Superficiality Question

[Felix_Jones]

How important are looks to you when considering a potential partner? Are a person's physical attributes at or near the top of the list?

I say they are. I read some bullshit online article about some grad student's study on the importance of looks and apparently both men and women rank the importance of appearance equally.

I think that our draw towards physical features is ingrained. Hard wired, and probably the reason why something like half of marriages end in divorce. But I'll admit, I am and will be drawn to a cute face, a high tight ass, and all the rest of the outward, surface features that make women so attractive. How about you? What draws you to the opposite (or same) sex?

 

[TypicalDeviant]

How important are looks to you when considering a potential partner? Are a person's physical attributes at or near the top of the list?

I say they are. I read some bullshit online article about some grad student's study on the importance of looks and apparently both men and women rank the importance of appearance equally.

I think that our draw towards physical features is ingrained. Hard wired, and probably the reason why something like half of marriages end in divorce. But I'll admit, I am and will be drawn to a cute face, a high tight ass, and all the rest of the outward, surface features that make women so attractive. How about you? What draws you to the opposite (or same) sex?

How is it bullshit? You don't think men and women put equal importance on looks?

Either way, you have to look at her/him when you wake up in the morning, may as well be pleasing.

 

[infinity706]

I actually don't weigh looks that highly at all (probably part of why I get so much sex). I pick out partners by interacting with people and of course, fucking their brains out if I get the chance. I have plenty of regular partners that most people wouldn't consider 'hot.' I do prefer people that are low maintenance, fun to be around, generous, and treat me with respect.

 

[Felix_Jones]

How is it bullshit? You don't think men and women put equal importance on looks?

Either way, you have to look at her/him when you wake up in the morning, may as well be pleasing.

Bullshit meaning some grad students mid-term project, drawing conclusions form a ridiculously small sample size. Whose conclusions are baseless, and probably rrelevant.

I agree with your point though, if you're thinking long term the whole liking their looks thing definitely resonates with me.

 

[Felix_Jones]

I actually don't weigh looks that highly at all (probably part of why I get so much sex). I pick out partners by interacting with people and of course, fucking their brains out if I get the chance. I have plenty of regular partners that most people wouldn't consider 'hot.' I do prefer people that are low maintenance, fun to be around, generous, and treat me with respect.

Interesting point. You probably get laid more than I do.

 

[sunandshadow]

I'm well aware that being too picky about looks is why I hardly ever get laid. Being what most people would consider a 5, but only interested in people you would consider an 8 or better, the math just does not work out.

 

[LaRocha]

I don't know that it's that superficial, it's just the first line of criteria when choosing a partner. Whether you try and meet some person online or in person you look at their face first and then consider talking to them. It becomes superficial when you can't stand someone but stay with them because they've got a cute ass.

 

[TypicalDeviant]

They did a study in Europe (Holland/Netherlands, maybe?) where they took two female mannequins around town and asked males who were blind from birth to touch them and say which one they preferred.

One mannequin had a waist to hips ratio of about 0.70, the other was 0.78 or 0.8. With some, minor and expected deviation, the guys preferred the mannequin with the ratio of 0.70

Granted, other cultures have different ideals, but in the end, when looking for a (reproductive) partner, you want the one who appears the most fertile.

 

[BrazenFellow]

Standards of fertility are dependent on area and culture. In some cultures it's desirable to have rather... rotund... partners because that indicates a skill at gaining food or that they've bred before and survived the experience.

The western ideal (save for the huge tits thing, that's a societal construct) is for lean, athletic people who can move in the forests that make up most of our areas, and have reasonably broad hips, hence the appeal of the hourglass.

As La Rocha said, it's not necessarily superficial, it's just the first line of criteria. While you can "never judge a book by its cover" and all those cliches, you do decide whether or not to talk to someone based on how they look. When I'm cleaned up, I get a lot of attention. When I've just come out of the woods and I'm smeared with greasestick, three days of beard, and muddy, I don't get a lot of positive attention until after I shower. I'm the same guy, same face, but look significantly different. That's normal.

