The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
Serious Question: Anyone Else Here Not Superficial about Dating?
Poast new message in this thread
Date: October 19th, 2009 10:29 PM Author: tripping box office toaster This is probably the wrong fucking place to be asking this question, but I'm curious:
Anyone else not care that much about looks at the end of the day? I'm not saying I don't pay attention to how attractive a girl is at first. And there is a point where a girl is so fat or deformed that I would have a hard time being attracted to her.
But I'm a decent-looking guy who has dated girls that were anywhere from an objective 3 to an objective 9. They were all very witty, smart, had seductive abilities, were really good at sex, and were generally compatible with my personality. And I have absolutely no interest in dating an objective 9/10 who is dumb as a rock or has an irritating personality -- though I'll admit I would hook up with such a girl, given the opportunity.
Question of the day: Am I alone among XOXO'ers? |
Date: October 19th, 2009 10:29 PM Author: Scarlet aphrodisiac theatre sneaky criminal I agree with you, although perhaps to a slightly lesser extent. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1115292&forum_id=2#13033014) |
|
Date: October 19th, 2009 10:32 PM Author: bateful swollen idea he suggested fanboi where do you live? would you go on a date with me? I am looking for a nice guy. I was evaluated to be a 6.5 or so (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1115292&forum_id=2#13033062) |
 |
Date: October 19th, 2009 10:37 PM Author: tripping box office toaster Maybe. I've already revealed I'm HYS, so it's one of those three places. Not willing to get more specific because I've revealed quite a bit of other information. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1115292&forum_id=2#13033130) |
|
Date: October 19th, 2009 10:37 PM Author: Odious sticky locus black woman i see with my heart.
If I like a guy and he's a good person he becomes good looking to me. If he's a jerk he seems ugly. |
|
Date: October 20th, 2009 5:19 AM Author: talented crystalline goal in life old irish cottage you also posted pics of your wet titties on the internet so excuse me if i discount this (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1115292&forum_id=2#13035724) |
|
Date: October 19th, 2009 10:38 PM Author: Floppy Brass Laser Beams Menage me too (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1115292&forum_id=2#13033143) |
|
Date: October 19th, 2009 10:40 PM Author: Excitant drab lodge trust fund as long as she doesn't have zits and isn't fat (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1115292&forum_id=2#13033167) |
|
Date: October 19th, 2009 10:44 PM Author: Titillating ticket booth I don't care too much as long as she isn't overly fat (like more than 30 pounds overweight), frigid, and she has to get my humor. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1115292&forum_id=2#13033200) |
|
Date: October 19th, 2009 10:49 PM Author: Galvanic pale range mediation I'm this way. If I find someone I have great rapport/chemistry with, I'm so fucking happy, and this has often come in the form of guys without jobs, short guys who are losing their hair (but still cute), etc. I've never cared. I maybe should set some other standards now that I'm older but I'm a sucker for a fun time. ditto on the no fats but otherwise I'm set. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1115292&forum_id=2#13033253) |
|
Date: October 19th, 2009 11:28 PM Author: self-centered arousing stead travel guidebook Even GED waiters? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1115292&forum_id=2#13033705) |
|
Date: October 19th, 2009 11:36 PM Author: Galvanic pale range mediation especially w/ the pizza man (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1115292&forum_id=2#13033770) |
|
Date: October 19th, 2009 11:37 PM Author: self-centered arousing stead travel guidebook you fuck the pizza man too? I knew I should have taken that offer at Dominos (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1115292&forum_id=2#13033784) |
|
Date: October 19th, 2009 11:36 PM Author: tripping box office toaster Well, perhaps you should screen out the true losers (e.g. waiters), but if you do that, I'd argue you'll probably end up more happy long term. Most people get ugly by their mid to late thirties anyway, so the bald dude with a personality that dazzles you will have a better chance of keeping you happy. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1115292&forum_id=2#13033769) |
|
Date: October 19th, 2009 10:51 PM Author: Shimmering hot hall deer antler I am not superficial but I am picky as hell. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1115292&forum_id=2#13033273) |
|
Date: October 19th, 2009 10:55 PM Author: deranged stage stain me 2. also, no fats. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1115292&forum_id=2#13033333) |
|
Date: October 19th, 2009 11:05 PM Author: tripping box office toaster I don't really have the fatty aversion. At least, not within limits. There are some girls I know who have great booties, a really nice face, and a few extra pounds, and I'm fine with that.
