Why is "you meet them when you aren't looking" true for some people?

[somedude81]

Well, sure there are some single guys. But that doesn't mean they're right for me. Sometimes it's only about the sex, which is fine, but again, doesn't lead to a relationship.

Other times, after a couple of dates things fizzle, for one reason or another. Someone that looks good on paper might not be a good match!

 

And sure, I'm fairly attractive. I'm no model though and don't stop traffic. And I'm sure some things about my personality will not be attractive to others.

Still, I expected you to get a lot of attention from men. I guess it may be difficult to say that you get a lot of attention, when the amount of you get is normal to you.

 

I'm having a hard time really understanding what you mean that a guy isn't right for you or that things with a guy that looks good on paper just fizzles out. Of course this is all because of my own personal experiences with dating. I would never let things just fizzle out with a woman on my end. And so it seems I'm making a judgement error and assuming that it applies to all other men as well.

 

I don't tend to go up to a guy and ask him out, though. I will initiate conversations and flirt and try to show my interest as best as I can. As "forward" as I may be, I still live in this society, where men are supposed to be the pursuers. And I don't think they have to do all the work, but if I get no positive response to my advances, I chalk it up to a no and move on.

What you do is fine and actually preferable. Directly asking guys out is a little too much, and smiling at a guy, hoping he'll come over to you is too little.

 

 

 

I have a very recent example of being rejected, once again! Guy I met years ago. We flirted and were clearly attracted to each other. But the timing was wrong. Fair enough. Years later we start messaging again, with him saying we should meet up. I run with it and try to arrange meeting. He always came up with some excuse. I took it as a no and stopped actively contacting him. Same thing happened again. He sent me a happy birthday msg and suggested we meet up! Great! I once again took on the role of the initiator. Once again he came up with excuses every single time. I stopped.

That guy clearly is not interested. He might be attracted to me, but is not interested in seeing where it leads, at all! It happens a lot.

Yeah that's just weird. I have no idea what's going on with him.

 

So that type of rejection is common for you? The series of false starts?

Well, the guy I had no chemistry at all with was ok looking and interesting. Like I said, I always thought he was a good catch, but he was in a relationship. Then they broke up. We met up again, by chance and started chatting and he asked me out! I thought it could actually lead to something!

 

But then... there was nothing there. I can't explain chemistry to you... I don't think anyone can. But it's what makes kissing that person a great experience, as opposed to kissing your hand! And when that guy kissed me... I felt nothing. I was very disappointed! And went out with him again. And that second time just cemented my feelings that we weren't a good match.

 

Maybe I'm dreaming of a knight in shining armour, but I want to feel some kind of butterflies when I kiss someone.

I've only kissed two girls in my life, both I really liked, so I'm not going to be able to understand a kiss that feels like nothing. Hopefully it will never happen to me, it doesn't sound fun.

 

My last ex was obese. And I mean OBESE! When he first started pursuing me I wasn't that interested. But he was cute and I didn't want to dismiss him just because he was fat. So I went out with him. And that went well. Then we kissed and I wasn't disgusted at all, which, frankly, surprised me. We went out again and eventually slept together and after that I could not keep my hands off of him!

 

With this other guy, I was attracted to start with, then we kissed and I felt "meh" and when we slept together I was like "oh... is that it? hmmm".

 

And before you say anything about size, my ex was very small, on a very obese body. Proportion was not his friend. Our first time was not earth shattering. It was just regular. Same as with this other guy, who was more average. But with my ex I felt butterflies. With this other guy I felt nothing at all... That's chemistry!

How odd. The obese guy was cute so you went along with it, and felt something from his kiss? And then you slept with him? How often do you go out with guys you aren't attracted to?

 

I'm really wondering why women aren't giving me chances. I don't think I'm that ugly, I got a picture in my album page in my profile.

[somedude81]

Many women on here have discussed their personal experiences and have explained that dating is hard for them. Many of us have gone years without dating.

 

Why do you refuse to believe it? Do you think we are lying?

