This is embarrassing to ask at my age

Post Reply New Topic

I'm rather fed up with all your asexual preaching and your inability to understand that not all of us are fricking asexual. Are you so mentally disable that you cannot understand something so simple? You only are able to spew out such BS because something had gone wrong with your head and you lack instincts that we have. Got it? So get off your high horse.

I'm not asexual. I'm hypersexual under the right conditions which is not through sexual attraction.

Maybe for you that's how it works. But for most others that's not at all how it works. And it's part of the reason why there are so many guys on this forum who are not understanding why they are so unsuccessful at online dating - or dating in real life, for that matter.

But if that's how you like it, there's nothing wrong with it. Just understand that casting a wider net will catch more fish. And being more appealing will attract more people to you rather than just 1 or 2.

This is a fact in my book:

There are people who get MORE attractive as they get older.

I don't think we can make that conclusion. First, we don't know why guys here are unsuccessful. If you have never experienced a natural connection with somebody its appealing to accept whatever reason are offered regardless of how likely it is. People get desperate and then accept things they wouldn't accept otherwise.

Second, I've been married over 20 years and nevet got this kind of connection with wife, so time alone won't fix it.

Third, you assume that becoming more normal means chances will increase but from my experience that's not how it works. Number of potential partners is not a good indicator of success.

So I just want to get this clear: you are saying that physical attraction has no impact on dating at all? Because that's what I'm hearing.

I'd also like to put the question out there to others: would you date someone who you found to be a nice person but were not at all physically attracted to?

Looks were never a factor for me with my two exes & current girlfriend. I cared about personality & was willing to give most any woman a chance as long as she didn't have kids & wasn't a lot older than me(but the age was cuz I didn't think I'd have much in common with an older person).

No, physical attraction works more like a switch rather than as a continuous variable. Therefore, if somebody is above some minimal level then that property becomes irrelevant.

So for clarification: how does physical attraction work as a switch?

What if someone is below that minimal level? Who/what determines minimal level of attractiveness?

Above: Potentially interesting.
Below: Not interesting regardless of other traits.

The level will depend on your own attractivity. It's a filter just like everything else in dating.

Studies have shown that looks are important, at least in the beginning. And the poster who stated there is a minimum threshold is correct. For me I like height and wieght standards, facial appreance means less to me than that. But for some it is the opposite.
Women know there level of attractiveness l, studies have shown that women know their level of attractiveness and choose a mate based on that level.
For me, college amd online dating, eharmony, really got me most of my relationships.
Due to my social issues, and the fact that i am a ginger, I had less partners than the American average. But overall not too bad.
I feel you, I have definitely been there looking at how it is hard to get a date no matter how much you try
Keep your weight in check and try to keep stylish clothes (which I dont)

Okay but this is why I'm confused because at first you said "First priority is their personality, and looks are rather unimportant."

But here you're saying that someone needs to meet a minimum of attractiveness: "Not interesting regardless of other traits."

I'm confused.

Physical attraction works through scent, not looks. Look and personality are factors in rejection of potential partner, and are culturally based.

Yeah I'm getting the feeling that rdos is talking about the success in a long-term relationship, which is more personality based rather than physically based. I'm talking more about getting that person's attention and just getting a 1st date.

I'm saying: A potential date is unlikely to look twice at you if you look like you haven't taken a shower or washed your clothes in a month.

To elaborate a little bit more. Physical attraction is signalled through pheromones, which basically say: hey, here's a good genetic match for you! It's the most important factor, I'm sure you know persons who are nice looking with good personality, but they lack that "something" to be considered good partners. That's pheromones. But there's habituation, and after some time new partner will release stronger reaction. Looks plays secondary role: s/he's not appalling, which means their genes are good enough for the environment. "Nice personality" means that their genes are good enough for social environment. The last two are changeable, so for example of food shortages, fatty persons are more attractive, but when there's plenty of food they become less attractive because they are more likely to have health issues. What is seen as attractive personality also changes with time. Of course one can see prevalent culture as bad, and choose partner according to the culture more appealing to them, but there's no reason for every person to have the same culture, quite the contrary, persons keeping "wrong" culture are important, because environment may change.
Of course there's another factor, love, and it's a special interest for the person, and it can be lifetime.
For successful partnership both physical attraction and love are required. There are so many divorces because many people feel only physical attraction (which they think is love), and it can last only few years, for longer periods true love is required, but they lack the ability to feel it.