This discussion is now closed.
Check out other Related discussions
Being physically attractive is a good thing!
Scroll to see replies
Original post by alexs2602
It's not a myth. I've met some hot women with ok personalities, some with good personalities but none with great personalities. I also never said hot women have no personalities, I said they don't have great personalities. Not the same thing. I've met many average women who have far better personalities than any hot woman I've met.
It may be true to an extent, but it's hugely exaggerated.
Are you saying that if overweight girls lost weight and became hot, they would suddenly lose their personalities?
For me looks matter more than personality as long as the girl is not an absolute bitch. Everyone has their preferences, but in general, hot guys date hot girls, ugly guys date ugly girls. It's irrefutable.
Original post by wenger16
Oh i thought you meant someone can only be attractive if their really skinny like kate moss etc.
Not only does she lack curves (not fat, there's a difference) but she has the face of a zombie, like most catwalk models do.
Catwalk models are rarely hot and do set a poor example to young girls. Just like fat girls do. Size 8-12 girls FTW.
Original post by im so academic
They're girls my age that I hang out with. I think they're a bit young for you.
You've just beaten your own argument there. They're a bit young for me, and why? Not mature enough. In fact if people didn't change between the age of 15 and early 20s then it would be normal and acceptable for dating to happen throughout this age range. As it is it isn't accepted, and isn't normal. Sure there will be some people who have a larger age gap at that age but they're in the minority. Most couples tend to have a year or less difference in their birth dates.
I would explain, but not publicly...
Explaining has nothing to do with it. If you have certain views they'll affect your behaviour. If you think you're hot you'll tend to have more confidence, self esteem. And since you have a very skeptical view on the world, and a negative opinion of yourself, it can be inferred you're not the most extroverted person in the world. Probably very introverted.
It's the reality of the world - isn't it? To be loved by a man you need to be beautiful?
How can you prove me wrong?
How can you prove me wrong?
That isn't correct, the girl I love isn't beautiful by physical standards, she wears little to no make up but oh my God, her personality; it knocks me sideways. Her morals are a big factor for me - she's a member of Amnesty Intl.
The only way you'll believe is if you saw it in real life. So either take my word for it or carry on being misersable and misinformed.
(edited 11 years ago)
Original post by Drunk Punx
Yeah, the sex was alright. Despite professing to having slept with over 15 guys, she had the same "skill level" as someone who'd had sex with a fifth of that number.
It's also worth mentioning that the lass I slept with who'd had sex with three guys was much more receptive (plus she took it up the gary. Always a bonus), and altogether it was a more enjoyable experience.
I don't have "lads", I have "friends" or "mates" (the two being synonymous). I'm not one of those idiots who, upon hearing that a male friend had sex the previous night, feels the need to shout "LAD!" at the top of my lungs whilst high-fiving him.
I like to think that, despite how I look or what I do for a living, I have a little more class than that.
Don't get me wrong, I don't look down on people for being "lads". Chances are they're getting more pussy than I am, so fair play to them for it, but the "lad" culture is just plain ridiculous if you ask me.
Yes, you're a man whose actions are occasionally questionable. Congratulations. Why that deserves a high five and a shout is beyond me.
Or maybe you're not trying hard enough?
I'll put this into perspective for you: the chick I'm digging on at the moment is fairly hot (in my opinion, anyway. I realise this isn't helping, but bare with me), but I couldn't care less about that. It's her personality that has genuinely piqued my interest. I've never met a chick like her before. She's essentially a female version of me, and I love nobody more than I love myself
If your boss-to-be is a dirty perv or runs a pub, sure.
But the reason publicans give staff positions to attractive girls is to pull more punters in (as a male, I'm sad to say that that kind of obvious deception works).
It's also worth mentioning that the lass I slept with who'd had sex with three guys was much more receptive (plus she took it up the gary. Always a bonus), and altogether it was a more enjoyable experience.
