It’s just a fact of our culture (if not our biology) that the physical desirability of men is judged by a far looser standard than women.
I don’t give a crap if my potential partner is a dead ringer for the Hunchback of Norte Dame-- it’s what kind of person he is inside that matters. “Cultural standards” in general don’t play much of a part in my day to day life, why any rational person should think like a sheep when it comes to mate selection is beyond me.
I haven’t had a TV for years, so consider myself immune from “Hollywood think” in all its manifestations.
I don’t get it. If you do strength training 3 times a week, then why wouldn’t you desire a man whose body reflects this same dedication to physical health?
I don’t get it. If you do strength training 3 times a week, then why wouldn’t you desire a man whose body reflects this same dedication to physical health?
–Dan Edge
Ideally, you would have both–but in the end, I place a far greater value on the examined life. A brilliant, interesting person could probably be reasoned into taking better care of himself (and believe me, I’ve helped make it happen!) but trying to get somebody interested in the life of the mind who isn’t already is probably more of a losing proposition.
However, I have to say the stereotype of the “dumb meathead weightlifter” is often a myth. Listening to the discussion on Dave Draper’s “Iron Online” forum is like sitting in on a graduate class on physiology. These physically huge men have dedication and discipline like you wouldn’t believe.
You have mentioned that Hollywood is not a good representation of the rest of the population. I don’t disagree but at the same time I am showing you “regular” women whom I know.
You’re missing the point. Posting a picture of a well-preserved 40 year old and saying “hey, they look pretty good” doesn’t really reflect much about what an average 40 year old look like.
But you are looking for rational women, no?
I was under the impression that this thread was about women in general. How do you define a rational woman? Most of the women I know are certain rational most of the time. And almost nobody I know, man or woman, are rational all the time.
Honestly, I’ve never set out to find an age range, it’s just how it turned out based on shared personality traits, maturity, intellectual interests and the kind of things we have in common.
I on the other hand make it a point to avoid septuagenarians, at least at this stage of my life. That is of course not by any means my only standard, but certainly one of the rules that I have consistently followed.
By the time I turned 18, I’d read the complete works of Aristotle–what would your average callow young man have to say to me, now OR then?
Well I couldn’t answer for an average callow young man. But I would probably say, “Good job.” But then, I probably wouldn’t find that the act itself make you any more desirable or interesting, now or then.
I don’t give a crap if my potential partner is a dead ringer for the Hunchback of Norte Dame-- it’s what kind of person he is inside that matters. “Cultural standards” in general don’t play much of a part in my day to day life, why any rational person should think like a sheep when it comes to mate selection is beyond me.
I haven’t had a TV for years, so consider myself immune from “Hollywood think” in all its manifestations.
“Cultural standards” doesn’t have much to do with men desiring beautiful women (or vice versa). Hollywood doesn’t have much to do with it either. And desiring a physically pleasing mate doesn’t necessarily make you a “sheep”.
But yes, what kind of person he or she is on the inside is what’s most important.
“Cultural standards” doesn’t have much to do with men desiring beautiful women (or vice versa). Hollywood doesn’t have much to do with it either. And desiring a physically pleasing mate doesn’t necessarily make you a “sheep”. But yes, what kind of person he or she is on the inside is what’s most important.
Sounds to me like you would have picked Barbara Branden over Miss Rand too.
Yes, my observations are limited. But the sample size is certainly far larger compared to yours.
Are you not aware of the meaning of the term “data point”? That’s how I prefaced my comment…sheesh.
Sounds to me like you would have picked Barbara Branden over Miss Rand too.
Sounds to me like you have no idea what you’re talking about. Rand herself certainly had no problems picking young Nathaniel Branden over Frank. Who could know why? The only certainty is that love is sustained by more than just a high IQ and intellectual discourse.
Are you not aware of the meaning of the term “data point”? That’s how I prefaced my comment…sheesh.
In that case it seems to me that your data point lies pretty far outside of the curve. I haven’t met a single woman in my life that didn’t actually care at all about what their ideal mate should look.
“All generalizations are dangerous, even this one.”-Dumas, But not nearly so dangerous as the one you brought up here.
lol…Moebius, man, if I were you, I would have backed out of this conversation as gracefully as possible about 40 posts ago so 2 points to you for intrepidity. Some free advice, however… Generalizations don’t go over well as a general rule here and the one you chose to bring up is A)Just a personal perspective related mostly to your age. B ) Personally applicable to a significant number of active members on this board who are educated and formidable as well as over 30 And C) About a certain aspect of character which the fairer sex is generally very concerned with, without your reminding them. And whats worse, this is a discussion which you will never win. Even if you cite a study proving beyond all doubt that 35 year old women are 90% ugly and fat, you’ll lose in every way that matters.
It reminds me of the chess scene from Star Wars…“I suggest a new strategy, Artoo…Let the wookie win”
*running and hiding now*
edit B ) when pressed to close together becomes :o Doh
“All generalizations are dangerous, even this one.”-Dumas, But not nearly so dangerous as the one you brought up here.
lol…Moebius, man, if I were you, I would have backed out of this conversation as gracefully as possible about 40 posts ago so 2 points to you for intrepidity. Some free advice, however… Generalizations don’t go over well as a general rule here and the one you chose to bring up is A)Just a personal perspective related mostly to your age. :o Personally applicable to a significant number of active members on this board who are educated and formidable as well as over 30 And C) About a certain aspect of character which the fairer sex is generally very concerned with, without your reminding them. And whats worse, this is a discussion which you will never win. Even if you cite a study proving beyond all doubt that 35 year old women are 90% ugly and fat, you’ll lose in every way that matters.
It reminds me of the chess scene from Star Wars…“I suggest a new strategy, Artoo…Let the wookie win”
*running and hiding now*
lol. You know, you’re goddamn right.
eudaemonist, you are a beautiful 35 (or whatever) year old, and I am sure you’ll find Mr. Right some day.
Sophia, I’ll stop generalizing older (but not old!) women. Plus your sister is a hottie.
And all rational women are beautiful regardless of age… at least on the inside, and probably on the outside too.
I haven’t met a single woman in my life that didn’t actually care at all about what their ideal mate should look.
Well here’s #2. Heck, over the past year/year and a half I’ve kind of lost interest in the entire mate-procurement thing, period. I’ve got better things to worry about.*waaaraaaariirra* [makes wookie noise]
Well here’s #2. Heck, over the past year/year and a half I’ve kind of lost interest in the entire mate-procurement thing, period. I’ve got better things to worry about.*waaaraaaariirra* [makes wookie noise]
I could have swore in another thread you mentioned that you preferred men that were well-dressed and decent looking…
Anyway, giving up on mate-procurement doesn’t really have anything to do with your aesthetic standards. It just means you stopped looking.
