IF they didnt like me before Mentality
Replies
-
All of you = (coefficient1 x mental) + (coefficient2 x physical)
Since everyone is impressed/perplexed by your math, I think it's only fair to point out that your function is misspecified. You have "all of you" specified as an additive seperable function of "mental" and "physical." Clearly, ones mental aspects can be affected by his/her physical appearance - lack of confidence, etc. and ones physical appearance can be affected by his/her mental make up. Please provide a more accurate model of "all of you" in future posts.0 -
It's very hard to put a number on it, but yes, my expectation is that I will realise as quickly as possible that I am compatible emotionally with a woman (by the 3rd date), and achieve a connection that would take months to achieve with other people.
Interestingly (and horrifyingly at the same time), your question can then become: "If I haven't had sex by the 3rd date, is it worth pursuing the relationship as that means I'm not getting a fast connection with the person, fast connection that I could certainly achieve by going for another man?".
So as you get more experienced, faster sex means often that you've achieved an emotional connection faster with the person, this is desirable... And following that principle, you should screen all the men with who you don't want to have sex that early.
I don't agree but I do enjoy reading your thoughts on the issue.
My point is that you have elevated that to a point he has to strive to attain only upon satisfying all your personal qualifiers.
That is where it becomes selfish (sorry to put it that way but don`t know any other) because you or anyone else have now elevated a want of yours above anything the other party does.
Accept a guys desires and deal with them but also don`t consider your own to be sacred.
It is a two way street.
Of course it is a two-way street! I don't disagree. But sex is something extremely risky (emotionally risky and risky to your body) and important (at least to me), so in the beginning, I think getting to know each other's personality is tantamount over sex. And if a guy can't accept that, well I'm not going to want to explore a relationship with him further - but it doesn't mean I am selfish.
That is my point,you have made that act a be all and end all thing.
I am not saying you should compromise that but understand in doing so you have restricted the dating pool and no it does not make all guys who are not looking for that pond scum.
Of course follow the path you are comfortable with but don`t be surprised by the outcome.
It doesn't make them pond scum but someone like that is someone I will never date. 0 -
It's very hard to put a number on it, but yes, my expectation is that I will realise as quickly as possible that I am compatible emotionally with a woman (by the 3rd date), and achieve a connection that would take months to achieve with other people.
Interestingly (and horrifyingly at the same time), your question can then become: "If I haven't had sex by the 3rd date, is it worth pursuing the relationship as that means I'm not getting a fast connection with the person, fast connection that I could certainly achieve by going for another man?".
So as you get more experienced, faster sex means often that you've achieved an emotional connection faster with the person, this is desirable... And following that principle, you should screen all the men with who you don't want to have sex that early.
I don't agree but I do enjoy reading your thoughts on the issue.My point is that you have elevated that to a point he has to strive to attain only upon satisfying all your personal qualifiers.
That is where it becomes selfish (sorry to put it that way but don`t know any other) because you or anyone else have now elevated a want of yours above anything the other party does.
Accept a guys desires and deal with them but also don`t consider your own to be sacred.
It is a two way street.
Of course it is a two-way street! I don't disagree. But sex is something extremely risky (emotionally risky and risky to your body) and important (at least to me), so in the beginning, I think getting to know each other's personality is tantamount over sex. And if a guy can't accept that, well I'm not going to want to explore a relationship with him further - but it doesn't mean I am selfish.
That is my point,you have made that act a be all and end all thing.
I am not saying you should compromise that but understand in doing so you have restricted the dating pool and no it does not make all guys who are not looking for that pond scum.
Of course follow the path you are comfortable with but don`t be surprised by the outcome.
It doesn't make them pond scum but someone like that is someone I will never date.
Then understand and accept the reality of the world you choose and never complain about it.
We all make life what it is,sometimes the choices are pushed on us and others truly as we see fit.0 -
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
Since everyone is impressed/perplexed by your math, I think it's only fair to point out that your function is misspecified. You have "all of you" specified as an additive seperable function of "mental" and "physical." Clearly, ones mental aspects can be affected by his/her physical appearance - lack of confidence, etc. and ones physical appearance can be affected by his/her mental make up. Please provide a more accurate model of "all of you" in future posts.All of you = (coefficient1 x mental) + (coefficient2 x physical)0 -
All of you = (coefficient1 x mental) + (coefficient2 x physical)
Since everyone is impressed/perplexed by your math, I think it's only fair to point out that your function is misspecified. You have "all of you" specified as an additive seperable function of "mental" and "physical." Clearly, ones mental aspects can be affected by his/her physical appearance - lack of confidence, etc. and ones physical appearance can be affected by his/her mental make up. Please provide a more accurate model of "all of you" in future posts.
