Guys, what are your thoughts on the concept of "superficiality"?
In dating and relationships, is it really what's on the inside that counts? Or is it OK to just judge each other's date-ability by the surface values, e.g. appearance, money etc.?
One of the things that has always fascinated me is the way that women always complain about men being shallow, that we only want one thing from a girl, and all that. "Why can't men love us for who we are?" I've often heard them say. "Why can't they want us for our minds and personalities? All they think about is sex.." etc. You've all heard it.
And I totally sympathize with them in theory, and it would be all well and good... except that many of these same women would never, ever do that same favour for a man.
I mean, is she really going to take seriously the short, nervous guy with the high voice who collects action figures and still lives with his parents at 30? Even if he's really a great guy, will she love him for who he is? Highly unlikely. But isn't that just as shallow?
And it works the other way too, of course. If that same guy complains that women reject him because he's a sci-fi geek and lives at home, but he won't think of dating a woman who doesn't look like she should be a model, then he's just as much a hypocrite as the complaining women. Meanwhile, attractive men and women who whine that others only want them for their looks/status/whatever should also check to make sure they're not doing the same thing when they look for somebody, or else they're just as bad too. Right?
In a way, I'm lucky that looks don't matter to me quite as much. I'd be lying if I said model-worthy hotties didn't turn my head (I'm a red-blooded man, after all). But on a deeper level, I'd rather be with a plain-looking woman who's actually interesting and fun to be with than a so-called "10" who's an absolute b*tch. Besides, and I know this is a wild generalization, but I've often found that the more a woman works to be good-looking, the less interesting she is as a person. In fact, I've even found that a physical attraction for an average girl did develop over time if I really liked her as a person, in a few cases. If I'd put all my stock in looks, I'm sure I'd still be a virgin, since I'm far from Brad Pitt myself. If only more women thought the same way, we'd be in paradise.
I believe that men as a whole are more willing to like/love someone "for who she is", and overlook minor imperfections, than women are. Maybe that sounds like AFC behaviour, I don't know. But with women, it seems like the minute you make one small mistake, she bails. Doesn't matter how well it was going; you make the most inconsequential mistake, you don't meet her criteria for Mr. Wonderful, and she deems you worthless and moves on. So which is more right -- to be more open-minded, or to have high standards in certain departments?
Anyway... discuss.
In dating and relationships, is it really what's on the inside that counts? Or is it OK to just judge each other's date-ability by the surface values, e.g. appearance, money etc.?
One of the things that has always fascinated me is the way that women always complain about men being shallow, that we only want one thing from a girl, and all that. "Why can't men love us for who we are?" I've often heard them say. "Why can't they want us for our minds and personalities? All they think about is sex.." etc. You've all heard it.
And I totally sympathize with them in theory, and it would be all well and good... except that many of these same women would never, ever do that same favour for a man.
I mean, is she really going to take seriously the short, nervous guy with the high voice who collects action figures and still lives with his parents at 30? Even if he's really a great guy, will she love him for who he is? Highly unlikely. But isn't that just as shallow?
And it works the other way too, of course. If that same guy complains that women reject him because he's a sci-fi geek and lives at home, but he won't think of dating a woman who doesn't look like she should be a model, then he's just as much a hypocrite as the complaining women. Meanwhile, attractive men and women who whine that others only want them for their looks/status/whatever should also check to make sure they're not doing the same thing when they look for somebody, or else they're just as bad too. Right?
In a way, I'm lucky that looks don't matter to me quite as much. I'd be lying if I said model-worthy hotties didn't turn my head (I'm a red-blooded man, after all). But on a deeper level, I'd rather be with a plain-looking woman who's actually interesting and fun to be with than a so-called "10" who's an absolute b*tch. Besides, and I know this is a wild generalization, but I've often found that the more a woman works to be good-looking, the less interesting she is as a person. In fact, I've even found that a physical attraction for an average girl did develop over time if I really liked her as a person, in a few cases. If I'd put all my stock in looks, I'm sure I'd still be a virgin, since I'm far from Brad Pitt myself. If only more women thought the same way, we'd be in paradise.
I believe that men as a whole are more willing to like/love someone "for who she is", and overlook minor imperfections, than women are. Maybe that sounds like AFC behaviour, I don't know. But with women, it seems like the minute you make one small mistake, she bails. Doesn't matter how well it was going; you make the most inconsequential mistake, you don't meet her criteria for Mr. Wonderful, and she deems you worthless and moves on. So which is more right -- to be more open-minded, or to have high standards in certain departments?
Anyway... discuss.
