Kaftan Barlast Posted September 21, 2009 Posted September 21, 2009 ladies and gentlemen, Last thread we did stumble over a subject that I thought was so interesting that Im making a whole new thread about it. Are women more shallow than men because they tend to go for money/power while men go for appearance/bootyliciousness? Stereotypicly speaking, of course. Theres nothing wrong with a man having a sugarmama. Also, try to keep the misogygny on an entertaining level. Personally I find it not only logical, but an act of utter selflessness to choose a partner based on appearance instead of financial or social status. A wealthy partner will provide a comfortable life for you personally, but a hot partner will ensure your children will be hot and live the awesome life that hot people live. And since attractiveness is a sign of good genes, they will be strong and healthy aswell. It's a friggin win-win situation. Women on the other hand, are much more primal creature that act on instinct and short-term well-being. You may score a good life for yourself, but your children, if you get any to begin with, will not only be short and ugly, but spoiled and obnoxious aswell. Its thinking like that, thats destroying this planet. You're alot better off supporting a young, but poor and moderately attractive, aspiring illusionist get his career off the ground. Thats my take on it. Work with me, people. DISCLAIMER: Do not take what I write seriously unless it is clearly and in no uncertain terms, declared by me to be meant in a serious and non-humoristic manner. If there is no clear indication, asume the post is written in jest. This notification is meant very seriously and its purpouse is to avoid misunderstandings and the consequences thereof. Furthermore; I can not be held accountable for anything I write on these forums since the idea of taking serious responsability for my unserious actions, is an oxymoron in itself. Important: as the following sentence contains many naughty words I warn you not to read it under any circumstances; botty, knickers, wee, erogenous zone, psychiatrist, clitoris, stockings, bosom, poetry reading, dentist, fellatio and the department of agriculture. "I suppose outright stupidity and complete lack of taste could also be considered points of view. "
Volourn Posted September 21, 2009 Posted September 21, 2009 I personally find neither shallow. Everyone has their wants and needs. You should be with wheoever you are attracted to. The problem is some will marry a rich person even if they're not really attracted to them. That's shallow. DWARVES IN PROJECT ETERNITY = VOLOURN HAS PLEDGED $250.
ramza Posted September 21, 2009 Posted September 21, 2009 Both actually are shallow criteria actually. Sure, they have to be taken into consideration but it's the personality that matters the most. "Ooo, squirrels, Boo! I know I saw them! Quick, throw nuts!" -Minsc "I am a well-known racist in the Realms! Elves? Dwarves? Ha! Kill'em all! Humans rule! -Me Volourn will never grow up, he's like the Black Peter Pan, here to tell you that it might be great to always be a child, but everybody around is gonna hate it.
Hurlshort Posted September 21, 2009 Posted September 21, 2009 I think it is much smarter to marry for money. My wife has told me many times that her next marriage will be to someone rich.
Purkake Posted September 21, 2009 Posted September 21, 2009 I think it is much smarter to marry for money. My wife has told me many times that her next marriage will be to someone rich.
Kaftan Barlast Posted September 21, 2009 Author Posted September 21, 2009 <--- badum-tisch!! emoticon Note to admin, incorporate this. Now. DISCLAIMER: Do not take what I write seriously unless it is clearly and in no uncertain terms, declared by me to be meant in a serious and non-humoristic manner. If there is no clear indication, asume the post is written in jest. This notification is meant very seriously and its purpouse is to avoid misunderstandings and the consequences thereof. Furthermore; I can not be held accountable for anything I write on these forums since the idea of taking serious responsability for my unserious actions, is an oxymoron in itself. Important: as the following sentence contains many naughty words I warn you not to read it under any circumstances; botty, knickers, wee, erogenous zone, psychiatrist, clitoris, stockings, bosom, poetry reading, dentist, fellatio and the department of agriculture. "I suppose outright stupidity and complete lack of taste could also be considered points of view. "
Purkake Posted September 21, 2009 Posted September 21, 2009 And when you click on it, it should play this.
