I am a big fan of movie reviewer James Berardinelli, but his review of the film Because I Said So contains this paragraph:
"The movie starts with a premise that’s in Santa Claus territory. Mandy Moore
plays Milly, a beautiful, desirable young woman who also happens to be a
fantastic cook but who can’t find Mr. Right. Like Santa Claus, this person exists
only in fantasy since there is no way someone as smart and alluring as Milly is
going to be starved for meaningful companionship. However, that’s what
suspension of disbelief is all about. So I’ll give the filmmakers a pass, especially
considering that Moore is attractive and appealing and probably more enjoyable
to watch than someone who might do a better job filling the part “realistically.”
Hmm. So an intelligent, discerning and charming woman who also happens to be very good looking will automatically find a compatible male of the species. He’ll just pop out of the ground as she passes Central Park in the morning, they fall in love and marry and live happily ever after. She isn’t discerning enough to wait (for however long it takes) for a really good match tho but is somehow able to avoid the various Mr. Wrongs who will undoubtedly make a play for her. She’ll thus settle for the first half-decent guy she runs across, and she doesn’t have to wait long if at all.
Am I reading his argument correctly? [explicit and implied parts combined] ARE there no well-adjusted (non neurotic etc.) beautiful women (or men) who are nevertheless starving for quality companionship of the opposite sex? Is the core assumption here that beautiful people are shallow enough that they won’t spend deliberate amounts of time sorting through the good and the bad while waiting for Mr. Right? Obviously by “quality companionship” I mean being in a committed relationship with someone who is more or less a good fit not only physically but also socially, emotionally and even spiritually (and yes the latter term can include two atheists). Don’t have to wait hardly at all huh?
Well, I can think of at least one off the top of my head. Leslie Parrish, she of the Trek ep. “Who Mourns For Adonis”, who later fell in love with and married author Richard Bach. As detailed in his book of their relationship, A Bridge Across Forever, she, by the time she had actually gotten involved with him, had pretty much decided that living out the rest of her life without a man would have been okay. [that’s from memory just paraphrasing what I remember her saying in the novel]
So do you agree with Berardinelli, or me? What have been your observations? Is the notion of lonely beautiful people so outlandish that it veers into Santa Claus territory? James may lurk here and if so he is free to join in the discussion.
I have a female friend that is very attractive and not unintelligent, she lives at home with rich parents. She has pretty much everything a guy could want. I almost never hear about her going on any kind of dates or anything. I can’t recall her ever being in a serious relationship. She is my age (21) and claims to still be a virgin. I think either she is completely alright with her current circumstances or is utterly asexual or something.
I think another part of it is not only the intimidation, but if you see a good-looking woman you tend to assume she is already taken, so one might not even bother to find out.
Eh? The description was: “Are there lonely good-looking people?”
The first part is lonely. You’re lonely but you’re not lonely?
As to the OP, the reviewer also makes the assumption that the person (Mandy Moore’s character in this case) is also outgoing and extroverted. A person could be smart and attractive but not go out enough to meet people. Maybe there’s something in the movie that negates that.
My wife has a friend who is definitely good looking but to the best of my knowledge hasn’t been out on a date in a few years. She is fairly anti-social which explains it. My friends are always stunned to find out that she isn’t dating and just doesn’t go out anywhere. One of my friends went so far as to call her stunning.
Of course there are good looking lonely people. The illogical idea that there are not stems from the jealous musings of those who assume that the good looking cruise through life with ease. No one gets off that easy… with the possible exception of Paris Hilton, who is not only good looking, but has the further advantage of being rich, and too dumb to contemplate her own inadequacies.
It is my personal belief that looks take a far second place to personality. People control how they look with their personality, and its not just based upon their genetically-born face and body.
I consider myself to be fairly attractive. Perhaps not Mandy Moore level, but still fairly attractive, and I’m generally considered to be intelligent and charming by those who know me. I’ve also been single for two years and haven’t dated at all for the past year. Sure, I could be dating quite a few people, but after having dated around and been annoyed quite a bit, I’m satisfied to wait until I meet somebody whom I immedietely want to go out with, rather than a guy who fills me with a whole lot of “meh.”
Isn’t that how it works, generally? I mean, random creepy guys will accost me outside of Wal-Mart and tell me I’m hot but that doesn’t mean I’m under some sort of obligation to go out with them. So, yes, there are men who would date me. I’m not a troll. I’m still lonely for men whom I don’t find to be trollish themselves.
Basically she left all her personal info in a storage container and didn’t pay the bill. The owners of said container auctioned the items off for about $200 (standard operating procedure for such places) and they were then bought by a budding business man who’s made them available on the internet for the low, low price of $39.
The stash includes things such as her perscription for Valtrex, pics of her doing every kind of drug there is, lots of sex videos, fake id’s, abortion records - you know, all that stuff that most people - and I submit Paris - really wouldn’t want made public.
Every extraordinarily good-looking person I’ve ever known has an unhappy, troubled life. Even though they usually have someone in their lives, these someones are usually transient because they either run their prospective mates off through their selfishness and sense of entitlement, or they can’t keep from jumping into bed with every other hottie that comes their way. Broken hearts (not theirs) and alcoholism (often theirs) abound, as well. So yeah, I’d say they’re lonely.
Frankly, I would not want to be extraordinarily good-looking. There are too many temptations, too many complications, too many broken hearts. And besides, you get old and lose it and your entire way of life gets turned upside down.
I know 2 very very good-looking men who have never married and are now pushing 50, much to their dismay, alone. Both wanted to enjoy their 20’s and 30’s single and found themselves in their 40’s just starting to actively search for The One. Neither advanced a career or accumulated any real possessions in what they saw as the first half of their lives and so the package they present to potential mates isn’t all that great. As a single 30 something, I was 7 years between relationships and lonely but I had youngish children to keep in school and a career to maintain, so I know I let opportunities for romance slip away. I wasn’t waiting or holding out for Mr. Right, exactally, but there was more than my wants and needs to consider. Some of those were addressed every other weekend—I dated a lot.
So the real take home message, kids, is not that looks won’t but you happyness, nor that you shouldn’t put your homemade porn into self-storage, but the real thing to get out of all of this is that you should e nice to people, take care of your own porn, and don’t end up old and alone and poor.
