QuoteEveryone has a list of qualities they look for in a partner and though physical attributes often feature, who you fall for usually comes down to chemistry.
For some men, however, a slender physique is a non-negotiable requirement, and knowing this all too well, New York dating service On Speed Dating will host its second 'Skinny Minny' night to cater to such demand.
The speed dating extravaganza to be held in Manhattan's East Village, will only allow entry to women size 0-8 and all clothing labels they guarantee, will be checked at the door.
Once a skirt or pant label is approved, the arrival will then have her size noted down on a badge she must wear for the duration of the evening.
The dating company, whose slogan reads: 'Because life is short', prides itself on holding events that meet the specific criteria people often look for in potential romantic partnerships.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2142502/The-speed-dating-event-men-want-meet-skinny-woman--check-womens-dress-sizes-door.html#ixzz1vGFUTiGp (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2142502/The-speed-dating-event-men-want-meet-skinny-woman--check-womens-dress-sizes-door.html#ixzz1vGFUTiGp)
So yeah. What do you guys think about this? I'll admit that I have "a type" so I understand that others also have "a type." On the other hand, I think that checking a woman's dress size at the door goes beyond looking for your type, I mean after all, do you really need to see a person's "stats" to know whether or not they are your type? Wouldn't seeing them and being either attracted or not be enough to know if she's your type? And then making a woman wear her dress size on a badge all night is beyond humiliating and objectifying.
Having said that, were I "on the market", I would be grateful to know that they have these types of events and be grateful to know if any of the men I was considering bedding had attended them. Mostly so I would know who to cross off my "potential bedmates" list forever. No matter what dress size I happen to be wearing. ;)
Apparently there might be some that disagree it's humiliating and degrading to women...namely those attending the event. I'm sure no woman is forced to participate, which then would make it humiliating and degrading to them.
Not that I agree, but it would be interesting if I were of dating age...back in my prime.
But that's the male in me speaking. :)
*Throws up on AD's shoes*
Size matters to me, but if that's ALL someone sees, they wouldnt be
worth my time.
I need a great personality, and a great set of hair.
We're all a little superficial, but this goes beyond that. Aren't women degraded enough by men? Ugh
Quote from: Ali on May 18, 2012, 11:34:13 PM
*Throws up on AD's shoes*
Hasn't he a point though? Aren't the women who attend this grisly function actively and willingly colluding in their own objectification? Fortunately I'm wearing my plastic galoshes tonight.
Quote from: Sweetdeath on May 19, 2012, 12:02:40 AM
Size matters to me, but if that's ALL someone sees, they wouldnt be
worth my time.
I need a great personality, and a great set of hair.
We're all a little superficial, but this goes beyond that. Aren't women degraded enough by men? Ugh
I always liked girls with luxuriant and lustrous hair. Though I drew the line at moustaches.
Some women get competitive with each other over weight, so I could see why some women of the "approved" size might like a chance to show off how small they are. Afterall, if you starve yourself into becoming a zero (not saying that all size zeros are starving, but probably a good portion are), you'd probably like some validation about how awesome you look. It's external validation in the most literal sense "You're an 'approved' number! you win!"
Should they be allowed to do it? Yes. Does it make me really glad that I'm out of the dating scene? Also yes. (My husband and I got together the old fashioned way. You know. With the help of alcohol.)
Quote from: En_Route on May 19, 2012, 12:14:42 AM
Hasn't he a point though? Aren't the women who attend this grisly function actively and willingly colluding in their own objectification? Fortunately I'm wearing my plastic galoshes tonight.
Yes they most certainly are. Which makes it just that little bit even sadder and even less sexy. However, the reason I threw up on AD's shoes is that he indicated that he might enjoy attending said debacle, were he a younger singler man.
What exactly is distasteful here?
Some men have priorities, so what?! Is this any less valid than choosing a mate for their above-average intelligence, stable means or a six-pack? There's nothing to stop the women setting up speed dates where the male participants lay down their Amex at the door. And good luck to them. Live and let live.