I don't have "lads", I have "friends" or "mates" (the two being synonymous). I'm not one of those idiots who, upon hearing that a male friend had sex the previous night, feels the need to shout "LAD!" at the top of my lungs whilst high-fiving him.
I like to think that, despite how I look or what I do for a living, I have a little more class than that.
Don't get me wrong, I don't look down on people for being "lads". Chances are they're getting more pussy than I am, so fair play to them for it, but the "lad" culture is just plain ridiculous if you ask me.
Yes, you're a man whose actions are occasionally questionable. Congratulations. Why that deserves a high five and a shout is beyond me.
Or maybe you're not trying hard enough?
I'll put this into perspective for you: the chick I'm digging on at the moment is fairly hot (in my opinion, anyway. I realise this isn't helping, but bare with me), but I couldn't care less about that. It's her personality that has genuinely piqued my interest. I've never met a chick like her before. She's essentially a female version of me, and I love nobody more than I love myself
If your boss-to-be is a dirty perv or runs a pub, sure.
But the reason publicans give staff positions to attractive girls is to pull more punters in (as a male, I'm sad to say that that kind of obvious deception works).
Actually, I read a journal very, very recently that beautiful women do get an advantage in the working enviroment and not only if they have a dirty-old pervy boss. I can't find it right now, so working from memory .... beautiful tend to get promoted faster and earn something like 9% more than a person of equivalent skills but not as appealing appearance wise.
Original post by alexs2602
No, they're too young, because they're actually really young for you. Anyway, they're my competition. They've beaten me before I've even started.
Original post by im so academic
No, they're too young, because they're actually really young for you. Anyway, they're my competition. They've beaten me before I've even started.
No, you're wrong. If it wasn't for their maturity levels things would be very different. Have you seen the way people your age dress? And how developed they are? Jesus, if it was from a purely physical perspective then there would be a lot of interaction between men in their early 20s and girls in their midteens. And by that I mean there would be a lot of banging. Biologically they're ready to reproduce and if it was considered normal, acceptable or those men actually found their maturity/personalites etc attractive it would happen. No question, but it doesn't happen much.
(edited 11 years ago)
Original post by alexs2602
No, you're wrong. If it wasn't for their maturity levels things would be very different. Have you seen the way people your age dress? And how developed they are? Jesus, if it was from a purely physical perspective then there would be a lot of interaction between men in their early 20s and girls in their midteens. And by that I mean there would be a lot of banging. Biologically they're ready to reproduce and if it was considered normal, acceptable or those men actually found their maturity/personalites etc attractive it would happen. No question, but it doesn't happen much.
That's another issue. Tits.
It's upsetting seeing girls with bigger tits than me; it makes them more desirable in the eyes of men.
Original post by im so academic
That's another issue. Tits.
It's upsetting seeing girls with bigger tits than me; it makes them more desirable in the eyes of men.
It's upsetting seeing girls with bigger tits than me; it makes them more desirable in the eyes of men.
Please go away ISA. Okay, you're ugly, do something about it rather than clogging up my thread with your childish arguments.
Original post by im so academic
That's another issue. Tits.
It's upsetting seeing girls with bigger tits than me; it makes them more desirable in the eyes of men.
It's upsetting seeing girls with bigger tits than me; it makes them more desirable in the eyes of men.
Not necessarily true. Every man has different tastes and in my opinion the things that really matter you won't see until she's naked. Size isn't as big an issue as it's made out to be. Generally speaking not too big, not too small but beyond that shape, texture and skin are the most important things. If he cares enough for her then he won't care how big they are. Every woman suits different boobs too, that's not to say every woman has boobs which suit her body best ofc.
Actually the girl I love dresses very demurely. I think most people would say she's flat if they saw her in revealing clothing but it's irrelevant to me.
Original post by barnetbuzzzz
Not true.
How do you explain nearly all guys finding slim girls more attractive than fat girls? Have they all been brainwashed, or is it just the simple fact that slim women are more attractive?
Henry VIII didn't have so many wives because he was fat, he had so many wives because he was rich. Wealth can over-ride looks in the attractiveness stakes (especially for girls).
