Perspective

[ZA Dater]

10 minutes 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.

 

Thank you. If there is no physical attraction at all chances are the person is not going to be interested at all. My mistake, one of many is to believe a lack of physical attraction can be overcome.

[ZA Dater]

40 minutes ago, semble said:

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.

My intention was never to mislead and likewise I did not use her. Again if I was so bad how come she still considers me to be a friend and we still see each other socially.

[ZA Dater]

16 minutes ago, Gebidozo said:

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.

A very nice story, thanks for sharing. I guess we are all fundamentally different in what draws us to people. As I have said many times, someone can be superficially attractive and still be overall unattractive to me, I have met quite a few people like that. Its good to read success stories.

 

[NuevoYorko]

On 6/3/2024 at 11:07 PM, ZA Dater said:

All good and well but when there are openly contradictory posts here one has to wonder.

B.S.  In all these thousands of posts there are rarely contradictory ones

Quote

 

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".

Everybody is saying the same thing, bruh.   That as long as you refuse, or cannot,  "be bothered" to get to know any women who are not objectively "10's," you are missing out.    To compound your problems, you ALSO won't try to get to know the hot supermodels that you need (or you are "settling") because you won't take the risk of being rejected. 

Bottom line is:  you will never get to know any women because you are not interested in that.  You just want to *HAVE* a specific *THING* which, ironically, you're not even willing to work for.  

So ... you are the king of boring long redundant threads on a forum, and you probably do this on your "manosphere" and incel sites as well, where you also get a lot of support for it. 

 

Quote

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. 

Yeah.  But the majority of humans are not fixated 100% on surface qualities.   They are not all waiting for a hormonal explosion in order to know another person.   That's why you will see many average or below average looking people happily paired up with normal looking ones:  because THEY LIKED THE PERSON.  And clearly there was physical attraction as well, but generally that came about over time.  No, they were not "settling," they fell for a PERSON.  

You are uniquely superficial.  

Edited June 5 by NuevoYorko

[ZA Dater]

3 hours ago, NuevoYorko said:

B.S.  In all these thousands of posts there are rarely contradictory ones

Everybody is saying the same thing, bruh.   That as long as you refuse, or cannot,  "be bothered" to get to know any women who are not objectively "10's," you are missing out.    To compound your problems, you ALSO won't try to get to know the hot supermodels that you need (or you are "settling") because you won't take the risk of being rejected. 

Bottom line is:  you will never get to know any women because you are not interested in that.  You just want to *HAVE* a specific *THING* which, ironically, you're not even willing to work for.  

So ... you are the king of boring long redundant threads on a forum, and you probably do this on your "manosphere" and incel sites as well, where you also get a lot of support for it. 

 

Yeah.  But the majority of humans are not fixated 100% on surface qualities.   They are not all waiting for a hormonal explosion in order to know another person.   That's why you will see many average or below average looking people happily paired up with normal looking ones:  because THEY LIKED THE PERSON.  And clearly there was physical attraction as well, but generally that came about over time.  No, they were not "settling," they fell for a PERSON.  

You are uniquely superficial.  

Notice its only you talking about so called 10"s, not me. Quite frankly I find it amusing how "I must get to know people" yet they make zero effort to get to know me, which I accept by the way. As for missing out, what am I missing out on exactly? Again you are the only person talking about supermodels, not me.  Everyone around me either married or dating people they find attractive.

Sure people are not fixated on surface qualities, just those who have them will always get more attention and by virtue more choice, do you agree? Generally, ah so its not certain, OK fine but then when a person does that its apparently cruel to do so, so which is it? 

I do not buy into "fell for the person" without any initial physical attraction which drew them to the person. Note the word "initial". Its laughable because I spent years and years going on OLD dates with people I did not find attractive but went anyway in the hope in the person they may be more attractive even from a conversational point of view. Equally how many attractive people swiped on me and gave me the same opportunity....the answer is zero. One sided much?

Again its just how it works and I accept that.

