Attraction Question
j_wilson2012
Posts: 293
in Chit-Chat
Hello. I have a question. I am not a religious buff. I want to get opinions on this question: Do you believe in Natural Selection? The theory suggests that a person will choose a relatively attractive person to be with, because their kids will look great too. I know the old cliche:"Its what is on the inside that counts." But do you really want the nicest, smoothest guy if he looks like McLovin? Sex appeal is a greater factor in relationships these days, as premarital sex runs rampant.
I believe that if the sex attraction is not there anymore, the relationship is dead. We are mammals, it is natural. Science proves that better looking and fit people do better in life because it speaks volumes about their personality, and other people see that. What do you believe? In addition, do you believe in the scale theory (noone can date higher than their 1-10 rating)? I believe it has some merit, and for various reasons.
I believe that if the sex attraction is not there anymore, the relationship is dead. We are mammals, it is natural. Science proves that better looking and fit people do better in life because it speaks volumes about their personality, and other people see that. What do you believe? In addition, do you believe in the scale theory (noone can date higher than their 1-10 rating)? I believe it has some merit, and for various reasons.
0
Replies
-
The field you are looking for is "evolutionary psychology" and, yes, sexual attraction is a big chunk of it.0
-
for sure.
I am attracted to guys with dark eyes, dark hair, olive skin. Not only can I not resist dark features, but it basically assures me that my children will not be gingers!0 -
I believe in natural selection but not the scale theory. Have you read the Selfish Gene?0
-
I absoutely believe that you need to be sexually attracted to you partner. Do people become sexier the more you get to know them? Sure. As far as the scale theory, I don't think so. Because who says he is an 8 or she is a 10? The scale will vary depending on who you ask. I may think the girl within the couple is sexier than the guy, but then someone else may disagree. And if neither can have a higher # than the other, you would have to have the same number....might make things a bit difficult....0
-
I actually agree with you, I used to feel so dis heartened by gals who basically didnt give me a thought, but looking back at old pictures, I truely do not blame them, I think we are abit more complex in this day and age, I value a girl who has a terrific personallity but attraction is a major factor in my opinion, If people really do go purely on personallity, good on them but in the real world, thats just the way it is. I know what type of girl I like, abit square, has a cool side and filled with feathers, been together 4 years me and pillowie :P0
-
I absoutely believe that you need to be sexually attracted to you partner. Do people become sexier the more you get to know them? Sure. As far as the scale theory, I don't think so. Because who says he is an 8 or she is a 10? The scale will vary depending on who you ask. I may think the girl within the couple is sexier than the guy, but then someone else may disagree. And if neither can have a higher # than the other, you would have to have the same number....might make things a bit difficult....
Lets say I am a 6, for instance. I am not attractive enough to be going into a club every saturday night and taking a flock of girls home with me. Same as a woman would not even look in my direction if I dont instigate the conversation. I have observed this firsthand. The perception is that if a 6 dates a 10, the relationship is built on false premises, because the 10 is dating at his/her comfort level, and otherwise feels insecure. The 10 knows that the 6 will not stray. It shows low confidence, and on the flip side, it is only a matter of time before the 10 gets tired of what he/she is not getting out of the relationship, i.e. good sex, being out in public comfortably, etc (noone likes the pasty white guy with man-boobs on the beach). That is where I am coming from on that.0 -
I absoutely believe that you need to be sexually attracted to you partner. Do people become sexier the more you get to know them? Sure. As far as the scale theory, I don't think so. Because who says he is an 8 or she is a 10? The scale will vary depending on who you ask. I may think the girl within the couple is sexier than the guy, but then someone else may disagree. And if neither can have a higher # than the other, you would have to have the same number....might make things a bit difficult....
Lets say I am a 6, for instance. I am not attractive enough to be going into a club every saturday night and taking a flock of girls home with me. Same as a woman would not even look in my direction if I dont instigate the conversation. I have observed this firsthand. The perception is that if a 6 dates a 10, the relationship is built on false premises, because the 10 is dating at his/her comfort level, and otherwise feels insecure. The 10 knows that the 6 will not stray. It shows low confidence, and on the flip side, it is only a matter of time before the 10 gets tired of what he/she is not getting out of the relationship, i.e. good sex, being out in public comfortably, etc (noone likes the pasty white guy with man-boobs on the beach). That is where I am coming from on that.
