The Fairer Sex

[eleanor]

[font="trebuchet ms"] I was just talking about physical relationships between guys and girls who are dating with a friend, and I thought it was an interesting topic. And before anyone smashes me on being mean, this argument just has to use blunt words.

How do you feel about ugly guys who date pretty girls, or when ugly girls date pretty guys?

I have no problem in the world about it at a primal level, but lately I get irritated when I see uglier guys always getting together with gorgeous girls due to the sexist connotations. Even in the media, the average Joe is being glorified, getting hot chicks, and winning in the end. But when was the last time we saw an average Jane getting all of it? Even shows/movies that have what's supposed to be an average girl all have beautiful actresses behind the character, and when the character is ugly, the actress is great looking in real life.

Any thoughts?[/font]

[The13thMan]

[COLOR=DarkOrange][FONT=Century Gothic]When you think of one person complimenting another as 'beautiful' which gender usually gives the comliment and which usually recieves? It's typically the woman that recieves. I know that i certainly would feel strange if a girl called me beautiful... it would just feel off. I think there's a reason for this. Society puts more stress on females to look good, to be beautiful. It's because men are more visual than women. Sexually speaking a man can be aroused by simply looking at a pretty girl. Now... i'm no woman, but from my experience it takes a bit of forplay so they can catch up. ;) To put it simply, it's more important for men that a woman looks good than it is for women that a man looks good. Not to say it's not important for women... just not as much.

Women look for older more intelligent and mature men whereas men look for younger and better looking women. It's all about teh sex, ladies and gents. That's my two cents anyways.
[/FONT][/COLOR]

[Retribution]

[quote name='Lunox'][font="trebuchet ms"]How do you feel about ugly guys who date pretty girls, or when ugly girls date pretty guys?

I have no problem in the world about it at a primal level, but lately I get irritated when I see uglier guys always getting together with gorgeous girls due to the sexist connotations. Even in the media, the average Joe is being glorified, getting hot chicks, and winning in the end. But when was the last time we saw an average Jane getting all of it? Even shows/movies that have what's supposed to be an average girl all have beautiful actresses behind the character, and when the character is ugly, the actress is great looking in real life.

Any thoughts?[/font][/QUOTE]
[font=Arial]You're more likely to see an ugly guy with a gorgeous girl than the other way around, although you're not likely to see either until the couple is like 25+ in age.

To put it simply, guys are more motivated by the physical and visual rather than emotional/intangible. Therefore men seek out a physically attractive partner, and even though few will admit it, it's one of the most important criteria in finding "the right one".

Women, on the other hand, are a bit more expansive than that. They tend to look for personality and emotional connection to a greater extent than a typical man would. But don't get me wrong, women are into physical attractiveness as well, and don't really move away from it until their late 20s.

Although I admit, whenver I see a fugly dude with a really attractive girl, I always think "How did [i]he[/i] end up with [i]her[/i]?" and then "Man, I totally look better than him". So in short, I'd say I feel bitter towards them lol.

As for seeing a hot guy date a fugly girl, I see it as a gesture of pity, to be frank.[/font]

[Gavin]

[SIZE="1"]I've got to admit it's never really bothered me, because I guess based on Alex's assertions, I'm one of the few guys who doesn't pay that much heed to what a girl looks like as opposed to her personality. I'd say it's probably more likely that women are less shallow than men, but I know plenty of women who make puddles seem deep by comparison.

But really, all this thread is going to do is make people who agree seem really bitter and shallow.[/SIZE]

[eleanor]

[quote name='Gavin'][SIZE="1"]I've got to admit it's never really bothered me, because I guess based on Alex's assertions, I'm one of the few guys who doesn't pay that much heed to what a girl looks like as opposed to her personality. I'd say it's probably more likely that women are less shallow than men, but I know plenty of women who make puddles seem deep by comparison.

But really, all this thread is going to do is make people who agree seem really bitter and shallow.[/SIZE][/QUOTE]

[font="trebuchet ms"] I was more interested in the sexism in it, but I guess only girls think of that way. I don't know, it's a big mess because people will bring in scientific things and argue that it's just the way things will be, but I still think there's a level of sexism to it.

Is it shallow the people think good looking people should date each other? One some levels, yeah, but it's just the way humans thinks. We like things that match. :L [/font]

[Retribution]

[quote name='Gavin'][SIZE="1"]But really, all this thread is going to do is make people who agree seem really bitter and shallow.[/SIZE][/QUOTE]
[font=Arial]This bothers me. Why is it people are afraid to admit they are on some level superficial? [i]Humans are shallow creatures[/i], and it's based in evolution. I mean, c'mon, drop the PC card.

