Do all pickles taste the same?
Yeah, pretty much.
Are all people who share a certain measurement the same?
Nope.
I think it’s interesting that we’re discussing the issue of superficiality or silliness when what the OP wanted to know was why it’s “ok” for one gender to explicitly and vocally hold one POV and not ok for the other gender to do the same.
Of course we respond to people based on an initial physical response to them - when we get into “superficial” or “silly” responses is when, for example, I say, “Well, I really like that SuaSponte guy, but he’s too tall/short/fat/thin/dumb/smart/poor/rich (well, okay, maybe not rich ;)) for me, so I won’t see him again” - even though he may meet every other criteria personality-wise that I’m looking for! (BTW, I couldn’t say with Sua - I haven’t seen his picture, and haven’t met him IRL. I’m just using him as an example.) It’s rejecting someone after you get to know and like them that strikes me as silly and superficial.
[sub]Am I babbling? I have this feeling I’m babbling…[/sub]
BlackKnight
I know a few pickle connesieurs who would care to argue that one 
but I agree, they all pretty much do taste the same. I don’t even give a thought to the consistency, the color, the size, the freshness, etc etc…I judge by taste alone.
(actually I’ve recently started liking pickles after a 23 year personal ban on them. I eat pickle slices with french fries)
In regards to picking another person I do the same thing. If they don’t match a particular quality then they are not the first thing nor even the second thing I look for. My height “requirements” are pretty lax, I just don’t like girls the same height as me (5’11"). People of the same height don’t seem to “fit” tegether right in cuddling, huggin, kissing, etc. Anyway.
Lets say that cuts out 25% of all women in the world. A darn high figure, I’m sure you’ll agree. Then we go ahead and tack on the intelligence issue. this is gonna knock most of them out if we stick to the IQ standard (which I wouldn’t but this is a hypothetical anyway) and that would knock out, if I remember my statistics correctly, about 80% of the earth’s females. If we consider that all qualities of women are equally distributed, then, we so far have available girls for ARL to be .25(.80(world population)). Then lets say that I also don’t like blondes (which I don’t actually use as an exclusion, but what the hell this is neat). That’s a good 33% gone if we take blonde, brown, and red. I would say that brown falls around 50% of all hair (including black hair). Anyway, now we’re at .25(.33(.8(x))). Ah, what else did I mention? Responsible women. This one is even worse than IQ I think considering world poverty levels. Lets say that 25% of the world falls above 30K (or equivalent for the country in terms of goods obtainable, not strict dollar to yen conversion or something) a year. that’s probably a low guess, but what the hell.
So,
.25 X .8 X .33 X .25 X 5000000000 ~ 82500000 chicks for me. Not too bad. Lets cut that in a fifth to match an age group for me and get 16500000. Over 16 million women out there who pretty much match my criteria.
Now I have no idea where I was going with this pathetic application of math.
But, needless to say, that’s not the encouraging figure of ~50% of the worlds population if I judged each woman individually. Bah. I’m not in a huge hurry for a relationship anyway. I could be even less picky and still not have a mate because I pretty much don’t want one.
Oh, and I don’t mind being superficially judged, either, before anyone says “But how would you feel…” I don’t mind. In fact, I perfectly understand. Romnce ain’t platonic, my friends.
Oh, my final qualification would be to like video gaming. that probably puts the final count down to about, oh, 17? hahaha.
Elmwood, there’s nothing wrong with being attracted to a certain body type. (Saying publicly that you find larger women unattractive is probably impolitic, but it’s your call.) I think everyone has a certain “type” that they’re attracted to, & that’s just how it is. For example, I am NOT attracted to guys who are losing their hair, & when I start to get serious with a guy, I ask whether his dad lost his hair, his uncles, grandfathers, etc. Some people may think that’s superficial, but I like hair & couldn’t be attracted to a guy who didn’t have it. (I am a freak as far as that goes, though…I am even fond of back hair.)
That said, I think it’s worth dating someone who ISN’T your type, at least once, to see if you like it…before me, my SO had never dated a girl who was under 5’8". (I’m 5’4".) He has since discovered that he likes shorter girls better, hmm hmm. So you never know.