And the notion that they're the ones who end up huge is not correct, at least generally. My obervation is that it's the ones who had perfect metabolisms for 20-30 years and blew up like a balloon after the metabolic party was over that end up being truly huge. Not the ones that have been working on it for much of their life. |
|
Date: October 19th, 2009 11:33 PM Author: Shimmering hot hall deer antler no fats or uglies or dummies. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1115292&forum_id=2#13033743) |
|
Date: October 19th, 2009 11:06 PM Author: Splenetic international law enforcement agency I like to think i'm not superficial, but i care about looks a LOT. it's a deal breaker and rightly so. if you're not sexually attracted to a person it'll never work long term. that said, i also look for lots of other qualities. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1115292&forum_id=2#13033477) |
|
Date: October 19th, 2009 11:08 PM Author: tripping box office toaster I'm sure it doesn't work this way for you, but I think you've got it a bit backwards. For people like me, sexual attraction is just as important, but it's not (relatively) fixed after I see how a girl looks. My level of attraction fluctuates based on other qualities. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1115292&forum_id=2#13033507) |
|
Date: October 19th, 2009 11:15 PM Author: Splenetic international law enforcement agency yea i'm very much into their looks first. if she fits the profile then i care to learn about her other important qualities. i wouldn't be with a hot girl just cause she's hot. she would have to be smart/funny/notabitch etc. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1115292&forum_id=2#13033572) |
|
Date: October 19th, 2009 11:10 PM Author: Cyan Wonderful Masturbator Mood You need to be sexually attracted to the person, or the relationship is pointless. They don't need to be a model, but there needs to be something there. - For girls that are relationship material, I see attractiveness as a zero-sum. After that, all the other qualities become important. - If I'm at a bar, I have my HS mentality where I will rate girls purely on a mental 1-10 scale and the higher the number automatically wins. |
|
Date: October 19th, 2009 11:20 PM Author: Sapphire New Version Jewess Difference between "7" girl-next-door and "9" model is irrelevant. I prefer the former, often. Below that "7" level, I start to miss certain things.
Attraction is basically 0/1, maybe an S-shaped curve with a very steep inflection point. For me, that point seems to usually be around what most people consider a 7, although some "objective 6"es pass and some "8-10" fail. |
|
Date: October 20th, 2009 12:27 AM Author: violet soul-stirring tanning salon quadroon *creeps up behind you wearing a cow mask as you type away*
*stabs you with a syringe*
*drags you to an unknown location*
Pensive, for years you have displayed unwarranted arrogance, passing judgment on countless others. Tomorrow night, it is you who will be judged. |
|
Date: October 20th, 2009 12:45 AM Author: pontificating faggot firefighter (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1115292&forum_id=2#13034450) |
|
Date: October 20th, 2009 12:45 AM Author: emerald flirting hell tank To be fair,
180 |
|
Date: October 20th, 2009 12:48 AM Author: vibrant church building weed whacker Awesome. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1115292&forum_id=2#13034476) |
|
Date: October 20th, 2009 12:55 AM Author: Sable flatulent ape gunner OMFG Yes! (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1115292&forum_id=2#13034540) |
|
Date: October 20th, 2009 12:59 AM Author: Aquamarine whorehouse aww shit (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1115292&forum_id=2#13034582) |
|
Date: October 20th, 2009 12:34 AM Author: Wine ceo parlor Agreed on the 0/1 analysis. I like to think I have a type, but in the end it is a vague preference. All I really care about is my three requirements: smart, drunk, freak in bed (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1115292&forum_id=2#13034361) |
|
Date: October 20th, 2009 12:39 AM Author: vibrant church building weed whacker Somehow I suspect pensive wouldn't agree with 2 of those requirements. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1115292&forum_id=2#13034404) |
|
Date: October 19th, 2009 11:34 PM Author: Cerebral Sinister Pistol Hmmm. This has changed as I've gotten older, which I suspect is to be expected. When I was in my early 20s, I typically dated very good-looking men who may or may not have been successful, ambitious, etc. But he always had to be of above-average intelligence, regardless of whether or not he was actually "doing something" with that intellect.