Lunox - I see what you mean, and it's glorified by beer/car commercials. Certainly it's objectifying to see the everyman getting lucky with a stellar girl... or at the very least it's degrading/devaluing that woman's beauty. However seeing an average Joe with a gorgeous woman isn't sexist in real life, that guy is just a lucky man.[/font]

[Delta]

[COLOR=#35425e][FONT="Palatino Linotype"]Gavin, not "bitter and shallow." They just respond more strongly to first impressions, yeah? What I mean is that when we see such a couple down the street, most of us will be asking our share of whys and hows but only a few are actually going to point at them and elevate the question to hot topic level.

Evaluation of an individual's character at first sight is an instinctive trait of humans, no matter how much one believes that he/she is free from biases.[/FONT][/COLOR]

[Gavin]

[SIZE="1"]Heh, I knew I should have added a smiley after that, it was meant to be a joke as much as it was a commentary.

As for whether or not it's just how humans think, I definitely agree. There's a very obvious primal aspect to it and you can't escape genetics. Human inherently seek out the best mate for them, and physical appearance gives a good indication of how suitable a mate will be, i.e. how good their genes are. It's a subconscious thing, but when you look at a good-looking girl or guy, you're actually assessing them as to how good a parent that might be for your future children. After all the most basic function of animals is procreation.

So yes, while it may be a bit shallow if you're jealous an ugly guy or girl is dating a hot one, feel even more jealous if you've been passed up, because that means that he or she feels your genes are inferior. :p[/SIZE]

[Dagger]

I think it's a bit odd, actually, that people refer back to evolutionary theory when trying to explain why this or that couple is together. They say that initial attractiveness has to do with child-creating potential or whatever, but the ultimate reasons that people get involved in long-term relationships are [I]way[/I] too complicated to be reduced to evolution.

Heck, even sexual attraction can't be easily accounted for by evolution etc. Why do I get weak-kneed when people wear glasses? What's with the "girl wearing her boyfriend's shirt" fetish?

~Dagger~

[Gavin]

[quote name='Dagger']I think it's a bit odd, actually, that people refer back to evolutionary theory when trying to explain why this or that couple is together. They say that initial attractiveness has to do with child-creating potential or whatever, but the ultimate reasons that people get involved in long-term relationships are [I]way[/I] too complicated to be reduced to evolution.

Heck, even sexual attraction can't be easily accounted for by evolution etc. Why do I get weak-kneed when people wear glasses? What's with the "girl wearing her boyfriend's shirt" fetish?

~Dagger~[/QUOTE]

[SIZE="1"]Heh agreed. As I said, the whole anthropological explanation is only a small aspect as to why we are attracted to certain people over others. It would obviously be a terrible thing to think we've only ever gone out with people for sex wouldn't it ? :p

But all joking aside, while it is a bit shallow in reality to be jealous of someone for going out with someone you feel is much better looking than them, it is really just a natural reaction because you're only look at physical appearances.[/SIZE]

[eleanor]

[quote name='Dagger'] What's with the "girl wearing her boyfriend's shirt" fetish?

~Dagger~[/QUOTE]

[font="trebuchet ms"] I think all girls (even if it's at a deep, deep, never-tell-anyone level) crave being marked by their boyfriend. I've never met a girl who wasn't turned in some way when their boyfriend got protective, or they got to wear their boyfriend's letter jacket or hoodie. Centuries of female role or biology? Dunno, but it's just true. :3[/font]

[Dagger]

Good response, but I was actually thinking of it the other way around! :p Some guys seem to love seeing women stroll around the house in a man's shirt (as part of the morning after image). The same reasoning could apply, of course.

~Dagger~

[Retribution]

[font=Arial]Actually, a fair amount of sexual attraction into long-term relationships can be explained by evolution. I won't bore you with it, since no one really cares, but it's there.

As for personal preference about who you're attracted to, I would argue it's partially nurture. Your previous experience and preconceived notions probably play a massive role in that. And, typical of the brain, there are parts we have absolutely no idea what's happening in there.[/font]

[Aberinkula]

[COLOR="DarkSlateGray"]I have to agree with DB, I don't see the point. I thought this was a [I]"question of what gender is better to you" [/I]kind of thread. But, no derailment from me.

I don't care really as long as you find someone who loves you. But if she's butt ugly and others think you're hot, eh, you're lucky and that's really it.