It's superficial when you do what I did, and think that 'the hotness' excuses some sort of innate crazy.

 

[bobinks2]

One mannequin had a waist to hips ratio of about 0.70, the other was 0.78 or 0.8. With some, minor and expected deviation, the guys preferred the mannequin with the ratio of 0.70

I've read other studies that tested the .70 waist to hip ratio. That's the ideal in most cultures around the world. Oddly enough, I've read that both Marylin Monroe, and Twiggy (despite their differences in weight) both had a waist to hip ration of .70.

 

[LaRocha]

I read somewhere that the current selection pressures are for tall, thin men and shorter, chubbier women. Not overweight per se, just more curvy.

 

[human_male]

I'd say that women are at least as hung on on looks as men are, but men are more... flexible, shall we say.

For me looks are an important part of the whole package, but equally important is personality. And when I say looks are important, I don't mean she has to be a specific type, or weight, or have particular features. I have a very wide scope of what I find attractive. So she just has to look pleasant to me. She might not even be what most people would call attractive, but she still might look pleasant to me.

 

[juicypeachxx]

I saw trhis fascinating documentary on sex somewhere, discovery? science channel? or such & it said among other things that attractiveness is actually natures way of insuring procreation, that a person male or female looks for even features healthy skin healthy weight muscles for men curves for women: traits that reveal a health and healthy genetics which mean healthy offspring. Sure we want someone cute but it goes deeper than that, its not shallowness. its not just society & magazines etc it is part of natures sex drive.
I think what is also fascinating is this thing of people finding mates/partners that are of equal or enequal attractiveness... and how one feels if they perceive their mate as more or less attractive than them....
In general yes i look for an attractive partner but more important than that are traits like emotional sensitivity, general sexiness and sensuality, intelligence and charm, which is HUGE to me. But i do find my partner very attractive because of the look he gives me with his big brown eyes....

 

[LaRocha]

I think the natural inclination is to go for the man or woman who's obviously more attractive than you and then settle for the equivalent or less than. I read this article that said that people decide on marriage based on something like "I can or can't risk losing this person at this moment and hope to find someone better in the future." It took years to trick my wife into marrying me, she must have been weighing stuff in some uber calculated way, totally anti-romantic as it may be.

You can always find someone better in theory, but in practice most people aren't inclined to take that risk when there's someone who barely passes muster in front of them. That might be one of the many reasons why divorce is so popular, we're trained not to 'settle' but we always figure out we've settled years later and want a re-do.

When I was younger I swore girls had to date a guy that was objectively better looking than them. Now it seems that the girls my friends are dating look better than them. Age issue, if you're a dude maybe hold off until you're near thirty to lock down a better looking girl. If you're a female maybe your best bet is to marry young. I'm not a social scientist, I just got a degree in it.

 

[kaycee217]

Looks are only somewhat important to me.

A great body with a prude attitude = nasty.

 

[Felix_Jones]

I read somewhere that the current selection pressures are for tall, thin men and shorter, chubbier women. Not overweight per se, just more curvy.

Well that would bode very well for tall thin men and short chubby women.

 

[Eilan]

And when I say looks are important, I don't mean she has to be a specific type, or weight, or have particular features. I have a very wide scope of what I find attractive. So she just has to look pleasant to me. She might not even be what most people would call attractive, but she still might look pleasant to me.

Switch the pronouns from "she" to "he" and I could have written this, particularly the bolded sentence. I don't know that my husband/ex-husband are what's considered traditionally/typically attractive, but they were attractive to me.

If someone is physically attractive to me, but he opens his mouth and a whole lot of stupid comes out, then he's instantly much uglier in my eyes.

 

[human_male]

Switch the pronouns from "she" to "he" and I could have written this, particularly the bolded sentence. I don't know that my husband/ex-husband are what's considered traditionally/typically attractive, but they were attractive to me.

If someone is physically attractive to me, but he opens his mouth and a whole lot of stupid comes out, then he's instantly much uglier in my eyes.

I was just talking about tits.

