Perspective

[BaileyB]

23 minutes ago, ZA Dater said:

there was never going to be any long term.

Well then, this should have been communicated to her in the first few weeks - not almost a year later. 

Edited June 3 by BaileyB

[ZA Dater]

2 minutes ago, BaileyB said:

Well then, this should have been communicated to her in the first few weeks - not almost a year later. 

It took me months to get to that point. Indecision took over and I kept thinking I should feel more and I thought if I gave it more time it would happen. It simply did not and I got what I deserved and thankfully she found someone great and we are still friends.

I really do not see how that is a bad outcome. 

[NuevoYorko]

On 6/2/2024 at 7:26 AM, ZA Dater said:

I have learnt a lack of superficial attraction cannot be overcome. Which is fine, everyone has to be attracted to their partner so it's to be expected.

You have not learned anything about superficial attraction as it relates to a deeper attraction.   You are just stuck on superficial.  To you it's exactly like, say, buying a car.   You want the Ferrari Purosangue.   Your budget limits you to something much more mundane.  Rather than "settle" for the affordable car, you prefer to have no car.  it makes sense; you can use public transportation, save your money, and ultimately get the car that you really want.  

That makes sense.

When you are talking about a material object. 

 

 

[NuevoYorko]

20 hours ago, ZA Dater said:

No thanks. I can see why therapy is such a lucrative industry, apparently its the fix all even when my experience its a total of waste of time. I am however glad it works for some.

You are clueless, and / or willfully obtuse.  Of course people don't think that therapy "fixes" a damn thing.   Therapy works for people who want to make changes in themselves, for the better, to help improve the quality of their lives.  Help them set and reach goals, get rid of roadblocks,  self defeating patterns, etc.  

Of COURSE you would not want to invest in anything that would have the potential to help you with any of those things.  You are very outspoken about how you are against learning,  growth or change for yourself in any way.  

[NuevoYorko]

19 hours ago, ZA Dater said:

Everything I do is based on logic, risk and the probability of a positive outcome.

Unfortunately, you're not very good at "logic."  

[OKtoday]

I thought you were trying to get back together with her after the breakup? Am I remembering that right???

[BaileyB]

50 minutes ago, OKtoday said:

I thought you were trying to get back together with her after the breakup? Am I remembering that right???

At one point, I think he definitely was…

Which means that he was prepared to waste more of the woman’s time. The realization that it was “never going to be anything long term” came only after she ended the relationship and moved on…

Edited June 3 by BaileyB

[ZA Dater]

2 hours ago, OKtoday said:

I thought you were trying to get back together with her after the breakup? Am I remembering that right???

Which would have been quite a bad idea. Instead we have remained friends, the occasional coffee, lunch etc. Makes you think if I was such a terrible person and so bad toward her why would she want anything to do with me.

[ZA Dater]

3 hours ago, NuevoYorko said:

You are clueless, and / or willfully obtuse.  Of course people don't think that therapy "fixes" a damn thing.   Therapy works for people who want to make changes in themselves, for the better, to help improve the quality of their lives.  Help them set and reach goals, get rid of roadblocks,  self defeating patterns, etc.  

Of COURSE you would not want to invest in anything that would have the potential to help you with any of those things.  You are very outspoken about how you are against learning,  growth or change for yourself in any way.  

OK. People are quite capable of making changes without sitting talking to some stranger who does now know them from a bar of soap. I've invested enough to know its not for me and the ROI was particularly poor. I am outspoken about questioning things yes rather than simply following on blindly. 

[ZA Dater]

3 hours ago, NuevoYorko said:

You have not learned anything about superficial attraction as it relates to a deeper attraction.   You are just stuck on superficial.  To you it's exactly like, say, buying a car.   You want the Ferrari Purosangue.   Your budget limits you to something much more mundane.  Rather than "settle" for the affordable car, you prefer to have no car.  it makes sense; you can use public transportation, save your money, and ultimately get the car that you really want.  

That makes sense.

When you are talking about a material object. 