:laugh: What fun this forum has become over the weekend, when I wasn't looking...
Florian, I can see how you misunderstood what I was trying to say, so think I should clarify - my apologies for failing to express myself clearly. Of course one's body is part of "all of you". The point I was trying to make is that if someone is attracted by your personality, and perhaps thinks you are 'pretty/cute' when you are heavier, but does not make a move/express an interest solely because of your weight/physique, then I'm not at all sure that person is a wise choice of partner if, when you are smaller/more toned etc, they then express a romantic interest. That, to me, suggests that they are primarily concerned with either, or both, the physical elements of a person, or how you make them look to the outside world, neither of which is, in my opinion, a satisfactory basis for a long-term relationship.
From my perspective, and it is only that, the goal is to find someone who is at least as attracted, if not more so, by the things that make you 'you', and are likely to remain reasonably constant - for me, intellect, personality, character - as by the purely physical elements of who you are, which will change, come hell or high water, with time. Ideally a 60-40 balance at the absolute least. Call it an insurance policy if you like - say I gain weight with having children and don't miraculously snap back to my pre-baby body a la your average 's'leb', I want to know that my husband is primarily attracted to me by more than the sum of my physical parts, because that makes him less likely to disappear off with the next nubile young thing who crosses his path. I wonder if we are essentially coming at this question from different angles, with your ideas focused on short-term relationships/dating scenarios, and my theories being related to long-term relationships/marriage? Inevitably, these scenarios (scenarii?!)have different priorities, or at least I hope they do. Perhaps I am misunderstanding you as well.
Let me ask you this: Which is more important to you in choosing a wife/long-term partner? Of course, the ideal, the fairytale, is to have all of this to the utmost degree in one person, but if you had to prioritise one thing above the other.... A compatible, stimulating partnership with someone you respect and enjoy spending time with in a variety of situations, or an attractive body/face that's great fun in bed, and enhances your social cachet?0 -
I want both, everyone always end up with both or end up breaking up.Let me ask you this: Which is more important to you in choosing a wife/long-term partner? Of course, the ideal, the fairytale, is to have all of this to the utmost degree in one person, but if you had to prioritise one thing above the other.... A compatible, stimulating partnership with someone you respect and enjoy spending time with in a variety of situations, or an attractive body/face that's great fun in bed, and enhances your social cachet?
But you're doing it wrong here: "an attractive body/face that's great fun in bed, and enhances your social cachet" should be "a body/face you find attractive and enjoy hugging/kissing". Why would you care about what other people think? Are you really that shallow?
The point is you want to be attracted physically. That is all I am saying. This is nothing revolutionary. I'm not saying that you want someone young, slim and beautiful on your arm, I'm saying you want to be attracted to your partner. The guy in OP's case was clearly not attracted to her in the beginning. Are we saying that OP has suddenly become "fun in bed and enhances the social cachet" of people who've got her on their arm? I very much doubt it.
All I'm basically saying is:
- You want to be reasonably attracted to your man physically (it is fairly quick normally to tell),
- You want to be reasonably compatible with your man emotionally (this takes more time).
Not the utmost degree, just enough so that it doesn't cost you to compromise.
Now, if your question is: if everyone was born with an equal amount of intelligence and beauty (5 out of 10 in both), and you have 5 spare points you can then put in one or the other, where would you put it? I'd probably do "Intelligence:8 beauty:7".
And while all intelligent people don't expect the body to be the same at 40 y.o. than at 20 y.o., one still expects (and assumes) a reasonable level of "maintenance". I mean that the partner shouldn't change "fundamentally". And if they do, let's be honest, it's often because of mental issues (+400lbs because of depression for example).0 -
I want both, everyone always end up with both or end up breaking up.Let me ask you this: Which is more important to you in choosing a wife/long-term partner? Of course, the ideal, the fairytale, is to have all of this to the utmost degree in one person, but if you had to prioritise one thing above the other.... A compatible, stimulating partnership with someone you respect and enjoy spending time with in a variety of situations, or an attractive body/face that's great fun in bed, and enhances your social cachet?