At about 26, I found myself almost exclusively attracted to men who were very intelligent and witty, regardless of their looks. I've dated some objectively unattractive men, and was more sexually attracted to them than the pretty boys I used to run around with, entirely because of their sense of humor. I also can't imagine myself attracted to someone without at least a mildly demanding career, if for no other reason then we'd probably have little in common.
BUT I don't date fat doods. Ever. |
|
Date: October 19th, 2009 11:37 PM Author: self-centered arousing stead travel guidebook Fat seems to be the deal breaker for lots of women. Just like it is for lots of men.
Do you have a height requirement? |
|
Date: October 19th, 2009 11:49 PM Author: Cerebral Sinister Pistol A very tall man will always catch my eye (6'3"+), but no real height requirement. I've dated (and loved) a couple short doods too (5'7 or so). A short dood will probably have to be putting in a little bit more effort, though. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1115292&forum_id=2#13033905) |
|
Date: October 19th, 2009 11:49 PM Author: Comical temple College undergrads have demanding careers? :) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1115292&forum_id=2#13033899) |
|
Date: October 19th, 2009 11:51 PM Author: Cerebral Sinister Pistol He was an extraordinary package in every other respect. And was well on his way to a good career. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1115292&forum_id=2#13033913) |
|
Date: October 19th, 2009 11:52 PM Author: Comical temple Good to see you back. We ok? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1115292&forum_id=2#13033931) |
|
Date: October 19th, 2009 11:56 PM Author: Cerebral Sinister Pistol It's all good, dooder. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1115292&forum_id=2#13033976) |
|
Date: October 20th, 2009 12:06 AM Author: Comical temple you're feisty as hell. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1115292&forum_id=2#13034064) |
|
Date: October 20th, 2009 12:20 AM Author: Cerebral Sinister Pistol That I am. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1115292&forum_id=2#13034191) |
|
Date: October 20th, 2009 12:29 AM Author: Comical temple *becomes more attracted* (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1115292&forum_id=2#13034286) |
|
Date: October 19th, 2009 11:49 PM Author: Comical temple She has to pass the looks test. Doesn't have to be a super model, but takes care of herself, not too short or too tall, etc.
After she passes that, its more about personality. |
|
Date: October 20th, 2009 5:27 AM Author: tripping box office toaster Missed this earlier, but I've never met a dude who care how tall she was -- except perhaps if she was freakishly tall or short. Weird. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1115292&forum_id=2#13035726) |
|
Date: October 19th, 2009 11:59 PM Author: balding thriller piazza My gf's body weight has fluctuated to the tune of 100 pounds in the time we've been dating. I'd say that I'm not superficial. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1115292&forum_id=2#13034007) |
|
Date: October 20th, 2009 12:01 AM Author: Galvanic pale range mediation tell her to have some respect wtf (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1115292&forum_id=2#13034021) |
|
Date: October 20th, 2009 12:04 AM Author: balding thriller piazza I did. She has dropped 50+ pounds and is on her way to 135. I consider myself not superficial for not ATD'ing during the weight gain phase. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1115292&forum_id=2#13034048) |
|
Date: October 20th, 2009 12:03 AM Author: Puce swashbuckling address Even if she started out thin, 100 pounds would be pushing it for me at almost any height. Maybe if she was 6'0'' or taller and she carried it *really* well.
Obviously it would be different if I was married, but in terms of the relationship, I don't think I would enjoy the sex anymore. |
|
Date: October 20th, 2009 12:05 AM Author: balding thriller piazza Gained 45 lost 55. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1115292&forum_id=2#13034050) |
|
Date: October 20th, 2009 12:06 AM Author: Galvanic pale range mediation oh. thats not so bad (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1115292&forum_id=2#13034072) |
|
Date: October 20th, 2009 12:07 AM Author: Puce swashbuckling address Ah, sorry, wasn't paying attention. Depending on height and starting weight, 45 wouldn't necessarily be a problem.
Although I would worry that it's tied up in deep emotional issues, since that is my experience with women and big weight fluctuations. And being fucked up is a bigger turn off for me than weight. |
|
Date: October 20th, 2009 12:24 AM Author: balding thriller piazza Unreal. 5 minutes ago, she came in to talk to me about how my weight has become a problem. I've gained MAYBE 20 pounds since we met. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1115292&forum_id=2#13034224) |
|
Date: October 20th, 2009 12:26 AM Author: Puce swashbuckling address Sounds a bit crazy to me, unless she said "I know this is a little hypocritical, but sometimes your modest weight gain bothers me."
But if she just pretended it was fine to say it bothers her, it's not a good sign dooderino. |
|
Date: October 20th, 2009 12:28 AM Author: vibrant church building weed whacker Sounds like he called her on her weight gain and told her to drop some pounds, though. Is it just that she said something earlier than he did? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1115292&forum_id=2#13034267) |
|
Date: October 20th, 2009 12:33 AM Author: Puce swashbuckling address I'm not saying that it's verboten for her to bring it up at all. She might be a little hurt he said something, which is understandable.
The only thing I'm saying is that if she didn't recognize and admit right away that it might reek of hypocrisy, it's a sign of being somewhat crazy/psycho. |
|
Date: October 20th, 2009 12:35 AM Author: vibrant church building weed whacker I just don't see the hypocrisy. She gained a shitload of weight, he said something, she lost it all and then some (note that she's not fat now). He gained a moderate amount of weight, and she said something, presumably in hopes that he'd do the same. Seems like the same set of rules, assuming she's not threatening to leave him or anything. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1115292&forum_id=2#13034367) |
|
Date: October 20th, 2009 12:40 AM Author: Puce swashbuckling address Well, obviously not the same set of rules, since her weight gain was much larger -- especially considering she's probably quite a bit smaller to start with, it was *much* larger, almost in a different league.
But I think we have a different interpretation of her frame of mind. You're assuming that his weight gain just bothers her a bit and she said something. I'm skeptical that that's the only thing going on here. Yes, that could be part of it, but I would bet the mortgage that she's also a little resentful that he said it bothered him, and she's using this to get back. Hence, the hypocrisy.
No way to know for sure, I'm relying on my experiences, and you're relying on yours. |
|
Date: October 20th, 2009 12:44 AM Author: vibrant church building weed whacker I would be more likely to buy the resentful angle if she were still heavy. The woman has just lost 55 pounds. I have no idea what it takes to do that, but it probably involves a substantial change in exercise and diet habits. If she's turned into a health freak, him being less healthy than he used to is going to irk her.
His weight gain is admittedly smaller, but 20 pounds is enough to be both less attractive and less healthy. Even if there's some resentment at play, I think that if one partner has the right to criticize weight gain, the other has the same right. I think I'd be pretty pissed if I killed myself to get thin to preserve my relationship only to see the partner who complained gaining weight. |
|
Date: October 20th, 2009 12:48 AM Author: Puce swashbuckling address Well, if she did it for him, and it was difficult/painful, of course that would create resentment.
How old are you? You seem to follow a very rule/rights based approach to relationships, and my experience is that it's a good idea to drop that as you get older.
Edit: I'm not trying to criticize you. It's just that I used to be like that, and it ruined a few of my relationships. |
|
Date: October 20th, 2009 12:53 AM Author: vibrant church building weed whacker I'm 29. We're judging hypocrisy here - not kindness or value as a relationship partner or any other trait. I think it's hard to assess whether someone's been hypocritical without dealing with rights or rules at some level.
He asked something of her and she did it. She asked the same thing of him. I can see how that might not be nice, but how is it hypocritical? |
|
Date: October 20th, 2009 1:03 AM Author: Puce swashbuckling address It's hypocritical because (I would bet money) she's angry he said something about her weight, and now she's saying something about his weight to retaliate. To attack someone else with the same verbal weapon that upset you is hypocritical.