Well, then I think you're talking more about the insecurity levels, not physical attractiveness. You can have some smokin hot girl who has a 10 body but her self esteem be real low...which then may cause problems in the relationship, which I believe is pretty similar to what you are saying. But I don't know that the scale for attractiveness is necessarily linked to the scale for self esteem. So I don't agree with the concept of not dating someone "higher" than you.0 -
t it basically assures me that my children will not be gingers!
ಠ_ಠ0 -
Speaking as someone who does not experience sexual attraction, I'm definitely more attracted to personality than "sex appeal."
It depends on the person. For some, sex is vital to a relationship. For others, we couldn't care less about it.
:ohwell:0 -
I absoutely believe that you need to be sexually attracted to you partner. Do people become sexier the more you get to know them? Sure. As far as the scale theory, I don't think so. Because who says he is an 8 or she is a 10? The scale will vary depending on who you ask. I may think the girl within the couple is sexier than the guy, but then someone else may disagree. And if neither can have a higher # than the other, you would have to have the same number....might make things a bit difficult....
Lets say I am a 6, for instance. I am not attractive enough to be going into a club every saturday night and taking a flock of girls home with me. Same as a woman would not even look in my direction if I dont instigate the conversation. I have observed this firsthand. The perception is that if a 6 dates a 10, the relationship is built on false premises, because the 10 is dating at his/her comfort level, and otherwise feels insecure. The 10 knows that the 6 will not stray. It shows low confidence, and on the flip side, it is only a matter of time before the 10 gets tired of what he/she is not getting out of the relationship, i.e. good sex, being out in public comfortably, etc (noone likes the pasty white guy with man-boobs on the beach). That is where I am coming from on that.
Well, then I think you're talking more about the insecurity levels, not physical attractiveness. You can have some smokin hot girl who has a 10 body but her self esteem be real low...which then may cause problems in the relationship, which I believe is pretty similar to what you are saying. But I don't know that the scale for attractiveness is necessarily linked to the scale for self esteem. So I don't agree with the concept of not dating someone "higher" than you.
But doesn't physical condition/apperance kind of correlate with that confidence level? I believe this does. It is the reason that girls dress in skimpy dresses to attract a guy. If she is sporting the cottage cheese, it will not work as well.0 -
Going by your scale, Donald Trump should be 10/10 because Melania Knauss married him, OP. Or Arthur Miller for marrying Marylin Monroe. And don't tell me Monroe had low confidence.0
-
The field you are looking for is "evolutionary psychology" and, yes, sexual attraction is a big chunk of it.
Exactly. But what is sexually attractive and important to pass on to further generations is subjective.0 -
Absolutely you need to be sexually attracted to your partner. Otherwise you're basically just roommates, right? But I think that personality as well as looks contribute towards sexual attraction. My husband was everything I DIDN'T want in a guy (looks-wise) but once we got to know each other, I grew more and more attracted to him. Now I couldn't even imagine being with the type of guy I used to like.
As for the primal part, I think women look for men who they feel can protect and provide for them. That leads them towards the more dominent, strong personality types because they're not going to just fold when the going gets tough.0 -
for sure.
I am attracted to guys with dark eyes, dark hair, olive skin. Not only can I not resist dark features, but it basically assures me that my children will not be gingers!
Goodness me... do you normally blurt out whatever foolish thing is in your head? Do you understand genetics at all? :noway:
I don't think it matters much really, as soon as you open your mouth I would imagine that many men that you would like to breed with will be totally turned off by you and wouldn't 'go there' with a visa.
<Beauty is fleeting... but stupid lasts forever emoticon>0 -
I don't think you can be with someone that you don't find attractive. What certain people find attractive is subjective, though. Everyone has different tastes.