You're another small town girl.

 

So far the only women that I know of that have gone a long time without dating, while not trying to avoid dating, are you and Phoe.

[iris219]

You're another small town girl.

 

So far the only women that I know of that have gone a long time without dating, while not trying to avoid dating, are you and Phoe.

 

I haven't just been hanging out in a small town my whole life.

 

I lived in NYC for about a year and no one even flirted with me.

 

I regularly visit large cities to see friends and never met anyone. I've traveled for fun and for work and never got a date.

[ASG]

Still, I expected you to get a lot of attention from men. I guess it may be difficult to say that you get a lot of attention, when the amount of you get is normal to you.

 

I'm having a hard time really understanding what you mean that a guy isn't right for you or that things with a guy that looks good on paper just fizzles out. Of course this is all because of my own personal experiences with dating. I would never let things just fizzle out with a woman on my end. And so it seems I'm making a judgement error and assuming that it applies to all other men as well.

 

 

What you do is fine and actually preferable. Directly asking guys out is a little too much, and smiling at a guy, hoping he'll come over to you is too little.

 

 

 

 

Yeah that's just weird. I have no idea what's going on with him.

 

So that type of rejection is common for you? The series of false starts?

 

I've only kissed two girls in my life, both I really liked, so I'm not going to be able to understand a kiss that feels like nothing. Hopefully it will never happen to me, it doesn't sound fun.

 

 

How odd. The obese guy was cute so you went along with it, and felt something from his kiss? And then you slept with him? How often do you go out with guys you aren't attracted to?

 

I'm really wondering why women aren't giving me chances. I don't think I'm that ugly, I got a picture in my album page in my profile.

 

 

Honestly, the amount of things that could go wrong between a guy and a girl before anything serious even starts is staggering.

A few examples of things you might not have noticed before starting to go out with the person: the way they eat; their political/religious views; one of you being judgemental of the other's hobbies. The list is immense!

One of my favourite hobbies is going to sci fi conventions. I go to a few every year. A guy who was not ok with that would not be a good match for me.

They don't have to want to come. Just be ok that I go.

 

Sometimes, someone you find interesting on a friend level, once you start digging deeper, you just find annoying.

 

All types of rejection are common, to be honest. From the flake, to the simple ignoring of your advances, to the straight out "not interested". It works exactly the same way fr men and women. Put that through your head!

 

My ex was obese. I was put off by his weight. but he was GORGEOUS. And very charming. So I went on a date with him because I didn't want to dismiss him offhand just for being fat, when he had a pretty face! I wasn't attracted because he was fat. I'd never dated a fat guy and wasn't sure I wanted to. So I gave it a shot, in the spirit of open mindedness (yes, I do put my money where my mouth is).

 

And the first date was good, even if I still wasn't convinced I could ever be attracted to him fully. I think he kissed me before the second date happened and that was good, but I still had doubts... 2nd date was ok, we slept together on the 3rd date. I'm not gonna lie... I still had my doubts! I was not looking forward to seeing his naked body at all!!! But after we slept together, something clicked and I was all over it!

 

This is a guy that, despite being extremely overweight, exuded confidence through every pore.

[clia]

I just have to comment on this...

 

I'm not saying that it's men vs. women. Just that women have it much easier.

 

Women can pretty much get a date with whomever they want. Do you disagree?

 

 

Yes, I quite vehemently disagree. For instance, I want a date with John Hamm. Will I get it? No.

 

No, but seriously. I'm sure every woman on this site can tell you stories about the men they wanted who didn't want them back. I remember the guy I swooned over in high school who didn't want anything to do with me. There were also guys I wanted in college and law school who just liked me for a friend even though I wanted more.

 

Attraction goes both ways. Just because I'm interested in a guy doesn't mean he is interested in me. Women go through the exact same thing as men do in that respect.

[kodakgirl]

 

Of course this is all because of my own personal experiences with dating. I would never let things just fizzle out with a woman on my end. And so it seems I'm making a judgement error and assuming that it applies to all other men as well.

