Never_Sure Posted January 28, 2008 Share Posted January 28, 2008 So, I'm sure there are plenty of threads on here that discuss the topic, but I am wondering: why it is that unavailable people are so attractive? I mean, the only unavailable person I've ever been attracted to is my professor (see first post), but he is available in every respect except that he is my mentor. However, I know many women (and men, for that matter) who only are really attracted to unavailable people. So, I wonder: is it the fact that he/she is someone you can't have? Or do you feel safe with that person? Like they can't make any real commitments, so you don't have to worry about them cheating/leaving/all the other things one has to worry about in relationships? I am just curious. One of my good friends is only ever interested in unavailable people. I mean, she is 23, has been with 3 men and 1 woman all of who were with someone else (three of them married), but she has never been in an actual relationship. When I ask her about it, she just responds, "I don't know why." Her dad left her when she was young, and I think that may have something to do with it, but she never really discusses it with me. So, I wonder: why bother with something that you know you can't have and will most likely end badly? Link to post Share on other sites
bentnotbroken Posted January 28, 2008 Share Posted January 28, 2008 It's the forbidden fruit syndrome. Even as children whatever our parents told us we couldn't have, we wanted it more. Most of the things my mother told me not to do, I tried because I figured it had to be fun,( I was convinced she didn't want me to have any fun:D), but I only did it because she told me not to. The more off limits, the more appealing. Link to post Share on other sites
Curmudgeon Posted January 28, 2008 Share Posted January 28, 2008 They're not, but they seem to be. Forbidden fruit. The thrill of the chase. Winning! You name it. Unfortunately, once you've caught them you usually can't wait to throw them back. If you don't then you're the one who becomes hooked and reeled in. Link to post Share on other sites
Trialbyfire Posted January 28, 2008 Share Posted January 28, 2008 I've never figured out why previously committed people seem more attractive than single people. If anything, I'd rather pick someone 1000 miles away, rather than consider someone who's married or already in an exclusive relationship. Link to post Share on other sites
LucreziaBorgia Posted January 28, 2008 Share Posted January 28, 2008 Part of it too is that when you crush on someone you know you can't ever have, you tend to map onto them your dreams/hopes/expectations/fantasies of what you think they could be to you and that makes you want to chase them that much harder. It is like holding a mirror up to your heart and mistaking it for something other than what it is: a reflection in the form of an illusion. Link to post Share on other sites
Owl Posted January 28, 2008 Share Posted January 28, 2008 I can give you an educated guess on why unavailable MEN are more attractive. Because they don't care about starting a relationship with the OW...at least not at first. There's no pressure, there's no stress, there's no worry about 'what if she says no'. He might not even be looking for anything... And that makes him appear to be very confidant. Even when the relationship starts, he's got a "backup plan" in his wife...so if the relationship with the OW fails, he's not all on his one. So it makes him appear to be supremely confidant and comfortable in the relationship with the OW...which is tremendously attractive to most women. Now...the main reason I've seen for most married women to be attractive are because the OM tends to have a "knight in shining armour" complex. He wants to rescue her. She's attractive to him because she looks like someone he can "save"...from a bad marriage/situation. She says she's unhappy, she's hurting, she's uncertain...and he feels that he can make her situation better. He can be her "knight in shining armour"...and that is incredibly attractive to many men. Its a boost to our egos and self-esteem to 'save' a woman. Link to post Share on other sites
OWoman Posted January 28, 2008 Share Posted January 28, 2008 I've been attracted to both available, and (technically) unavailable people, so I wouldn't say I find one more attractive than the other as a category. I view people as individuals, not as examples of categories, anyway. And yes, I've acted on some of those attractions - to single and married people I've found attractive. I've got very clear ground rules and boundaries under which I'm prepared to get involved, and upfront during the negotiations it often becomes clear that single guys wanted more than I was prepared to invest. I compartmentalise neatly, and had particular delineated vacancies I wished to fill, part-time, while they wanted to be my Universe. Sorry, not going to work - next! So, typically, my agenda was far more compatible with the agendas of the MP I was attracted to, so a greater level of success. Link to post Share on other sites