Are you seriously telling me that in Tudor times, if a girl had a choice between two wealthy men, one was fat and one was a hunk, she would choose the fat guy? No she wouldn't.
How do you explain nearly all guys finding slim girls more attractive than fat girls? Have they all been brainwashed, or is it just the simple fact that slim women are more attractive?
Henry VIII didn't have so many wives because he was fat, he had so many wives because he was rich. Wealth can over-ride looks in the attractiveness stakes (especially for girls).
Are you seriously telling me that in Tudor times, if a girl had a choice between two wealthy men, one was fat and one was a hunk, she would choose the fat guy? No she wouldn't.
"How do you explain nearly all guys finding slim girls more attractive than fat girls?"
You can't ignore my point by raising the same issue again.
It's socialised. You openly accept not all people find fat people repulsive - meaning that it can't be biological.
"Slim women are more attractive" is not a "!simple fact". For it to be a fact, it would have to be universal.The statement "most people find slim people more attractive than fat people" is almost certainly the case, but it's not a fact.
And you've changed my point on Henry the 8th. He didn't have wives because he was fat per se; it was more because his portly build was attractive in the sense that it implied wealth. A hunky body is not, in itself, attractive. It implies physical health and sexual power, which is why it is attractive. Neither fat or hunky bodies are attractive in their own right, it's what we infer from it that is important. And what we infer as important, is certainly socialised.
Original post by barnetbuzzzz
Please go away ISA. Okay, you're ugly, do something about it rather than clogging up my thread with your childish arguments.
Original post by The Patriot
The statement "most people find slim people more attractive than fat people" is almost certainly the case, but it's not a fact.
The statement "most people find slim people more attractive than fat people" is almost certainly the case, but it's not a fact.
Erm, if it were true (as you seem to think) it would be a fact.
I'm curious as to where being unattractive comes in on the "things that make people miserable" scale.
Original post by barnetbuzzzz
She has curves in the right places. She's not fat.
What annoys me is girls looking at Christina Hendricks and saying "oh she's such a good role model for bigger girls", ignoring the fat that she's not fat, and is a bigger size because she has big boobs/bum which are curves that guys like. Note how she doesn't have a big stomach, which is what guys do not like.
What annoys me is girls looking at Christina Hendricks and saying "oh she's such a good role model for bigger girls", ignoring the fat that she's not fat, and is a bigger size because she has big boobs/bum which are curves that guys like. Note how she doesn't have a big stomach, which is what guys do not like.
I think that's one thing a lot of people who say "curvy" seem to ignore.
When curvy comes to mind, I think of a strong hour-glass figure like Christina Hendricks, which looks great. Not what some people define as curvy, in a pear or apple shaped body where the only curves are hanging over the waistline or dangling from their upper arms; that's just fat. On the other side of the coin, I've seen girls who have athletic bodies, get called anorexic, simply because they aren't pear or apple shaped.
Original post by The Patriot
"How do you explain nearly all guys finding slim girls more attractive than fat girls?"
You can't ignore my point by raising the same issue again.
It's socialised. You openly accept not all people find fat people repulsive - meaning that it can't be biological.
"Slim women are more attractive" is not a "!simple fact". For it to be a fact, it would have to be universal.The statement "most people find slim people more attractive than fat people" is almost certainly the case, but it's not a fact.
And you've changed my point on Henry the 8th. He didn't have wives because he was fat per se; it was more because his portly build was attractive in the sense that it implied wealth. A hunky body is not, in itself, attractive. It implies physical health and sexual power, which is why it is attractive. Neither fat or hunky bodies are attractive in their own right, it's what we infer from it that is important. And what we infer as important, is certainly socialised.
You can't ignore my point by raising the same issue again.
It's socialised. You openly accept not all people find fat people repulsive - meaning that it can't be biological.
"Slim women are more attractive" is not a "!simple fact". For it to be a fact, it would have to be universal.The statement "most people find slim people more attractive than fat people" is almost certainly the case, but it's not a fact.