 

.

 

It is really awesome to hear you say this. I think this is something we all should be aware of in our discussions. People start getting frustrated when others won't even concede it. I think if you (and all of us) can keep this in mind some of these discussions will be a lot more fruitful.

 

It can be hard to truly understand that other people see things differently. And a lot of the time you're never really going to understand how they think, but still it's important to accept they do think that way and it does make sense to them. Like you, I'd never let something good fizzle out unless something majorly bad happened. But this summer, I was dating this fellow-- we were extremely compatible, we had lots of chemistry, we were very attracted to one another (all of these things on all levels). We weren't rushing, just taking it slow and enjoying getting to know each other, with interest nonetheless made clear on both sides. Everything was great and it was so promising. At about the ten date mark, without anything changing, he called it off with the old 'not looking for a relationship right now.' I still do NOT understand. I'd never do that, and I don't think you'd ever do that, and I don't think most people here would ever do that. But 99% of people thinking differently doesn't affect how he thought. Nor do 99% of women who are able to smile back at cute guys make it any easier for me to do it.

 

I think it's important to remember that every person does think differently and have their own experiences, and even strong general trends say nothing about the way one particular person will act. Everyone has their issues, and most of them are invisible. Meeting me one on one you'd never guess I can't even smile at a guy. I was once even called "outgoing" by a hairdresser I'd been having a good conversation with! Some things are easier for some people, but often it's balanced by other things being harder for them. You just might not know what those things are. I feel one of the best things about forums like this is how they demonstrate that. I understand the struggles of men better and feel more compassion, which I feel will help me in my interactions with single men, both those who interest me and those who don't. I'm thankful for that. I really hope that at least some of the men here are able to experience the same thing, even if trying for that sometimes feels like tilting at windmills.

[Revolver]

That was something told to young shy cute girls and everyone Else thought it applied to them

[ASG]

 

It can be hard to truly understand that other people see things differently. And a lot of the time you're never really going to understand how they think, but still it's important to accept they do think that way and it does make sense to them. Like you, I'd never let something good fizzle out unless something majorly bad happened. But this summer, I was dating this fellow-- we were extremely compatible, we had lots of chemistry, we were very attracted to one another (all of these things on all levels). We weren't rushing, just taking it slow and enjoying getting to know each other, with interest nonetheless made clear on both sides. Everything was great and it was so promising. At about the ten date mark, without anything changing, he called it off with the old 'not looking for a relationship right now.' I still do NOT understand. I'd never do that, and I don't think you'd ever do that, and I don't think most people here would ever do that. But 99% of people thinking differently doesn't affect how he thought. Nor do 99% of women who are able to smile back at cute guys make it any easier for me to do it.

 

 

The thing is, what we consider MAJOR varied wildly from person to person. And for that guy you were dating, maybe he felt overwhelmed by the relationship, and considered it major.

 

Some people consider finding out a less than "holy" sexual past something MAJOR. Others don't even bat an eyelid. Some will consider unemployment something major, other won't, etc etc etc. The list goes on and on and on!

 

My example on this is the guy I've been seeing recently. It started out last year, as a FWB that was quite frankly more of a booty call. Which was great! We had some fun times! The past month and a half we've been seeing each other again. But more on a FWB basis. We had some really good times. If he wasn't going away for work, it might even develop into something serious (it sure developed into something more than either of us was expecting), but neither I nor he want to pursue this once he's away.

Distance is our something MAJOR.

[kodakgirl]

The thing is, what we consider MAJOR varied wildly from person to person. And for that guy you were dating, maybe he felt overwhelmed by the relationship, and considered it major.

 

Some people consider finding out a less than "holy" sexual past something MAJOR. Others don't even bat an eyelid. Some will consider unemployment something major, other won't, etc etc etc. The list goes on and on and on!