And one more thing…just because I’m thin doesn’t mean I’m anorexic or I never eat. I eat three meals & 2 snacks every day, but I weigh 118 pounds. & I’m not some workout fanatic either, it’s just genetics. So stop lumping me in with Ally McBoobless & her ilk, OK?
I did not say that it was shallow for a person to understand their own romantic preferences. I did not say that it was silly for a person to not enter a romantic relationship with someone they do not find attractive. I did not say it was superficial to apply past experience to future prospects.
It is shallow to base the desirability of a partner upon a single physical characteristic. It is silly pretend that an instant attraction, or lack of attraction, will be persistent and immutable. It is superficial to decide that libidinous response can be reduced to metrics.
I think this sentence demonstrates that your understanding of my posts has been superficial at best. Actually, if you feel recognizing superficiality makes one superficial I worry that your understanding of logic (or English) might be superficial as well.
Nor do I.
Easy! I wasn’t talking about your posts.
I agree that using a single criteria to overlook an entire spectrum of women is probably wrong but not necessrily. What disturbs me is the conotation that judging character is “superior” to judging appearance. I find them to be on the same level (as much as they can be when character itself contains many different properties). That is, why is it bad to not stay with a person due to appearence but ok when discussing, say, a difference of opinion on how to raise (or even have!) children. Both judgements are relative to attraction. No?
I, too, have had girlfriends who were not my definition of perfect. However, they were not on the far side of it, either. In order to be in a relationship I must be both physically and mentally attracted to them. Those criteria I gave are not absolutes but personal guides. I’ve dated a blonde or two even though I prefer brunettes. It just takes more for me to like a blonde, yeah?
If it ever came down to “she would be perfect but for this one thing…” I think I would seriously look for a compromise
Hell, I’ve actually dated a socialist, if you can believe that 
I just want to repeat this line–it sums up the argument for me.
I do think that their are people out there (individuals, not “society”) who have unrealistic expectations of what “attraction” is. They seem to think that when the person of thier dreams appears, they will be accompanied by the appropriate theme music and lighting, and the attraction will be immediate, sharp, and enduring. They seem to feel like if they don’t have to go change thier panties or their briefs the first time and every other time that person walks in the door, then they “aren’t attracted, that’s it, no hope there” and they dismiss the whole idea. I know lots of good relationships (including my own) where attraction developed slowly, hand in hand with the discovery of commen interests, common worldviews, and just pleasure in being with each other. I know people that look at anything short of instantanous, mutual chemistry as “settling”–but I don’t feel like I’ve settled at all. While it is true that you can’t found a relationship with a person you are not attracted too, you often can not tell whether you are attrated to someone early in your association with them. It is simply premature.
western civilization is one giant double standard with the deck stacked against women, not men. since these double standards are traditions you have grown up with, you don’t notice them. or if you notice them, you accept them in a way you won’t accept new, non-traditional behaviors, regardless of the fact they might be more fair.
women are held to a higher standard than men when it comes to physical appearance, and judgements of women’s overall character are based more strongly on their physical appearance. as a man, publicly asserting your physical preferences for women is like kicking someone when they’re down. the culture is set up to accomodate your preferences anyway. that is why the double standard.
men who complain about double standards that favor women are just passive-aggressively surfing the status quo. if you want to address societal double-standards, be prepared to discuss all of them, not just the subset that showcases your disapproval of uppity women.
make a list of every double standard you can think of using two columns- those that are unfair to women and those that are unfair to men. guess which one will be longer. when that list reaches parity, then you can bring the ones that are unfair to men to the table.
it’s an interesting subject, and there’s all kinds of neat ideas in this thread.
i think you (the OP’er) touched on something when you mentioned income. which would you say is more insulting to men, being turned down based on looks, or being turned down because you don’t have money or influence? which of the two is more insulting to women? i think it’s easier to illustrate my point by working backwards- if you really wanted to insult someone, what is the best thing to criticize, and would you pick something different for a man vs. a woman?
-fh
I think what we’re looking at are separate by related issues. Namely:
- Are individuals generally attracted to a particular body type/look?
Yes. It seems to be true that people prefer a particular look in their potential mates. I don’t really think many people argue with this.
- Is it ok for an individual to have that preference?