Gfted1 Posted September 21, 2009 Posted September 21, 2009 While I agree that looks are of paramount importance for initial attraction, in the long run personality is a must have. After all, looks fade. Eh, who am I kidding, Id have married for money given the opportunity. "I'm your biggest fan, Ill follow you until you love me, Papa"
Rosbjerg Posted September 21, 2009 Posted September 21, 2009 You might as well ask if attraction in general is shallow.. Nothing wrong with women being attracted to successful/rich men, as they have proven, from a biological standpoint, that they are capable of supplying for themselves and a family. Nothing wrong with men being attracted to beauty either, as that signifies good genes (which is why we find them attractive to begin with). It's all biology baby, nothing shallow about it. Fortune favors the bald.
alanschu Posted September 21, 2009 Posted September 21, 2009 Personally I find it not only logical, but an act of utter selflessness to choose a partner based on appearance instead of financial or social status. A wealthy partner will provide a comfortable life for you personally, but a hot partner will ensure your children will be hot and live the awesome life that hot people live. And since attractiveness is a sign of good genes, they will be strong and healthy aswell. It's a friggin win-win situation. Women on the other hand, are much more primal creature that act on instinct and short-term well-being. You may score a good life for yourself, but your children, if you get any to begin with, will not only be short and ugly, but spoiled and obnoxious aswell. Its thinking like that, thats destroying this planet. You're alot better off supporting a young, but poor and moderately attractive, aspiring illusionist get his career off the ground. I love the rationalization
Guard Dog Posted September 21, 2009 Posted September 21, 2009 but a hot partner will ensure your children will be hot and live the awesome life that hot people live. And since attractiveness is a sign of good genes, they will be strong and healthy aswell. It's a friggin win-win situation. Thats assuming your genes are keeping up their end of the bargain. "While it is true you learn with age, the down side is what you often learn is what a damn fool you were before" Thomas Sowell
Pidesco Posted September 21, 2009 Posted September 21, 2009 All around the world millions are declaring their undying love, singing paeans to someone's beauty, describing a person in wonderful, perfect detail while thinking "I could do worse". People don't just choose the richest or the prettiest partner or the one with best personality. Most(all?) people settle for someone. Someone within their proverbial league, someone they can strive for without too much work/money/selflessness. People are lazy, scared, generally incompetent and unable to face the reasons behind their choices. No one's together with a perfect 10, everyone's married to a 5 and everyone knows it. "My hovercraft is full of eels!" - Hungarian tourist I am Dan Quayle of the Romans. I want to tattoo a map of the Netherlands on my nether lands. Heja Sverige!! Everyone should cuffawkle more. The wrench is your friend.
kirottu Posted September 21, 2009 Posted September 21, 2009 I think you This post is not to be enjoyed, discussed, or referenced on company time.
Guard Dog Posted September 21, 2009 Posted September 21, 2009 All around the world millions are declaring their undying love, singing paeans to someone's beauty, describing a person in wonderful, perfect detail while thinking "I could do worse". People don't just choose the richest or the prettiest partner or the one with best personality. Most(all?) people settle for someone. Someone within their proverbial league, someone they can strive for without too much work/money/selflessness. People are lazy, scared, generally incompetent and unable to face the reasons behind their choices. No one's together with a perfect 10, everyone's married to a 5 and everyone knows it. Pidesco wins. "While it is true you learn with age, the down side is what you often learn is what a damn fool you were before" Thomas Sowell
Purkake Posted September 21, 2009 Posted September 21, 2009 All around the world millions are declaring their undying love, singing paeans to someone's beauty, describing a person in wonderful, perfect detail while thinking "I could do worse". People don't just choose the richest or the prettiest partner or the one with best personality. Most(all?) people settle for someone. Someone within their proverbial league, someone they can strive for without too much work/money/selflessness. People are lazy, scared, generally incompetent and unable to face the reasons behind their choices. No one's together with a perfect 10, everyone's married to a 5 and everyone knows it. 7/10, nice post, would read again.
