PG doesn't want you (or ANY ivillage lady) to change her mind if there are certain perimeters that make her uncomfortable.
I personally think your AGE bias IS a "cop-out", but that's only one man's opinion.
This isn't an issue of "lowering your standards"----it's an issue of dismissing MEN before they even are given the opportunity to prove to you that their hearts are pure and that their intentions (toward you) are honorable.
Whether you choose to reciprocate toward us in a romantic manner or not, try to remember that a lot of men DON'T NEED THE MUSHY STUFF! Many are quite content being in the presence of women who generally 'care' about and for them.
What usually turns most of us off is when certain women adopt the "I'M IN THIS RELATIONSHIP STRICTLY FOR WHAT I CAN GET OUT OF IT" attitude. Once a man realizes this, our response is usually: "WHY SHOULD I WASTE MY TIME WITH HER?"
Just as you have choices and preferences....so do we!
It is interesting to observe the way women can precisely describe the *physical* features a man must NOT have. This implies men who have these features are ugly but women get away with it because they say it's "having standards". BUT I was labelled a "typical man" when I described the type of woman I want and there was an implication that men like me don't have what it takes to get them.
>Giving a few criteria that eliminates certain men is much >different from giving a few criteria that qualifies certain women.
This is a very misleading statement. You said that you don't want any "stupid and ugly" men. Sure, that is only few criteria but how many men does it eliminate? What is your definition of ugly and stupid?
>And to clear things up, I never said YOU personally couldn't snag a hottie.
I never said I wanted a "hottie".
>Which one would have more people who qualify? A no-brainer if you ask me.
Your example doesn't support your argument. I could easily say there's a contest. In that contest, all men can enter except the stupid ugly ones. Then there is another contest, all men can enter except the ones with an IQ below 130, shorter than 170cm and a waist size larger than 34 inches. Which contest would have more men who qualify?
>There aren't a lot of "hottie" women out there, but since much of the male >population wants one, those women can be pickier and therefore will end up >with the cream of the crop- not the 300 pound man with food between is fat >rolls and who still lives with his mother...or the guy with no job...or the >guy who can't carry on a conversation.
I don't understand your argument. You have ardently stated:-
"And you can SAY you aren't suggesting lowering my standards, but anything other than exactly what I want would be."
Do you expect men who don't fit *your* standard (ie/ the 300 pound man with food between is fat rolls and who still lives with his mother...or the guy with no job...or the guy who can't carry on a conversation) to lower theirs? There may be "hotties" that don't care about the things which YOU find unattractive, or are you their elected spokesperson?
Pages
>That's what most men want these days....and most of
>them are no where near the quality it takes to snag
>a girl like that
It seems most women don't want short fat bald men either.
>Being ugly and being overweight..or "fat" are not synonymous.
I never said they were. I didn't even imply it. But I will say that "ugly" is SUBJECTIVE!
shyone...
PG doesn't want you (or ANY ivillage lady) to change her mind if there are certain perimeters that make her uncomfortable.
I personally think your AGE bias IS a "cop-out", but that's only one man's opinion.
This isn't an issue of "lowering your standards"----it's an issue of dismissing MEN before they even are given the opportunity to prove to you that their hearts are pure and that their intentions (toward you) are honorable.
Whether you choose to reciprocate toward us in a romantic manner or not, try to remember that a lot of men DON'T NEED THE MUSHY STUFF! Many are quite content being in the presence of women who generally 'care' about and for them.
What usually turns most of us off is when certain women adopt the "I'M IN THIS RELATIONSHIP STRICTLY FOR WHAT I CAN GET OUT OF IT" attitude. Once a man realizes this, our response is usually: "WHY SHOULD I WASTE MY TIME WITH HER?"
Just as you have choices and preferences....so do we!
Pianoguy
If you get absolutely nothing out of a relationship, then what's the point? You ARE just wasting your time and the other person's.
(BTW, I'm not talking about material things, of course.)
"I'M IN THIS RELATIONSHIP STRICTLY FOR WHAT I CAN GET OUT OF IT" attitude."
What do you mean by this? Are you insinuating that shy is one of those "types"? I don't see that at all ...
bbw 26...
With regards to the relationship statement, Pianoguy was speaking generically......and made NO DIRECT REFERENCE to shyone (or anyone) in particular.
Pianoguy
Are you kidding?
I personally think your AGE bias IS a "cop-out", but that's only one man's opinion.
A cop out of what?
Stacey,
It is interesting to observe the way women can precisely describe the *physical* features a man must NOT have. This implies men who have these features are ugly but women get away with it because they say it's "having standards". BUT I was labelled a "typical man" when I described the type of woman I want and there was an implication that men like me don't have what it takes to get them.
Giving a few criteria that eliminates certain men is much different from giving a few criteria that qualifies certain women.
For example, let's say there's a contest- any contest.
Shy,
>Giving a few criteria that eliminates certain men is much
>different from giving a few criteria that qualifies certain women.
This is a very misleading statement. You said that you don't want any "stupid and ugly" men. Sure, that is only few criteria but how many men does it eliminate? What is your definition of ugly and stupid?
>And to clear things up, I never said YOU personally couldn't snag a hottie.
I never said I wanted a "hottie".
>Which one would have more people who qualify? A no-brainer if you ask me.
Your example doesn't support your argument. I could easily say there's a contest. In that contest, all men can enter except the stupid ugly ones. Then there is another contest, all men can enter except the ones with an IQ below 130, shorter than 170cm and a waist size larger than 34 inches. Which contest would have more men who qualify?
>There aren't a lot of "hottie" women out there, but since much of the male
>population wants one, those women can be pickier and therefore will end up
>with the cream of the crop- not the 300 pound man with food between is fat
>rolls and who still lives with his mother...or the guy with no job...or the
>guy who can't carry on a conversation.
I don't understand your argument. You have ardently stated:-
"And you can SAY you aren't suggesting lowering my standards, but anything other than exactly what I want would be."
Do you expect men who don't fit *your* standard (ie/ the 300 pound man with food between is fat rolls and who still lives with his mother...or the guy with no job...or the guy who can't carry on a conversation) to lower theirs? There may be "hotties" that don't care about the things which YOU find unattractive, or are you their elected spokesperson?
Pages