Detached Attraction

Post Reply New Topic

*Disclaimer* This is long and doesn't directly ask anything. This is half documented introspection, and half a launching point for discussion: do you have any issues or argument with what I've said? Am I too harsh on myself or others? Am I disillusioned? Am I a cynic? (That one's rhetorical) Do you find yourself thinking similar? *Disclaimer*

Feeling that my emotional side and my logical side are quite separated, I've realised a few things when it comes to attempting to date.


If find that when I look at a woman, I calculate (yes, calculate) whether they would be an acceptable mate/partner. I look and think "they appear to have no physical flaws, they conform with common standards of beauty, they seem well kept, they seem healthy". Then through interaction decide if their personality is suitable - by which I mean they are not obviously a terrible person. Then feelings may start to develop unbidden (though not discouraged), or not. I feel that my approach to finding a wife is more like an arranged marriage than modern dating. Through prolonged interaction, they may come to like, then love, me. I'm a slow burn. And the way people meet and find each other now is not condusive to this.


I often find a reason not to try. I think there are three reasons this might be: self preservation, where I don't want to risk "failure"; standards too high, where I have an image of an ideal that will never fit; the (or just a) right person isn't where I'm looking.

On this first option, low-self esteem plays a key factor, and pre-empting rejection prevents negative emotions. I know that this is quite false, intellectually, but who ever thought the brain had a say? Well, it does when it tells me the person is too conventionally attractive, or they appear to be the kind of person who defines themselves by others, or has no personality (unfortunately the American Highschool sterotype of the bitchy cheerleader type has inveigled my consciousness). And this depresses me, lowering self-esteem further. If someone asked me why they should date me, my first response would be along the line "well, I think I'm alright". Humble or self-effacing to a fault, unable to acknowledge good points are something to be proud of, rather than seeing them as intrinsic and the founding of decency - you do it because it is right, not for compliments or praise. Or I come accross as arrogant. "That was very well done." "I know, I just did it." sounds terrible to some people, but in reality I mean that I would have given no less than my best, and how is that commendable?

The second option is also quite possible. I only really have four vital criteria for considering a potential partner: less than a foot shorter than me, weighs less than me, doesn't already have kids with an ex, and mustn't smoke. However, though this doesn't exclude any sort of majority, I never seem to find someone. I have to believe I'm not some sort of elephant man if I want to step outside the house every day, but I know I'm not a chiselled Adonis. No one has set our rules and regulations about this. I'm not suggesting a Brave New World system of Alphas, Betas, and Gammas, but they certainly had fewer concerns when it came to dating. But no one will tell you "generally aim for someone of this level of attractiveness, because they'll be aiming at your bracket too". They tell you looks aren't important, and that personality is. I thinkt to myself sometimes, "could I look at this face for another 50 years?", and quite often come back with a no.

The third is also a possibility. I look in a limited number of places, and it's fair to say not every eligible woman circulates in these areas.


I think of myself as a realist in most cases, though some of you may call this a bipolar optimist-pessimist. I look at the previous data and draw conclusions: I have not previously had much success, so this is likely to continue. Unless I change how I try. I'm already being myself, that that advice won't be of any help. I see an idea: to become incredibly well-formed and muscled, leading to being judged differently by women. But my mind says "then it's only your body they will want". True, it will be the bait on the hook, but surely they will come to love my personality, even when I slip out of shape again? But hey will had had prejudices againt who I was. We are not just our personality, we are our actions, our thoughts, and our form. Thought and form inform action. Action informs thought and form. I can try to change, but in short, I am not at this moment someone who will.

Hello

You're putting a lot of thought into which is good, but it's also quite intense. Is there a way to relax with your approach?

Im 34 and macho men with little substance are a thing of my past. What i'm looking for is a companion who shares my values, a support to get through life's hurdles, and a kind, trustworthy and respectful man who will be a good partner to me and role model for my future children. I share this with you because a lot of women feel this way.

With this in mind, you might want to prioritise hobbies more likely to be shared by women, or spend time in places representative of your value system. You might try to get better at spotting the women who are looking for substance - intellectual women are a good starting point but the stereotypes become less indicative as people mature. Women who know what they want are less likely to waste time messing you about. Also, have you researched internet dating websites?

Thanks for the response.

What I wrote was kind of like a raw dump of my thoughts; if I'm intense in company, it's because someone is talking about an interest of mine, not because I'm trying to recite the hastily typed philosophy above. I've been described as shy far more than I have intense (at least, to my face).

I'm not sure which part of what I wrote implies that I am, or am trying to be, a macho man with no substance. If it comes accross that way, then I guess that's part of the problem. The comment I made about getting in to peak physical conditions was just recognising that people (of either gender) are more inclined to interact with "the beautiful people", and not an assertion that all women want Joe Six-Pack. Being an aspie in a competetive work environment does mean I play up the testosterone when interecting with peers at the office, but as far as I know, this is all fun and games, and nobody thinks I'll start a fist fight to get to the top. I try to leave that persona at the office door.

On prioritising hobbies more likely to be shared by women, sexist sterotypes and statistics might come in here. What hobbies are women likely to have? Most activities are not gender exclusive, and there are people of either gender who are interested in what is typically the realm of the other gender (e.g. car shows). Of course, activities like knitting were massively dominated by women, until the recent spate of young men ("hipsters") joining the fold. Is reading a hobby? I read, but it's a solo activity. I don't want to be one of those people who goes to a coffee shop so people can see I'm reading; if I'm reading for my enjoyment, what have you got to do with it? Would I not be better seeking out women with hobbies similar to mine, than seeking out hobies similar to women's?

I am on a subscription dating site, and have received 5 or so instances of first contact in my year+ on there, and very few responses from my messages, despite my attempts to be personal and not blanket. The numbers game is not my thing. I have had one date from that site, and it was from when I uncharacteristically cut straight in with an invitation to drinks (being more masculine and asertive). As a side, she said it was nice to meet me, but that there was nothing there, from which I took that it was nice to get out of the house, but that I held no interest for her.

I find it difficult to articulate it without sounding like an ass, though that may just mean I'm an ass.