It's near hopeless if you're an average (or less) Iooking guy.

Loneliness, Depression & Relationship Forum

Help Support Loneliness, Depression & Relationship Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
The good news is if you are still single by your mid forties, you should be able to date some very attractive as long as they are your age, because in my experience of online dating, once a man is in their 40s their age range for dating is 18-35...
 
MisterLonely said:
There is nothing wrong with wanting a person on your intellectual level, on your social level, on your income level, on your political level and your sports/outgoing level, why the fresia do we all still have to pretend that wanting someone that's on your physical level is the same as being shallow?

No where does the OP state he want's to date hot girls, he even goes as far as to say he finds most women in his chosen age range to be sufficiently attractive and desirable. Personally I don't think looks matter, I've had crushes on women I never even saw, be it IRL or in a picture, but if the only factor to go by is looks (in for instance a tinder scenario) I sure as hell will pick women I find attractive, as in on my level.

I think it's only natural to want "the best" for yourself.

The problem is when men want that for themselves. =p

Now get out there, lower your standards, and maybe you'll find true love!

It may sound like I'm angry at the world but I'm almost always just angry at the fact that people are trying to ignore facts and pretend that the phenomenon doesn't exist. The fact that it does exist isn't something that really causes much anger. There is 0 anger/ bitterness in my first reply to this thread. Just my personal experiences. If it reads as angry to you nilla then that's not really my problem.
 
Richard_39 said:
MisterLonely said:
There is nothing wrong with wanting a person on your intellectual level, on your social level, on your income level, on your political level and your sports/outgoing level, why the fresia do we all still have to pretend that wanting someone that's on your physical level is the same as being shallow?

No where does the OP state he want's to date hot girls, he even goes as far as to say he finds most women in his chosen age range to be sufficiently attractive and desirable. Personally I don't think looks matter, I've had crushes on women I never even saw, be it IRL or in a picture, but if the only factor to go by is looks (in for instance a tinder scenario) I sure as hell will pick women I find attractive, as in on my level.

I think it's only natural to want "the best" for yourself.

That's not the assumption I posited, I didn't imply that men OR women were vain or shallow for wanting someone who's their equal in terms of beauty; I posited that, as the example stated, if 80% of women fight over only 20% of men and refuse to even look at the other 80% of men, why bother with them in the first place? Wouldn't that imply that, in their perception, they feel 80% of the remaining men are below their level and not worth their attention? Why even be bothered by the fact you're not granted attention by them? Seems a waste of effort to even try to.
That's my definition of shallow.
Besides which, beauty or attractiveness being such a subjective topic in the first place, it's a rather vague topic. I can see a 9 where you see a 2 and vice-versa. Which leads to my own druthers on those types of articles or studies. It's not beauty as such, but the perception of it, that's most of the time the issue.

And as you can see from my original post, it was not in response to you, it was my personal opinion after reading all the posts (yes even the huge ones from micheal2), so I'm not sure why you felt the need to defend your opinion :)

.....But since you did, and since you made a comment about beauty being subjective, lets just start on that :p, lets apply the law of averages on this topic and say that a woman/man is a 9 to 3% and a 6 or lower to 80+%, that would almost certainly imply a kink or fetish playing into things, an aspect found beautiful and/or desirable that goes against the "norm".

The idea that women can score way above there averaged beauty score is in this thread "blamed" on women, where as it could mean there are more men out there that have kinks and/or fetishism's, it could also mean that men are less influenced by "beauty" than we are led to believe, and it could also mean that men are quicker to lower their standards compared to women.

As my original post says at the end, "I think it's only natural to want 'the best' for yourself.", so yes... if women live in a world where they as a 5 can easily get an 8, don't lame women for dating "above" their score, blame the ******* men for offsetting it in the first place!

(also a quick comparison makes no sense, if 20% of men is dating 80% of women, that would mean a lot of singles both sides)
 
MisterLonely said:
The idea that women can score way above there averaged beauty score is in this thread "blamed" on women, where as it could mean there are more men out there that have kinks and/or fetishism's, it could also mean that men are less influenced by "beauty" than we are led to believe, and it could also mean that men are quicker to lower their standards compared to women.

Or it could just mean that men overall find women more attractive than women find men.
 
ardour said:
MisterLonely said:
The idea that women can score way above there averaged beauty score is in this thread "blamed" on women, where as it could mean there are more men out there that have kinks and/or fetishism's, it could also mean that men are less influenced by "beauty" than we are led to believe, and it could also mean that men are quicker to lower their standards compared to women.

