It isn't all about personality

Page 1 of 3 [ 40 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

Lifeistoohard
Tufted Titmouse
Tufted Titmouse

User avatar

Joined: 3 Mar 2015
Posts: 41

29 Oct 2015, 10:26 am

When I was in high school, I had more female friends then male friends. Part of this was most of the parental attention coming from my mom and my dad being macho who always though I should "man up". I'm a sensitive Aspie by nature and the more my dad didn't want to accept that, the more sensitive and nerdy I became.

I was interested in relationships during much of high school, but I was both too shy to find one and had no advice from male friends. All my advice came from movies that I should wait for "her to come".

I made female friends very easily since I have that aura of sensitivity, that it led some kids to think I was gay (ya know I'm not :) )

Plus one thing that always characterized me was the lack of playfulness, which is critical to forming close friendships due to the fact that you can disagree with someone and later laugh it off to form a stronger bond.

If someone (guy A) wore a lousy shirt and asked "how do I look", I'd say "it's fine", as part of my yes-man attitude and fear of conflicts, I tried not to expose myself and my true ideas.
Another guy (guy B) would say "It looks gay". Then guys A and B would tussle a bit and later shrug it off and form a strong bond since they already experienced each others' true opinions and emotional responses.

So I was always that sweet guy with girls to hang around with, but none who wanted to date me.

Summary: It's a huge misunderstanding to think guys with no girlfriends are bitter misogynists. There are terrible people like Ted Bundy who managed to have relationships because those guys are very charming. It's just the narcissism that prevents the relationships from becoming long term.



darthsuhtek
Emu Egg
Emu Egg

User avatar

Joined: 4 Dec 2014
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 7

29 Oct 2015, 10:54 am

Well, it seems you are at least comfortable around women, and I'd say that is certainly a step in the right direction.



The_Face_of_Boo
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Jun 2010
Age: 42
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 33,107
Location: Beirut, Lebanon.

29 Oct 2015, 3:45 pm

There are so many married people with horrible personalities.



Drawyer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 May 2015
Gender: Female
Posts: 3,860
Location: Away

01 Nov 2015, 4:15 pm

There are attractions which give instant click, chemistries. They can be looks, voice, charisma, smile and I found "being playful" can be one of them. Being playful can be very attractive. But there is no doubt that good personality builds firm attraction which is slower steadier and stronger. Without good personalities which you seem to have, an attraction is very short-lived.


_________________
"Embrace the glorious mess that you are."


AndThatsTheTruth
Emu Egg
Emu Egg

Joined: 5 Nov 2015
Age: 36
Posts: 3
Location: Netherlands

05 Nov 2015, 8:36 am

People firstly match based on looks level. After that, of course personality matters, but looks come first when the sexes are mixing and matching.



MissBearpolar
Raven
Raven

Joined: 24 Oct 2015
Age: 45
Posts: 107

05 Nov 2015, 11:27 am

AndThatsTheTruth wrote:
People firstly match based on looks level. After that, of course personality matters, but looks come first when the sexes are mixing and matching.


Looks matter, of course, but tend not to be a dealbreaker unless your Quasimodo-like. One might not initially think "he/she's so hot" upon first meeting, but getting to know the person a bit (because you're in the same class, on the same curling team, run into each other most nights walking the dog, etc) better tends to make them more attractive. Or less.

Personality matters, big time.



xxZeromancerlovexx
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Jul 2010
Age: 31
Gender: Female
Posts: 3,915
Location: In my imagination

05 Nov 2015, 12:09 pm

MissBearpolar wrote:
AndThatsTheTruth wrote:
People firstly match based on looks level. After that, of course personality matters, but looks come first when the sexes are mixing and matching.


Looks matter, of course, but tend not to be a dealbreaker unless your Quasimodo-like. One might not initially think "he/she's so hot" upon first meeting, but getting to know the person a bit (because you're in the same class, on the same curling team, run into each other most nights walking the dog, etc) better tends to make them more attractive. Or less.

Personality matters, big time.


With my former boyfriends we were in the same classes and got to know our personality because we were in the same classes or were at the same lunch at school.

If a guy or girl dates a guy just because they are physically attractive then if their appearance changes and they dated or were in a relationship just because of looks then I would think that they would be out of luck.

When a couple has stuff in common and like their personality it makes more sense.

For example, I'm very talkative and passionate about my video games and action movies. If a guy hates those things and only dated me for looks then I would be very unhappy and disappointed.