And you've changed my point on Henry the 8th. He didn't have wives because he was fat per se; it was more because his portly build was attractive in the sense that it implied wealth. A hunky body is not, in itself, attractive. It implies physical health and sexual power, which is why it is attractive. Neither fat or hunky bodies are attractive in their own right, it's what we infer from it that is important. And what we infer as important, is certainly socialised.
Different people have different biologies, but mostly, guys find slim girls attractive.
Lack of fat just looks better than fat. There's nothing socialised about that.
(edited 11 years ago)
Original post by mimx
Erm, if it were true (as you seem to think) it would be a fact.
It's not a fact because it's not, as far as I know, empirically observed to be the case in all situations.
However, as I allude to, I think it's likely that the statement it true, and thus a fact, but I do not know.
The point I was suggesting is that, If we take a leap and say that the statement "most people find slim people more attractive than fat people" is indeed a fact, then that is still an example of socialisation. As its only "most people" which suggests another option.
Original post by The Patriot
It's not a fact because it's not, as far as I know, empirically observed to be the case in all situations.
However, as I allude to, I think it's likely that the statement it true, and thus a fact, but I do not know.
The point I was suggesting is that, If we take a leap and say that the statement "most people find slim people more attractive than fat people" is indeed a fact, then that is still an example of socialisation. As its only "most people" which suggests another option.
However, as I allude to, I think it's likely that the statement it true, and thus a fact, but I do not know.
The point I was suggesting is that, If we take a leap and say that the statement "most people find slim people more attractive than fat people" is indeed a fact, then that is still an example of socialisation. As its only "most people" which suggests another option.
That option is that different people have different biologies.
By the same logic, would you argue that being gay is socialised?
As it's pretty much accepted that being gay is genetic, and are just different biologically to straight people.
Original post by alexs2602
You've just beaten your own argument there. They're a bit young for me, and why? Not mature enough. In fact if people didn't change between the age of 15 and early 20s then it would be normal and acceptable for dating to happen throughout this age range. As it is it isn't accepted, and isn't normal. Sure there will be some people who have a larger age gap at that age but they're in the minority. Most couples tend to have a year or less difference in their birth dates.
Explaining has nothing to do with it. If you have certain views they'll affect your behaviour. If you think you're hot you'll tend to have more confidence, self esteem. And since you have a very skeptical view on the world, and a negative opinion of yourself, it can be inferred you're not the most extroverted person in the world. Probably very introverted.
That isn't correct, the girl I love isn't beautiful by physical standards, she wears little to no make up but oh my God, her personality; it knocks me sideways. Her morals are a big factor for me - she's a member of Amnesty Intl.
The only way you'll believe is if you saw it in real life. So either take my word for it or carry on being misersable and misinformed.
Explaining has nothing to do with it. If you have certain views they'll affect your behaviour. If you think you're hot you'll tend to have more confidence, self esteem. And since you have a very skeptical view on the world, and a negative opinion of yourself, it can be inferred you're not the most extroverted person in the world. Probably very introverted.
That isn't correct, the girl I love isn't beautiful by physical standards, she wears little to no make up but oh my God, her personality; it knocks me sideways. Her morals are a big factor for me - she's a member of Amnesty Intl.
The only way you'll believe is if you saw it in real life. So either take my word for it or carry on being misersable and misinformed.
Oh yeeeesss, your personality! Yeeeessssss, you're in Amnesty! Yes! Yeeesss! Yeeeesssssss!
Nah, most guys find that looks turn them on sexually.
Original post by barnetbuzzzz
Oh yeeeesss, your personality! Yeeeessssss, you're in Amnesty! Yes! Yeeesss! Yeeeesssssss!
Nah, most guys find that looks turn them on sexually.
Nah, most guys find that looks turn them on sexually.
And you're one of the aforementioned asses I was going on about.
Have you heard of emotional satisfaction? Try getting that from sex and looks, I double dare you.
Latest
Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