Or it could just mean that men overall find women more attractive than women find men.

I'd say that falls under the 'it could also mean that men are less influenced by "beauty" than we are led to believe' 
 
I look at on line dating much like searching for a new job. You present your self in the best way possible, search for opportunities that are suitable to what you AND the other party are looking for, write a short summery of why this would be a good fit, hope for the best while realising 100 other people have just done the same thing!
 
Seahorse said:
I look at on line dating much like searching for a new job. You present your self in the best way possible, search for opportunities that are suitable to what you AND the other party are looking for, write a short summery of why this would be a good fit, hope for the best while realising 100 other people have just done the same thing!

One of the problems I have with this is that people don't know what they want or who they are.  Employers seem better at being objective. 

I think the real problem is that the media has hopelessly warped the idea of love and marriage and everyone thinks that they are entitled to some sort of god that is beautiful, supportive, good in bed, and rich. I admit that is what I wish for. I do think that something kinder might have been arranged marriages. We are sadly incapable of doing it for ourselves.
 
kamya said:
It may sound like I'm angry at the world but I'm almost always just angry at the fact that people are trying to ignore facts and pretend that the phenomenon doesn't exist. The fact that it does exist isn't something that really causes much anger. There is 0 anger/ bitterness in my first reply to this thread. Just my personal experiences. If it reads as angry to you nilla then that's not really my problem.

Fair enough. It does exist, but not for everyone. But your attitude has been working for you just fine so far. Honestly, go at it however you want. It's not me that has to deal with the nastiness.
 
ardour said:
MisterLonely said:
The idea that women can score way above there averaged beauty score is in this thread "blamed" on women, where as it could mean there are more men out there that have kinks and/or fetishism's, it could also mean that men are less influenced by "beauty" than we are led to believe, and it could also mean that men are quicker to lower their standards compared to women.

Or it could just mean that men overall find women more attractive than women find men.

I think women do have an edge over men in looks.  But its because women on average have spent a lifetime perfecting their looks and spend a great deal more time then men on personal appearance.  How many of you guys spend 10-15 minutes in the mirror before going out?  Also women have the advantage of makeup,  which gives them another boost in attractiveness.  Its also a doubled edged sword as makeup raises the standard of beauty for them so high that many women tend to look 'ugly' without it.

I'm not gay, but its quite obvious to me theres just as many good looking guys as there are good looking women, same with average looking guys and and average looking women.  But thats just based on how they look in the face.

There difference between the sexes and attractiveness might be in sexuality.  Men can only look sexy if they have big muscles.  Big muscles is hard to obtain for men, so most lack them.  But men can get aroused by the breasts and ass on an average woman, no matter what size they are, and no work is needed by the woman, so most have this sexual attractiveness by default.  If a man is slightly overweight, hes considered to have an unattractive 'dad bod'.  If a woman is slightly overweight, shes considered thick and still sexy.  Even a very overweight woman is considered by some men a BBW.  So its much much harder for a man to be sexy then a woman.  I think this plays into women rating guys lower then men do them.  I think its possible if a guy lifts weights and becomes physically impressive, he can dramatically raise his sexual appeal to women.  

Then theres the difference between what each sex says they desire,  and what they actually need.  A man may think he wants a 21 year old with big breasts who loves sex.  But in reality a 32 year old woman with small breasts who respects him and makes him a better man is actually what he needs.  A woman might think she wants a popular alpha who is big and strong, but in reality an average built guy who is honest, caring, and always there for her is what she needs.  The man I mentioned has allowed his sex drive to think for him.  He's primarily concerned in a woman's sexual ability and overlooked his need for a capable partner.  The woman I mentioned has allowed her want for protection and security to override her need to be loved and cared for.  The sad thing is,  its quite likely 80% of women AND men struggle to see past the 'wants' of a partnership to ever really grasp the 'needs'.  This is why older men sometimes leave their wife of the same age to run off with younger women, and why women might run away from their lowly but faithful husband to be with a more wealthy alpha.  They simply care more about their wants then needs.  They already have 80% of what they need in a relationship, but they desire that last 20% more then anything.  Most of the time the younger woman or alpha doesnt provide the 80% they received previously.

So yeah, I think both sexes have their issues.  The sex drive of men tends to screw up their thinking, and a woman's desire for being taken care of and security tends to screw up hers.  You just have to find the people who are woke to this.  The guy who realizes a good supportive woman is better then a trophy wife.  The woman who realizes a loving, caring man is better then a rich playboy.  Sadly I think these people are few.  

Personally, Im not interested in playing the game the 80% want.  If you become a PUA, then your playing the game.  

Look at the ridiculous advice in this article for how to deal with hypgamy in women

  • Work out 3-5x a week
  • Meditate for 20 minutes daily
  • Read for 30 minutes daily
  • Start a business
  • Work on your style
  • Go out 2-3 nights a week and learn game

[font=Roboto, sans-serif]Now, however, there’s TREMENDOUS social mobility—you can be born in the bottom 5% of men and work your way up to the top 5% within a matter of 15-20 years. It isn’t that hard.[/font]
http://www.masculinedevelopment.com/female-hypergamy-advantage/

The author calls men 'butthurt' who find hypergamy distasteful, but at the same time look at the lengths hes willing to go to in order to appease this particular set of women.  I'd much rather be butthurt then a desperate lackey who spends the majority of his life improving himself just so he can reach some silly standard set by shallow women who will likely drop you just as fast as they found you for a better catch.  Notice how he mentions spending 15-20 years of your life to reach the top 5% of men to attract such women 'isnt that' hard.  What an idiot.  

So yeah... if you become a PUA,  your playing the game.  The problem is, as a man, you start every game down 20 points.  Your bound to lose over and over again before winning.  Many men have tricked themselves in believing somehow doing this makes them a real man.  How exactly does approaching numerous women who have no interest in you make you anything but a desperate loser?  This is exactly what women want.  They want random men approaching them, which boosts their ego.  And they will only pick the 20% 'best' who approach them.  Why?  Because they can.  Because men give them that power.

The way Im going about it?  Im going to be the best man i can be.  If I stay single forever, so be it.  At least I've maintained my dignity and I didnt sell out to try and appeal to a woman who doesnt need another ego boost.  If a woman who is somewhere in my ballpark shows mutual interest in me, I'll attempt to take the next step.  The crappy game it seems 80% of the population plays?  I'm sitting it out.
 
EmilyFoxSeaton said:
Seahorse said:
I look at on line dating much like searching for a new job. You present your self in the best way possible, search for opportunities that are suitable to what you AND the other party are looking for, write a short summery of why this would be a good fit, hope for the best while realising 100 other people have just done the same thing!

One of the problems I have with this is that people don't know what they want or who they are.  Employers seem better at being objective. 

I think the real problem is that the media has hopelessly warped the idea of love and marriage and everyone thinks that they are entitled to some sort of god that is beautiful, supportive, good in bed, and rich. I admit that is what I wish for. I do think that something kinder might have been arranged marriages. We are sadly incapable of doing it for ourselves.

I think even us lonely people are very capable, it just needs to be a 2 way thing, you can as a man bark up one tree for all your life and not get anywhere if the other party is not in the mental mindset to accept she is wanted by someone, or not willing to give it a try in fear off missing out on something better. And the same goes for women in regards to men. 

Humans really are simple beast deep down, if we all are honest and unashamed about what you want I'm sure we'll find it.


Xpendable said:
Cuckity-cuckity-cuck-cuck

Very helpful, great insights....
 
MisterLonely said:
And as you can see from my original post, it was not in response to you, it was my personal opinion after reading all the posts (yes even the huge ones from micheal2), so I'm not sure why you felt the need to defend your opinion :)

.....But since you did, and since you made a comment about beauty being subjective, lets just start on that :p, lets apply the law of averages on this topic and say that a woman/man is a 9 to 3% and a 6 or lower to 80+%, that would almost certainly imply a kink or fetish playing into things, an aspect found beautiful and/or desirable that goes against the "norm".

The idea that women can score way above there averaged beauty score is in this thread "blamed" on women, where as it could mean there are more men out there that have kinks and/or fetishism's, it could also mean that men are less influenced by "beauty" than we are led to believe, and it could also mean that men are quicker to lower their standards compared to women.

As my original post says at the end, "I think it's only natural to want 'the best' for yourself.", so yes... if women live in a world where they as a 5 can easily get an 8, don't lame women for dating "above" their score, blame the ******* men for offsetting it in the first place!

(also a quick comparison makes no sense, if 20% of men is dating 80% of women, that would mean a lot of singles both sides)

Oh. Uh. Hehe. Sure. I knew that. I was just testing you. *clears throat*

Honestly, this debate is getting too complicated for me. I personally think a simpler answer is more often accurate than all the stats and the graphs in the world. I understand how some men feel bitter of course, saying this matters, this doesn't, etc. but always fail to understand the point. As much as I can see where Kamya's coming from, I wonder if he goes out on a date if he mentions to the girl his viewpoint and how unfair it is. I'm not so sure the date would go so well if she heard that. Yet I still agree partially to what he's saying and understand his frustration with it.

I find that I don't really care. It's an argument I've been hearing for the last, oh, 20-30 years. Things haven't changed much. I suspect it hasn't for the last 200, and I doubt it'll change for the next 200. What I know is if you want something, you get it. Worked for me in my life in that department. Maybe I am "lowering" my standards. Maybe none of my girlfriends have been Pam Anderson.
At the same time, you know what I think? I think Pam Anderson would have benefited being more like my girlfriends. And I sure wouldn't tell them that I lowered my standards. Pretty sure dad wouldn't have told that to mom either if he'd fancied his balls in the same place lol.
I think both are to blame. See, I think there's exactly ZERO difference between men and women. We're just too stupid or arrogant, as a species, to have noticed it yet. So we blame each other's differences. Hell, even when we're in a relationship, ever notice how it's always the other's fault? I'm no different.  We're dumb, dumb, DUMB creatures, all of us lol. Maybe a relationship would go better if we learned to look beyond the looks, which like, what, 90% never do? Maybe less marriages would end in divorces if we focused on how similar we are, instead of how different. Maybe we'd finally reach that middle, that mysterious planet found between Venus and Mars (Earth, where we apparently all migrated to).

That's all I know and that's all I can contribute anymore to this debate. I personally don't trust those graphs farther than I can throw 'em, but in the end, true or not, they aren't going to change anything in my life. So I just need to concentrate on what I can, and that's being a decent human being. Make the stats wrong and all, you know ;-)
 
I don't really bring the topic up at all in person. It is mostly something that I talk about online or with friends I've met online. Mostly just whenever the subject comes up.

When it comes to in-person interactions this is something that almost never comes up.

I'd say I count myself among the group of people least concerned with looks. I definitely have a type and appreciate "beauty" but it's not really what makes me interested in someone. Like I said though, whether they are a 2 or 10 it doesn't matter. They all end up being a waste of time and energy in the end. Even the legitimate relationships I've managed to have ended up mostly in disappointment and wasted time.
 
kamya said:
I don't really bring the topic up at all in person. It is mostly something that I talk about online or with friends I've met online. Mostly just whenever the subject comes up.

When it comes to in-person interactions this is something that almost never comes up.

I'd say I count myself among the group of people least concerned with looks. I definitely have a type and appreciate "beauty" but it's not really what makes me interested in someone. Like I said though, whether they are a 2 or 10 it doesn't matter. They all end up being a waste of time and energy in the end. Even the legitimate relationships I've managed to have ended up mostly in disappointment and wasted time.

Well, to be fair, so have I.
Yet here am I, alone, bitter, disappointed. Some days I think about trying again, then figure I shouldn't because 2 child support amounts are enough.
Don't tell me that's one of your goals in life. Because, trust me, that's rather sad lol.
I for one, wonder at many of the same things you do. But I refuse it. Because I don't want to go all the way bitter. I'd rather, I try, to keep a little optimism and not believe in stuff like those stats. Who knows, maybe I'll get lucky, find someone who thinks at the same level, someday.
Over 10 years, now, I've been single. I doubt I'm someone who should be emulated. I have to tell myself that, too, because I forget it so often.

Anyway, that's my spiel. Because if I do believe relationships are an utter waste of time, more likely than not I'll die alone. And that's one of my biggest fears. I wouldn't wish that on any guy, especially decent ones.
 
Guy pours his frustrated heart out. Callie promptly tells him to harden the fresia up. Imagine my shock.......

But I digress..... As far as 'looks' go, I feel that it would be disingenuous to date someone whom I wasn't attracted to physically. People here and elsewhere will often tell you, "it's what's inside that counts!" Callie will tell you, "Don't be so ******* shallow!" But, as someone said earlier: Unattractive appearances don't guarantee attractive personalities. I've seen some real shockers at the mall I work at. Yeah, those vibrant personalities really come out when they start abusing checkout operators over the price of a single bottle of milk. And more to the point: if we're supposed to pursue relationships based only on personalities, then you might as well just pursue friendships. I'm friends with quite a few women I'm not physically attracted to. It certainly doesn't make them lesser beings in my eyes. Actually dating one of them would lead to a very short, and unfulfilling relationship for both parties, because my heart wouldn't be fully invested, and they'd be able to pick up on that. And cue the insecurities about me only dating them out of pity, and the fear that I'd cut and run the moment someone better came along. And if this reasoning makes me shallow, then I'll take that one on the chest.

It's also possible that this reasoning contributes to why I've been single for the entirety of my life, and will remain so until my deathbed. But, I dare not dwell on that here. I know what that will net me.
 
The assumption that most women want a beautiful man and vice versa is correct and factual. Those who would tell you that’s not true and lying to themselves. However, don’t be most people. Find someone who you are attracted to and is attracted to you. If your only attracted to “beautiful” people then you’ve accepted that challenge to find one that will be attracted to you in turn. Dont be picky but don’t let someone tell you you’re being picky either. Do what makes you happy. Try to fight for what you want.
 
Red_Wedding_Casualty said:
Guy pours his frustrated heart out. Callie promptly tells him to harden the fresia up. Imagine my shock.......

But I digress..... As far as 'looks' go, I feel that it would be disingenuous to date someone whom I wasn't attracted to physically. People here and elsewhere will often tell you, "it's what's inside that counts!" Callie will tell you, "Don't be so ******* shallow!" But, as someone said earlier: Unattractive appearances don't guarantee attractive personalities. I've seen some real shockers at the mall I work at. Yeah, those vibrant personalities really come out when they start abusing checkout operators over the price of a single bottle of milk. And more to the point: if we're supposed to pursue relationships based only on personalities, then you might as well just pursue friendships. I'm friends with quite a few women I'm not physically attracted to. It certainly doesn't make them lesser beings in my eyes. Actually dating one of them would lead to a very short, and unfulfilling relationship for both parties, because my heart wouldn't be fully invested, and they'd be able to pick up on that. And cue the insecurities about me only dating them out of pity, and the fear that I'd cut and run the moment someone better came along. And if this reasoning makes me shallow, then I'll take that one on the chest.

It's also possible that this reasoning contributes to why I've been single for the entirety of my life, and will remain so until my deathbed. But, I dare not dwell on that here. I know what that will net me.

Attraction is NOT always instant.  So yeah, if you've been around your friends for a while and know you aren't attracted to them, that's one thing, but to say you won't even give someone a chance, even if they aren't your usual type because you want things to be instantaneous, well, that's on you. 
It IS shallow to disregard someone simply because they aren't the typical "hot" person you go for.  Yes, it is your right to do so, but it's still shallow. 
Digress, my ass, but at least you didn't insult me.


Naizo said:
The assumption that most women want a beautiful man and vice versa is correct and factual. Those who would tell you that’s not true and lying to themselves. However, don’t be most people. Find someone who you are attracted to and is attracted to you. If your only attracted to “beautiful” people then you’ve accepted that challenge to find one that will be attracted to you in turn. Dont be picky but don’t let someone tell you you’re being picky either. Do what makes you happy. Try to fight for what you want.

Wait, I'm lying to myself now?  Would you like to take a look at my dating history?  Hell, the man I married wasn't a "beautiful" man and I wasn't attracted to him until like a month after we started dating.  But hey, maybe my entire life is a lie :O
 
Red_Wedding_Casualty said:
Guy pours his frustrated heart out. Callie promptly tells him to harden the fresia up. Imagine my shock.......

Please don't start.

Naizo said:
The assumption that most women want a beautiful man and vice versa is correct and factual. Those who would tell you that’s not true and lying to themselves. However, don’t be most people. Find someone who you are attracted to and is attracted to you. If your only attracted to “beautiful” people then you’ve accepted that challenge to find one that will be attracted to you in turn. Dont be picky but don’t let someone tell you you’re being picky either. Do what makes you happy. Try to fight for what you want.

Do not agree with the beautiful man thing. I like scarred up guys. I personally don't want a model. Plenty women do, but a lot of us don't. But I do agree with not being most people, doing what makes you happy, and going for what you really want. I think that's when we end up doing better.
 
So the lonely don’t have a right to want someone they’re initially physically attracted to (whether they meet ‘conventional beauty standards’ is something else; I’ve been attracted to plenty of women who don’t) . As for those who claim there was *no* physical attraction to their partner until they got to know them, I think that’s holier than thou bollocks to be honest. Maybe when people are middle aged or older and looking primarily for companionship, otherwise I don’t believe that’s how things happen.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top