Yes. Just as it’s ok for a person to like asparagus, opera, or roller blading. These things are ok. I want to point out however that it isn’t ok to be impolite because a person doesn’t have the physical characteristics desired. Also, as has been said before I believe it’s silly to simply dismiss a person because they don’t match a physical ideal.
- Is physical attraction important in a romantic relationship?
IMHO Yes. I think it’s important to qualify that answer with the statement that the right personality can make a person physically attractive to me when just their appearance won’t. I’ve had female friends that I wasn’t attracted to physically to begin with but was very much physically attracted to later on after I had gotten to know them.
- Are individual preferences influenced by societal / media depictions of the ideal physical form?
IMHO Yes. While I don’t have any studies to cite I think it’s naive to suggest that we’re all just hard wired to prefer a certain thing without any cultural influence. I think most people (including myself) don’t realize the extent to which they are socialized to a particular world view. As a small but applicable example the average size of breast implants is different from country to country. Another example would be to examine the centerfolds found in issues of Playboy over the last 50 years (same country, arguably different society 50 years ago). I think that it’s likely that members of a given society probably tend towards preferring the physical ideal of said society.
- Do members of one gender as a group generally find a particular look in the opposite gender preferable? (i.e. Most men prefer slim, busty women… or most women prefer tall, dark and handsome, etc.)
Probably. There are almost always exceptions to broad statements (i.e. Not all, or even most, men like busty women, blondes, etc.) but I think it’s likely that we would find trends in preference which correlate to a societies preference.
- Are the social ramifications of a being a short man equivalent to being an overweight woman?
IMHO No. While they share the common ground of being a physical characteristic that people sometimes get rejected for I think it’s pretty clear that they generate different responses. As a hypothetical situation for thought… suppose you had 2 men who had the exact same personality/history and were practically identical in most physical respects (facial features, skin type, hygiene, hair color/texture, etc.) except one was fit and 5 feet tall whereas the other was obese but 6’2. Which do you think would be more likely to get a date? What if we were to try and apply the situation to 2 women? How does the tall obese woman fare against the short slim woman? Or the short obese woman with the tall slim woman? The physical comparison just doesn’t translate well between genders in my opinion.
- Is there a difference in the way people react when a man is rejected because of his height by a woman and when a woman is rejected because of her weight by a man?
Depends. I think the persons reasoning is the key here. If a woman says “I don’t like dating short guys because I feel less feminine” it’s fundamentally different from “I don’t like dating short guys because they aren’t a status symbol”. The first response is likely to get an accepting response from her friends whereas the second response is likely to cause her friends to think she’s a snob (unless of course they are too…). Likewise there is a difference between the man who says “I enjoy doing active things like biking, swimming and dancing and I prefer a fit woman who can enjoy these activities with me” and the man who says “I won’t date heavy women because I’ll be embarrassed”.
Grim_Beaker
elmwood wrote, in the OP:
<tracer runs off and looks up “zaftig” in the online dictionary>
Well … since your female friends are discussing their potential mates’ height, while you’re discussing your potential mate’s girth … my guess is that this apparent double-standard is partially caused by the fact that the two are not exactly the same thing.
**
Now I’m pissed. Yes, we men have it so easy, don’t we? That’s why we commit suicide more often, go insane more often, get heart attacks more often, get cancer more often, and die on average 7.5 years younger than women. And the difference used to be one year (back in the 1920’s). I guess things have just been getting “easier” for us all along, haven’t they?
**
Is that so? Well, I don’t know too many bald, fat guys who are getting tons of dates. In fact, I know several guys who openly admit they like big women (hell, I did it myself) but I’ve yet to hear a woman say how much she loves a beer gut. Most women I’ve talked to on the subject are inclined to say they think a guy with a gut is lazy or a slob, but woe betide any man who would suggest the same of an overweight woman. Guys are supposed to “accept the beautiful person inside” and if we don’t we’re “sizeist”, narrow-minded", etc. I believe that’s called a double-standard!
**
Okay. How about the double standard whereby single women w/o children in my home state (Ohio) can collect welfare, while a man under the same circumstances cannot? How about the double-standard whereby a wife in a divorce is awarded custody of the children more often than the father, usually for no real reason at all? How about the double standard whereby a decent-looking woman could easily get a guy of a chivalrous bent she had never seen before to buy her a drink, but would probably act shocked if he suggested she do something to earn it? How about the double standard whereby a man on average gains 10% in quality of lifestyle after a divorce, while a woman loses 27%? This means a man is losing something to stay married, while a woman is gaining quite a bit. I could go on and on in this vein. How about the whole concept of alimony? How many women are required to pay alimony, even if they make significantly more money than their ex-husband?