j_hunt_12 Posted January 28, 2008 Share Posted January 28, 2008 Because they don't care about starting a relationship with the OW...at least not at first. There's no pressure, there's no stress, there's no worry about 'what if she says no'. He might not even be looking for anything... And that makes him appear to be very confidant. Even when the relationship starts, he's got a "backup plan" in his wife...so if the relationship with the OW fails, he's not all on his one. So it makes him appear to be supremely confidant and comfortable in the relationship with the OW...which is tremendously attractive to most women. yep, from a guy, that's exactly it. I was always pretty attrative but shy. Never had a chance with girls, (well a good bit, but not all that much, and I was terrified of relationships). All of a sudden I get a girlfriend, finally, I'm so happy, and I find myself dancing at clubs (just to hang out and have fun) and all these girls are all over me.. It's all about confidence, now I really don't care so opportunities arise all the time. Not like it does me any good... anyways, I really think this is exactly the reason... Link to post Share on other sites
sally4sara Posted January 28, 2008 Share Posted January 28, 2008 Really it is about biological drive. Our most basic instinct is to seek out the healthiest and strongest and most symmetric people of either gender for partners. A person who has already been judged worthy of this by one person is more likely to be judged worthy by another. As well, someone who has some experience in relationships will be more relaxed and more prepared for what is expected of them. Biological approval rating and success viability. Link to post Share on other sites
st951 Posted January 29, 2008 Share Posted January 29, 2008 I don't think it has much to do with availability/unavailability. It's who you are attracted to. When we were in high school, just about everyone was up for grabs. The older we get, the more the availability pool shrinks. Maybe some of us are less mature in that we tend to respond to the instant attraction. I am old enough now to see that it means trouble, in general. And often is not really attraction but manipulation. Link to post Share on other sites
OpenBook Posted January 30, 2008 Share Posted January 30, 2008 Well, I've already gotten flamed for expressing my opinion on this in another thread... and I probably will again... but I'm a big girl, I can take it. I obviously can't speak for a OM's attraction to an MW. But I have a theory about why MM can be so alluring to OW. I think it's because he has undergone extensive sensitivity training by his W in his own M. He's LEARNED... he knows his way around a woman. SG's don't have this same kind of experience under their belts. They're clueless about what a woman wants and needs. So that's why the OW always feels sooooo comfortable and open and desired in the MM's presence ("he's my soulmate", "we connect on so many levels," "I've never felt this way with anyone before", blah blah blah). He knows the ropes. He knows what he's doing. The OW really owes it to his W. Just my 2 cents. Link to post Share on other sites
Tomcat33 Posted January 30, 2008 Share Posted January 30, 2008 They're not. Link to post Share on other sites
Tony T Posted January 30, 2008 Share Posted January 30, 2008 For a lot of people there is simply no challenge to others who are readily available. So many want a challenge...something they can't have. For some, that's a natural thing...for others it's just that they are terrified of a genuine relationship where the love and caring is reciprocal. Go figure! Link to post Share on other sites
Ariadne Posted January 30, 2008 Share Posted January 30, 2008 Why are unavailable people attractive? Is more like, why are the attractive unavailable? Link to post Share on other sites
Lizzie60 Posted January 30, 2008 Share Posted January 30, 2008 What is it they say: 'Men are like parking spaces, the best are taken'... Link to post Share on other sites
InvisibleGirl Posted January 30, 2008 Share Posted January 30, 2008 because I'm sure they are a lot more romantic and charming then they would be towards you if you were their only woman. How can you not love someone that makes you feel so good.... Link to post Share on other sites
annabelle75 Posted January 30, 2008 Share Posted January 30, 2008 Hee hee ...... sigh. Questions like these show how little people really understand affairs. There may be a few people that fixate on married or unavailable partners, but that is not the norm by far. Most affairs are simply two people that enjoy each others company and have good chemistry. The fact the MM or MW is married is a hinderance not a selling point. OW and OM are not out trolling the streets obsessively looking for married partners. Link to post Share on other sites
OWoman Posted January 30, 2008 Share Posted January 30, 2008 Hee hee ...... sigh. Questions like these show how little people really understand affairs. But come on, the armchair psychologising it brings out is pretty amusing. Gems like "because they're scared of a REAL relationship"; "because of the challenge"; "because of they're competitive and get off on winning the MM away from the W"; "because they fear commitment"; etc. It's pretty easy to speak about groups of other people in sweeping terms - easy enough, too, to go to war and kill people based on those kinds of "othering" attitudes - and I suppose at heart it serves its purpose: to make the individuals expressing those views about "them" feel better about themselves. Or maybe someone was just late on handing in a Psycho 101 paper and these threads are their "research"? Link to post Share on other sites
Woggle Posted January 30, 2008 Share Posted January 30, 2008 It's ego. People and especially women like to feel they are desired and when a MM or taken pays attention to them they feel they are special and it feels good to have the potential to take a man away from his wife. When OW get what they want they lose interest very quickly because they have won the prize already. Link to post Share on other sites
