a few sentences to determine whether you really want to be around someone much longer.
[QUOTE=stlukesguild;1149520
http://localism.com/image_store/uplo...3348256134.jpg
I think I rode with him once