Ah I see, suddenly from being irrelevant and "can grow over time" we have superficial attraction relating to deeper attraction. I see so the person who decides to chat to the athletic lady over the not so athletic one has at that moment a deeper attraction. Even though he does not know either from bar of soap. Thank you, we have now established that superficial attraction is the foundation.

The FUV is quite a machine.

Edited June 3 by ZA Dater

[NuevoYorko]

3 hours ago, ZA Dater said:

Ah I see, suddenly from being irrelevant and "can grow over time" we have superficial attraction relating to deeper attraction.

"Suddenly"?  "Irrelevant"?  Huh?  Oh yeah.  You don't read posts, do you.

I've said probably over a dozen times that 1)  most of us -certainly I myself - are not suggesting that you get involved with someone you do not find attractive.   and 2) that there is a lot more to people beyond the mundane surface bells and whistles that are all you recognize.  You won't ever even understand WHY people are together if you don't grasp what is beneath the surface.

 

The "relationship" to deeper attraction requires a person to "compare and contrast."   You just want a checklist of things. 

3 hours ago, ZA Dater said:

 

The FUV is quite a machine.

You are really not as "intellectual," logical or smart as you think you are.   Sometimes you have the breadth of understanding of an 11 year old pissy kid who thinks he knows more than every adult.

Seriously - you are talking to dozens of people here  who have relationship experience of all kinds and NONE of it is remotely interesting to you because you *know it all.*   Just like the 11 year old kid knows all about what it's like to be the CEO of a Fortune 500 company.   

[basil67]

3 hours ago, ZA Dater said:

Ah I see, suddenly from being irrelevant and "can grow over time" we have superficial attraction relating to deeper attraction. I see so the person who decides to chat to the athletic lady over the not so athletic one has at that moment a deeper attraction. Even though he does not know either from bar of soap. Thank you, we have now established that superficial attraction is the foundation.

We have established nothing because you're coming from the angle where a woman's appearance is everything.   

On the other hand, the kind of men I know aren't as shallow as you:   Sure, he may be initially attracted to the tall slim one, but then find her to be vapid.   As he holds no strong convictions over body shape he notices the other woman has a killer smile and a sexy twinkle in her eye.  He talks to her finds that she's fun and interesting...and he falls in love.

Also, why do you keep using the term "athletic" as description?   One of the female P/Ts at my gym is short and blocky but is also sporty, strong and agile.  And then there are women who are tall and slim without the slightest bit of athletic ability.    Are you going to date a swimmer who's 5'4 with shoulders are twice as big as yours?  What about the Olympic weight lifter?  The term athletic is meaningless when it comes to body shape. 

 

Edited June 3 by basil67

[FredEire]

 

7 minutes ago, basil67 said:

We have established nothing because you're coming from the angle where a woman's appearance is everything.   

On the other hand, the kind of men I know aren't as shallow as you:   Sure, he may be initially attracted to the tall slim one, but then find her to be vapid.   As he holds no strong convictions over body shape he notices the other woman has a killer smile and a sexy twinkle in her eye.  He talks to her finds that she's fun and interesting...and he falls in love.

Also, why do you keep using the term "athletic" as description?   One of the female P/Ts at my gym is short and blocky but is also sporty, strong and agile.  And then there are women who are tall and slim without the slightest bit of athletic ability.    Are you going to date a swimmer who's shoulders are twice as big as yours and has a masculine facial structure?  The term athletic is meaningless when it comes to body shape.

 

I think in broader terms the point people are making such as Basil here is that there's an awful lot you haven't learned about relationships because you've never got off the starting blocks so to speak.

The fantasy you have in your head about the sexy beautiful woman who has it all and is mutually attracted to you is actually a lot more complicated than you think because at the moment it only exists in your head.

Sometimes people are only half-attracted to you, sometimes they are attracted but it's a toxic and possessive attraction, relationships are complicated and difficult.

I think it would be much more useful for you just to tap into humility and say "at this point I basically know nothing" rather than leaning on all these beliefs about the dating game based on biases from observed relationships you really know nothing about. You're a white-belt dater, and that's OK. It would be a useful first step just to throw everything you think you know from ruminating and observing of others in the bin and take the attitude that OK I don't know very much at the moment but I'm open and willing to learn.

Edited June 3 by FredEire

[BaileyB]

49 minutes ago, basil67 said:

Also, why do you keep using the term "athletic" as description?  The term athletic is meaningless when it comes to body shape. 

“Athletic” is obviously more socially appropriate than thin, not overweight, or looks like a model - which is the desired body type. ZA lacks social awareness but he has apparently learned enough to be a little more socially appropriate when describing the desired model he would like to date…

[NuevoYorko]

In real life, what often happens is that people who are together for whatever reason start to feel drawn to each other.  They may not have had their sox knocked off or whatever by the amazing beauty of the other person at first.  Since they got to know each other, attraction happened.   It's happened to me and I bet it's happened to the majority of people on this thread.   It's common and normal.  It's not "settling" and has nothing to do with settling.   When you love a person, you love them.   

Nobody forced it, it developed.  

In many other cases, people are together for whatever reason (mutual friends,  their shared passion for something, work, etc) do NOT ever feel that way.  No attraction develops and they  either are friendly, colleagues, or just deal with each other out of necessity.   That's all normal too.

 

 

[basil67]

5 minutes ago, NuevoYorko said:

They may not have had their sox knocked off or whatever by the amazing beauty of the other person at first.  Since they got to know each other, attraction happened. 

Sums up every relationship I've ever had

[ZA Dater]

7 hours ago, FredEire said:

 

I think in broader terms the point people are making such as Basil here is that there's an awful lot you haven't learned about relationships because you've never got off the starting blocks so to speak.

The fantasy you have in your head about the sexy beautiful woman who has it all and is mutually attracted to you is actually a lot more complicated than you think because at the moment it only exists in your head.

Sometimes people are only half-attracted to you, sometimes they are attracted but it's a toxic and possessive attraction, relationships are complicated and difficult.

I think it would be much more useful for you just to tap into humility and say "at this point I basically know nothing" rather than leaning on all these beliefs about the dating game based on biases from observed relationships you really know nothing about. You're a white-belt dater, and that's OK. It would be a useful first step just to throw everything you think you know from ruminating and observing of others in the bin and take the attitude that OK I don't know very much at the moment but I'm open and willing to learn.

All good and well but when there are openly contradictory posts here one has to wonder. On the one hand I get roundly criticized for taking too long for attraction to seemingly grow, on the other I am criticized for not giving people a chance because "attraction can grow over time" Then we have " there a is a deeper attraction to people who are superficially attractive".

Why have I not got off the starting block, again simply, there is never mutual attraction. Then I get told, well it will grow over time but again who exactly is doing the compromising in that scenario, I'd guess it would have to be me. 

Open and willing to learn, if I cannot find mutually attractive people there is very little point in dating at all. 

No attraction= no foundation. 

[ZA Dater]

6 hours ago, NuevoYorko said:

In real life, what often happens is that people who are together for whatever reason start to feel drawn to each other.  They may not have had their sox knocked off or whatever by the amazing beauty of the other person at first.  Since they got to know each other, attraction happened.   It's happened to me and I bet it's happened to the majority of people on this thread.   It's common and normal.  It's not "settling" and has nothing to do with settling.   When you love a person, you love them.   

Nobody forced it, it developed.  

In many other cases, people are together for whatever reason (mutual friends,  their shared passion for something, work, etc) do NOT ever feel that way.  No attraction develops and they  either are friendly, colleagues, or just deal with each other out of necessity.   That's all normal too.

Yet when I tried to do that I got told I was "nasty and cruel", so which is it really, attraction after months did not grow yet I am somehow in the wrong?  Frankly I have felt drawn to anyone I did not find attractive for whatever reason, be it they were well spoken, great conversationalist, pretty face, interesting life story. 

Yeah no attraction ever develops toward me and I just need to accept that because like you say that is normal.

[ZA Dater]

8 hours ago, NuevoYorko said:

"Suddenly"?  "Irrelevant"?  Huh?  Oh yeah.  You don't read posts, do you.

I've said probably over a dozen times that 1)  most of us -certainly I myself - are not suggesting that you get involved with someone you do not find attractive.   and 2) that there is a lot more to people beyond the mundane surface bells and whistles that are all you recognize.  You won't ever even understand WHY people are together if you don't grasp what is beneath the surface.

The "relationship" to deeper attraction requires a person to "compare and contrast."   You just want a checklist of things. 

You are really not as "intellectual," logical or smart as you think you are.   Sometimes you have the breadth of understanding of an 11 year old pissy kid who thinks he knows more than every adult.

Seriously - you are talking to dozens of people here  who have relationship experience of all kinds and NONE of it is remotely interesting to you because you *know it all.*   Just like the 11 year old kid knows all about what it's like to be the CEO of a Fortune 500 company.   

Actually its widely suggested when nonsense like leagues are discussed. Oddly enough I do find people I find attractive so clearly whatever I do does actually work so  I cannot be accused of chasing unicorns, frankly if someone speaks poorly I could not care if they are the best looking person on earth I would not be interested, likewise someone who cannot have a meaningful conversation and wait for, someone who sits there and asks me not one question, its an immediate no from me. Notice how many of those are superficial? None.

Humor me, if the all is true why was OLD such a total disaster is people look beyond the surface?

 

[semble]

On 6/4/2024 at 9:11 AM, ZA Dater said:

Yet when I tried to do that I got told I was "nasty and cruel",

Clearly you misunderstood. If you stay with a person whom you are not attracted to, in order to see if something grows and develops, it's all good. If you're leading the person on, and pretending to be into them because you want sex, well that's somewhat "nasty and cruel". It's all about intent. As long as your honest about your motivations, there's nothing wrong with it. They can choose to go along with it or not.

 

 

[Gebidozo]

On 6/3/2024 at 11:16 PM, NuevoYorko said:

That makes sense.

When you are talking about a material object. 

I’ve been trying to make the OP understand that he views women like objects across many pages. You also have made this very apt car comparison before. Looks like the OP is in some sort of a deep denial.

[Gebidozo]

On 6/4/2024 at 6:12 AM, basil67 said:

On the other hand, the kind of men I know aren't as shallow as you:   Sure, he may be initially attracted to the tall slim one, but then find her to be vapid.   As he holds no strong convictions over body shape he notices the other woman has a killer smile and a sexy twinkle in her eye.  He talks to her finds that she's fun and interesting...and he falls in love.

I’ll add that the more mature the man is, the less time he would spend on that initial attraction towards his physical type, to the point that he would probably not feel it at all and go straight for the less superficial criteria.

The OP really sounds like an 11 year old boy talking about women as though they were shiny photos of famous actresses or teenage pop queens or something. It’s like he has no idea what real attraction feels like.

Edited June 5 by Gebidozo

[semble]

3 minutes ago, Gebidozo said:

I’ll add that the more mature the man is, the less time he would spend on that initial attraction towards his physical type,

Nah, most guys are going for physical attraction first, then we're going to evaluate her on the rest of her merits including but not limited to intelligence and her adjusted gross income on her Schedule C.

 

[Gebidozo]

On 6/4/2024 at 7:22 AM, basil67 said:

Sums up every relationship I've ever had

Mine too.

I can add that as time passes, the beloved person’s physical appearance grows on you, to the point of becoming a new ideal of beauty.

When I first talked to my now-fiancée, I barely even noticed how she looked like. I only felt that she was nice and sweet and intelligent and had an attractive smile and an infectious laugh, and made me feel all cozy and comfortable, and was cute and slightly naughty, and I couldn’t stop talking to her and wanted to see her again.

Now I believe with all certainty that she is the most beautiful woman I’ve ever met.

[Gebidozo]

1 minute ago, semble said:

Nah, most guys are going for physical attraction first, then we're going to evaluate her on the rest of her merits including but not limited to intelligence and her adjusted gross income on her Schedule C.

 

Physical attraction is not at all the same as physical appearance.