You might not be attracted to the McLovin type but somewhere out there, there is a girl (or guy) that is.0 -
Not to sound full of myself or shallow but, in regards to the majority of my past relationships, I have dated below my caliber. Initially they are very nice and they may treat me well and we get along great, but these relationships all failed. They didn't excite me as I know a significant other should. That being said, sexual attraction to a partner as well as a certain passion are indeed key in a working relationship. If your significant other is a great person but you don't feel that pull of lust towards them then I don't believe it will end well. What happens when you meet someone you do have an attraction to while in a dull, but "nice" relationship? You will be blinded by the attraction. So you should find a partner that has the full spectrum. No one is perfect, and you aren't going to find a single Megan Fox or Ryan Gosling look a-like wandering the streets (unless you're incredibly lucky), but your partner should be a perfect fit for you.0
-
And always open for interpretation. It is best to teach about the person the the look, for humanity is the only species in which the females flaunt their looks to attract the males.The field you are looking for is "evolutionary psychology" and, yes, sexual attraction is a big chunk of it.
Exactly. But what is sexually attractive and important to pass on to further generations is subjective.0 -
I watched a video on Netflix way back that was done by the Discovery channel - it was called "The Science of Sex Appeal," and they went into so many different topics, such as what makes someone attractive, voices being attractive, the sliding scale theory (I think). I think they also went into how it works for evolution/reproduction and all of that too.
It was actually pretty interesting though, I'd recommend watching!0 -
I don't think you can be with someone that you don't find attractive. What certain people find attractive is subjective, though. Everyone has different tastes.
You might not be attracted to the McLovin type but somewhere out there, there is a girl (or guy) that is.
Attraction is not limited to visual stimuli. To believe so it futile.0 -
Yes, but you're narrowing the definition of "attraction" down to physical appearance when there are definitely many more factors involved... size of territory, persistence of courting behavior, proof of certain skills and intelligence levels. If you want to compare us to animals (which you should, because we are) then you should compare accurately - the best looking animals aren't the ones who procreate most actively... it's the best looking ones with the biggest territories, loudest voices, most confident struts, and killer dance moves...0
-
I feel like attraction is important but if it's not there anymore I don't think the relationship is dead. It's important initially but in a relationship there is more to it than that.0
-
I absoutely believe that you need to be sexually attracted to you partner. Do people become sexier the more you get to know them? Sure. As far as the scale theory, I don't think so. Because who says he is an 8 or she is a 10? The scale will vary depending on who you ask. I may think the girl within the couple is sexier than the guy, but then someone else may disagree. And if neither can have a higher # than the other, you would have to have the same number....might make things a bit difficult....
Lets say I am a 6, for instance. I am not attractive enough to be going into a club every saturday night and taking a flock of girls home with me. Same as a woman would not even look in my direction if I dont instigate the conversation. I have observed this firsthand. The perception is that if a 6 dates a 10, the relationship is built on false premises, because the 10 is dating at his/her comfort level, and otherwise feels insecure. The 10 knows that the 6 will not stray. It shows low confidence, and on the flip side, it is only a matter of time before the 10 gets tired of what he/she is not getting out of the relationship, i.e. good sex, being out in public comfortably, etc (noone likes the pasty white guy with man-boobs on the beach). That is where I am coming from on that.
Well, then I think you're talking more about the insecurity levels, not physical attractiveness. You can have some smokin hot girl who has a 10 body but her self esteem be real low...which then may cause problems in the relationship, which I believe is pretty similar to what you are saying. But I don't know that the scale for attractiveness is necessarily linked to the scale for self esteem. So I don't agree with the concept of not dating someone "higher" than you.
But doesn't physical condition/apperance kind of correlate with that confidence level? I believe this does. It is the reason that girls dress in skimpy dresses to attract a guy. If she is sporting the cottage cheese, it will not work as well.
Yes, confidence is somewhat linked to appearence. However, if the girl is sporting a bit of "cottage cheese" but doesn't care, and has confidence in herself and is comfortable with her body...wouldn't that make her more attractive then another girl with the same cottage cheese but low self esteem? So you can have the same exact body, and on that note, both have a....7. However, when you bring attitutde and confidence into the mix, one girl may become an 8 or 9 while the other is lowered to a 5 or 6. So I guess it all depends on what influences the scale, and when that scale comes into play. If a guys sees a girl and just based on her looks gives her a 9 while he is a 6, then based on this concept, he should not date her. However, if the guy takes a chance and gets to know her, but she has some insecurites and becomes a 6 as well...he can continue to date her?0 -
As a psych student I found this question intriguing. My dissertation is going to be based on this somewhat so I'll be interested to know the answers. What I will say though is that sexual selection for men and women is not necessarily the same. Men (theoretically) are attracted to women who are younger, look fit and have a good waist to hip ratio as this would indicate health and fertility. A man's primal instinct is to impregnate as many women as possible in order to ensure the survival of the human race and all of thos characteristics will mean better success. Women don't just go for looks. They go for personality aswell. They need someone who is successful, reliable and stable. As women are the ones qwho have to carry the child they need to know that their mate will be able to support them and provide for them in the long run. This is all theory however!
