The Student Room Group

Guys, do you find stretch marks a turn off?

So I have tiger stripes on my ass as well as stretch marks on my stomach and thighs. I'm so self concious of them so I was wondering, is it a turn off?

Scroll to see replies

Original post by Anonymous
So I have tiger stripes on my ass as well as stretch marks on my stomach and thighs. I'm so self concious of them so I was wondering, is it a turn off?


I don't think guys really notice stretch marks to be honest.

Plus, a lot of guys might have them as well.
Reply 2
I love women and I can assure you that stretch marks are beautiful. They are quirks like anything else. Plus you can't get rid of them so you might as well embrace them :smile:. We think these things are distasteful because society feeds us lies that we should try to rid ourselves of all our so-called 'imperfections' (with their expensive products, ideally). But you don't have to buy into it.

If a man (or woman) is put off by stretch marks, body hair or body fat, then they are not worth your time, least of all your romantic attention.

You are awesome as you are now.
(edited 7 years ago)
I can get over them :yep:
I don't really care.
i don't care as i have stretch marks so i can't be a hypocrite
Original post by jamesthehustler
i don't care as i have stretch marks so i can't be a hypocrite


Likewise

My gf doesn't care about mine either
Reply 7
Original post by Anonymous
So I have tiger stripes on my ass as well as stretch marks on my stomach and thighs. I'm so self concious of them so I was wondering, is it a turn off?


not really
Original post by AndrewSCO
Likewise

My gf doesn't care about mine either


none of my 7 exes complained
I am not a huge fan of them but it depends on the stretch marks. Some are really bad, some are ok. In rare cases some are even nice when very mild.
They are fine!:smile:
Original post by Laus2

If a man (or woman) is put off by stretch marks, body hair or body fat, then they are not worth your time, least of all your romantic attention.



Yeah, death to those with personal preferences.
Yep, not attractive.
Reply 13
Original post by Jebedee
Yeah, death to those with personal preferences.


That's exactly what I was saying. You're smart.
Original post by Laus2
That's exactly what I was saying. You're smart.


I guess the "not worth your time" phrasing may be seen to demonise physical preferences that are, ironically, no more voluntary nor indicative of moral character (or lack thereof) than having stretch-marks, and arguably less so than being overweight or hirsute, which would at least broadly correlate to a particular philosophical outlook and resultant lifestyle choice.
Reply 15
Original post by Profesh
I guess the "not worth your time" phrasing may be seen to demonise physical preferences that are, ironically, no more voluntary nor indicative of moral character (or lack thereof) than having stretch marks, and arguably less so than being overweight or hirsute, which would at least broadly correlate to a particular philosophical outlook and resultant lifestyle choice.


It comes more from being aware that hairy men aren't encouraged to shave their entire bodies, in the way that women are. What's more, larger men don't get half as much hassle, because it's more socially unacceptable to be female and fat. Women are told every day in one way or another that they should be 'self-improving'. If it centered on self-esteem and self-empowerment, I wouldn't care as much. But advertising is often about improving oneself in order to be more desirable to men, who are taught to admire certain characteristics over others, including lack of body hair and low body fat.

It's not coincidental that women are more likely to develop eating disorders. Disliking fat people under the guise of being concerned for their health, or just not liking the look of fat people isn't coincidental either. Being very thin is just as unhealthy as being fat, yet fat shaming is rife.

I've digressed slightly. My point is: whilst it is perfectly okay to have personal preferences, if someone does not want to go out with someone else because they are hairy or, say, slightly overweight, it is not a fault of the person who is being criticised for how they look. Rather, it is the fault of those who perpetuate the lie that larger people can't be sexy/hairy women can't be desirable. A documentary called Those Pesky Dames showed the presenter asking random men on the street what they would rather - to sleep with a woman who doesn't shave, or to break a leg. Most said they would rather break a leg. This kind of thinking is a problem, and I guess I'm trying to counter that ******** by telling people they are beautiful as they are now. That kind of attitude is the only kind of attitude that has made me want to change myself for the better.

I get what you're saying, though. I too have preferences. I guess I just find it hard to fathom how someone would dismiss a potential partner based solely on a characteristic(s) they do not find aesthetically pleasing.

Attachment not found
Original post by Anonymous
So I have tiger stripes on my ass as well as stretch marks on my stomach and thighs. I'm so self concious of them so I was wondering, is it a turn off?


I think I'd find that quite sexy.


⚔🛡⚔~Nothing happens to anyone that he is not fitted by nature to bear - Maximus Decimus Meridius~⚔🛡⚔
No, I have stretch marks on my arms from being really skinny then gaining weight really fast, got to keep the skin hydrated, use coconut oil/almond oil
(edited 7 years ago)
Stretch marks on a girl are signs of a real woman
Original post by Laus2
It comes more from being aware that hairy men aren't encouraged to shave their entire bodies, in the way that women are. What's more, larger men don't get half as much hassle, because it's more socially unacceptable to be female and fat. Women are told every day in one way or another that they should be 'self-improving'. If it centered on self-esteem and self-empowerment, I wouldn't care as much. But advertising is often about improving oneself in order to be more desirable to men, who are taught to admire certain characteristics over others, including lack of body hair and low body fat.

It's not coincidental that women are more likely to develop eating disorders. Disliking fat people under the guise of being concerned for their health, or just not liking the look of fat people isn't coincidental either. Being very thin is just as unhealthy as being fat, yet fat shaming is rife.

I've digressed slightly. My point is: whilst it is perfectly okay to have personal preferences, if someone does not want to go out with someone else because they are hairy or, say, slightly overweight, it is not a fault of the person who is being criticised for how they look. Rather, it is the fault of those who perpetuate the lie that larger people can't be sexy/hairy women can't be desirable. A documentary called Those Pesky Dames showed the presenter asking random men on the street what they would rather - to sleep with a woman who doesn't shave, or to break a leg. Most said they would rather break a leg. This kind of thinking is a problem, and I guess I'm trying to counter that ******** by telling people they are beautiful as they are now. That kind of attitude is the only kind of attitude that has made me want to change myself for the better.


While I concur with the spirit of the sentiment and readily acknowledge the wider issues at play, I don't think suggesting that it's reasonable—or moral—to scorn a person who rejects you for their conditioned, unconscious, involuntary preferences is any more constructive than instilling said person with the idea that anyone who doesn't conform to those preferences ought likewise to be deserving of scorn. If I'm personally morally accountable for harbouring a slight aversion to unkempt female body-hair, then I reserve the right to have anyone who declines my advances on grounds of hair-colour tried for hate-crime. As it is; if a partner wants me to shave all of my hair below the neckline out of reciprocation, I'll happily do so.

I get what you're saying, though. I too have preferences. I guess I just find it hard to fathom how someone would dismiss a potential partner based solely on a characteristic(s) they do not find aesthetically pleasing.

Attachment not found

On the topic of deciding eligibility among prospective partners you might find that this exchange provides some insight into an example of a dating mentality which, for all its inherent 'unfairness', is arguably necessitated by the practical, economic constraints of human existence and, to that extent, bears analogy with many other such (if more overtly calculating) decision-making processes the world over.

Edit: No-one approves attachments; if you want to link an image, I recommend imgur.
(edited 7 years ago)

Quick Reply