 

My example on this is the guy I've been seeing recently. It started out last year, as a FWB that was quite frankly more of a booty call. Which was great! We had some fun times! The past month and a half we've been seeing each other again. But more on a FWB basis. We had some really good times. If he wasn't going away for work, it might even develop into something serious (it sure developed into something more than either of us was expecting), but neither I nor he want to pursue this once he's away.

Distance is our something MAJOR.

 

Exactly... that's essentially what I was trying to say, though I see how it wasn't clear. I don't know what was major to him, because it wasn't something I would consider major. But something was, and I have to accept that even if I can't personally relate to it. I think it's important to appreciate that people have their invisible obstacles, and the fact that they aren't obstacles to you doesn't mean they aren't real.

 

Distance is a good case in point. It was a huge thing with my ex and I. He absolutely did not want to pursue a long-distance relationship, especially because he'd had a bad experience, no matter how well he could see me as a potential partner. I simply did not understand how it could be THAT much of an obstacle. For me it wasn't-- it sucked, but it wasn't an obstacle. And I knew lots of couples for whom it wasn't (and a lot of them have ended up married). I just didn't get it. This, unsurprisingly, caused major issues, and with hindsight a lot of that was the fact that the view I"m talking about now didn't occur to me then (I was very young, very inexperienced, and very in love). I think if I'd recognized how major it was to him things would have been a lot better. I'm glad that you and your friend are able to recognize your feelings towards situation and make the best of it in that light.

[ASG]

Exactly... that's essentially what I was trying to say, though I see how it wasn't clear. I don't know what was major to him, because it wasn't something I would consider major. But something was, and I have to accept that even if I can't personally relate to it. I think it's important to appreciate that people have their invisible obstacles, and the fact that they aren't obstacles to you doesn't mean they aren't real.

 

Distance is a good case in point. It was a huge thing with my ex and I. He absolutely did not want to pursue a long-distance relationship, especially because he'd had a bad experience, no matter how well he could see me as a potential partner. I simply did not understand how it could be THAT much of an obstacle. For me it wasn't-- it sucked, but it wasn't an obstacle. And I knew lots of couples for whom it wasn't (and a lot of them have ended up married). I just didn't get it. This, unsurprisingly, caused major issues, and with hindsight a lot of that was the fact that the view I"m talking about now didn't occur to me then (I was very young, very inexperienced, and very in love). I think if I'd recognized how major it was to him things would have been a lot better. I'm glad that you and your friend are able to recognize your feelings towards situation and make the best of it in that light.

 

I don't think I could do LDR at all! Specially if the relationship isn't even properly established. For ME, the issue is that I need physical closeness. I NEED it. Talking to someone every day, Skyping and whatnot is great, but if I don't get to see them, then I'm not ok.

 

I have a few close friends whom I talk to regularly and share my problems and victories and whatnot. From a boyfriend, I need to kissing and the touching and the cuddling and the sex. I would probably be a basket case!

 

I remember being away for a month and a half for work when I was dating my ex. We saw each other twice for a day or 2 during that time (Christmas and New year). I was going insane! I didn't even fully enjoy going to see my family after the job finished in January cause I was still not seeing him! I have no idea how I would cope for longer than that!

[Imajerk17]

I will play Devil's Advocate here.

 

I think what Somedude81 is getting at is that women are fussier than many men when it comes to feeling attraction. It's not really about "on paper" stuff such as looks, career, or even how interesting a guy is that makes a woman want to pursue something with a man (and men actually are much fussier about a woman's looks than women are about a man's). It's more about "spark" or "chemistry" that I hear women tend to experience not that often.

 

Many guys who are less experienced with women, don't really get the concept of "sparks" or "chemistry" though. For many a guy, if a woman is nice, decent-looking, has her life together, and interested, then that is enough for him to be interested. That is not enough (and sometimes it's not even necessary!) for most women though.

 

So when a woman says "dating isn't any easier for women, sure I had a nice guy interested in me and he was decent-looking too but I felt no chemistry so he isn't an option", many a guy will take that as proof that dating really IS easier for a woman. See, HE couldn't ever see himself turning a woman down who was nice and decent-looking, as he doesn't really feel "chemistry" so selectively as a woman does.