All involved should be applauded for their unashamed, forthright approach. Far from being degrading, it must be liberating for the ladies to know that there is one less factor to worry about. They're all adults.
I find fat ankles and fat necks very unattractive... and ugly people I find unattractive too....does that make me superficial? Or maybe just someone who knows what I can and can't put up with in a mate?
I don't think men have the monopoly on superficial.
...And those who puke on shoes at the thought of someone asserting their personal preferences... does that not seem a tad hypocritical within the context of the thread...?
Quote from: Sweetdeath on May 19, 2012, 12:02:40 AM
Size matters to me, but if that's ALL someone sees, they wouldnt be
worth my time.
I need a great personality, and a great set of hair.
We're all a little superficial, but this goes beyond that. Aren't women degraded enough by men? Ugh
Wouldn't a dating service that provided only potential suitors with great hair save a lot of time and effort?
Scissorlegs, I don't think Ali was arguing that physical attractiveness and knowing what you like is irrelevant, it's the degree of exactness that's a bit unsettling. You said you don't like fat necks. Cool. Do you know exactly how many inches in diameter crosses the threshold into "unattractive" for you? Have you ever measured someone's neck or ankles or asked for their measurements? Probably not. You just LOOK at someone and think "hot" or "not". Attraction isn't a science, even if you have a "type" and I think she was criticizing the level to which this attempts to standardize attractiveness. Would most of these guys REALLY be turned off by a size 9? I'm skeptical. But sure, these people can do whatever the hell they like - I, personally, don't care if they create a "plastic surgery only" dating pool.
Not for me really, even though that is my preferred range of weight but I'm not really that fussed as long as they are not fat all is good. I can understand why some people might attend this sort of event though and assuming that the women attending this event would also hold similar views or why else attend.
But if they are using dress size as an indicator couldn't a larger woman squeeze into those clothes and still attend if they wanted. Actually that would be great if the guys went and all they found were women with overhanging flab.
Quote from: Ali on May 18, 2012, 11:05:02 PMI'll admit that I have "a type"
I appreciate a number of "types" but skeletal isn't one of them.
There is a positive to having types and not one universal ideal. Instead of everybody longing for a particular person they can find attainable personally ideal people. I know that is kinda obvious but I said it anyway.
Quote from: DeterminedJuliet on May 19, 2012, 01:47:49 AM
Scissorlegs, I don't think Ali was arguing that physical attractiveness and knowing what you like is irrelevant, it's the degree of exactness that's a bit unsettling. You said you don't like fat necks. Cool. Do you know exactly how many inches in diameter crosses the threshold into "unattractive" for you? Have you ever measured someone's neck or ankles or asked for their measurements? Probably not. You just LOOK at someone and think "hot" or "not". Attraction isn't a science, even if you have a "type" and I think she was criticizing the level to which this attempts to standardize attractiveness. Would most of these guys REALLY be turned off by a size 9? I'm skeptical. But sure, these people can do whatever the hell they like - I, personally, don't care if they create a "plastic surgery only" dating pool.
Why should choosing a mate be any different to choosing a car? There're thousands to choose from, but I want the Nissan with leather seats, electric windows and in silver. So I'm more likely to find what I'm after at a Nissan garage. Of course you can go to Car-Giant and find a decent runner, but if you've got your heart set on the Silver Nissan...
...And maybe the car likes being driven by someone who appreciates its own specific design.
Because standardization makes sense when you're talking about a static product made in a factory but not so much when you talk about a living organism?
Humans change. Even hot ones. Forgetting about objectification or superficiality or whatever - it just doesn't make sense to me to make the distinction that specific because, unlike a car, you don't get a warranty with a person. It seems silly to me to try and place a "custom order" that specific. How many men or women stay the exact same size (up or down)? How do the numbers help in a way that your eyes don't?
DJ - Yes, yes, and yes.
Scissorlegs - I am not arguing against physical attractiveness as a starting point for the beginnings of an attraction. Again, I have a type, I know my type, and if that makes me superficial, then so be it. I just so happen to like big tall guys. That doesn't mean that I would never or have never dated smaller men, but I do like a big man, just as some men like a small woman. I get that, and that's not the part I find puke worthy. As DJ said, I find the exacting measurements and standardization to be the disturbing bit, and it's disturbing that women feel the need to buy into that.
