If you weren't addressing me, as you maintain, with your now greatly depreciated word, who were you referring to in your post's ending: For those not familiar with the factual basis behind the charade which FoxHastings is now trying to perpetrate, her post used only this partial quote, OF MINE: DEFinning said: ↑ MJ, you are a feminist. This is not a bad thing; I may be something of one, myself. But I do think this critique of yours, when applied generally, is being overly-sensitive.* <End Snip> Not only must you consider others to be as dumb as your post, but it does not a show a great deal of, let's say predictive ability, for you to think you would be able to fool anyone, by claiming that the "effing condescending," poster, to whom you refer, for OKaying MJ's feminism (as you put it), is anyone other than the person whom you quoted, telling MJ that being a feminist, "is not a bad thing," and that, "I may be something of one myself." Really, who do think would buy that? Not that further proof is necessary for any but the brain-dead, but we can add the way your post begins, as well: Why do those words, "overly-sensitive," seem so familiar? Well I'm sure that it could have nothing to do with my using those words, in the snippet of my post which you quoted, at the head of your post. Right? I had this word deleted from one post but I'm going to try once more, because if your claim, "I WASN'T ADDRESSING YOU," in these circumstances, is not the epitome of pathetic, then I'd like to know what is. I purposefully used that expression-- so you would have lost your bet, that I did not recognize the connotations. It turns out, however, that I would have, likewise, lost, had I wagered on my expectation, that you could not possibly be so clueless as to not recognize this as being said for its irony.
Don't be hard on yourself-- you are only gauging the most likely probability, and I do not doubt that your expectations, at least often, are in line with the odds. It is only natural, in some circumstances, to wonder about this. But not everyone is going to fit the stereotypes, so it is good that you are consciously aware of that. If you find misassumptions disconcerting, all I can recommend is what I'm sure you already appreciate, that such judgements, here, deserve to be taken with a heavy dose of salt, and extra reservations. I'll admit something, along similar lines, that might sound silly to you. I associate neat handwriting with females, and messy penmanship with males, even though I've seen that's probably a less-reliable method, than your own. There is one more factor, that deserves mention, in this particular venue. Online, it is far from unheard of, for people of one sex to represent themselves as the other sex, for I suppose various reasons. And we have no way, of course, of confirming what another claims about their gender, online. Further, I am getting the impression that online, or at least in this forum (I have very limited experience with social media), the proportion of transexuals, and gender-envious, that one encounters is higher than in the general population. Though I suppose it could, rather, be the case that the proportions match, but it is only online that many express a side of themself that, in person, you might never be shown. My point, however, is that in some of these cases, a secret inner self, perhaps living outwardly as a person of different gender, is bound to acquire a mixture of experiences, habits, traits, and the like, that can lead a correspondent to the wrong conclusion. These are just my speculations, but I think their implied suggestion, at least, holds some validity: there are lots of possible reasons to be inaccurate in guessing someone's sex, online.
I am more inclined toward the figures popular in the 1940's. Some call that full figured now, but I call it feminine. Of course I find fat about as appealing as bone!
I like a woman with intelligence; it's the interior and not the exterior that makes a woman attractive to me. I know women who are "trophy girls" and when you both wake up and you say hello dear, how are you? they respond by saying "huh?", and a plain jane where you both wake up and you ask them the same question, you get a response back "I'm fine and how are you?"
Thank you for your thoughtful post and for taking the time to respond. I agree with you on all accounts.
Unlike you, I cannot speak for all women. All human behavior is on a bell curve. I can say most do this, some do that and a few think this. I was trying to point out the difference in what is attractive to most men and women. I can not say that a few men what find a powerful woman attractive even if she looks like Madeline Albright (sorry Madeline). I can't say a few men would find a talented person attractive even if she looked like Mick Jagger (not sorry). Men generally seem to have simpler criteria for what is attractive. Both sexes appreciate beauty because subconsciously it is a sign of having few genetic defects, but women have a different strategy because of the possibility of child bearing. That is why they find a person with high social standing or wealth enhances a male's attractiveness.
I don't find this sexy or pretty. Gross is my take. But, there are men and women who do. I don't mind a strong body from working out. But, this goes too far.
Yes, Glamorous has that casual look of sophistication. Paltrow has that. Others as well. I equate "sexy" with "hot." Pageant girls are mostly beautiful with a few that shouldn't be there. The categories I have I think are used by many of the judges in these large events like Miss USA or Miss Universe. Glamorous is not usually one that is used. Beautiful is used quite often and even gorgeous. Hot is rarely used for judges and that's why many of those I select as winners don't make it. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. During my junior year in high school, my chemistry lab partner was "cute." Great personality, funny and very helpful to help me pass chemistry as she was very smart too. I didn't see her as a potential girl friend or someone to date. I wasn't dating at that point anyways. More into sports. One December Saturday night, the Junior Prom was going on. A group of us guys decided to drive by and see who was going to the Prom. We saw someone we knew get out of the car and wondered who he was taking. He was kind of a goofy guy so we were puzzled. Them, my chem. lab partner got out of his car in a beautiful dress looking stunningly cute pretty. I couldn't take my eyes off her. I never looked at her in this way. We drove around the block and cruised by again and I watched her go up the ramp to the building until I couldn't see her. After Christmas break, I mentioned to her how nice her dressed looked but never asked her out until the end of the year. I think I was afraid of rejection. She accepted and we went together for about a year until time to go off to college. So, you never know...
I just like girls and women in general. I find some hefty girls very sexy, and that is mostly attitude on their part. Used to have a saying, I like to take in a women's best feature or features and focus on it. Had a GF that was just appalled by a first date, the guy, at one point, just whips out his penis.. she wasn't impressed. Alot of guys assume women have the same turn on as men, and I know for a fact that most guys get flashed by a chick.. their is going to be some sex, not so much for women. I was told that women go for witty more than just about anything else.. and witty can imply many other qualities of success, i.e. intelligence, confidence, etc..
Your continued, attempts to paint my response as anything other than cool-headed, & logical, demonstrate the same inability on your part to do anything but make things up, Testing 1,2,3...testing 1, 2,3,..
I'm speaking for female mammals - and they mostly have the same drivers. As regard females seeking males who will support breeding - that's of course quite true, but to suggest we have somehow magically overriden our hardwiring is silly. We STILL seek physical health/strength/determination/fearlessness/competence-in-hunting, etc. All of those things are most manifest in modern males as 'youth'/fitness/confidence/practical skills etc. We will always see a very fit male who is quietly confident and fearless, as far more attractive than a male who has allowed himself to become unhealthy - no matter how rich he is. Money and power are no substitute for the qualities in a man which drive him to be at his physical peak for his entire life. His determination to remain healthy says that he understands how necessary he is to the protection and care of his family. It indicates selflessness and courage. It indicates a self-contained man, who doesn't need any of the 'distractions' of dissolution. While money can somewhat replace his competence, when we have to seek it instead of competence, we are acting against our INSTINCTS. It only happens when we ourselves are not measuring up to that required by competent men.
To me, it's a mixing of both. Small flaws are magnified with a beautifull personnality, but I would feel hypocrite to pretend I don't need to be attracted a minimum physically first by a girl. But yes, when you're looking for a girl who would be a real life partner, you want much more than a pretty face.
Baloney, money lasts, bodies don't.... ....if our spouse gets old , with the ensuing effects of aging, should they be dumped? BTW, men no longer have to go into the bush/jungle/forest to kill animals and gather food... BTW, you do not speak for all "female mammals"...they have brains and think for themselves...
Yep. There needs to be a poll and thread about what is actually "fat". Most women today seem to think they aren't fat....when they really are. Or should I say they are in denial. Some of it is because their mommas coddled them and brainwashed them into believing they weren't fat....you know all the PC bullshit....instead of being truthful. There is a reason why the average weight of child-bearing age American women is about 171, and average height is about 5' 3.5". 171 is fat at any height.
What does lean girl mean? I have to admit that anyone with a 13 inch waist is totally unattractive to me.
I have always favored the 'happy medium'. Pencil-thin chicks are always gaunt and sad looking. They don't possess recognizable feminine features, but for many, that may make them quite attractive, little-differentiated from teenage boys (if that's your taste). Very trendy in the 21st-century.... And, the gobby-slop FAT women are disgusting in a number of ways which I won't go into. Use your imagination... and try not to choke.
Nature is quite diverse, from the very skinny to the humongous chubbies. I'm not into the skinnies, but I'm not into the Chubb's, just something comfortable enough to hold onto.