Rostere Posted September 21, 2009 Posted September 21, 2009 All around the world millions are declaring their undying love, singing paeans to someone's beauty, describing a person in wonderful, perfect detail while thinking "I could do worse". People don't just choose the richest or the prettiest partner or the one with best personality. Most(all?) people settle for someone. Someone within their proverbial league, someone they can strive for without too much work/money/selflessness. People are lazy, scared, generally incompetent and unable to face the reasons behind their choices. No one's together with a perfect 10, everyone's married to a 5 and everyone knows it. 10/10!!! "Well, overkill is my middle name. And my last name. And all of my other names as well!"
alanschu Posted September 21, 2009 Posted September 21, 2009 I do agree that most people settle. I think it's also true that we all "settle" in some way. But some just more than others. I prefer to not be in that group haha. I won't delude myself into thinking that I found the best match for me in all the world (since I'll never meet the whole world), but that person better damn well be one of the top contenders for best match I have met so far (and hopefully for the rest of my life).
Hurlshort Posted September 21, 2009 Posted September 21, 2009 It has never crossed my mind that I may have "settled" for my wife. Every day I look at her and I think, hot damn, how'd I convince her to put up with me all these years? Then I go out and buy her something to keep her happy. Good times. Looks are really just an initial stage, as is status. Given some time, any relationship has to move past beauty and status and find a deeper connection, otherwise it will turn to crap pretty fast. I'll divulge a little embarrassing tidbit about my own relationship to make my point. For some reason my wife lost complete interest in sex for about 3 years. It was torture. I didn't know what to do, either did she. It was like a switch had been turned off. We fought quite a bit, but at no point did I ever think about giving up on the marriage. Then the switched turned back on, and it was like we had just met all over again. If it was just about looks and status, we never would have gotten through that time.
Kaftan Barlast Posted September 21, 2009 Author Posted September 21, 2009 Nothing wrong with women being attracted to successful/rich men First of all, it's sick and wrong. Second, its not attraction if its by conscious choice, you cant just go "Im going to go and be attracted by this guy over here". If that worked, people could marry lamp poles or dustbins. Third, if its a conscious choice, then its probably some sort of malevolent and dishonest scheme on part of the woman, in order to get something they dont rightfully deserve. Which is basicly fraud. Its just like when you pick up a hot prostitute that turns out to be a man, its just deceitful and mean behaviour. ...as they have proven, from a biological standpoint, that they are capable of supplying for themselves and a family. Id like to see Donald Trump guide his tribe through the Gobi desert and wrestle lions with his bare hands, I think he'd do just swell... DISCLAIMER: Do not take what I write seriously unless it is clearly and in no uncertain terms, declared by me to be meant in a serious and non-humoristic manner. If there is no clear indication, asume the post is written in jest. This notification is meant very seriously and its purpouse is to avoid misunderstandings and the consequences thereof. Furthermore; I can not be held accountable for anything I write on these forums since the idea of taking serious responsability for my unserious actions, is an oxymoron in itself. Important: as the following sentence contains many naughty words I warn you not to read it under any circumstances; botty, knickers, wee, erogenous zone, psychiatrist, clitoris, stockings, bosom, poetry reading, dentist, fellatio and the department of agriculture. "I suppose outright stupidity and complete lack of taste could also be considered points of view. "
Purkake Posted September 21, 2009 Posted September 21, 2009 Nothing wrong with women being attracted to successful/rich men First of all, it's sick and wrong. Strong words, man. You seem to care about this deeply, while I couldn't care less. Why so much passion about what other people do?
alanschu Posted September 21, 2009 Posted September 21, 2009 A lot of attraction is still a social construct.
HoonDing Posted September 21, 2009 Posted September 21, 2009 (edited) I learnt a nice new English word today - "paeans". Simply beautiful. As for the thread, as always: live and let live. Edited September 21, 2009 by virumor The ending of the words is ALMSIVI.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now