I think that your metaphor of buying a car is perfect. Because a car is an object, as opposed to a living breathing human being.
Quote from: Ali on May 19, 2012, 02:21:53 AM
I think that your metaphor of buying a car is perfect. Because a car is an object, as opposed to a living breathing human being.
Some people are seriously messed up though.
I was just thinking that they should have all of the guys wear badges with their exact penis size on it. Then the party will get really interesting (and yes, for the record, I think that idea is just as silly as the clothes-size idea.)
Everyone changes. Everyone ages.
An accident may even happen to leave you in bad shape. Or sickness.
Superficial people make me sick.
Quote from: Scissorlegs on May 19, 2012, 02:01:23 AMbut if you've got your heart set on the Silver Nissan...
It is much simpler if you can find a woman who can tell you what you want.
I used to think I liked peanut butter, tuna, avocado, peas and not beans so much.
It is quite liberating not having to worry about these things though that picture of me in the canary yellow pants and budgie blue shirt is disturbing, what was I (told to be) thinking?
There could a problem if you are filtering for what is a trivial characteristic.
What if a desire for skinny girls originates from some early teen love lost or never attained? She moves on attains healthy proportions but you're left with a fetish for a physical ideal most likely filled by someone with a mental disorder. Teal=Sigmund Pudding
Quote from: DeterminedJuliet on May 19, 2012, 02:14:37 AM
Because standardization makes sense when you're talking about a static product made in a factory but not so much when you talk about a living organism?
Humans change. Even hot ones. Forgetting about objectification or superficiality or whatever - it just doesn't make sense to me to make the distinction that specific because, unlike a car, you don't get a warranty with a person. It seems silly to me to try and place a "custom order" that specific. How many men or women stay the exact same size (up or down)? How do the numbers help in a way that your eyes don't?
Numbers within a range are helpful. In this case, maybe a 9 would work, but definitely not a 12. By starting out with an 8 you're less likely to end up with a 16.
I'm not so picky myself (within a range and notwithstanding the ankle issue) and agree with what you say here. But I just don't see a problem with someone who wants to be more specific. If they believe that they'll not be happy with a 10+ then who are we to judge? For some, Love is less of a priority than wealth, or looks.... or size. Who says we have to prioritise love? That's a value judgement not befitting free thinkers.
Quote from: Scissorlegs on May 19, 2012, 02:42:10 AM
If they believe that they'll not be happy with a 10+ then who are we to judge?
I don't. Though, if I knew someone personally, I might wonder to myself if they want kids. It's the rare woman that can have a baby and stay under a size 10. But that's a different kettle of fish.
Quote from: DeterminedJuliet on May 19, 2012, 02:30:44 AM
I was just thinking that they should have all of the guys wear badges with their exact penis size on it. Then the party will get really interesting (and yes, for the record, I think that idea is just as silly as the clothes-size idea.)
Getting the exact size is kinda hard though as they change size due to lots a variables.
----
It also might be a fetish type thing where people are obsessed by skinny people, like those who are obsessed by morbidly obese people.
While I agree that most people do have a 'type' (I know I have at least a few types I prefer over others), I agree that getting very specific about a certain dress size is going too far, perhaps. Just like only dating people who are a certain height, or skin colour, or hair colour. While you may have a preference for a specific look, if you're looking to date only people who fall into your teeny tiny narrow range, you need to accept the fact that you might get the look you want, but it's less likely you'll also find a personality that matches yours well.
I suppose it depends on what you're looking for. If someone's looking for a hook-up, one night stand, etc, and they'd rather treat someone like an object rather than a person, I can see why they'd be so specific about who they got together with. If you're looking for something way less superficial though (ie, a relationship), you need to look for way more than just measurements. And if you can't find very many partners who have the measurements and the personality you prefer, you shouldn't be surprised. It's rare to find someone with the entire 'package'. And it seems odd to me that anyone would think humans are built the same way a custom computer is -- right down to every specification you require for optimal 'performance'. We really aren't built that way. Even if we are physically, our physical build is temporary and fleeting, at best. To say nothing of how we are mentally, emotionally, socially, etc.