Again you seem to imply its possible to become attractive with poor levels of attraction, I am sure it might be but that depends on the level of the choice the other person has, again I have tried this David and Goliath battle many times, be it going against more successful, better looking, more confident and you know what I admire people who do this but its like going into a battle with a tank using a knife. Its a lovely romantic idea that the awkward shy guy lands up with the attractive confident lady but in reality how often does that happen? 

As for surface qualities, I like someone who communicates well, has confidence, is educated, can talk on a variety of topics, is employed and has some ambition. Hardly surface qualities. Its very attractive when communication flows well.

I've asked myself many times why I even bother, its simple there are people I have met which I have really wanted to spend time with and get to know a lot better. The irony is guys around me go with the view of hooking up and I go with the view of getting to know the person if i find them attractive, my method fails every single time and theirs, seems to work much better....the proviso is they are much more attractive than me.

 

[NuevoYorko]

1 hour ago, ZA Dater said:

Quite frankly I find it amusing how "I must get to know people" yet they make zero effort to get to know me,

That's "amusing"?   I don't see anyone else whining and complaining about their plight for thousands of pages over a whole decade on a relationship advice forum.  That's you.   I have a feeling that the other people, though they haven't been interested in getting to know YOU,  have got to know plenty of other people and that's why they are not reaching the astounding record of self pity postings that you have accomplished.

1 hour ago, ZA Dater said:

 

Sure people are not fixated on surface qualities, just those who have them will always get more attention and by virtue more choice, do you agree?

Of course.  Who cares?  Oh yeah - you.   It's another great topic for self pity - all the wonderful choices good looking, smart, socially engaged, interesting, caring people have and you do not.   Well ... you could learn or grow, but we all know that you draw a hard line between yourself and those things.  

1 hour ago, ZA Dater said:

I do not buy into "fell for the person" without any initial physical attraction which drew them to the person.

So those of us who have shared here ... even within the most recent dozen or so pages - that we have had those experiences are liars?  

OK.  

 

 

[basil67]

3 hours ago, ZA Dater said:

I do not buy into "fell for the person" without any initial physical attraction which drew them to the person.

I agree with @NuevoYorko.   I've shared this story about my own life and you thank me for telling a positive dating story.  Then you go call me a liar!  

What the F is wrong with you????   

[NuevoYorko]

1 hour ago, basil67 said:

I agree with @NuevoYorko.   I've shared this story about my own life and you thank me for telling a positive dating story.  Then you go call me a liar!  

What the F is wrong with you????   

I think it's because the OP doesn't even recognize that people are multidimensional.  Since this concept does not exist for him it's impossible to conceive of becoming enchanted by another person because of who they are, which we discovered by being around them.   Not by "trying" to become attracted.  

If you think of a person as a *thing* there is nothing more to discover once you've either liked or disliked the external packaging.  

It's ironic, in a way, because suddenly "noticing" the pretty girl or the shy guy who was "there all along" is a trope that plays a part in dozens of movies, shows and literature. 

This would not be the case if it were not a regular, easy to identify with occurrence   

 

 

Edited June 5 by NuevoYorko

[basil67]

3 minutes ago, NuevoYorko said:

I think it's because the OP doesn't even recognize that people are multidimensional.  Since this concept does not exist for him it's impossible to conceive of becoming enchanted by another person because of who they are, which we discovered by being around them.   Not by "trying" to become attracted.  

If you think of a person as a *thing* there is nothing more to discover once you've either liked or disliked the external packaging.  

It's ironic, in a way, because suddenly "noticing" the pretty girl or the shy guy who was "there all along" is a trope that plays a part in dozens of movies, shows and literature. 

This would not be the case if it were not a regular, easy to identify with occurrence   

This makes a lot of sense. 

I get that OP is neuro diverse and doesn't experience attraction like we do.  But what I don't understand is why he keeps coming for advice from people who he believes are full of s***

[Gaeta]

15 minutes ago, basil67 said:

 

I get that OP is neuro diverse and doesn't experience attraction like we do.  But what I don't understand is why he keeps coming for advice from people who he believes are full of s***

The answer is in the question.

[basil67]

1 hour ago, Gaeta said:

The answer is in the question.

