Personality Cafe banner

How much of a percentage does physical attributes determine compatibility for you?

  • 100%

    Votes: 7 4.2%
  • 90%

    Votes: 2 1.2%
  • 80%

    Votes: 9 5.5%
  • 70%

    Votes: 24 14.5%
  • 60%

    Votes: 22 13.3%
  • 50%

    Votes: 32 19.4%
  • 40%

    Votes: 21 12.7%
  • 30%

    Votes: 20 12.1%
  • 20%

    Votes: 13 7.9%
  • 10%

    Votes: 9 5.5%
  • 0%

    Votes: 6 3.6%

  • Total voters
    165
Status
Not open for further replies.
21 - 40 of 75 Posts

·
The Doer King
Joined
·
13,680 Posts
*Goes to her sad place* :sad:
At least i'm honest.
Hey I was honest as well. I am not debating that at all. The problem with looks (and I love beautiful women) is that after you get use to the person under the looks all you got is personality. Looks will only keep a relationship going a couple months. Maybe it can sustain you longer, only you know.

Technically I would like to be shallow and I would love to date a hot woman. It's just that through experience I know it isn't worth it. So I try to get hot women with nice personalities.
 

·
MOTM Jan 2010
Joined
·
2,988 Posts
Personality also boosts someone's phsyical attraction. At least it does for me. I need to have that attraction, though. If I don't have it, I just can't find it in myself to sustain a relationship with them beyond friendship. :/
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
330 Posts
Its difficult to be attracted to a lot of girls in the first place personally, so that's why I chose 50%. Now, they don't have to be models, but I find girls in shape with their own style attractive. What really matters to me though, is a refreshing personality. The mental stimulation has to be present. If she can get me to think and enjoys talking about the going-on's of the world/science/the future/etc. that is a major plus. :cool:
 

·
MOTM Aug 2010
Joined
·
1,412 Posts
Damnit, you know how much I hate assigning number values to things that are subjective! :angry:

I can see where snail is coming from, but in my experience dishonesty is even worse than not being attracted to someone because of appearance (which is not the same thing as deeming someone to be completely unworthy of love because they are "ugly"). I used to feel guilty about being attracted to physical features, but trying to come across as someone who wasn't turned me into someone who came across as completely fake.

Liontiger did make a good point about non-physical features enhancing one's attractiveness, though. I always look at the whole person, not just isolated aspects. And I don't have a "standard" definition of beauty, either; there are many women I find beautiful (*points to signature*).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
308 Posts
I'm extremely disappointed to see that I'm the only now who voted zero so far. I can't imagine any rational person even saying one tenth of a person's value is appearance-based, and feel very little hope for the state of humanity when I hear things like this. :(
Posted via Mobile Device
The only "hope" for humanity is awareness of the choices we make and why we make them. It's superficial to damn the world based on the values people ascribed to looks. Now damning the world over lack of compassion, lack of awareness of others needs, or lack of discipline, those I can understand but to damn the world over people's various choices on outward appearances is in itself quite superficial.
 

·
Cafe Legend and MOTM Jan 2011
Joined
·
15,420 Posts
In order to clarify so I won't be perceived as an extremist, I will say that presentation is not the same as appearance. A person's choices have meaning, but innate features do not. For example, a woman may get a bad first impression because a man is wearing a baseball cap, which she believes may symbolize a competitive nature, and this is valid information to take into consideration until there is other, more reliable information available. After all, what a person wears can be used to communicate things about preferences and social identification. It would be ridiculous, however, to say that a man would make a terrible husband because he has a big nose. The size of his nose has nothing to do with his character or whether he is psychologically compatible as a relationship partner. After the woman sees that the potential social indicator does not mean what she thinks, she may fall in love with the man in the baseball cap, and it would be silly to consider him unattractive for his fashion. Therefore, looks themselves are irrelevant to me unless they carry clues about the underlying self, and even then the information is of limited use.
Posted via Mobile Device
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,633 Posts
The only "hope" for humanity is awareness of the choices we make and why we make them. It's superficial to damn the world based on the values people ascribed to looks. Now damning the world over lack of compassion, lack of awareness of others needs, or lack of discipline, those I can understand but to damn the world over people's various choices on outward appearances is in itself quite superficial.
Yes but for me putting a percentage on what apperance is to you dont mean I go for the totally pretty girls all the time. I go for the quirky ones more often that have that special look in their eyes that makes me say "she's cute and pretty".

What I mean is that as much as I want it to be 0% and all personality, at first there has to be an attraction something physically attractive. Then when you get to know her she automatically becomes even more beautiful. Okay I want my 60% to be 50% or 40% then, if the trend is they have to be stellar beauties the higher the scale you go.

Im not totally attractive, I have a nice face I think but my body is lacking tons so yeah I probably cant score a stellar beauty anyways so...
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
14,865 Posts
A person's form to me, is a meaningless cluster of shapes and colors until the personality defines what those images mean to me. There are only theories in science, many contradictory, and absurd which try to prescribe ideas about which uh.. type of face I should be attracted to- and for what? That person isn't going to please me more just because they look more similar to the beauty standard of this culture and time.