**
Well, I could, but I don’t think you’d get it. You see, since these double standards are traditions you have grown up with, you don’t notice them.
**
Indeed. And most of them aren’t coming from you.
**
The former. I can always get more money and/or influence, but beyond a certain point I was born with the looks I have.
**
If a woman turns down a guy for either of these reasons it’s inulting. Neither one has anything to do with how good a person someone is.
Sure I would. Because there are just as many female assholes out there, but they have their own professional justifiers like you working for them.
{fixed code --Gaudere}
[Edited by Gaudere on 01-10-2001 at 05:04 PM]
Cite, please.
Define “big,” please, Lizard. Several people, male and female, have said that they find obesity offputting. I don’t recall anyone saying anything about a “beer gut” (or, as my best friend refers to her husband’s stomach, his “squishy middle”). Men are also expected to gain some weight as they get older, but woe betide the woman who goes from a size 8 to a size 10 in the course of having two (or more!) children. Male actors are allowed to grow old, go bald, get fat, and are still considered sexy - and continue to (in the movies, and sometimes in real life) “get” women who are younger and thinner than they are, and with more hair to boot. My Doctor has told me that until I weigh less than I have since I was 9 I will be considered overweight by his chart - I’m 5’2" tall, and according to the “chart” I’m supposed to weigh no more than 99-105 lbs! Somehow, I don’t think that’s right.
Since I doubt you’ll cite anything from above, let me offer a few statements of my own:
Women, on average, suffer from anorexia and bulimia at a higher rate than men.
Women are more likely to be beaten by men.
Women are expected to never age
A woman who is in her 30s and has never dated is stigmatized as frigid (this from personal experience)
BTW, Lizard, I’m only quoting those things I’m choosing to comment on. (bold goes inside quote, BTW…;))
Now…think carefully. How, exactly are you suggesting that woman should earn that drink? Are you equating this with prostitution? Are you suggesting that a woman who accepts such a drink, or a dinner invitation, owes sexual favors to said man? As I said, consider your position carefully.
Women can, and do, send “decent-looking” men drinks as well. Sorry if it’s never happened to you.
BTW, we were discussing in one of the other marriage threads that women also lose something in marriage - a part of their lifespan. Men, OTOH, gain years once they’re married. And, how many of the women (cite, please) that you’re talking about never held a job before they got married? And is your study taking into consideration the fact that women, on average earn less than men in general?
Actually, Lizard, most of us don’t need “professional justifiers.” And we usually call an asshole an asshole, regardless of gender. However, as you’ve been so desperate that you felt the need to visit a prostitute, don’t for a minute dare to come in here higher-than-thou because you’re feeling picked on as a male. You do have more rights and priviledges than the average female, and I’d better stop before I actually do work myself up into a pitworthy froth.
I apologize, then, for the overreaction. I do stand behind the content of my response, though.
Besides, it looks like this thread has taken yet another turn.
dogsbody, I’m aware of the problems with the vB code. I’ve already e-mailed Gaudere about it.
Try “Who Stole Feminism?” by Christina Hoff Summers and “Women Can’t Hear What Men Don’t Say” by Warren Farrell. It’s all there.
**
How can I be expected to define something that changes with every person? “Big” is different whoever you talk to. It’s not impossible for someone to be both, too. I weight 300 pounds and am considered slightly obese. But I’m 6’4", and would be considered “big” even if I got down to 250.
**
Oh? By who?
I’m pretty sure they don’t expect it.
**
Again I say, by who? Not me or any guy I know, that’s for damn sure. If you paid money to watch Jack Nicholson with Helen Hunt in “As Good As It Gets” or Sean Connery with Catherine Zeta Jones in “Entrapment”, than you are as guilty of this as anyone. I didn’t go to those movies to see the men, I went for the women. Both of whom are older than me, by the way.
**
Those charts say the same thing about me. When I was 15 I remmber clearly my doctor saying to my mother “You feed him too much.” What’s your point?