Actually.....yeah.  And the worst thing is that we're enabling it

[ExpatInItaly]

71 pages of this?

And it's mostly just the same thing, page after page after page. 

[ZA Dater]

7 hours ago, basil67 said:

I agree with @NuevoYorko.   I've shared this story about my own life and you thank me for telling a positive dating story.  Then you go call me a liar!  

What the F is wrong with you????   

So you found nothing physically attractive at all about your partner when you met him? 

[basil67]

12 minutes ago, ZA Dater said:

So you found nothing physically attractive at all about your partner when you met him? 

Have I not been consistent about how my attraction works in the entirety of the time I've been here?   Or do you just ignore everything I write?

[ZA Dater]

7 hours ago, NuevoYorko said:

I think it's because the OP doesn't even recognize that people are multidimensional.  Since this concept does not exist for him it's impossible to conceive of becoming enchanted by another person because of who they are, which we discovered by being around them.   Not by "trying" to become attracted.  

If you think of a person as a *thing* there is nothing more to discover once you've either liked or disliked the external packaging.  

It's ironic, in a way, because suddenly "noticing" the pretty girl or the shy guy who was "there all along" is a trope that plays a part in dozens of movies, shows and literature. 

This would not be the case if it were not a regular, easy to identify with occurrence   

 

 

This really is frankly amazing. I've spent year's and year's on dating site's and you tell me people are multi dimensional and you know attraction is not all physical and you know it's about getting to know the person and developing deeper attraction, I might agree with some of this.

The reality is dating sites don't work like that, you swipe based on pure superficial attraction, nobody gives chances, why would they if a better more superficially attractive person is  a swipe away? 

There are no chances there, flip if there were maybe I'd have actually gone out with people I actually found physically attractive. 

Go to a bar or a club, can you honestly tell me less attractive people get the same degree of interest based on "well let's see if there is more to them and maybe a deeper attraction".

I'll go so far as to say I'd hope you are right, I simply have not ever seen any of this, everytime I've tried I've been passed over immediately for better option's, again that's fine.

When I started out I believed in all you describe, 25 years later experience has meant I believe in basically none of it. A good example is every single person I wanted to get to know rejected me, where was that "oh let's get to know him"?

If the world works as you describe why absolutely total rejection all the time? I suppose you'll blame me rather than concede it's actually not perfect and not everyone experiences what you do.

I'm ok with being thrown on the trash dump, people must choose the best option for them so thats find but let's not pretend physical appearance does not feature on that list of requirements.

What's even more amazing is the more I try the worse the results are so actually it's been better to just assume nobody I'm interested in is interested.

Edited June 6 by ZA Dater

[ZA Dater]

1 minute ago, basil67 said:

Have I not been consistent about how my attraction works in the entirety of the time I've been here?   Or do you just ignore everything I write?

My question remains the same. There must have been some degree of physical attraction, that's my point,  few unless they are sapiosexual will completely discount physical attraction.

[basil67]

8 minutes ago, ZA Dater said:

My question remains the same. There must have been some degree of physical attraction, that's my point,  few unless they are sapiosexual will completely discount physical attraction.

No, I can't say there was initial physical attraction.  But he was fun, very social, great company, easy to talk with.  And by the end of the evening, I took him to the bedroom.  And no I'm not sapiosexual.  Rather, I'm attracted to the kind of man who's interesting, has a sense of humour which vibes with mine, is social, employable, progressive and well groomed

For what it's worth, I was bored on the bus recently and I looked at the men while killing time.  I decided that if they were neat and tidy, I would have given any of them a chance if the personality clicked.

 

Edited June 6 by basil67

[Gebidozo]

20 hours ago, ZA Dater said:

A very nice story, thanks for sharing. I guess we are all fundamentally different in what draws us to people. As I have said many times, someone can be superficially attractive and still be overall unattractive to me, I have met quite a few people like that. Its good to read success stories.

 

Err… I think you’ve missed my point again, as you usually do.

My point is that my initial attraction to the love of my life was only partly based on her physical appearance. It was based on physical attraction, together with other types of attraction - spiritual, intellectual, and so on. It was a process of deep chemistry growing out of the initial spark, and that spark was not based on some silly pre-conceived notions of height or waist size.