Great post, Amicale. :)
Quote from: Scissorlegs on May 19, 2012, 01:38:13 AM
What exactly is distasteful here?
Some men have priorities, so what?! Is this any less valid than choosing a mate for their above-average intelligence, stable means or a six-pack? There's nothing to stop the women setting up speed dates where the male participants lay down their Amex at the door. And good luck to them. Live and let live.
I agree with this. Everyone has a type, some types are more superficial than others and the superficial need love (or their approximation of it) too. I say good for them that they're aren't wasting their own and other peoples time in pretense. Being able to state clearly what you want is the first step to getting it, and women who don't want to be judged on weight will know which men not to give a second glance. Everybody wins.
Frankly I'm a little envious of people who can not only pare what they want down to something as simple as dress size, but to something as easily verifiable as dress size. My basic type is intelligent, funny, good-natured and easy-going -- do you realize the time and hard feelings that could have been saved if I'd been able to confirm that with nothing more than a label check when
I was on the market?
Quote from: Amicale on May 19, 2012, 05:40:45 AM
While I agree that most people do have a 'type' (I know I have at least a few types I prefer over others), I agree that getting very specific about a certain dress size is going too far, perhaps. Just like only dating people who are a certain height, or skin colour, or hair colour. While you may have a preference for a specific look, if you're looking to date only people who fall into your teeny tiny narrow range, you need to accept the fact that you might get the look you want, but it's less likely you'll also find a personality that matches yours well.
I suppose it depends on what you're looking for. If someone's looking for a hook-up, one night stand, etc, and they'd rather treat someone like an object rather than a person, I can see why they'd be so specific about who they got together with. If you're looking for something way less superficial though (ie, a relationship), you need to look for way more than just measurements. And if you can't find very many partners who have the measurements and the personality you prefer, you shouldn't be surprised. It's rare to find someone with the entire 'package'. And it seems odd to me that anyone would think humans are built the same way a custom computer is -- right down to every specification you require for optimal 'performance'. We really aren't built that way. Even if we are physically, our physical build is temporary and fleeting, at best. To say nothing of how we are mentally, emotionally, socially, etc.
Absolutely!
But so what?! Why are these people worthy of disdain?
Let's not judge them against our own prejudices.
Quote from: DeterminedJuliet on May 19, 2012, 02:30:44 AM
I was just thinking that they should have all of the guys wear badges with their exact penis size on it. Then the party will get really interesting (and yes, for the record, I think that idea is just as silly as the clothes-size idea.)
...and that would be equally valid if that is the criteria by which they wish to choose a mate. And a fairly successful criteria for those more interested in carnal pleasure, I assume.
Quote from: Scissorlegs on May 19, 2012, 02:42:10 AM
Quote from: DeterminedJuliet on May 19, 2012, 02:14:37 AM
Because standardization makes sense when you're talking about a static product made in a factory but not so much when you talk about a living organism?
Humans change. Even hot ones. Forgetting about objectification or superficiality or whatever - it just doesn't make sense to me to make the distinction that specific because, unlike a car, you don't get a warranty with a person. It seems silly to me to try and place a "custom order" that specific. How many men or women stay the exact same size (up or down)? How do the numbers help in a way that your eyes don't?
That's a value judgement not befitting free thinkers.
Which is of course itself a value judgement
Quote from: En_Route on May 19, 2012, 11:49:24 AM
Quote from: Scissorlegs on May 19, 2012, 02:42:10 AM
Quote from: DeterminedJuliet on May 19, 2012, 02:14:37 AM
Because standardization makes sense when you're talking about a static product made in a factory but not so much when you talk about a living organism?
Humans change. Even hot ones. Forgetting about objectification or superficiality or whatever - it just doesn't make sense to me to make the distinction that specific because, unlike a car, you don't get a warranty with a person. It seems silly to me to try and place a "custom order" that specific. How many men or women stay the exact same size (up or down)? How do the numbers help in a way that your eyes don't?
That's a value judgement not befitting free thinkers.
Which is of course itself a value judgement
I'd also add this is a forum for atheists not freethinkers. All freethinkers are atheists but not all atheists are freethinkers.
Quote from: En_Route on May 19, 2012, 11:49:24 AM
Quote from: Scissorlegs on May 19, 2012, 02:42:10 AM
Quote from: DeterminedJuliet on May 19, 2012, 02:14:37 AM
Because standardization makes sense when you're talking about a static product made in a factory but not so much when you talk about a living organism?
Humans change. Even hot ones. Forgetting about objectification or superficiality or whatever - it just doesn't make sense to me to make the distinction that specific because, unlike a car, you don't get a warranty with a person. It seems silly to me to try and place a "custom order" that specific. How many men or women stay the exact same size (up or down)? How do the numbers help in a way that your eyes don't?
That's a value judgement not befitting free thinkers.
Which is of course itself a value judgement
Touché!
Quote from: En_Route on May 19, 2012, 12:03:59 PM
I'd also add this is a forum for atheists not freethinkers. All freethinkers are atheists but not all atheists are freethinkers.
I like that but I don't believe there is such a thing as free thinker.
I can recommend some cheap ones but they all cost something.
Quote from: The Magic Pudding on May 19, 2012, 02:23:23 PM
Quote from: En_Route on May 19, 2012, 12:03:59 PM
I'd also add this is a forum for atheists not freethinkers. All freethinkers are atheists but not all atheists are freethinkers.
I like that but I don't believe there is such a thing as free thinker.
I can recommend some cheap ones but they all cost something.
Same goes for free love if my memory serves me well.
Quote from: En_Route on May 19, 2012, 02:43:26 PM
Quote from: The Magic Pudding on May 19, 2012, 02:23:23 PM
Quote from: En_Route on May 19, 2012, 12:03:59 PM
I'd also add this is a forum for atheists not freethinkers. All freethinkers are atheists but not all atheists are freethinkers.
Quote
I like that but I don't believe there is such a thing as free thinker.
I can recommend some cheap ones but they all cost something.
Same goes for free love if my memory serves me well.
Charity begins at home... as it were... :D
I'd like free cupcakes. :)
Quote from: Sweetdeath on May 19, 2012, 04:32:16 PM
I'd like free cupcakes. :)
Mmmm, cupcakes! Thanks SD, now you have me craving them. ;D I just may need to go into a baking frenzy this weekend...
It is a bit odd you know.
Someone with a preferance for the overlarge male raising doubts on the rightness of males seeking the small.
You're fucked up you know.
It's OK we're all fucked up.
Let's dance now but don't step on me with your clumsy oversized feet.
Quote from: The Magic Pudding on May 19, 2012, 05:06:54 PM
It is a bit odd you know.
Someone with a preferance for the overlarge male raising doubts on the rightness of males seeking the small.
You're fucked up you know.
It's OK we're all fucked up.
Let's dance now but don't step on me with your clumsy oversized feet.
I'd dance with you, but what with the way your hippo's eyeing me, I'm pretty sure she has plans to sit on me. I don't think I can deal with that unless I have at least another cup of coffee.
I wallow blissfully in the delight of consorting with people as mad as myself.
Quote from: The Magic Pudding on May 19, 2012, 05:06:54 PM
It is a bit odd you know.
Someone with a preferance for the overlarge male raising doubts on the rightness of males seeking the small.
You're fucked up you know.
It's OK we're all fucked up.
Let's dance now but don't step on me with your clumsy oversized feet.
Okay, but let me quantify my fondness for oversized men. I'm not saying that I would or have only ever dated giant guys. In fact, I would say that the majority of the men I have dated have been average sized (by definition, there are more average sized guys bouncing around than any other type) and both of my two firsts (first love and first sexual partner) were smaller than average guys. When I say that I have a fondness for large men, all I'm really saying is that I have a special corner of my smile devoted to the Big and Tall. If I were on the prowl, Large But Boring might catch my eye, but I'd still be going home with Short But Funny and Interesting, if those were my two choices. And the idea of someone measuring them and making them wear a badge that lists their height (and rejecting some for not being large enough) grosses me out as much as the idea of women wearing their dress size on a badge.
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on May 18, 2012, 11:30:11 PM
Apparently there might be some that disagree it's humiliating and degrading to women...namely those attending the event. I'm sure no woman is forced to participate, which then would make it humiliating and degrading to them.
Not that I agree, but it would be interesting if I were of dating age...back in my prime.
But that's the male in me speaking. :)
Agreed. One of the things we should strive for in Humanity is individual freedom and the acknowledgement that were are evolved apes with just enough brains to be dangerous. This causes variation in form and desire and where the two coincide it should be accepted.
Quote from: Ali on May 19, 2012, 06:11:24 PM
Quote from: The Magic Pudding on May 19, 2012, 05:06:54 PM
It is a bit odd you know.
Someone with a preferance for the overlarge male raising doubts on the rightness of males seeking the small.
You're fucked up you know.
It's OK we're all fucked up.
Let's dance now but don't step on me with your clumsy oversized feet.
Okay, but let me quantify my fondness for oversized men. I'm not saying that I would or have only ever dated giant guys. In fact, I would say that the majority of the men I have dated have been average sized (by definition, there are more average sized guys bouncing around than any other type) and both of my two firsts (first love and first sexual partner) were smaller than average guys. When I say that I have a fondness for large men, all I'm really saying is that I have a special corner of my smile devoted to the Big and Tall. If I were on the prowl, Large But Boring might catch my eye, but I'd still be going home with Short But Funny and Interesting, if those were my two choices. And the idea of someone measuring them and making them wear a badge that lists their height (and rejecting some for not being large enough) grosses me out as much as the idea of women wearing their dress size on a badge.
I wasn't the choosy type. My only requirement was that she shouldn't be connected to a life support machine.
Quote from: OldGit on May 19, 2012, 06:02:19 PM
I wallow blissfully in the delight of consorting with people as mad as myself.
We do our best but you're a hard act to follow.
Nothing shocks me in a world where people describe "Edward Cullen" as being their type. :P
I think it's absurd to reduce compatibility down to a number on a piece of clothing, but if the silly and shallow people want to band together in their dating and mating endeavours, I suppose that's their choice.
I wonder though, how often it is that people actually end up with someone who fits their so-called type? And how often do those relationships succeed? On the contrast, I guess I'd consider my "type" to be nerd, which could take any number of forms. Some of the sexiest people I've known had bigger brains than, well, other parts of their anatomy. But they ran the gamut from short and stocky to tall and willowy, blond to ginger and anything in between. People who might not have been otherwise attractive to me become attractive through their wit and personality, etc... In terms of forging actual relationships, and not just casual encounters, I honestly don't understand how people can think the shell is more important than what's inside of it. Maybe that's really why 50% of marriages end in divorce. ::)
Quote from: philosoraptor on May 20, 2012, 12:32:42 AM
I think it's absurd to reduce compatibility down to a number on a piece of clothing, but if the silly and shallow people want to band together in their dating and mating endeavours, I suppose that's their choice.
When I thought about this some more, I don't think compatibility in its entirety is being reduced to a dress size -- it's just a starting point where the non-negotiable need can be gotten out of the way fast and easy so they can get right down to the business of the negotiable wants and trade-offs.
I don't think every man who insists on a size 0 woman is going to be happy with
any size 0 woman, that's just where he needs to start and at least he's being honest about it.
As for ending up with ones type, I've done that fairly consistently as far as serious "ending up" is concerned and I realized some time ago that it was because the qualities for my basic type are not only what attacts me to them, but makes them able to put up with me. It's a push me-pull you affect that I'm not sure would work if my type had physical requirements.
I get what you're saying in terms of needing a jumping off point, I'm just in the camp of the why so specific? You can make an event 0-8 without needing to pin the numbers on people and objectify them that way. It almost seems like a competition within a competition. If you're already at the event, what difference do those numbers make, other than to incite jealousy and pettiness amongst the participants?
I wish I had access to the files still, but when I was in college I did a survey for my stat course where I had people rate attractiveness based on weight, etc... and also had them rate themselves and their own weight. Of course this was hidden under the psychobabble so that the participants weren't actually supposed to know what we were really studying-I forget what the cover actually was. But in the end, when analyzing results, I remember laughing because so many people (especially men, sorry guys) who had rated themselves as being overweight or unattractive still said they wouldn't date people rated at the same or a lower level of attractiveness as themselves. I guess it's the hypocrisy that bothers me. Not that it's anything new-it's always been more acceptable for men to be overweight than it has been for women.
Quote from: philosoraptor on May 20, 2012, 01:08:17 AM
I get what you're saying in terms of needing a jumping off point, I'm just in the camp of the why so specific?
Because some people are just that shallow. Me, I'd rather they were honest about it than pretend to have more complex needs, and run the risk of tricking themselves as well as others. That never turns out well.
QuoteBut in the end, when analyzing results, I remember laughing because so many people (especially men, sorry guys) who had rated themselves as being overweight or unattractive still said they wouldn't date people rated at the same or a lower level of attractiveness as themselves.
I remember once walking past a tubby guy who was arm in arm with a string bean girlfriend -- he was wearing a t-shirt that read "no fat chicks". Before I could help myself, I'd stared pointedly at his paunch and then given him a "seriously?" look. At least he had the grace to look uncomfortable in return. I suppose that was hypocritical of me, given my stance on people being honest about what they want, but it was a knee-jerk reaction.
I think a justified knee-jerk reaction, in that circumstance. Less a judgment on his weight and more a judgment on the double-standard. You can't always choose whether or not you end up fat or thin. You can, however, choose just how large of a douchebag you want to act like.
Quote from: philosoraptor on May 20, 2012, 02:34:01 AM
I think a justified knee-jerk reaction, in that circumstance. Less a judgment on his weight and more a judgment on the double-standard. You can't always choose whether or not you end up fat or thin. You can, however, choose just how large of a douchebag you want to act like.
Wise words to live by. :)
If you're going to be that shallow about such things, it's better to be up front about it, I suppose. Personally, looks are far less important to me than a man who can make me laugh.
Quote from: Velma on May 20, 2012, 03:45:07 AM
If you're going to be that shallow about such things, it's better to be up front about it, I suppose. Personally, looks are far less important to me than a man who can make me laugh.
What about a man whose looks make you laugh?
Quote from: En_Route on May 20, 2012, 10:19:25 AM
Quote from: Velma on May 20, 2012, 03:45:07 AM
If you're going to be that shallow about such things, it's better to be up front about it, I suppose. Personally, looks are far less important to me than a man who can make me laugh.
What about a man whose looks make you laugh?
Hmmmmm...can't say that I've ever met one whose looks made me laugh. However, if he had a good sense of humor, looks would not be important. The man who became my husband started wooing me with a series of funny, slightly teasing posts on a forum where we were both on staff.
Quote from: Scissorlegs on May 19, 2012, 09:08:50 AM
Let's not judge them against our own prejudices.
Couldn't agree with this more even if I tried.
People have there own desires and some may be more quirky than others but if there is something out that is accommodating this where all sides are in consent, helps them find others of a similar way of thinking then why not. If it's a persons fantasy to sleep or be around a person that's a size 0 then why not, I'm sure it saves those people a lot of trouble and other people being creeped out.
In light of what has come from this topic and some reaction to my post, let me clarify that in my "prime" I was not looking for a spouse. I was looking for my idea of hot girls to hook up with. That's it. That's the male in me speaking...and about the only voice I heard at this point in my life as I assume is much the same for the other males "in their prime". ( maybe I'm wrong )
As for some intestinal juice in my shoes, I can't fault the judgment from ones with more life experience for this. :)