Looks or Personality?

That's happened to me, too. I'll get to know someone and by doing that, I become attracted to them.

 

Women are generally more forgiving of a man's physical deficiencies (potbelly, receding hairline, or plain ugliness) if he brings other attributes to table, usually in the form of "resources." That is changing too, at least in societies where women are financially independent.

Where women no longer depend on men for financial stability, they ask more in terms of physical attractiveness and personality attributes (sense of humor, kindheartedness, etc.).

The problem with looks for men is we've been getting away with being less physically attractive in lieu of being able to offer resources. This is because historically men have been in control of most, if not all, of the resources. Had women a more equal share in controlling resources, men would've begun to focus centuries earlier on other ways (using charm, wit) of attracting women.

Men who primarily rely on financial resources to attract mates are operating from a model that will likely pass on in the near future.

Perhaps this is an unverifiable statement laden with heterosexual male prejudice, but there seems to be an imbalanced ratio between physically attractive women vis-a-vis physically attractive men. There just seems to be more good looking women in the world than men?

If men have had to rely less on being physically attractive, instead of breadwinners, then where is the evolutionary impetus for more of us to adapt better looks?

 

co-sign.

This is very very true. Society is redefining the male, now, and suddenly men has to think of looks, personality, at the same time as they still feel pressure from the older more conservative generation to be the breadwinners.

As more women gains power and money, the role gets redefined, but with a subclause that wasnt there for the women: We want equals. Its not a shift were the man suddenly is only dependent on looks (a trophy husband, any one?) or charm, but were the women want someone who is equally successfull. And good looking. And charming.

Is this too much to ask for? I don't believe it is. It might sound harsch, but women has been able to pull it off, both fixing their nails and hair, and having a job. It's not even a question of multitasking. But it is a question of priorities, women are still those who are the ones who are supposed to be looking for a mate more then men, and as long as the womans role still is the one of the catch rather then the hunter, the men can probably get away with being well, a bit more laid back. It is, however, changing.

Todays men are caught up in a paradigm shift. Their own. quite a few will wake up and realize that the woman they love will not love them for "themself" but demand that they take care of themselves, dress properly, and so on. Because they want to be proud of them. Women aren't as before, grateful for the financial stability and happy that they at all got married. What was before myth with a lot of truth in, is now a myth from the past.

I know that I couldn't say that I go for personality. I do, but the first thing I see is looks. I wont settle for less then both. Because I know I have both and if there is no man who thinks like me, well, I can always stay single. As the world is today, I do not need a man to complete my life. It sounds horrible, but I mean it in a very real sense. I make my own money and even if I'll be lonely, I'll be fine. I want a man, but thats another thing.

It's gonna be interresting to see how things develop, how the male role will be defined and how men will find a sence of stability in it. How men themselves want to define it with the help of the "rules" of the new context.
I don't see a conflict between both taking care of yourself and being male. A real man is a man who can wear a glitter top and a manbag, and still be a man. I always saw manliness as something that comes from the inside, from security.
Probably these things will become easier if men could find more security in their role, which I think will come with time.

phew. Long post, but you got me thinking. I hope everyone gets that I mean this in a very nonthreatening way. I'm not trying to bash men, I was just thinking about the male role.

Im opting for both however, I want a good looking guy with a big heart. And a gorgeous brain, because their is nothing sexier then a brilliant mind. And I hope I find a man who wants the same, and sees it in me.

 

I totally agree with what you said. So, in response to all of this, I shall be less forgiving of my man's physical defiencies in the future. :smt023

 

Depends on the type of smartness. Some people are just 'shut the fuck up' smart. You know when you see something funny and they go all 'well, that's theoretically impossible because the paradigm alignments of nickel cadmium rejects apptitudal corduroys'. You can't watch a movie, enjoy a dinner, take a shit, go to a comedy show, or take your dog for a walk without getting educated.

I dated one of those, it was a serious turnoff. I wanted to give her a titty twister every time she pulled that.

 

LOL I haven't heard that since the 5th grade! The good ones never die!

 

That has happened to me as well.

I'd easily choose personality over looks. Beauty fades any way.

 

This thread tends to be about personal preference, so I won't make this long, you're entitled to your personal preference, but I had to speak up on a few things.

I have never been concerned about money, but kindheartedness, and great character is important. But I can be very forgiving of a man who doesn't have the greatest looks, in fact I don't trust a man who's too good looking.

This may be true, because beauty is in the eye of the beholder and you are a guy, probably not very picky as to the attractiveness of the lady.

This precludes a belief in evolution, but that wouldn't help any of you now anyway, so what do you do for yourself meanwhile during the billions of years of ugliness ahead while evolution does it's magic on the men in this world.

I think you're right that there is a re-definition but, women may be sorry if we persist in this re-definition of men as we know them, I for one want a traditional man in my life. I don't mind working but I do want to be taken care of.

I am proud of my man, and will remain proud of him even if he isn't all that good looking and I will always love him for being "himself" if a woman can't do that then it isn't love at all. Conditional love is not Love, Sorry! This one I truly have to disagree with. It sounds like you are looking for a "trophy husband" and I think you'll find a very shallow man, I hope you don't, I hope he can be all you want him to be, but I think you're on thin ice here.

I agree here, I don't need a man, I used to, I've grown up, any woman who needs a man is in a bad position to be making a choice. I think getting into a relationship out of need is not healthy. None of us should need a man, but I for one, want a man to love on, to spoil, and to enjoy being spoiled by. Someone to enjoy spending my time with for the rest of my life.

Wow, that's a bit strange in my book, I'll wear the glitter tops and carry the purse. I don't want to seem him doing that when he's out with me. Maybe you do, and you're welcome to all the men that prefer that style. Any guy who wants to wear my clothes and carry his own purse is not for me. Keep him in Europe OK!

 

It has to be a combination of looks and personality. To much of either one will caluse problems.

If all someone has to offer in a relationship is looks or that they can cook and don't bring anything else to the table that is a reciepe for disaster. Once you get tired of what ever that one thing that initially attracted you things will go down hill fast because there is nothing else there that you have in common with that person.

 

ahahahaha, you are hilarious Jaisee!

 

ah I made this thread but didn't even say anything.

Personality, every girl i've dated in my life has looked good but their personality has always been more rotten than a apple filled with maggots.

Looks fade

 

I work with a girl like that. Annoying as hell. :roll: I can't imagine what it would be like to date someone like that!

 

Uh . . . fuck that. hahaha

But everything else I read was pretty good and informative.

 

I thought I answered this but I guess I didnt.

Personality definitely. I have to be very attracted to him, but that often comes from things that are not the traditional physical attraction type of things...and more so from personality traits.

 

My ex wore glitter tops and he was not a man.

 

I thought you had only dated one woman? Anyway you're right looks fade, so, go for character.

 

Ok this is a new one for me, and I live in California. I have met those who do the manpurse, manis and pedis, all sorts of jewelry, carry foofy small dogs around, drink foo foo drinks, etc. But no glitter tops.

I won't comment on whether they are men or not. Sometimes I feel like Eddy Murphy on Beverly Hills Cop where he was walking down the street and turns his head to look at those guys and shakes his head and laughs.

 

nah, i've dated more, but only been in one serious relationship that was with my ex fiance

 

Lol J, I didn't mean that kind of person! I don't get turned on by such attitude. I mean the kind of person that talks and u think "wow... I waint him/her to talk more and teach me things!!!". Well he wasn't THAT smart probably, since how he behaved with me :smt086, but I still think about when we talked and laughed together.

 

It's all mathematical...like the study of limits.

As attraction to someone's personality approaches infinity...their concern of the person's looks approaches negative infinity.