For me, if she's cute and has a great personality, then she's cool for me.[/COLOR]

[Sojiro47]

[quote name='Retribution'][font=Arial]And, typical of the brain, there are parts we have absolutely no idea what's happening in there.[/font][/QUOTE]
[FONT="Book Antiqua"]Coming from a random side of this most fetishes actually come from sub-conscious (sp) memory of our childhood. I don't remember the article I read it in (and I'm98.65% sure it wasn't anything like the Sex Curved IQ article), but it used the example of foot fetishes. The article said that infants who slept at the the foot of parents' beds or spent most of their time playing by their parents feet between the ages of birth and 2 years of age generaly had foot fetishes. Retribution's post just reminded me of that.[/FONT]

[Retribution]

[quote name='Sojiro47'][FONT="Book Antiqua"]Coming from a random side of this most fetishes actually come from sub-conscious (sp) memory of our childhood. I don't remember the article I read it in (and I'm98.65% sure it wasn't anything like the Sex Curved IQ article), but it used the example of foot fetishes. The article said that infants who slept at the the foot of parents' beds or spent most of their time playing by their parents feet between the ages of birth and 2 years of age generaly had foot fetishes. Retribution's post just reminded me of that.[/FONT][/QUOTE]
[font=Arial]That?s possible as well, although Freudians would argue something slightly different.

Basically there?s these ?psychosexual stages of development? we all have to get through as a child. The first is oral ? you derive enjoyment from oral stimulation i.e. drinking. The second is anal ? you have power to decide whether or not you?ll poop. The list goes on, but the idea is that if you somehow do not progress from one to the next like a ?normal? infant, you will develop a fixation to the stage you failed to bypass. There?s no foot stage, so obviously Freud has gaps (and is wrong in many respects anyway).

I haven?t really studied fetishes at all, so you might be right.[/font]

[Dagger]

Freud has been pretty much 100% discredited* by modern psychology, though. Or is that what you were saying? Anyway, I guess part of me is leery about accepting definitive statements like "women are attracted to men because of X" or vice versa.

As you said, there's so much we don't know--so much that even respected studies don't realize they have to account for. Any insights into complex behavior (e.g. everything related to marriage, sleeping around, romance, raising kids) are subject to endless change, refinement and contradiction.

Studies of this nature can yield interesting** results, but I don't think they should ever be taken as an actual explanation for what goes on in a modern society. There are just too many factors.

*Which is funny, because English teachers still love him.

**I recently read yet another article about how women like masculine-faced men for one-night stands but prefer men with more feminine features as long-term partners, particularly for raising children. "Huh," I thought. "Cool." As with anything else in the area, though, I would rather not risk reading too much into it.

~Dagger~

[Sojiro47]

[quote name='Dagger']Studies of this nature can yield interesting** results, but I don't think they should ever be taken as an actual explanation for what goes on in a modern society. There are just too many factors.
[/QUOTE]
[FONT="Book Antiqua"]I whole heartedly agree. There, in my mind, can be no real explination to anything people do in this regard, mainly because individual lives are never lived similarly enough for any general explination to be correct. But they're fun to hear and think about.[/FONT]

[Retribution]

[quote name='Dagger']Studies of this nature can yield interesting** results, but I don't think they should ever be taken as an actual explanation for what goes on in a modern society. There are just too many factors.[/QUOTE]
[font=Arial]I acknowledge that, but to say ?there are too many factors? is to essentially forsake any further scientific inquiry. We can draw conclusions, albeit limited ones, and continue to build our body of knowledge. And yes, there are some theories out there that are supported by the scientific community that attempt to account for our behavior in relationships.

For instance, the passionate beginning to most relationships (honeymoon period) is allegedly an evolutionary device for procreation. And once this passion dies off, a deeper, long term attachment settles in, again supposedly to keep the two parents together to increase the chances of that child having a safe upbringing. Certainly there are outliers, but I think it accurately describes a fair number of the population.

As for attraction, there?s some legit research out there as well that?s been widely acclaimed. Granted, we are extremely complex, but we?ve already learned so much about the mind and anthropology. You?ve got to at least lend an ear to the theories that attempt to make reason out of our actions.[/font]

[Nerdsy]

[quote name='Dagger']Good response, but I was actually thinking of it the other way around! :p Some guys seem to love seeing women stroll around the house in a man's shirt (as part of the morning after image). The same reasoning could apply, of course.

~Dagger~[/QUOTE]

[color=deeppink]I think the customary lack of pants might be a factor in that one.

Or at least the impression of pantslessness.[/color]

[2010DigitalBoy]

[quote name='Nerdsy'][color=deeppink]I think the customary lack of pants might be a factor in that one.

Or at least the impression of pantslessness.[/color][/QUOTE]

[COLOR="DarkOrange"]I've always thought of it that the extra length of the shirt is sort of like the pants, but a kind of pants that can be easily entered and an outfit that can be removed in a single swipe. Or, if it's a shirt too big even for you, you could probably both fit in there. The pantslessness isn't the only benefit, though. Having a tiny girl in a big shirt is just... :animenose it's like the epitome of moe.

