this thread is getting started by me due to a topic that was going on the Tickling Discussion forum. this is about attractiveness. there seems to be this line of thought between men and women about how we handle someone's attractiveness (or lack of..).
i notice that men are labed as "superficial, shallow" beings and that we should look at a woman's "inside" rather than her outside. now true, a woman's personality is probably the most important thing because i would much rather hang around someone who has a great personality than someone who is evil or dull. but why do women (not all women of course...) ask men to essentially go out with "non supermodels" instead of "supermodels"? wouldnt that a stereotype from women who think "non supermodels" would have better personalities than "supermodels"? couldnt a "supermodel" have an outstanding personality as well?
here is the bottom line. i dont give a damn how great your personality is, in order to make a romantic relationship happen, you have to be ATTRACTED to that person physically. they do not have to be "supermodel" types, but they have to have some kind of physical attraction. let's be real. a man (or a woman) will not have the "urge" if the person is not in the least somewhat attractive. am i wrong? no. it goes for both men and women.
now, would i choose a supermodel type, who's personality is shallow and vain, or an "average" woman who's personality shines? i am going to take the average woman, but ONLY if the average woman's looks are at the bare minimum of what i consider attractive.
anyone agree or disagree?
i notice that men are labed as "superficial, shallow" beings and that we should look at a woman's "inside" rather than her outside. now true, a woman's personality is probably the most important thing because i would much rather hang around someone who has a great personality than someone who is evil or dull. but why do women (not all women of course...) ask men to essentially go out with "non supermodels" instead of "supermodels"? wouldnt that a stereotype from women who think "non supermodels" would have better personalities than "supermodels"? couldnt a "supermodel" have an outstanding personality as well?
here is the bottom line. i dont give a damn how great your personality is, in order to make a romantic relationship happen, you have to be ATTRACTED to that person physically. they do not have to be "supermodel" types, but they have to have some kind of physical attraction. let's be real. a man (or a woman) will not have the "urge" if the person is not in the least somewhat attractive. am i wrong? no. it goes for both men and women.
now, would i choose a supermodel type, who's personality is shallow and vain, or an "average" woman who's personality shines? i am going to take the average woman, but ONLY if the average woman's looks are at the bare minimum of what i consider attractive.
anyone agree or disagree?
Thanks love. 