_________________
“There’s a lesson that we learn
In the pages that we burn
It’s written in the ashes of the fire below”
-Down, The Birthday Massacre


Klowglas
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Apr 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 545
Location: New England

06 Nov 2015, 12:54 am

Women strictly date the most dominant males, so being playful with them, or even getting along with them doesn't matter if you don't have dominant traits, being sensitive towards women sends you straight into the friend-zone, because back in the past, when we were swinging clubs in our loincloths, being a sensitive flower was a massive liability to the tribe and thus women will unconciously breed-out those qualities that threaten the group.

Someone whose good at poetry isn't going to be able to do much when a kodiak bear is charging at the family, but a warrior might be emboldened or dominant enough to scare the creature off, and thus the dominant male is selected.

Our bodies still think that the conditions of the past are still present.

This extends to sex, women like sex as much as guys do, they are only extremely selective about it because her body is conditioned to find the most dominant of male traits arousing, meaning it is trying to weed out sensitive traits while preserving itself in the harsh world that was present ages ago.



traven
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 30 Sep 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 14,545

06 Nov 2015, 2:06 am

whatever!!

my woman-neighbour would, from time to time, utter that my kids weren't normal because they didn't have bf or gf or go out in the weekends
I have never re-inforced upon them that you should be in a relationship in order to be *worth*while
I was not raised that way - and rather shocked when raising mine, of parents making all sorts of boy-girl differences and talking about love when little children of different sex would get along :( :( :(

we're so in a hurry to perpetually make the same mistake
and validated by our children doing the same
ooooooooooo :o



traven
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 30 Sep 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 14,545

06 Nov 2015, 2:24 am

now we're raising princesses, but no prince-s
princesses get arranged marriages, but who will do ??



Stalk
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Jul 2012
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,138

06 Nov 2015, 3:26 am

The most difficult thing I've found, was trying to be ok with one self. When everyone constantly criticizes you. I think only something like therapy can help with confidence. Remind you that, you are ok who you are and allowed to stand up for what you believe in, even when someone else disagrees and be ok with that.



wilburforce
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 Sep 2014
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,940

06 Nov 2015, 4:46 am

Klowglas wrote:
Women strictly date the most dominant males, so being playful with them, or even getting along with them doesn't matter if you don't have dominant traits, being sensitive towards women sends you straight into the friend-zone, because back in the past, when we were swinging clubs in our loincloths, being a sensitive flower was a massive liability to the tribe and thus women will unconciously breed-out those qualities that threaten the group.

Someone whose good at poetry isn't going to be able to do much when a kodiak bear is charging at the family, but a warrior might be emboldened or dominant enough to scare the creature off, and thus the dominant male is selected.

Our bodies still think that the conditions of the past are still present.

This extends to sex, women like sex as much as guys do, they are only extremely selective about it because her body is conditioned to find the most dominant of male traits arousing, meaning it is trying to weed out sensitive traits while preserving itself in the harsh world that was present ages ago.


This is some old-school evo-psych BS. At least find an original tack, this is such a cliché. You're like a parody of yourself with this ridiculously reductive biological essentialism argument, really.



Nocturnus
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 22 Jun 2015
Posts: 354
Location: England

06 Nov 2015, 4:59 am

wilburforce wrote:
Klowglas wrote:
Women strictly date the most dominant males, so being playful with them, or even getting along with them doesn't matter if you don't have dominant traits, being sensitive towards women sends you straight into the friend-zone, because back in the past, when we were swinging clubs in our loincloths, being a sensitive flower was a massive liability to the tribe and thus women will unconciously breed-out those qualities that threaten the group.

Someone whose good at poetry isn't going to be able to do much when a kodiak bear is charging at the family, but a warrior might be emboldened or dominant enough to scare the creature off, and thus the dominant male is selected.

Our bodies still think that the conditions of the past are still present.

This extends to sex, women like sex as much as guys do, they are only extremely selective about it because her body is conditioned to find the most dominant of male traits arousing, meaning it is trying to weed out sensitive traits while preserving itself in the harsh world that was present ages ago.


This is some old-school evo-psych BS. At least find an original tack, this is such a cliché. You're like a parody of yourself with this ridiculously reductive biological essentialism argument, really.


I think it can be true in a certain context, the standard for strength and dominant traits has changed. Social ability, perception, charisma and adaptability could be the standard of strength in our society and gathering fruit could be the equivalent to having a good career in our modern society.

I do agree, it is a rather one dimensional outlook in regards to dating, humans are much more dynamic and complex.



