The Student Room Group

Scroll to see replies

Original post by Sheldor
But with prosthetics like Oscar Pistorious, you can go years without realising they're wearing them unless you get intimate very quickly. You could easily get to know them before they mention their leg.

Posted from TSR Mobile


Pistorious' prosthetics are not the kind which the NHS can supply and so it would probably be much more obvious for most people. Even for his though I would imagine it would become fairly obvious in intimacy, definitely less than years, although I suppose attraction could build before their condition was made apparent. I've seen quite a few legless people in wheelchairs which is what I really had in mind when I wrote that. Probably shortages in the NHS
Original post by rac1
There have been some nasty jokes going round on twitter.

You mean the "he doesn't have a leg to stand on in court" jokes? Surely that's not abusing disabled people?
Original post by Lumos
assumption that legs are the key to attraction... brad pitt with prosthetic legs is still brad pitt, no? how many women do you know who say "god, brad pitt is so fit, I mean have you seen his knees?!?!" ?


How many men do you know who look like Brad Pitt? It's not so much about the presence of legs being a plus as their absence being a negative. We look for traits we want to pass on; the ugly truth is that this includes being attracted to a full set of working limbs and repelled by otherwise. You use Brad Pitt and Ryan Gosling as examples of how being legless is irrelevant because only their level of physical attraction would be enough to compensate for not having legs. Most men are far below their aesthetic level and I'm not sure you'd commit quite so willingly to courting with a legless average Joe.

I didn't assume that legs are the key to attraction. I implied that someone's attractiveness is seriously undermined in most people's eyes when they are missing half their body. It's not just aesthetic; the practical implications of having a partner without legs are very great. When you encounter someone with these problems but, not having known them, have no emotional investment in their life beyond general human sympathy it's extremely unlikely you'd be inclined to building a relationship with them of any kind, let alone romantic.
(edited 11 years ago)
Depends. If we were friends first etc, it wouldn't put me off. But if it was someone I'd met and hadn't befriended first, it would matter. I decided to be totally honest about it - because lets face it, the majority of people would not choose to get into a relationship where everything is going to be more difficult. That's common sense. But if I liked someone enough, I would date them anyway.

Basically: I'd be less likely to than if they had legs, but I wouldn't necessarily rule them out.
Original post by sophmay
Weeeird! I asked my fiancé this yesterday! (maybe we are telepathically connected :P) And I had a dream two days ago that I had no legs, only prosthetics. He said he would stay with me if I lost my legs. I asked what would we do about sex; would I keep my prosthetic legs on or off? He said it would be weird both ways. I think he would stay with me out of duty but he would look elsewhere for the physical side; I honestly don't think he would be sexually attracted to me if I had no legs.
If he had no legs; I would love him and stay with him but it would take a while to get used to. I would probably be inclined to ask him to keep prosthetics on for a while at least until I got used to it.

I've not really considered the situation without prosthetics since it was a conversation that arised because I had a dream I had them.


It made me sad to read that..If its what you feel would happen..:frown:.
honestly.... I would probably say no xx sorry
I think I would. People don't choose what they look like, or if they're disabled etc.
if the person is nice and I liked them then yes. The same applies to all people above 17. (i'm 17)..
Original post by anonymouspie227
I think I would. People don't choose what they look like, or if they're disabled etc.
if the person is nice and I liked them then yes. The same applies to all people above 17. (i'm 17)..


Well that's very nice, but you're not attracted to every single nice person above the age of seventeen.

People don't choose if they're really ugly (by society's standards), but just because they have a nice personality doesn't mean you'd still want to date them as much as someone who is lovely AND attractive.
Original post by anonymouspie227
I think I would. People don't choose what they look like, or if they're disabled etc.
if the person is nice and I liked them then yes. The same applies to all people above 17. (i'm 17)..


Please refer to post 34
Original post by Tuerin
Pistorious' prosthetics are not the kind which the NHS can supply and so it would probably be much more obvious for most people. Even for his though I would imagine it would become fairly obvious in intimacy, definitely less than years, although I suppose attraction could build before their condition was made apparent. I've seen quite a few legless people in wheelchairs which is what I really had in mind when I wrote that. Probably shortages in the NHS


The legless people you've seen in chairs are probably above the knee amputees or have other problems.(eg, people with heart/general health issues can't use prosthetics due to the extra strain on the body) I think here we're talking more Oscar Pistorious, Adam Hill prosthetics than wheelchairs, which are different.

Posted from TSR Mobile
(edited 11 years ago)
Reply 50
Honestly, i wouldn't.
Original post by Sheldor
The legless people you've seen in chairs are probably above the knee amputees or have other problems.(eg, people with heart/general health issues can't use prosthetics due to the extra strain on the body) I think here we're talking more Oscar Pistorious, Adam Hill prosthetics than wheelchairs, which are different.

Posted from TSR Mobile


Where in the OP did it make this distinction? All I can see is having no legs, nothing about whether this is specifically wheelchairs/Pistorian prosthetics
It depends on the situation.
Original post by anonymouspie227
It made me sad to read that..If its what you feel would happen..:frown:.


He says he'd faithfully stay with me and I'd like to think he would but you can't really says how people would react in those circumstances. I know men are very visual when it comes to sex and I think some may find a lack of a limb or two "off putting" as it were. But when we get married I suppose he'd have no choice but to stay with me :P I'm not sad about it, so you don't need to be! Chin up! :P
If I'm being honest no ... It's not just the sex , but being with someone with such a life limiting disability .... Like you couldn't even run about with your children


Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Ice Constricter
There's two options to this question, you either lie and make yourself look like a more open minded individual or tell truth and come off sounding like a mean shallow bastard.

Gimmie a minute...

dats real talk right there don
Original post by OU Student
It depends on the situation.

well they dont have legs
How cool would it be if your girlfriend had legs like Oscar


Posted from TSR Mobile
I know it sounds like false hindsight, but if my boyfriend had no legs when I just met him I would sill want to be with him.
This is a good question!
Say I was with someone and he lost his legs, I wouldn't break up with him because he lost his legs, I think that's pretty shallow. For example, if your husband or wife lost their legs in an accident, you wouldn't leave them would you?
If I met someone with no legs and I really liked them then I would definitely give it a shot tbh.
Talking about it with people, I'd probably say exactly what I've typed above.

Latest

Trending

Trending