BlueEyedGirl Posted January 30, 2008 Share Posted January 30, 2008 I have forever been attracted to unavailable people. Even when I was dating someone nice, I was secretly lusting after another man that I couldn't have. I think that mostly I don't like being in a relationship but I still need "something" so I prefer to create fantasy relationships - I have only ever hooked up for short term with my crushes so I am not sure if my feelings would change if I had them long term. I think that everybody feels that "the grass is greener" to a certain extent but with me it has been a life long major issue. Another thing is that I genuinly beleive that best men are taken. The ones that are single for a long period of time have a s*it load of issues (and this includes women too). I currently have a big crush on someone who is unavailable in every way (I'm talking multiple unavaialbilities here) - I think that I have really outdone myself here. I'm fully aware of the fact that I can't ever have him and I am still Link to post Share on other sites
Author Never_Sure Posted January 30, 2008 Author Share Posted January 30, 2008 (edited) But come on, the armchair psychologising it brings out is pretty amusing. Gems like "because they're scared of a REAL relationship"; "because of the challenge"; "because of they're competitive and get off on winning the MM away from the W"; "because they fear commitment"; etc. It's pretty easy to speak about groups of other people in sweeping terms - easy enough, too, to go to war and kill people based on those kinds of "othering" attitudes - and I suppose at heart it serves its purpose: to make the individuals expressing those views about "them" feel better about themselves. Or maybe someone was just late on handing in a Psycho 101 paper and these threads are their "research"? Hey. I'm not here to judge, nor am I doing research for a psych class. I posed the question, because I am curious. I mean, I like unavailable people too, in some respect. My professor, whom I have a huge crush on, is still my professor, thus unavailable to me. Generally, most of the girls I know (granted, they are young and in college) tend to be attracted to unavailable men: either married, or with girlfriends. It seems to me that it has something to do with the fact that these men attracted a woman, so there must be something good about them. I'm not saying it's a conscious thing, but I do think it's apparent that there are some people more attracted to unavailable people than others. Again, I'm not judging anyone. You only live once, and if two consenting adults wish to have an affair, or whatever else, by all means: go for it. Nearly everything I have said I wouldn't do, or judged others for doing, I have done. So, I am noone to judge anyone else. These kinds of comments are why I waited 2 years to join this site. You're hypocritically judging me based off of an innocent question posed out of curiosity. I wasn't throwing around any sort of accusations, nor was anything I said judgmental. I'm just curious, and came here for my own research, not class related. Though, speaking of class...I do have homework that I should be doing... Edited January 30, 2008 by Never_Sure Link to post Share on other sites
OWoman Posted January 30, 2008 Share Posted January 30, 2008 Hey. I'm not here to judge, nor am I doing research for a psych class. Sorry NS, the "psych assignment" reference was tongue-in-cheek, not meant as a serious accusation! Nor was I referring specifically to your thread on the judging matter - yours seems to be the exception in that you haven't invited people to comment simply to belittle them once they do - but more to the trend with threads like these being used (not necessarily by the OP, though in some cases that does happen) as a platform for people to wheel out their prejudices and their best Dr Phil (or is it Oprah?) impressions in discussing why other people act the way they do. Enjoy your homework! Link to post Share on other sites
Owl Posted January 30, 2008 Share Posted January 30, 2008 Me...now I AM the arm-chair psychiatrist! Wanna see my degree? Fetch me a pen and some paper and I'll get one done up real quick! Link to post Share on other sites
Tomcat33 Posted January 31, 2008 Share Posted January 31, 2008 (edited) Well just in case anyone missed it, and it appears a few have, I believe the term used was: Or maybe someone was just late on handing in a Psycho 101 paper and these threads are their "research"? Ohhhh OW you're too much!!! I laughed out loud for that one. :lmao: PS definitely Dr. Phil. His lines are WAAAAAY cheesier than Oprah's, but they do the trick for middle of the road intelligence. Actually the other day Dr. Phild told a woman who was married to a man who cheated on her, who physically and mentally abused her for years and in turn she was now having an A with a married dude and was ready to walk away from her marriage since she had nothing more to give to her H, to not call it quits just yet. He said she should give the marriage 90 days to see if they could resolve things. LOL Nice. Great advice Dr. Phil!!! I guess you never had a 230lb 6'3 man pound you to the ground or suffocate you with a pillow in order to shut you up...I wish you did actually and maybe people wouldn't have to listen to your CRAP anymore. Edited January 31, 2008 by Tomcat33 Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts