I've heard this expression many times... "I'm not shallow" or "I don't want to seem shallow, but..." when it comes to physical preferences.
Do you think it's shallow to consider looks when it comes to dating? How much do they matter?
No, there has to be some attraction. However it is not the only thing one should focus on. I once met a girl that was gorgeous, and the more I got to know her the uglier of a person she became to me. She became very unattractive to me and I had to sever all contact with her.
Looks aren't everything, obviously, but there are limits. It's not shallow if it is part of the equation, imo. If you have zero attraction to someone's looks, there could be difficulties in the relationship, no? But having said that, people tend to seem more attractive the more you like them.
I agree with all your points.
I would never have chosen a partner on looks alone. There absolutely has to be substance there.
I would even say a lot of the times the ones you find stunning to start with get dull as you get to know them and the attractive ones as you say get more attractive. I love a woman with balls, brains and skills but i got to fancy them or they become good friends.
No, it's not shallow, as long as, it's not the only criteria.
I've met people (not potential dates) that on first encounter, I wondered what attracted the person that was with them. After getting to know them it was obvious, their personality overrode their looks and I didn't see them in the same light. Their personality became the attraction.
So for me, and this is not easy to do because we have such a strong probably innate instinct to go toward the attractive, I try very hard not to look too intensely at the physical. I try to get into the person and their personality, it's much more attractive to me.
If there is no physical attraction then that makes it hard, wait, no its the other way around.
Hah! I get it.
The last girl I had a crush on, I couldn't pick out of a lineup today. She was so beautiful to me but it took me six weeks to notice her at all and 6 months to completely forget her looks. She had freckles on her nose though... And the greatest smile and the most innocent questions and the dirtiest mind.
In other words, when I'm in love, she's beautiful and looks matter. When I'm not in love, I'm oblivious...
Shallow = I will only consider dating 36-24-36 blonde bombshells / tall, fit, handsome GQ models
Totally normal = I will not consider dating that person, because they are not attractive to me.
Personally, no. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. If it's the ONLY thing you concider I'd say that's shallow.
No. One of the ways people need to be compatible for a successful sexual relationship is to find one another attractive.
I think the first thing you're attracted to is someone's looks.
That's not always the case when starting out on the net.
@bingst it is if you have a picture.
It matters. It is also a reflection of how a person takes care of themselves, and the related activity level. I love to be on the go, and I'd rather date someone with the same activity level than change myself or change them.
As both of you age, you may find they remind you of a favorite parent....one explanation of the adage that couples begin to resemble each other.
Having been married to 2 tall, good-looking guys (and I have Never cared about looks, go figure) who were horrible people in different, but equally nasty ways, I am now waiting for a 3' tall troll who loves to dance & makes me laugh, and you better not be in the way when he shows up!
Well, if it is shallow, then pretty much everybody who picks a partner is shallow. The level of acceptability is different for everyone, but if someone tells you it just flat doesn't matter to them one iota, I think they're only deceiving themselves.
Alphas get alphas, betas get betas, omegas get left overs. It is what it is.
@HeyHiHullo if you say so.
I'd say preference in appearance is shallow only when having a "hot" partner overrides their serious personality flaws (e.g., you tolerate racism or sexism or their dislike for Star Trek). In most cases, sexual attraction is important in a romantic partnership. I think it's a worthwhile and noble endeavor to recognize and appreciate a person's inner beauty, but sex is a physical act and there's a physical component to attraction. Nobody truly chooses what they're attracted to. I can't remember who said it, but I agree with the basic concept: when it comes to whom you date, you're allowed to discriminate.
Unless you're simply looking for a platonic friend, where looks may not matter, we each have certain features, triggers, preferences, regarding how someone looks, that we need in order to progress to kissing, touching, bodies together, all that.
I don't think it's shallow at all, more like a physical imperative. Some of what we react to in someone else , may not even be obvious to us ... pheromones and such - that undeniable desire to get close. Yum !
It is only shallow if this is the main criteria for picking a partner.Attractiveness gives either partner more options in terms of relationship alternatives ,which might make it harder to protect a relationship from outside threats.In this sense having to many other choices is likely not beneficial for relationship longevity
I have never slept with an ugly man, but I have woken up next to some. Baaadda Bing!
Seriously, when I am attracted to someone, I find it could be the way he holds himself, his interest in me, how he smiles (or smells), his sense of humor, his intellect (especially when it encompasses compassion for people), his self-respect, and not least (or maybe it is the least) his attractiveness that essentially makes that man attractive in my eyes. Even if his mother and I are the only ones on earth who find him attractive, he is attractive for me and I treat him that way. A man found attractive is one others find attractive. Few of them cheat, too.
I think is more like some features are more attractive to us ...symmetry!
I've heard of studies indicating the importance of symmetry.