**
I’m not arguing with that, but what does it prove?
**
This is simply not true. It’s a complete and utter myth, akin to the canals on Mars. Read the second of the books I cited above, and you’ll see why. Don’t try to argue this point until you’ve read it.
**
Again and again I say it: by who? Hey, is it MY fault that Cosmopolitan and Vogue only hire young, skinny models? I mean, these magazines (as well as most fashion magazines that young women read) are predominantly written by women, anyway.
**
And a guy who does the same is stigmatized as gay. If you don’t like what people think of your private life, then don’t tell them about it. People can be cruel. It has nothing to do with gender.
**
No, I would say she owes him something sexual only after the second or third date. I guess you are one of those women who would be shocked. But you know what someone is called who just takes and never gives back? A user. No, I’m not equating this with prostitution, because she’s not getting the cash. But she’s definitely getting something. And nothing comes for free. Women in other countries know this (something I know from personal experience), why are American women so clueless?
**
I wouldn’t accept it anyway, because I don’t drink much at all. Nor do I like this approach. So save your sympathy. And your condescension.
**
And yet they still die younger, on average, than their wives. Now that’s interesting.
**
Boy, you just can’t debate this subject without this tired old statistic raising it’s head. Of course two things are NEVER mentioned when it is raised:
1- Women’s average salaries as a percentage of what men earn have been rising continuously every year for decades. Right now it’s around 75%. It used to be around 50%. Do you think these gains could’ve been made without the cooperation of men? Of course not. But we must continuouly hear this statistic and how “unfair” it is, even as the percentage keeps rising.
2- If you remove women who take time off from work to have and raise children and compare single women without families to men, the percentage is well over 90%. Sounds quite a bit different, doesn’t it?
I’m afraid I don’t follow your logic, dogsbody. What does my seeing a hooker have to do with this debate? Since the answer is “nothing,” I must assume you bring it up only in an attempt to rattle me and distract from the validity of what I’m saying. You fail on both counts. Actually, seeing the hooker was overall a good experience, and I’d do it again in a second if I had the money.
As for my “rights and priviledges[sic]” just what are those? What legally defined rights do I have that you do not? And if I do have some privileges by virtue of being male, so what? It’s not as if women have none. The constitution doesn’t guarantee you “priviledges[sic]”, only rights. Note: I’m not admitting I do have any male “priviledges[sic]”. In fact, I don’t think you could prove such a thing even exists.
Lizard -
I will get into this when I am at home and not at work, but suffice to say that your ability to use a woman’s body, for your pleasure, IS a privilige (sorry, my British was showing ;P) that I, as a woman, don’t have in reverse, and therefore is extremely relevant to this debate. Men have more power than women in this society, and may I suggest you visit http://www.prostitutionresearch.com for how your trip to the prostitute proves this point.
The anorexia/bulimia quote has a great deal to do with any discussion of physical appeal. You don’t think girls are going to that extreme for each other, do you?
And yes, I know very well who reads “women’s” magazines, and I don’t associate with them very much, either. Most of my friends are busy reading Dragon or Fangoria or whatever computergeek magazine is popular this month. Mostly Wired right now, I think.
BTW, I really wasn’t meaning to be condescending with the comment about the drink - it’s never happened to me, either.
I also wasn’t being condescending about the coding, just trying to be helpful. I had to clean you up to quote you, after all…
But, in the interest of not hijacking this thread further, may I suggest that you and I either take this to email, or start a new thread? 
I still say the superficiality doesn’t come in until you reject someone you’ve known and liked for a while just because of one physical flaw.
Sigh.
My turn to be embarrassed by fouling up my code.
See? I’m human, too.
It proves nothing of the kind. You are assuming two things: 1-That women never use men for pleasure, something I know to be untrue (and women usually don’t have to pay for it, either) and 2- That women don’t use men in other ways. When women use men it’s usually for material things. I’ve had female friends try to use me to buy them things, I’ve seen my brother get used this way, and I’ve watched my (single) mother get what she could out of guys she was dating.
Maybe prostitutes are being used, but at $150+ per hour, most of them seem willing to live with it. What does the guy get who is used by a woman? The “privilege” of making her life easier.
Sure, some women become hookers because they are desperate or hooked on drugs. But they are punished far, far more lightly than desperate men who commit armed robbery for the same reasons.
Claiming that prostitution is all about male “power” over women is so much feminist B.S. It has a lot more to do with money. I personally wouldn’t turn down a job where I could make $1000+ working 8 hours a week, and neither would the women who go into sex work.
And this is not even mentioning the fact that there are male prostitutes who service women, even if they aren’t especially common in the U.S.
**
If not, than for who? It sure as hell isn’t coming from the male camp. I’ve yet to meet a guy who thinks making yourself puke or starving yourself to death = attractive. You make bulimia and anorexia sound like rational choices, when they are really mental disorders. There is no easy explanation for why people have mental problems. Attempting to blame it on an entire strata of society is ridiculous.
**
Maybe you don’t but an awful lot of women do. And as I said before, the magazines are written by women for women. How, then, are men in any way responsible for the various delusions that young women have?
**
I never said it has never happened to me. It actually has. That’s how I know I don’t like it as an approach. I would’ve much preffered it if she had tried to strike up a conversation. But that would be asking to much of most women. After all, risking face-to-face rejection is my job.
**
Fine.
**
Okay. i have sent you a blank e-mail you may respond with whatever futher thoughts you may have.
**
I agree. And I’ll just add that women are just as superficial as men are. After all, who spends more money and time on their hair/clothes/appearance in general?
Un-fricking-believable. What if the woman in question has strong moral/religious convictions, and feels she morally cannot “owe” the man she is dating “something sexual” after the second or third date? (By the way, what do you mean by “something sexual” anyway?) What about the fact that the man is (presumably) dating this woman because he enjoys spending time with her? I am pretty repulsed by your attitude that a woman “owes” a man anthing more than her good company and her time when he invites her on a date. She “owes” him her attention, her good grace, but she does not “owe” him her body, because he paid for a few meals. Yeah, I guess that makes me a silly American. If you don’t like the way American women view this issue, there’s no one keeping you here.
Perhaps this is going to sound mean and harsh, but maybe you will be better off saving up your money and spending it on prostitutes. In the long run, their sexual favors will cost more than a few meals you’d pay for a woman you might date. But then again, these “clueless” American women aren’t aware that you believe that if you buy them a few meals, they “owe” you something sexual. At least the prostitutes are on the same page you are.
Women do not owe men sex for any reason. Hmmm, does that mean that wives are required to have sex with their husbands? To what extreme do you take this line of reasoning?
Men do not owe women sex, or anything else. My fiance does not owe to me to give me his money, to take me out to dinner, to buy me a present, or to rub my feet at night after a long day. However he does these things because he enjoys doing things for me. I don’t owe it to him to do his laundry, or make dinner for him, rub his back, or even do “sexual things”. But these are things I enjoy doing for him.
Your attitude seems to be very frightening. I cannot believe that any sane, rational human being honestly believes that women owe their “men-folk” sexual favors by the 3rd date. I cannot believe that decent men honestly expect that. Women do not owe anybody sex after the 3rd date, the 3rd month, the 3rd year, or the 30th year. Ditto for men.
I cannot even express how angry that Lizard’s reasoning makes me.
If i may be so bold, I think that while Lizard’s phrasing is inflamatory, hw has a bit of a point. While it is true that a woman never “owes” a man sex or anything else, I myself am deeply disturbed by women I know who think nothing of leting a guy that is attracted to them but towards whom they have no interest and no potential interest spend lots of money on them when it is obvious they are enjoying the drinks more than the company. There is such a thing as an implicit understanding, and to enjoy the benefits of being courted without any intention of following through seems fundamentally dishonest to me. The women I know who do this say things like “But I never ask him to pay for dinner, he just does”, but the fact is that they do chose to accept the gift–one can refuse to go unless he lets one pay half–and accepting a gift is effectivly accepting the assumption that goes with it–that the reason you are there at all is that you are favorably disposed towards this person, potentially interested, whatever. This dosen’t have to be about sex, although that is one facet. I would have the same uneasiness about a conservative christian woman who let a conservative christian man buy her dinner and pay for her movie ticket once a week and so on and so forth if she knew that she didn’t like him that much and that he was hopeing for a wedding.