 

Also, many of these guys have gone their ENTIRE LIVES without being asked out and have heard A LOT of no's. So when a woman says "well I got rejected too and I went a whole few years without being asked out", many a guy actually will take this as further proof that dating is easier for women.

 

I'm not so much saying I agree with this, just that it just is. I bring this point up because these debates keep on going around in circles probably for this reason.

Edited April 24, 2014 by Imajerk17

[irc333]

Also, singles are single longer because they are always looking for a reason to not date someone.

[Teraskas]

Also, singles are single longer because they are always looking for a reason to not date someone.

 

Not necessarily true. (Although this can be the case for some folks who simply prefer single life as opposed to being attached.)

The factor of bad luck seems to be more prevalent.

 

More on topic: I disagree with the whole 'You meet them when you aren't looking". Past relationships have shown that I continuously had to do effort and essentially 'do the looking' in order for something to materialise.

Then again, that saying does hold a fraction of truth for my friends who are currently in relationships, but I digress...

[iris219]

 

So when a woman says "dating isn't any easier for women, sure I had a nice guy interested in me and he was decent-looking too but I felt no chemistry so he isn't an option", many a guy will take that as proof that dating really IS easier for a woman. See, HE couldn't ever see himself turning a woman down who was nice and decent-looking, as he doesn't really feel "chemistry" so selectively as a woman does.

 

The above is just one issue--and people shouldn't be expected to date people they aren't into.

 

But Somedude doesn't listen when several of us have tried tell him we got no attention from men and were not asked out at all.

[topaMAXX]

I will play Devil's Advocate here.

 

I think what Somedude81 is getting at is that women are fussier than many men when it comes to feeling attraction. It's not really about "on paper" stuff such as looks, career, or even how interesting a guy is that makes a woman want to pursue something with a man (and men actually are much fussier about a woman's looks than women are about a man's). It's more about "spark" or "chemistry" that I hear women tend to experience not that often.

 

Many guys who are less experienced with women, don't really get the concept of "sparks" or "chemistry" though. For many a guy, if a woman is nice, decent-looking, has her life together, and interested, then that is enough for him to be interested. That is not enough (and sometimes it's not even necessary!) for most women though.

 

So when a woman says "dating isn't any easier for women, sure I had a nice guy interested in me and he was decent-looking too but I felt no chemistry so he isn't an option", many a guy will take that as proof that dating really IS easier for a woman. See, HE couldn't ever see himself turning a woman down who was nice and decent-looking, as he doesn't really feel "chemistry" so selectively as a woman does.

 

Also, many of these guys have gone their ENTIRE LIVES without being asked out and have heard A LOT of no's. So when a woman says "well I got rejected too and I went a whole few years without being asked out", many a guy actually will take this as further proof that dating is easier for women.

 

I'm not so much saying I agree with this, just that it just is. I bring this point up because these debates keep on going around in circles probably for this reason.

 

I disagree with a lot of this, especially the bolded. When I was younger and less experienced, I was a hardcore advocate that looks didn't matter.

 

As I gained more experience, I realize that that isn't the case. The better looking a guy is, the more women will have "chemistry" with him. Personally, I don't really believe in chemistry. I think it's simply the combination of how attractive the guy is combined with how well their personalities click.

 

Generally, if the guy is just really attractive, the girl will either want to sleep with him only or she will want nothing to do with him (depending on the girl). If their personalities click, but the guy isn't attractive, it's friendsville for that guy.

 

Also, there are methods to make women feel sparks for the guy. What do you think PUA is? It's a way for less attractive guys to create the same kind of "spark" and "chemistry" that the good looking guys do.

 

Personally, I just got tired of being something that I'm not, in order to successfully date. To each their own though.

[irc333]

With the distance thing, esp. when high school couples go their seperate ways to different colleges, that's where it becomes hard.

