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?).