Venger
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 15 Apr 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,519

06 Nov 2015, 11:57 am

wilburforce wrote:
Klowglas wrote:
Women strictly date the most dominant males, so being playful with them, or even getting along with them doesn't matter if you don't have dominant traits, being sensitive towards women sends you straight into the friend-zone, because back in the past, when we were swinging clubs in our loincloths, being a sensitive flower was a massive liability to the tribe and thus women will unconciously breed-out those qualities that threaten the group.

Someone whose good at poetry isn't going to be able to do much when a kodiak bear is charging at the family, but a warrior might be emboldened or dominant enough to scare the creature off, and thus the dominant male is selected.

Our bodies still think that the conditions of the past are still present.

This extends to sex, women like sex as much as guys do, they are only extremely selective about it because her body is conditioned to find the most dominant of male traits arousing, meaning it is trying to weed out sensitive traits while preserving itself in the harsh world that was present ages ago.


This is some old-school evo-psych BS. At least find an original tack, this is such a cliché. You're like a parody of yourself with this ridiculously reductive biological essentialism argument, really.


I don't think it's cliche. People always put women on a pedestal when in fact they're morons just like most other people in the world(men and women).

This also is what makes feminists so amusing. They always leap to "the woman's" defense in almost any conflict when it's likely everybody in the scenario is an idiot of some sort.



MissBearpolar
Raven
Raven

Joined: 24 Oct 2015
Age: 45
Posts: 107

06 Nov 2015, 1:40 pm

Klowglas wrote:
Women strictly date the most dominant males, so being playful with them, or even getting along with them doesn't matter if you don't have dominant traits, being sensitive towards women sends you straight into the friend-zone, because back in the past, when we were swinging clubs in our loincloths, being a sensitive flower was a massive liability to the tribe and thus women will unconciously breed-out those qualities that threaten the group.

Someone whose good at poetry isn't going to be able to do much when a kodiak bear is charging at the family, but a warrior might be emboldened or dominant enough to scare the creature off, and thus the dominant male is selected.

Our bodies still think that the conditions of the past are still present.

This extends to sex, women like sex as much as guys do, they are only extremely selective about it because her body is conditioned to find the most dominant of male traits arousing, meaning it is trying to weed out sensitive traits while preserving itself in the harsh world that was present ages ago.


Bullsh!t. The so-called friend zone doesn't exist, it's a construct of the gross "pick up artist" culture. Plus, several of my boyfriends were my friends first.

Also, I've zero interest in any guy whose instinct is to fight - who wants a dude with self-control issues who lacks the sense to not engage with the drunk guy at the bar, slightly off neighbor, etc?

2/3 of adult Americans are overweight/obese and 85% of Americans are or have been married to a person of the opposite sex (as gay marriage wasn't legal during the last census). Women aren't nearly as selective as you seem to believe.



Nocturnus
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 22 Jun 2015
Posts: 354
Location: England

06 Nov 2015, 1:48 pm

MissBearpolar wrote:
Klowglas wrote:
Women strictly date the most dominant males, so being playful with them, or even getting along with them doesn't matter if you don't have dominant traits, being sensitive towards women sends you straight into the friend-zone, because back in the past, when we were swinging clubs in our loincloths, being a sensitive flower was a massive liability to the tribe and thus women will unconciously breed-out those qualities that threaten the group.

Someone whose good at poetry isn't going to be able to do much when a kodiak bear is charging at the family, but a warrior might be emboldened or dominant enough to scare the creature off, and thus the dominant male is selected.

Our bodies still think that the conditions of the past are still present.

This extends to sex, women like sex as much as guys do, they are only extremely selective about it because her body is conditioned to find the most dominant of male traits arousing, meaning it is trying to weed out sensitive traits while preserving itself in the harsh world that was present ages ago.


Bullsh!t. The so-called friend zone doesn't exist, it's a construct of the gross "pick up artist" culture. Plus, several of my boyfriends were my friends first.

Also, I've zero interest in any guy whose instinct is to fight - who wants a dude with self-control issues who lacks the sense to not engage with the drunk guy at the bar, slightly off neighbor, etc?

2/3 of adult Americans are overweight/obese and 85% of Americans are or have been married to a person of the opposite sex (as gay marriage wasn't legal during the last census). Women aren't nearly as selective as you seem to believe.


Strength might not be in the context of fighting but in social prowess, ability and resourcefulness..something that people on the spectrum inherently lack so in that context, it is a suitable description.