 

For one, you're starting a brand new social life in a new environment, allowing the person take on the "out of sight, out of mind" mentality. They are distracted by their new environment to wind up letting the old one fizzle out.

 

Sometimes the temptation to meet members of the opposite sex in your new college town is too tempting as the sig. other hundreds of miles away becomes someone that he/she just visits on the holidays when going home.

 

Exactly... that's essentially what I was trying to say, though I see how it wasn't clear. I don't know what was major to him, because it wasn't something I would consider major. But something was, and I have to accept that even if I can't personally relate to it. I think it's important to appreciate that people have their invisible obstacles, and the fact that they aren't obstacles to you doesn't mean they aren't real.

 

Distance is a good case in point. It was a huge thing with my ex and I. He absolutely did not want to pursue a long-distance relationship, especially because he'd had a bad experience, no matter how well he could see me as a potential partner. I simply did not understand how it could be THAT much of an obstacle. For me it wasn't-- it sucked, but it wasn't an obstacle. And I knew lots of couples for whom it wasn't (and a lot of them have ended up married). I just didn't get it. This, unsurprisingly, caused major issues, and with hindsight a lot of that was the fact that the view I"m talking about now didn't occur to me then (I was very young, very inexperienced, and very in love). I think if I'd recognized how major it was to him things would have been a lot better. I'm glad that you and your friend are able to recognize your feelings towards situation and make the best of it in that light.

 

 

For many a guy, if a woman is nice, decent-looking, has her life together, and interested, then that is enough for him to be interested. That is not enough (and sometimes it's not even necessary!) for most women though.

 

I recall some Harrison Ford movie, romantic comedy I think, where he was stranded on an island with a woman somewhere (plane wrecked) and she after all what she was talking about what she's looking for a man, she was asking an overall generic question, "So what is it men find attractive or woman has to do to get make him happy??"

 

He said, "All she has to do is show up". I had to laugh, because that line stuck with me from that moment on. lol. All she has to do is show up, and he's happy. LOL

Edited April 25, 2014 by irc333

[Scales]

I disagree with a lot of this, especially the bolded. When I was younger and less experienced, I was a hardcore advocate that looks didn't matter.

 

As I gained more experience, I realize that that isn't the case. The better looking a guy is, the more women will have "chemistry" with him. Personally, I don't really believe in chemistry. I think it's simply the combination of how attractive the guy is combined with how well their personalities click.

 

Generally, if the guy is just really attractive, the girl will either want to sleep with him only or she will want nothing to do with him (depending on the girl). If their personalities click, but the guy isn't attractive, it's friendsville for that guy.

 

Also, there are methods to make women feel sparks for the guy. What do you think PUA is? It's a way for less attractive guys to create the same kind of "spark" and "chemistry" that the good looking guys do.

 

Personally, I just got tired of being something that I'm not, in order to successfully date. To each their own though.

 

I would say from my own experiences that female attraction to males is almost 75% behavioral, 25% looks. And that 25% is made up of hygiene, fashion, and body structure. (yes I'm pulling the numbers out of my ass, its based on my own experience)

 

If women were attracted to men's bodies and looks as much as men are to women's bodies, they would be watching porn instead of reading romance novels. This is why sending a picture of your dick to a girl by text is pointless. Women aren't turned on by that. Now compare that to when a man sees boobs. The way you control the interaction and express your social dominance often leads to female attraction if she is interested in your look from the beginning. Men who end up being friendzoned are put there due to their own behavior. Were you acting like a nice, comforting friend? That is what you will be treated as. Were you acting like a sexual prospect from the moment you said hello? You will be considered, but possible rejected for the right reasons.

 

Think of it like this. You are a guy in an arcade (a social event). There are many game machines (prospective women). To even get a chance to play, you need to be able to put tokens. The amount of tokens equals your initial appearance. The hotter you are the more continues you get. After that, its all about your ability to do well at the game. Some games are easier than others. Some games you can't play at all. Some guys are terrible at them. Some guys can win with just one token.

 

That might seem like a really weird analogy. The point is that interaction creates most of the attraction for women. What you say, your body language, how you respond to criticism, making her laugh, being different or memorable, and not letting yourself get walked on. For men it is the opposite. A woman could be stupid, insecure, racist, and poor, but if she has right face and body type, she will still have guys all over her.

 

Its not easier for women, its just different. All women naturally have the body parts necessary for attraction, but all men do not naturally have the behaviors. Some of them have to learn.

[somedude81]

Here's a simpler way of putting it.

 

The better you look, the easier it is.

[iiiii]

. Personally, I don't really believe in chemistry. I think it's simply the combination of how attractive the guy is combined with how well their personalities click.

 

I agree with that, except with the qualifier that different girls can rate guys' attractiveness quite differently.

 

If I am at a bar or party with a couple of girlfriends, there will always be a few guys we all agree are hot, and a few we all think are really unattractive looking - but we also usually disagree about just how cute the "middle" ones are.

 

So looks are important for a guy, but unless you're really ugly or smelly, there will likely be a girl out there who thinks you're pretty cute.

 

Doesn't mean they'll want to hook up with you, obviously - you can be cute as hell to look at, but turn someone off the second you open your mouth.

[iiiii]

So far the only women that I know of that have gone a long time without dating, while not trying to avoid dating, are you and Phoe.

 

You can add me to the list - before I met my current partner, I didn't date anyone for about 2 years.

 

I wasn't actively avoiding dating, but I wasn't looking for anyone either. No one asked me out, so the issue never came up.

[Imajerk17]

I disagree with a lot of this, especially the bolded. When I was younger and less experienced, I was a hardcore advocate that looks didn't matter.

 

As I gained more experience, I realize that that isn't the case. The better looking a guy is, the more women will have "chemistry" with him. Personally, I don't really believe in chemistry. I think it's simply the combination of how attractive the guy is combined with how well their personalities click.

 

Generally, if the guy is just really attractive, the girl will either want to sleep with him only or she will want nothing to do with him (depending on the girl). If their personalities click, but the guy isn't attractive, it's friendsville for that guy.

 

Also, there are methods to make women feel sparks for the guy. What do you think PUA is? It's a way for less attractive guys to create the same kind of "spark" and "chemistry" that the good looking guys do.

 

Personally, I just got tired of being something that I'm not, in order to successfully date. To each their own though.

 

You have much to learn about women young grasshopper. Show me a guy who thinks that looks are that important and I will show you someone who really doesn't get how women work.

 

Yes, people (which includes women last I checked) size up others very quickly, in a matter of seconds. Yes, women have types they are into just as guys have types they are into.

 

But most of the time, whether a woman finds you attractive has less to do with facial features or height and more to do with mannerisms, posture, how you carry yourself, and so on. [stuff that takes only a few seconds to notice. And yes, stuff that PUA does attempt to address.] So you might THINK you got rejected due to your "looks" but depending on how you look at it, it's probably really not the reason why. On the one hand, you didn't get rejected due to your eyes were so close to each other or your forehead was too big. But on the other hand, confidence just naturally makes a guy more handsome/much better-looking, giving him "looks". So there you go, if you look at it that way maybe "looks" are that important after all..

Edited April 26, 2014 by Imajerk17

[topaMAXX]

You have much to learn about women young grasshopper. Show me a guy who thinks that looks are that important and I will show you someone who really doesn't get how women work.

 

Yes, people (which includes women last I checked) size up others very quickly, in a matter of seconds. Yes, women have types they are into just as guys have types they are into.

 

But most of the time, whether a woman finds you attractive has less to do with facial features or height and more to do with mannerisms, posture, how you carry yourself, and so on. [stuff that takes only a few seconds to notice. And yes, stuff that PUA does attempt to address.] So you might THINK you got rejected due to your "looks" but depending on how you look at it, it's probably really not the reason why. On the one hand, you didn't get rejected due to your eyes were so close to each other or your forehead was too big. But on the other hand, confidence just naturally makes a guy more handsome/much better-looking, giving him "looks". So there you go, if you look at it that way maybe "looks" are that important after all..

 

No, YOU are the one that has much to learn. In reality, the worse looking a guy is, the better his personality must be. Women are generally all attracted to the same thing both physically and personality-wise.

 

I know this because I've experimented with it a bunch. If I act a certain way with a girl, she will like me. I know how to turn on my "attractive personality" when I have to. Just about all women are attracted to me when I out on that personality. If they are not attracted to me, I wouldn't have gotten them anyway because of my looks.

 

Again, this is from years of going out and meeting and dating women. This is why PUA actually does work....because women all like the same things.

[Da Lonely 1]

I hear that expression a lot too, but I think it's annoying. Being single is not always nice, so of course you'll want to look for love. Although I think what people are trying to say is that you need a life of your own first, so having a partner enhances your already stable life.

[irc333]

Yeah, I would have to say, personality may have more to do with it than looks, because just yesterday...I was at an event where this very attractive woman and her daughter was in antecedence.

 

 

Her and her daughter were pretty good looking, dressed very nicely...at least for the occasion. Very pretty, I get to talking to the mother and this guy sits down right next to her, facing her direction.

 

He looked like a bum or a derlict, and I questioned whether he was a part of our group or not. And I find out from someone else, "Oh, that's her husband"

 

I was like WTF you gotta be kidding me.

 

Remember the movie "Deliverence"? or if not....just think of the customers 2 am at a Wal-Mart...the guy looked like THAT. Baked bean colored teeth, he was smokin' cigs, etc.

 

Completely unnmatched....turned out she was German and I was wondering she was some kind of mail-order bride or something. LOL

 

I would say from my own experiences that female attraction to males is almost 75% behavioral, 25% looks. And that 25% is made up of hygiene, fashion, and body structure. (yes I'm pulling the numbers out of my ass, its based on my own experience)

 

If women were attracted to men's bodies and looks as much as men are to women's bodies, they would be watching porn instead of reading romance novels. This is why sending a picture of your dick to a girl by text is pointless. Women aren't turned on by that. Now compare that to when a man sees boobs. The way you control the interaction and express your social dominance often leads to female attraction if she is interested in your look from the beginning. Men who end up being friendzoned are put there due to their own behavior. Were you acting like a nice, comforting friend? That is what you will be treated as. Were you acting like a sexual prospect from the moment you said hello? You will be considered, but possible rejected for the right reasons.

 

Think of it like this. You are a guy in an arcade (a social event). There are many game machines (prospective women). To even get a chance to play, you need to be able to put tokens. The amount of tokens equals your initial appearance. The hotter you are the more continues you get. After that, its all about your ability to do well at the game. Some games are easier than others. Some games you can't play at all. Some guys are terrible at them. Some guys can win with just one token.

 

That might seem like a really weird analogy. The point is that interaction creates most of the attraction for women. What you say, your body language, how you respond to criticism, making her laugh, being different or memorable, and not letting yourself get walked on. For men it is the opposite. A woman could be stupid, insecure, racist, and poor, but if she has right face and body type, she will still have guys all over her.

 

Its not easier for women, its just different. All women naturally have the body parts necessary for attraction, but all men do not naturally have the behaviors. Some of them have to learn.

[Lyn77]

Most of my family & friends tell me the same thing...oh, darling, don't chase love, let love find you when you least expect it...yeah yeah yeah....but when you get to mid-thirties, you start to panic!

I hate to say it, but I guess I agree with this cliche statement after all.

I also can't stand OLD. I think it's so much better to meet someone out of the blue, where you happen to notice their good looks, their personality or charm.

I can profess, this time around, I am not doing all the hard work for love. I am taking a graceful, classy approach and letting the guys do the chasing. Seems to be working for me so far, going on several dates. We will see! Good Luck!! ♥