In your case, all you talk about is physical appearance and some other equally superficial pre-conceived notions, which are not the gateway to deeper attraction at all.

Do you understand?

[basil67]

10 minutes ago, ZA Dater said:

Go to a bar or a club, can you honestly tell me less attractive people get the same degree of interest based on "well let's see if there is more to them and maybe a deeper attraction".

I actually asked my husband about this.  I said, "So there's this guy on LS and he gets mad about leagues.  Have you ever discounted approaching a woman because she's out of your league?"   And he thought and replied "Oh yeah, sometimes I'd be at a pub and see a stunner and think WOW and then realise that I'm not in her league and I look at the other women there"  

I've read a number of women who identify as very attractive who say that they don't get approached as much as their friends do.  Perhaps they have 'resting sour face' or the guys just automatically discount themselves and go for their own level.  I don't know what's actually happening.  But I do believe them.

[Gebidozo]

12 hours ago, ZA Dater said:

I do not buy into "fell for the person" without any initial physical attraction which drew them to the person.

Physical attraction is not what you think it is. It’s not correspondence to some physical appearance requirements, it’s not scoring enough points on a quiz. It’s a sensation that arises naturally, spontaneously, and mostly mutually, and when it’s intertwined and pretty much is inseparable from other types of attraction, then it really becomes attraction in general, liking a person, having feeling for a person, and eventually loving a person.

[ZA Dater]

18 minutes ago, Gebidozo said:

Err… I think you’ve missed my point again, as you usually do.

My point is that my initial attraction to the love of my life was only partly based on her physical appearance. It was based on physical attraction, together with other types of attraction - spiritual, intellectual, and so on. It was a process of deep chemistry growing out of the initial spark, and that spark was not based on some silly pre-conceived notions of height or waist size.

In your case, all you talk about is physical appearance and some other equally superficial pre-conceived notions, which are not the gateway to deeper attraction at all.

Do you understand?

I agree with you but again it was partly based on appearance. Someone who is not physically attractive to me would not interest me irrespective of what other qualities they may have, yes this is harsh but it's the standard upon which I am judged. And no they do not need to be a model to be physically attractive.

Deeper attraction, again one would need to experience that and I have not.

[ZA Dater]

7 minutes ago, Gebidozo said:

Physical attraction is not what you think it is. It’s not correspondence to some physical appearance requirements, it’s not scoring enough points on a quiz. It’s a sensation that arises naturally, spontaneously, and mostly mutually, and when it’s intertwined and pretty much is inseparable from other types of attraction, then it really becomes attraction in general, liking a person, having feeling for a person, and eventually loving a person.

I do not disagree, in fact I agree totally. You seen to think I have some sort of checklist, I really do not! If anything I acutely know what I do not find attractive.

[basil67]

deleted

 

Edited June 6 by basil67

[semble]

45 minutes ago, ZA Dater said:

Someone who is not physically attractive to me would not interest me irrespective of what other qualities they may have,

You don't need to defend your decision to only try to date women who are attractive to you. I'm the same way.

That much being said, given your abysmal record, you need to accept that those women who you are attracted to will never be interested in you, and the sooner you figure it out and stop chasing your tail the better off you will be in the long run.

Try a new hobby or something.

[FredEire]

27 minutes ago, semble said:

You don't need to defend your decision to only try to date women who are attractive to you. I'm the same way.

That much being said, given your abysmal record, you need to accept that those women who you are attracted to will never be interested in you, and the sooner you figure it out and stop chasing your tail the better off you will be in the long run.

Try a new hobby or something.

Not everyone is blessed with good looks, and nowadays an attractive woman has more options than ever. It's not easy to find a partner.

But it's the fact that OP is coming from a place of extreme self-pity and floor level confidence that is a little bit irritating. Very few women are going to be attracted to that. If he was really doing his very best in every department and still had no success I'd have a lot more sympathy.

The thing he continually misses is confidence and vulnerability breeds success, not the other way round. It's like trying to go fishing with your bare hands.

Edited June 6 by FredEire