Jump to content

How important is physical attraction in a relationship?


emc

Recommended Posts

There's a fine line between love and hate.


Familiarity breeds contempt.


I don't think physical attraction can somehow grow if there wasn't anything there in the first place.

Thankfully physical attraction means different things to different people.


Is this more about 'love at first sight' and people that are in relationships for the sake of it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

sexually attraction and desire is very important in a relationship and whilst it is not the most important thing, I have always seen it as the glue that binds the other stuff together. Fortunately the things that people find attractive and sexy are diverse (I have a hopeless weakness for glasses, nice hands and forearms, oh and slightly crooked bottom teeth...). But despite the importance of finding someone attractive, I have never ended a relationship because of not finding someone attractive, its usually that they are selfish or just not funny so it must be the other attributes which are more fundamental.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

waynetta Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Of course physical attraction is important. Why

> else would she be with him ?

>

> http://blog.mtvasia.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/12

> /2067054.jpg



Lol.....you cannot see the large wad of money in his pocket and his wallet full of no limit credit cards!

thats sex appeal!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very funny MrT! Incidentally I once heard a male gigolo explain that in order to 'perform' with his lady clients of all ages and physical appearance, he would always find at least one attractive thing upon which to focus.... nice eyes, nice hair, the shape of her thigh and so on. It goes to show that there is beauty in everyone if you are prepared to look. So, physical attraction is important in a relationship, but problems can arise if the other person doesn't look hard enough to see it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Physical attraction comes in all, shape and sizes but I have to agree with Lol it is the money you find in the celebrities world rich old men attract younger women very few go out with a women there own age I personally would not date a man shorter than myself as I feel is if I am forcing him.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Terry Thomas esq Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I say That's harsh.... but no mention of the ON

> switch Katie... did he not know how to turn you

> :-$n

>

> What a bounder


Tel, there's a lot of bounders out there, or so I hear, I'm sure you could teach them a thing or two :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

katie1997 Wrote:

>

> Tel, there's a lot of bounders out there, or so I

> hear, I'm sure you could teach them a thing or two

> :)


My Dear Katie


As much as I could teach them about etiquete and impressing the ladies, I would prefer to teach you a few things


Bottle of Champage during your first lesson my dear? of course you will

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From the Beeb:


Professor Robin Dunbar of Liverpool University spent much of the latter half of the 1990s studying the hidden evolutionary signals contained in Lonely Hearts advertisements.


Dunbar found that the vast majority of words used by people to describe themselves in ads could be lumped into five different categories.


He asked 200 university students to rate the appeal of ads containing different categories of words. When Dunbar analysed the results, he found that men and women attached very different levels of importance to the five categories:


Men's preferences

1. Attractiveness

1. Commitment

3. Social Skills

4. Resources

4. Sexiness


Women's preferences

1. Commitment

2. Social Skills

3. Resources

4. Attractiveness

5. Sexiness


Far from being conditioned to regard these things as important, Dunbar argued that men and women had evolved these preferences over millions of years of evolution. These were crucial qualities that enhanced the fitness of children, and, lest we forget, children are the key to the survival of our species.


What hidden messages do we send the opposite sex?


Pregnancy and breast-feeding place great stress on a mother, so females make the biggest investment in reproduction. This is why women are choosier about their partners than men, with 20-something women being the choosiest of all.


This big parental investment also explains why women seek males who are willing to stick around and provide for children


However, when the desire for reproduction is taken out of the equation, preferences change drastically. Dunbar has shown that lesbians were three times less likely to seek resources than heterosexual women.


For males, time spent providing for a pregnant partner could be better spent fathering other children with other women. This may explain why men place such a high premium on attractiveness.


Attractiveness is a rough indicator of age, and in women, age is a good indicator of fertility. After her late 20s, a woman's fertility steadily declines, and so does her value on the dating market.


However, asked to choose one woman as a long-term partner, all three groups chose the beautiful woman regardless of what age they thought she was.


"They are saying: 'I'd rather risk a relationship with an older woman who is not going to give me as many children but is very beautiful, than a woman who is more fecund but whose children will be plainer," says Fieldman.


The theory is based on the notion that a beautiful woman is more likely to bear beautiful offspring and that those offspring will be more successful than plainer offspring.


So I guess that whether physical attraction is important in a relationship depends entirely on what you want out of the relationship.


Without a doubt it's got to be important in the 'lust' stage, but it probably gets a lower priority in the 'attraction' and 'attachment' phases


If your overall priorities are resources or commitment, then you may not need to go through the 'lust' stage at all - thus negating the necessity for physical attraction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

dita-on-tees Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I think my relationships would be easier if I had

> a mute switch.



Most men have these inbuilt. Its when you can listen to what your wife says and watch sport at the same time, nodding occaisionally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mick Mac Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> dita-on-tees Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > I think my relationships would be easier if I

> had

> > a mute switch.

>

>

> Most men have these inbuilt. Its when you can

> listen to what your wife says and watch sport at

> the same time, nodding occaisionally.



So you men can multi-task after all!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • "If I hear 'my father was a tool maker' / my wife's a nurse / my father was a GP one more time... as if any of those things qualify anyone to fix / understand anything. "   yeah but that's not the point here - many (most?) of the people watching last night are the voters who tend not to pay much attention to Westminster and may well buy the "they are all the same - born into money and detached from real life" - so Starmer's story, as overplayed as it is to you and me will be news to many
    • It was an absolute shit show. And so much anger coming from both sides, not becoming at all (was surprised how riled cool Rishi was getting).  Agree about the format, it was lazy, whatsherchops wasn't asking pertinent questions, she was just going for binary yesses or nos. The producers didn't force either side to drill down on anything, just make commitments so they got good soundbites.  If I hear 'my father was a tool maker' / my wife's a nurse / my father was a GP one more time... as if any of those things qualify anyone to fix / understand anything. 
    • Good.  Subsidence claims generally have an excess of £1000 per claim, but was yours higher?
    • Indeed, many house here have had or will have subsidence issues so one needs to bear that in mind.  Many houses here have shallow foundations but they have been around 100 years or so without too much issue. What the surveyor has told you doesn't feel like a 'red flag', more of a sensible warning.  Bear in mind that although the surveyor is nominally working for you, their focus iln reality is mostly on the lender and the risk of being sued, either by them or you.  So they are always pretty cautious.  It would be wise to get a 2nd opinion, eg. from a structural engineer.  Or talk  to the original surveyor directly as they may say more than they are prepared to put in a report.  It's a little difficult from the description to identify what the situation is but the scenario in which part of a property has been underpinned and the rest has not is fairly common here.  The proximity of trees is likely to be the main thing to be concerned about, particularly after the hot summer of 2002, as insurers generally regard them as risky, especially if they are not cut back from time to time.  A second surveyor can advise directly on this. It would definitely be worth trying to take over the current buildings insurance.  Indeed, it may be quite hard to find new cover.  Enquire what the current premium is and who the policy is ultiimately underwitten by (ie. is it a name that you have ever heard of?)  The insurance industry, in general, works to a guideline that the insurance of an underpinned property should transfer to a new owner.   https://www.biba.org.uk/insurance-guides/home-insurance-guides/subsidence/
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...