In my experience, women who are truly relationship material recognize very quickly when they are doing this, and say something to at least clear the air. Otherwise, you end up arguing about other shit and waiting two weeks until she admits what's really bothering her. If she says "I know this is a bit hypocritical," you can both figure out what's really bothering her in five minutes, and you come to a mutual understanding about the problem quickly. |
|
Date: October 20th, 2009 1:09 AM Author: vibrant church building weed whacker I guess I don't see his request she lose weight as a weapon. She didn't seem to respond to it as such. Instead of crying or yelling or arguing, she lost weight. Isn't it possible she's simply employing the same rational approach he did towards maintaining an attractive appearance for one's partner during the course of the relationship?
Having dated someone who gained 20 pounds during the course of the relationship, it's enough to make a man significantly less attractive. What should she do in this situation? She could leave him, which would be both premature and a bit hypocritical, since he didn't do the same for her. She could refuse to sleep with him or otherwise be passive aggressive, which likewise seems unfair. She could ignore it, but doesn't she have some right (even if you don't like rights-based formulas) to a partner she finds attractive, especially if he wants the same from her? It seems like the most simple solution is for her to speak plainly, since that's presumably what he feels is most appropriate. |
|
Date: October 20th, 2009 12:27 AM Author: Cerebral Sinister Pistol NO FUCKING WAY. I'm sorry, dood, gaining 45 lbs would be damn near a dealbreaker for me. You're a better person than I am, to be sure. But if she lacks the self-awareness to recognize the hypocrisy... A --> D. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1115292&forum_id=2#13034254) |
|
Date: October 20th, 2009 12:27 AM Author: pearly effete parlour kitty I used to not consider myself as superficial as I have realized that I may actually be. But that mainly has to do within so much as my particular preference in the looks of a woman, which might not be considered the perfect 10 in the eyes of social standards. I have found that it is hard to bend outside of my physical partiality regardless of the level of intelligence, wit, success, etc. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1115292&forum_id=2#13034251) |
|
Date: October 20th, 2009 4:36 AM Author: mentally impaired mustard knife I had to be attracted to the guy, but I was attracted to a wide range of looks-height, plus personality counts for a lot. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1115292&forum_id=2#13035699) |
|
Date: October 20th, 2009 4:40 AM Author: cream sanctuary Looks are a part of natural selection bro. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1115292&forum_id=2#13035702) |
|
Date: October 20th, 2009 5:15 AM Author: tripping box office toaster "Nature is what we were put on earth to rise above" brosephus. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1115292&forum_id=2#13035722) |
|
Date: October 20th, 2009 5:18 AM Author: zippy provocative round eye I've never dated a girl I considered subjectively less than an 8. I dont care about objective considerations much. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1115292&forum_id=2#13035723) |
|
Date: October 20th, 2009 5:19 AM Author: tripping box office toaster What's the lowest a subjective 8 has been on an objective basis? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1115292&forum_id=2#13035725) |
|
Date: October 20th, 2009 5:28 AM Author: zippy provocative round eye Hard to say. I'm not sure how they translate. I basically like girls with tiny waists and big backyards and boobs. Like 1960's playboy model types. Farm girl types. Not sure how else to describe them.
I was notorious among my friends for turning down girls beneath standards and I dont think anyone thought I dated an unattractive girl.
So long story short: no fucking clue. A 7 perhaps? |
|
Date: October 20th, 2009 5:35 AM Author: tripping box office toaster Yeah, 7 sounds about right, assuming you have standards for her face as well.
I admit, there's something very impressive about a girl who has that kind of figure; it's almost awe inspiring. I've actually never dated such a girl; the 9 I was in a relationship with had a stunningly beautiful face and a small waistline, but not a huge backyard or boobs. |
|
Date: October 20th, 2009 5:38 AM Author: zippy provocative round eye I got hooked from my first girlfriend I think. I was 14. She was 15. She had 36D tits that were perky beyond belief. You just don't recover from manificence like that.
Face is critical.
My abberrant tastes mean I don't find something like 95% of the chicks around me attractive. I recognize that they might be objectively stunning, but I really couldn't give a shit. It's funny, because that aloofness really seems to play well with the objective hotties. But if I can't fluff your ass like a delicious pillow, it ain't gonna work. |
|
Date: December 13th, 2009 1:45 AM Author: Galvanic pale range mediation (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1115292&forum_id=2#13534986) |