Also, this is just my opinion, but I think the male clothes thing only works as well with long-haired girls. The shorter hair looses some of the effect. Also, the more the girl is blushing about being in your shirt, the better. Another great thing about the big short is that it works for all breast sizes. Though that's still on a more slight frame - I think the taller the girl is, the less appealing the big shirt thing is. The whole point is the cuteness, and taller girls turn it more sexy. Not to say that's all bad, but it's a whole different fetish.

Another thing is that the shirt thing is great because different shirts can be used in different situations. For instance, if you're looking to snuggle up, a really really big shirt would be best, and if it's winer time, a big hoodie is ideal. If you're going for a sexual encounter, it'd be more fun to have a shirt that goes just a few inches past the panties for that more tantalizing effect.

Also, accessories can play a major role in the look. The great thing about this is that the look is rather basic and allows for a lot of options. Glasses, cat ears/tails, long socks or stockings, all look great. Also, if you're into bondage you can tie the ropes right over the shirt. It's form-fitting while being roomy enough to get around...

:D I think anyone can guess what one of my biggest fetishes is XD[/COLOR]

[Aberinkula]

[COLOR="DarkSlateGray"]One of my frends wore my shirt after she got out ofthe water at the beach... I love that shirt so much. I kid of coarse, but it was the first time a girl wore my shirt. For some reason she thought I was smelling it, like I'd ever do that! And I think a girl in a guy's shirt is cute btw. I've always had more fun with a tomboy than a regular girl.

My ex-girlfriend was tomboyish and I liked it, we just clicked better than the girly girl type. I hope she's moving back like she said she would, we'd have a blast as friends.

My friend wore a big hoodie all the time, she comlpained that she was cold too, and I thought it looked cute on her.:catgirl: I like long-haired and short gils better than tall grils. Plus it really turns me on to see a girl in black leather. When the clothes cling on and conform to the body shape, I go nuts. And women acting as nurses are another turn-on for me. [I][B]"You've been a terrible patient; now I must punish you!"[/B][/I] But it's nothing more than a dream.

As for bondage, that's a whole other story, but I do find a girl in chains, whilst holding a whip; tantalizing. >_> I digress...

[/COLOR]

[Guest The Blue Jihad]

Everyone here needs to get laid immediately.

I don't think I've ever read more painful, misinformed, and inexperienced discourse on sex. I think I know why many of you are so frustrated or anal-retentive when it comes to sexual dynamics: because you're over-thinking things.

Some of the best sex I've ever had happened because I didn't try to have any deeper interaction. All I cared about was focking around.

If you want to get laid, thinking about evolution will not work. Thinking about gender or attraction dynamics won't get you anywhere. What [I]will[/I] get you some, however, is being relaxed and actually not caring about whether or not you get any.

Care enough not to care, basically.

[Retribution]

[quote name='The Blue Jihad']Everyone here needs to get laid immediately.

I don't think I've ever read more painful, misinformed, and inexperienced discourse on sex. I think I know why many of you are so frustrated or anal-retentive when it comes to sexual dynamics: because you're over-thinking things.

Some of the best sex I've ever had happened because I didn't try to have any deeper interaction. All I cared about was focking around.

If you want to get laid, thinking about evolution will not work. Thinking about gender or attraction dynamics won't get you anywhere. What [I]will[/I] get you some, however, is being relaxed and actually not caring about whether or not you get any.

Care enough not to care, basically.[/QUOTE]
[font=Arial]You know I love it when you’re snarky.

But really, we were (or at least I was) discussing the underlying mechanism that makes you want to hit it and quit it, or stick around. I’m personally not frustrated or anal-retentive (and do you even know what that means?), and I sincerely apologize for discussing sexual attraction, sir, it'll never happen again.

You’re really misled if you think I base my conscious decision making on attraction dynamics.[/font]

[Guest The Blue Jihad]

[quote name='Retribution'][FONT=Arial]You know I love it when you?re snarky.

But really, we were (or at least I was) discussing the underlying mechanism that makes you want to hit it and quit it, or stick around. I?m personally not frustrated or anal-retentive (and do you even know what that means?), and I sincerely apologize for discussing sexual attraction.

You?re really misled if you think I base my conscious decision making on attraction dynamics.[/FONT][/quote]

Man, when I see three medium length paragraphs discussing [I]evolutionary sexual dynamics[/I] when answering a question about sexual attraction...that's when I point my finger at you and tell you outright that you're overthinking things and basing your sexual advances on downright stupidity.

Don't mis-lead yourself. You made no dramatic revelation by hinting at the whole evolutionary shape theory, where men are attracted to big tits and curvy thighs because subconsciously big tits and curvy thighs represent fertility and ease of child birth.

Just go get laid, dude. You'll feel better. And you'll feel much less inclined to go on about sexual dynamics in evolutionary theory.