Also what you were saying about the 6 and the 10. I see what you're getting at. The idea of 'status' in society (I have that inverted as it's a societal construct not my personal opinion). That people should look within their own 'status' level and blah blah. I think it's crap personally, but a lot of people don't. It is all sort of about confidence and self esteem. If you believe that you belong to a certain class then you won't look outside of it and would be very uncomfortable being thrust into another.
My personal opinion: Sexual attraction is extremely important. To me anyway. If I'm not physically attracted to someone then it just won't work. Vice versa if they were the most physically desirable man on the planet but dull and boring it wouldn't work either. I need a combination of both. I think everyone's just different. People find different things appealing which is good or we'd all look the same.0 -
bump0
-
for sure.
I am attracted to guys with dark eyes, dark hair, olive skin. Not only can I not resist dark features, but it basically assures me that my children will not be gingers!
Rude...0 -
And always open for interpretation. It is best to teach about the person the the look, for humanity is the only species in which the females flaunt their looks to attract the males.The field you are looking for is "evolutionary psychology" and, yes, sexual attraction is a big chunk of it.
Exactly. But what is sexually attractive and important to pass on to further generations is subjective.
Actually not true. There are many species of birds that do that. But it's unfair to say that women basically sell themselves to get a man because a lot of men do it too, by thinking their looks are the most important thing.0 -
Exactly. But what is sexually attractive and important to pass on to further generations is subjective.
Some if it is cultural, but a whole lot of it is not. For example, it's been repeatedly shown, that men all over the world find women with specific waist-to-hip ratios more attractive, something like 0.7, regardless of weight.
Women factor in men's physical looks less than they their social dominance, which explains why an ugly old rock-star or real-estate moguls can easily snag a model -- they ARE matched in attractiveness, just not physically.0 -
And always open for interpretation. It is best to teach about the person the the look, for humanity is the only species in which the females flaunt their looks to attract the males.The field you are looking for is "evolutionary psychology" and, yes, sexual attraction is a big chunk of it.
Exactly. But what is sexually attractive and important to pass on to further generations is subjective.
30 percent of CEO's are 6' and higher....fyi.0 -
I think that natural selection is at play. I've taken classes explaining why we pick attractive mates. It is very interesting...attractive mates signal good genes, healthy genes; therefore, we naturally gravitate towards them. Not to mention we enjoy the physical aspect.
Don't quote me on this, it may not be 100% correct. I was just going from what I remembered hearing.0 -
I absoutely believe that you need to be sexually attracted to you partner. Do people become sexier the more you get to know them? Sure. As far as the scale theory, I don't think so. Because who says he is an 8 or she is a 10? The scale will vary depending on who you ask. I may think the girl within the couple is sexier than the guy, but then someone else may disagree. And if neither can have a higher # than the other, you would have to have the same number....might make things a bit difficult....
Lets say I am a 6, for instance. I am not attractive enough to be going into a club every saturday night and taking a flock of girls home with me. Same as a woman would not even look in my direction if I dont instigate the conversation. I have observed this firsthand. The perception is that if a 6 dates a 10, the relationship is built on false premises, because the 10 is dating at his/her comfort level, and otherwise feels insecure. The 10 knows that the 6 will not stray. It shows low confidence, and on the flip side, it is only a matter of time before the 10 gets tired of what he/she is not getting out of the relationship, i.e. good sex, being out in public comfortably, etc (noone likes the pasty white guy with man-boobs on the beach). That is where I am coming from on that.
This has little to do with "natural selection", at least if you're talking about Darwin. Just sayin'.
As for choosing partners based on attraction, for me attraction is based on far more than looks. Looks are a factor, but one out of many. How a guy smells (and I'm not talking cologne), whether he makes me laugh, if he's smart, sense of style, all of those things are also factors.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 430 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions