Skip to main content

General O/T Chit Chat Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Bluefin said:
I think I understand where you're coming from. The argument is no different to walking into a bar (for example) regarding judgment of looks and subsequently who someone is or isn't willing to talk to as a result. The point is in getting an initial match (numbers game) and assessing from there.
Click to expand...

That's actually a bit different. That is more a group situation rather than a relationship scenario.

That takes into account proximity / similarity, the setting of the bar, etc[DOUBLEPOST=1423974359][/DOUBLEPOST]
mutleyp said:
Well you aren't reading what we are saying very well then
Click to expand...

I am reading very well what you are all saying and I don't believe it.
 
JordanS said:
That's actually a bit different. That is more a group situation rather than a relationship scenario.

That takes into account proximity / similarity, the setting of the bar, etc[DOUBLEPOST=1423974359][/DOUBLEPOST]

I am reading very well what you are all saying and I don't believe it.
Click to expand...

I never said good looking people have shit personalities though...
 
mutleyp said:
I never said good looking people have shit personalities though...
Click to expand...

What was initially stated was why people don't go for personality over looks (hooleydooley wrote about that). The way I see it, looks is more worth going for and if the relationship doesn't work, it doesn't work. You move onto the next until you find your perfect partner. I would never go for someone first based on their personality.
 
JordanS said:
What was initially stated was why people don't go for personality over looks (hooleydooley wrote about that). The way I see it, looks is more worth going for and if the relationship doesn't work, it doesn't work. You move onto the next until you find your perfect partner. I would never go for someone first based on their personality.
Click to expand...

I didn't say that though, I said that someone can become more attractive/less attractive due to personality, and for a relationship, that becomes more important, there is a difference in statements there
 
I think the thing is, @JordanS, you're far too black and white sometimes. Life is all about the grey areas. What I'm gathering from what you're saying, it sounds as though you wouldn't even consider bothering to talk to someone if they weren't physically "attractive" which is actually ridiculous. You can't just avoid people because they don't adhere to some fantastical criteria. You're going to struggle to find this love you so apparently desire if you're not at least open to meeting a wide variety of people. You're not wrong in saying that physical attraction is necessary, but it can be found in people you least suspect. But that all comes with experience, of which you've had none, so I don't blame you for having these sorts of views. In all honesty though you seem to be describing lust more than love.

Also, @Bluefin is right: a bar is pretty much exactly the same as Tinder and whatnot. A bit different, yes, but I don't really understand your reasoning behind why they're different.
 
Interesting, quick read @JordonS Seems to assume love in the context of relationships. Love is possible without relationships, but there was no description of that love. Maybe it implies, it's not love if there's no relationship?

Maslow also makes a point. Sometimes people seek love to fulfill their imperfect selves - in order to feel whole, connected, valued etc. To satiate needs they're unable to otherwise meet through their own resources. Maslow's point - only at self actualization is a person capable of love. Why? Because they don't 'need' it, but may like to have it. I know people probably won't agree with this. And that's OK. Everyone applies their own shade to things. :)
 
iJake said:
I think the thing is, @JordanS, you're far too black and white sometimes. Life is all about the grey areas. What I'm gathering from what you're saying, it sounds as though you wouldn't even consider bothering to talk to someone if they weren't physically "attractive" which is actually ridiculous. You can't just avoid people because they don't adhere to some fantastical criteria. You're going to struggle to find this love you so apparently desire if you're not at least open to meeting a wide variety of people. You're not wrong in saying that physical attraction is necessary, but it can be found in people you least suspect.

Also, @Bluefin is right: a bar is pretty much exactly the same as Tinder and whatnot. A bit different, yes, but I don't really understand your reasoning behind why they're different.
Click to expand...

Okay, I will address both things that I have bolded in your statement:

(1) If you don't find someone physically attractive, I believe the relationship won't work. My view on things. The reasoning I wouldn't talk to someone who isn't physically attractive as a possible relationship is because there are so many components to a relationship that require physical attractiveness. Let me ask you this: would you sexually desire someone who is not physically attractive to you? It definitely wouldn't work for me.

(2) Some differences I can highlight is online vs real life scenario and also the general atmosphere of the bar. I will bring some Psychology into this once again: if you were to enter a bar and had a bad view about the bar, you are more likely to form a bad impression of the people inside the bar.
 
Bluefin said:
Maslow also makes a point. Sometimes people seek love to fulfill their imperfect selves - in order to feel whole, connected, valued etc. To satiate needs they're unable to otherwise meet through their own resources. Maslow's point - only at self actualization is a person capable of love. Why? Because they don't 'need' it, but may like to have it. I know people probably won't agree with this. And that's OK. Everyone applies their own shade to things. :)
Click to expand...

tumblr_mved1iKomo1qlvwnco1_r1_400.gif
 
Bluefin said:
Interesting, quick read @JordonS Seems to assume love in the context of relationships. Love is possible without relationships, but there was no description of that love. Maybe it implies, it's not love if there's no relationship?

Maslow also makes a point. Sometimes people seek love to fulfill their imperfect selves - in order to feel whole, connected, valued etc. To satiate needs they're unable to otherwise meet through their own resources. Maslow's point - only at self actualization is a person capable of love. Why? Because they don't 'need' it, but may like to have it. I know people probably won't agree with this. And that's OK. Everyone applies their own shade to things. :)
Click to expand...

The triangle is very interesting with the component of Intimacy, Passion and Commitment. The best love definitely involves all 3 of these. 2 of these things can make a relationship work it seems but 1 will not work at all.
 
JordanS said:
Okay, I will address both things that I have bolded in your statement:

(1) If you don't find someone physically attractive, I believe the relationship won't work. My view on things. The reasoning I wouldn't talk to someone who isn't physically attractive as a possible relationship is because there are so many components to a relationship that require physical attractiveness. Let me ask you this: would you sexually desire someone who is not physically attractive to you? It definitely wouldn't work for me.

(2) Some differences I can highlight is online vs real life scenario and also the general atmosphere of the bar. I will bring some Psychology into this once again: if you were to enter a bar and had a bad view about the bar, you are more likely to form a bad impression of the people inside the bar.
Click to expand...

What components are there apart from sex? And physical attraction is a broad spectrum. That's my point at the end of the day. I understand where you're coming from at the point in life that you're at, but take it from me and everyone else who have had more experience that it's a failed method. I too used to have very strict ideas of what I found attractive, and do you know how far that got me? Not very. It wasn't until I factored in a lot more than just looks that things blossomed, and as @mutleyp has said, people become more physically attractive the more you get to know them on other levels. That's some proven psychology for you too. At the end of the day, you can have your views, but if you're not willing to put time and effort into people, you're not going to get what you want. One of my pet peeves is people complaining about not finding "love" when they seem to do everything in their power to avoid it.

Well yes, okay, atmosphere is one, but I think certain apps and websites have a bad "atmosphere" and therefore feel wary of people on them, so again there isn't so much of a difference outside of physically being there.
 
JordanS said:
The triangle is very interesting with the component of Intimacy, Passion and Commitment. The best love definitely involves all 3 of these. 2 of these things can make a relationship work it seems but 1 will not work at all.
Click to expand...

I can give you a real life example of this, I met someone who I thought was cute, but never saw them more than that, then I got to know them and my desire for them, because of who they were at the time, increased a lot, because who they are is beautiful, so they became even more beautiful. Even with my current partner, there was obvious physical attraction, but would I said he is the most attractive person I have ever encountered? no, would I be for him? no, but the connection we have has made him in my eyes almost flawless, despite of what he thinks, and vice versa, I have body image issues, I have some scars on my body (completely unrelated so I won't go into that) which are significant and I am embarrassed by, to the point I will hide them at cost, because of the connection we had, I had no shame in him seeing them, and do you wanna know what he said? "That is one of the most beautiful things about you, don't ever let anyone make you think otherwise", now if either of us were just there because of physical attraction, these things wouldn't happen. There are more to relationships than pure physicality, they fade, what one person considers a flaw can be what attracts someone else, so yes it plays a part, but when it comes to anything long term, to base it on that, it won't last. This is my experience
 
Last edited:
What I find physically attractive and what you all find physical attractive could be two different things though.

Even though the relationship may be influenced by personality, my point still stands that looks is the most important part and is the driving factor to starting a relationship. I found another very interesting link for you @iJake which can give you some ideas of attraction bias' and how the Tinder/Pub scenario is different.

http://allpsych.com/psychology101/attribution_attraction/#.VOAcUi7KiHk

Enjoy :D
 
JordanS said:
What I find physically attractive and what you all find physical attractive could be two different things though.

Even though the relationship may be influenced by personality, my point still stands that looks is the most important part and is the driving factor to starting a relationship. I found another very interesting link for you @iJake which can give you some ideas of attraction bias' and how the Tinder/Pub scenario is different.

http://allpsych.com/psychology101/attribution_attraction/#.VOAcUi7KiHk

Enjoy :D
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone here is actually disputing physical attractiveness is an initiator
 
hooleydooley said:
I never understand why people make what they 'prefer' to be what they look for, as in looks! ...... I feel it is about the soul....... I am sure I am right here, but then again ugly is ugly, but as long as you click and share common interests ..... Go on looks alone - a disappointment.
There are always paper bags ......... and imagination ..... and crayons .....
Click to expand...

@mutleyp : to me, this sounds like there is belief that looks shouldn't be the initiating factor.
 
JordanS said:
What I find physically attractive and what you all find physical attractive could be two different things though.

Even though the relationship may be influenced by personality, my point still stands that looks is the most important part and is the driving factor to starting a relationship. I found another very interesting link for you @iJake which can give you some ideas of attraction bias' and how the Tinder/Pub scenario is different.

http://allpsych.com/psychology101/attribution_attraction/#.VOAcUi7KiHk

Enjoy :D
Click to expand...

What I find physically attractive and what you find physically attractive is irrelevant. It's the amount of worth you're placing on said physical attraction. And nobody, not even @hooleydooley, said that looks shouldn't be an initiating factor. All she was saying was that going on looks alone leads to disappointment, as is what everyone else has said. The thing is though, you haven't just said that looks are important to begin with—you've said that they're the most important factor overall, which is very different.

Also that article doesn't really dispute my point at all, least of all because a lot of the source material is from pre-internet times. In fact, it says: "Physical attraction plays a role in who we choose as friends, although not as much so as in who we choose as a mate" which sort of goes against what you're saying.
 
iJake said:
What I find physically attractive and what you find physically attractive is irrelevant. It's the amount of worth you're placing on said physical attraction. And nobody, not even @hooleydooley, said that looks shouldn't be an initiating factor. All she was saying was that going on looks alone leads to disappointment, as is what everyone else has said. The thing is though, you haven't just said that looks are important to begin with—you've said that they're the most important factor overall, which is very different.

Also that article doesn't really dispute my point at all, least of all because a lot of the source material is from pre-internet times. In fact, it says: "Physical attraction plays a role in who we choose as friends, although not as much so as in who we choose as a mate" which sort of goes against what you're saying.
Click to expand...

That is a pretty big assumption, isn't it? You are basically assuming that every case is the same as one another. A person with high physical attractiveness could be the most absolutely gem that you ever meet. It is not right to say that it would lead to disappointment when they could be the most lovely person out there.

Also, it says this: "This last statement brings up an important factor in how we determine our friends and partner. Ever wonder why very attractive people tend to ‘hang around’ other very attractive people?........ There is some truth to these stereotypical scenarios because we tend to assign “social assets” or “attraction points” to everyone we meet." This goes a bit against what you are saying.
 
JordanS said:
That is a pretty big assumption, isn't it? You are basically assuming that every case is the same as one another. A person with high physical attractiveness could be the most absolutely gem that you ever meet. It is not right to say that it would lead to disappointment when they could be the most lovely person out there.
Click to expand...

Just out of curiosity and obviously feel free to answer or not answer, but what has been the longest relationship you have been in?
 
mutleyp said:
Just out of curiosity and obviously feel free to answer or not answer, but what has been the longest relationship you have been in?
Click to expand...

I don't feel this is relevant to the argument that is presented. You can't assume that a highly physically attractive person is the worst person out for relationships. It is a generalization which is not true.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top