 

[BBW_Goddess_Anna]

While looks are important as far as initial meeting/dating, it does not hold a relationship together. I think most people are drawn to someone because of there looks, but each person's view of beauty is different. So what I find sexy & sensual someone else might find repulsive, so don't worry about that, everyone has a chance! We are all attractive & beautiful people.

 

[fuckmeat]

Looks are somewhat important to me and looks say a lot about lifestyle. I prefer a proportionate bodytype that says a person is healthy and active. Very slim people are as much of a turn off to me as very obese people. I know some people are naturally slim no matter what they do and that's great but it's not something I can personally find attractive. I couldn't have a relationship with someone I wasn't attracted to and I don't see the point of casual sex with someone I don't find hot. I know people's looks change over time but I also think that for a long term relationship to last it helps if both partners have some pride in their appearance and try to keep fit and healthy. My Mistress G is ill and currently very underweight but I still love her to pieces but that's something that's come with time, familiarity, love respect, and trust. If she had been her current weight when we first met, I doubt we'd have got together.

Being submissive, I'm attracted to well built, outwardly alpha types but looks can be deceiving. I suppose if I was to prioritise what I look for in a partner, it would go something like this...

1. Dominance/sadism and a correlation of kinks/limits.
2. Sexuality; someone who is comfortable with my bisexuality and who can be happily flexible about monogamy.
3. Personality/intelligence/general knowledge/life experience/tastes/lifegoals.
4. Looks, health, age, etc.

So it's up there but not important to the point of making me shallow. I also agree with those who have said that disliking a person makes them unattractive. If I'm given to any undue prejudice (aside from needing a dominant and sadistic partner) it's intellectual. I have a very low tolerance to ignorance and stupidity. I know not everyone has the same opportunities for education and personal growth but wilful ignorance is something I find very hard to handle with tact and diplomacy.

 

[Eilan]

I was just talking about tits.

Sorry for reading too much into it, then.

 

[Firefly69]

Looks can be what initially attracts a person--- but more is generally needed to keep someone around.

Most of us have probably experienced meeting someone who looked really good, but as you got to know them.... not so good. Other times, theres someone who looks ok, but doesn't strike you at first glance. Then you get to know them, and they start to look better and better.

Some people just shine, no matter what they look like.

A friend once told me about the time her and some other girlfriends went out and met two men. One was absolutely stunning to look at. The other one was alright-- but nothing exceptional. Then they spent time with them. By the end of the night-- all the women were gravitating towards the man who wasn't as outwardly attractive. Why? Because he was just so great to be around. He had personaility, a sense of humor and he was intelligent. His confidence was also a big turn on.

So while looks can matter-- I don't think they are what ultimately keeps people together.

 

[Mac98]

I think looks play a HUGE roll, and I'm the first to admit that it does for me. I can, however, see the beauty in someone I personally don't find attractive. I can see why someone would fall in love with some said girl while not having any of those feelings whatsoever myself.

I can't picture myself ever falling in love with someone I don't find to be attractive (by my standards which, i admit, are high). So looks play a huge roll. However, I'm even more picky when it comes to personality (some might argue that, but I stand by it), so event though I may be drawn to someone who's "hot", I'll be instantly repulsed by someone I can't stand.

 

[rydia57]

IMHO, mental aspects are more important than looks. I've learned you can be drop dead gorgeous and scare me away, but if you look just ok, and your talk is worth a million bucks, and your imagination is all that, you've got me on a string!

 

[KellysCrack]

seriously...looks may be what drew you together the smile or twinkle in an eye but 20 years from now you will not look like the day you met (well...plastic surgery could pose assist some). So what you toss it away for a newer model? We are rapidly becoming a unisex culture where man does not look much different than a woman. ewww I prefer a man to be strong mentally, able to out think me, challenge me to learn other things, go hunting, fishing, hiking, and anything else that we can enjoy doing. I could care less what you looked like, make me laugh keep me laughing no matter how bad it gets and its a deal. Everyone is so obsessed with looks and this is where it starts. This isn't just so, well it must be bad...meh that's crap. There is a perfect fit for everyone. No one may like what I prefer and that is fine...Tikka does and we work very well together.