I am considered conventionally attractive myself, and have dated many people who were not so at all- and have gotten really shallow responses from people saying I could 'do better.'

Whatever. If the personality is compatible with mine, that is what is going to please me.

That said- I pick a big, fat ZERO percent. :tongue:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
308 Posts
Yes but for me putting a percentage on what apperance is to you dont mean I go for the totally pretty girls all the time. I go for the quirky ones more often that have that special look in their eyes that makes me say "she's cute and pretty".

What I mean is that as much as I want it to be 0% and all personality, at first there has to be an attraction something physically attractive. Then when you get to know her she automatically becomes even more beautiful. Okay I want my 60% to be 50% or 40% then, if the trend is they have to be stellar beauties the higher the scale you go.

Im not totally attractive, I have a nice face I think but my body is lacking tons so yeah I probably cant score a stellar beauty anyways so...
I don't understand what you're quoting me for. You really don't even address what I said. I didn't even vote. So...
 

·
Cafe Legend and MOTM Jan 2011
Joined
·
15,420 Posts
A person's form to me, is a meaningless cluster of shapes and colors until the personality defines what those images mean to me. There are only theories in science, many contradictory, and absurd which try to prescribe ideas about which uh.. type of face I should be attracted to- and for what? That person isn't going to please me more just because they look more similar to the beauty standard of this culture and time.

I am considered conventionally attractive myself, and have dated many people who were not so at all- and have gotten really shallow responses from people saying I could 'do better.'

Whatever. If the personality is compatible with mine, that is what is going to please me.

That said- I pick a big, fat ZERO percent. :tongue:
You are very quickly becoming one of my new favorite people. :happy:
Posted via Mobile Device
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
305 Posts
I voted fifty percent. How someone looks is usually how I determine who I will take initiative with, if I do at all. However, I analyze their personality from that point on. If they're interesting, fun to be with, intelligent, then their physical capabilities are merely a plus. If they have a horrid personality that clashes with my own, then I'll move on regardless of how they look.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,094 Posts
I look at this in two different ways.

If I define 'physical attributes' as simply physical features, without reading underlying personality information, then I have no way to tell if the person is compatible for me. I may be more attracted to one person's looks than another, but it doesn't mean we will be compatible in the long term. For me physical attraction doesn't equal compatibility.

But if I define 'physical attributes' as being a complex web of features, body language, demeanour etc that demonstrates the underlying personality, then I start to get a better idea about whether someone might be compatible with me. For example, I am more attracted to relaxed, smiling, laughing people than tense, grumpy looking people. But even then, I don't see this as any guarantee that we would be compatible for a relationship.

So I chose a low percentage for this poll.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
853 Posts
Upon re-evaluation, I chose 40% for my answer. However, this percentage decreases to about 15% over the course of a couple months. Loving someone makes their innate goodness shine through their outer shell, and makes it much easier to downplay unattractive parts.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,365 Posts
Now, they don't have to be models, but I find girls in shape with their own style attractive. What really matters to me though, is a refreshing personality. The mental stimulation has to be present. If she can get me to think and enjoys talking about the going-on's of the world/science/the future/etc. that is a major plus. :cool:
Mmm, well said. I like guys who present themselves well. If they dress well...just take pride in their appearance generally and have their own style then I'm really attracted to them. Their natural body underneath doesn't really matter, it's all about how they present it.


I voted 20% because of course looks may be important to begin with. And honestly, I wouldn't date someone who was extremely obese. That would be not only because of their looks, but because they (probably) don't take care of themselves which is very important to me. I want someone who challenges me in health/lifestyle and knowledge so we can help each other grow and improve...So I want someone who is just as, if not more fit than me (for example).

Still, I would much rather marry a green skinned monster yeti man who liked philosophy/literature/history than the most attractive man on the planet who didn't care for it. But that's making it too simple, obviously. ..
 

·
Cafe Legend and MOTM Jan 2011
Joined
·
15,420 Posts
What if the interesting, intelligent green-skinned yeti was obese?
Posted via Mobile Device
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,070 Posts
Between 20 and 30%. I just picked 30%...but it's probably less now I think about it. It's all nice somebody being physically attractive but if they've got nothing else to back it upas soon as the novelty wears off you realise it's actually not that important.
 

·
Cafe Legend and MOTM Jan 2011
Joined
·
15,420 Posts
It seems to be a common tendency to use looks as the first part of the weeding out process, then to refine the search based on non-physical qualities, but to me, this seems as ridiculous as basing admission into a university first on the applicant's P.E. Grade, then only if they have an A in the least meaningful of all classes, to narrow them down according to actual academic performance. Sure, if they are going to school to be a professional football player this would make sense, but for someone who would rather be a scientist, mathematician, artist, or philosopher, the P.E. grade would not determine their potential to excell in their field. Likewise, if a relationship is going to be based primarily on mutual sexual objectification, only then would it make sense to use looks as the first limiting category. If the goal of the relationship is to be compatible with another human being on a deeper level, the depth-determining factors should be considered first. Physical intimacy would be a natural manifestation of psychological intimacy.
Posted via Mobile Device
 
21 - 40 of 75 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top