But you're doing it wrong here: "an attractive body/face that's great fun in bed, and enhances your social cachet" should be "a body/face you find attractive and enjoy hugging/kissing". Why would you care about what other people think? Are you really that shallow?
The point is you want to be attracted physically. That is all I am saying. This is nothing revolutionary. I'm not saying that you want someone young, slim and beautiful on your arm, I'm saying you want to be attracted to your partner. The guy in OP's case was clearly not attracted to her in the beginning. Are we saying that OP has suddenly become "fun in bed and enhances the social cachet" of people who've got her on their arm? I very much doubt it.
All I'm basically saying is:
- You want to be reasonably attracted to your man physically (it is fairly quick normally to tell),
- You want to be reasonably compatible with your man emotionally (this takes more time).
Not the utmost degree, just enough so that it doesn't cost you to compromise.
Now, if your question is: if everyone was born with an equal amount of intelligence and beauty (5 out of 10 in both), and you have 5 spare points you can then put in one or the other, where would you put it? I'd probably do "Intelligence:8 beauty:7".
And while all intelligent people don't expect the body to be the same at 40 y.o. than at 20 y.o., one still expects (and assumes) a reasonable level of "maintenance". I mean that the partner shouldn't change "fundamentally". And if they do, let's be honest, it's often because of mental issues (+400lbs because of depression for example).
OK, most of that we can agree on :laugh: I didn't read the OP's question as specifying whether the person was 'liked' or not pre-weight loss, I'm just suggesting that if someone's only reason for not dating someone they otherwise would have been interested in is excess weight, that may not make them a great option for a post-weightloss partner!But you're doing it wrong here: "an attractive body/face that's great fun in bed, and enhances your social cachet" should be "a body/face you find attractive and enjoy hugging/kissing". Why would you care about what other people think? Are you really that shallow?
Exactly my point - if someone only cares about the body that's stereotypically highly 'appealing' in bed, and looks 'good' on their arm in the eyes of the world, they're not a great option for anyone!0 -
I really don`t get why this is even a discussion.
Platonic relationships occur every day,they are based on mutual interests,likes,compatible personalities and such.
They are not restricted by gender preference or physical attraction.
It is called friendship.
A romantic relationship always has the added element of physical attraction,it is in fact where it starts.
Nothing will ever change that fact.
If a person dramatically changes any aspect of their physical appearance it is to be expected that others will regard them differently and that goes for both positive and negative changes.
One can not unwrite basic human emotions simply because we don`t like things about them.0 -
there's a world of difference from thinking that one's appearance may be improved and one's dating pool widened by weight loss and believing that being larger makes one inherently unattractive.
Help me understand the difference, because to me the statements are saying the same thing from a man's eyes. Yes, I can be attracted to a man based on his personality, but 9 times out of 10 it seems that men are asking the woman out based on physical attractiveness and then getting to know her. So to me, if the dating pool is widened by weight loss, it's the same thing as saying being larger makes one unattractive (to the demographic you want attracted to you- virile, successful, single men, lol).
This doesn’t mean overweight makes someone ugly or untouchable. But it’s like the race thing I always allude to: I can pretend that my ethnicity doesn’t impact the people who are attracted to me, but a lot of guys aren’t interested in a dark-skinned woman. Of those who are, many don’t like the idea of that woman being black. I have those experiences I’ve shared with you of men liking me until they found out that I was reared black and identify with that culture (thought technically I don’t really know my bloodline). Getting mad about it doesn’t change it. Pretending that’s not an issue doesn’t change it. Like with my weight, I find that I get more peace just accepting it and not taking rejection so personally like I used to.0 -
All I'm basically saying is:
- You want to be reasonably attracted to your man physically (it is fairly quick normally to tell),
- You want to be reasonably compatible with your man emotionally (this takes more time).
Not the utmost degree, just enough so that it doesn't cost you to compromise.
Exactly. I’ve worked with couples who married out of convenience or weren’t attracted to their mate and fell into that “marry your best friend, looks don’t matter” trap. A decade or two later, it does matter (PM me and I’ll explain more).
Looks aren’t the most important thing to everyone. I’m most physically attracted to the tall buff guys where just sitting around them I feel very feminine. If you asked me right now to pick any 5 guys in my life that I wish would ask me out (IRL + online), 4 of the 5 are thinner, short guys. Why? Because the personality is more important to me long-term than the looks.0
This discussion has been closed.