* How important is PHYSICAL attraction to you in a relationship? *

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 23, 2012 4:30 AM GMT
    Would you consider being in a relationship with somebody with great and complimentary characteristics, and who treats you extremely well, for example, but with whom you have to little to no physical attraction to?

    Just how important is physical attraction/sexual chemistry to you when it comes down to the deciding factors in entering a relationship?

    Scale of 1-10, with 10 being all important.

    When on the looks/sexual attraction spectrum (not necessarily exactly the same thing, granted) does it become a deal breaker, if at all?


    Just curious. Enquiring minds would like to know.
  • O5vx

    Posts: 3154

    Jul 23, 2012 7:16 AM GMT
    It's important, but not the most important. I would say about 5 for me.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 23, 2012 7:21 AM GMT
    8/10
  • nomad4life

    Posts: 332

    Jul 23, 2012 7:23 AM GMT
    I would average it at like a 7, but it depends on how far you want the relationship to go. I'd think of it as more of a reverse bell curve. 10 if you want just the hookup, maybe like a 5 if you want to temporarily date them and then just break up later, 10 if you want something long term because as good of a personality they might have, you still have to look at them all the time. I recently ended a relationship with a guy who had that beer gut which is a major turn off for me, but was amazing on every other level. We clicked on basically everything and I really liked him when we were apart, but then when we were together I just kept seeing that belly role out when he took his shirt off. I tried to work past it, but after 7 months I realized my sexual attraction to him wasn't going to change. I promised myself I'd be a little more shallow with the next one because looks do count, as bad as that sounds.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 23, 2012 7:24 AM GMT
    I'd have to say, for me, it's a solid 8. Why.? Because I'm used to pursuing men because I know what I'm physically attracted to. Simple as that.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 23, 2012 7:34 AM GMT
    Overall 4 for me, with higher emphasis on the face over body.

    For me personality/chemistry/compatibility would be of greater importance especially in the long run.

    That being said it is important to have some physical attraction, but it's not the most important thing for me. icon_smile.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 23, 2012 9:41 AM GMT
    METAMORPH saidWould you consider being in a relationship with somebody with great and complimentary characteristics, and who treats you extremely well, but, with whom you have to little no physical attraction to?


    That describes alot of the female friends I have.

    To me physical attraction is the starting point of a relationship (normally). Its either something that gets it started or something that comes along after a period of time.

    I think physical attraction is the baseline (how much attraction can be debated, but some is needed). I know this sounds bad, but think about it, without "attraction" to someone its hard to "commit" to someone on a relationship level (the highest level of relationships).

    Again, i have alot of female friends who fits that description perfectly, but im not physically attracted to them (which could be a bad example, but i feel its slightly relevant). I also have male friends who i love (i really do, they rock) but arent attracted to (which i cant imagine then being in a relationship with).

    Yes, you can care for someone, and there are a ton of other things that come into play (which is mentioned in the thread), but without attraction, i cant imagine it working completely.

    EDIT: On the looks spectrum, its hard to really give a rating. I think the rating is more than just physical in itself. I might want a 8 minimum, but a 8 to me can be someone you consider a 6-7 with something "special" which i cant define. I have met 10s who after two sentences become 7s. But a physical attraction needs to exist. IMO you can have the best personality on earth, if there is no physical attraction, then nope, cant do it. icon_sad.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 23, 2012 10:22 AM GMT
    I do not think that a strong physical attraction is required in the beginning as your perspective about somebody can change as time goes by.

    I met a guy that I thought was a little strange looking at first and physically he was not my type. After spending time with him I very quickly became very attracted to him as his personality was fantastic and he was very sweet. The sweetest guy I have ever met. Now I think that he is gorgeous in every way. Once he was not my type physically and now he is. Funny how perspectives change. Now when I see a guy that looks like him they draw my attention.

    On the scale rating I would say I would score a four as personality is a bit more important than looks.
  • DanOmatic

    Posts: 1155

    Jul 23, 2012 10:55 AM GMT
    For me, it's always been a pretty important factor. Don't get me wrong: physical attraction does not mean that I expect guys I date to be perfectly-built specimens. What is means is that the whole experience of someone--the hormonal response to him (chemistry), the facial features and expressiveness, what the eyes "say", how he moves and interacts in his own skin and when he's around others--add up to physical attractiveness, at least in my conceptualization of it.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 23, 2012 11:14 AM GMT
    I'd say 4 1/2....
    You'd really have to be a great guy to get to heart...
    Not necessarily a really good looking guy...
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 23, 2012 11:22 AM GMT
    10 in the first two weeks of an acquaintance, lowering by 1 with each following week till it reaches 5. But by the time it gets there the guy has to be real something (the very idea that he would stay for more than two months is strangely exhilarating).
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 23, 2012 11:45 AM GMT
    sbstn_frncsk said10 in the first two weeks of an acquaintance, lowering by 1 with each following week till it reaches 5. But by the time it gets there the guy has to be real something (the very idea that he would stay for more than two months is strangely exhilarating).


    OMG..You have a subtractive system..???
    So the subtractions are automatic...A 10 never stays a 10..???
    Interesting....icon_neutral.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 23, 2012 11:59 AM GMT
    demerit points. interesting. never thought of that!

    actually physical attraction is high for me. i can't have a romantic relationship without attraction. the truth is, i can't fake a hard on, and i don't think its worthwhile pursuing a sexless romantic relationship. i would call that an intimate friendship.

    in fact, many of my friends are people who have been physically attracted to me and we tried to date, but there was no reciprocal feeling (and vice versa).

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 23, 2012 12:01 PM GMT
    Probably 7/10.

    I'll be honest. I need to be physically attracted to a person for something to even spark and from there I'll get to know the person better for a deeper connection. The more you know someone the more you can develop that special bond. Personality and appearance do go hand in hand.

    Every person is different on what they consider attractive but nonetheless everyone has a preference there is something physical about everyone that you will find yourself attracted.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 23, 2012 12:02 PM GMT
    Its a necessary component so I'm not sure if there any point in rating it. Either you have it or you don't.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 23, 2012 12:21 PM GMT
    Anocxu said
    sbstn_frncsk said10 in the first two weeks of an acquaintance, lowering by 1 with each following week till it reaches 5. But by the time it gets there the guy has to be real something (the very idea that he would stay for more than two months is strangely exhilarating).


    OMG..You have a subtractive system..???
    So the subtractions are automatic...A 10 never stays a 10..???
    Interesting....icon_neutral.gif


    I'd call it chemistry wear-off, or whatever. Besides, take into consideration the fact that he might get older/unfit/fat/dismembered etc. The point is - you get allured by the body, but you stay for the personality (blahblah).
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 23, 2012 12:25 PM GMT
    It is quite important for me as well. I fall for a pretty face over a nice body anyday of the week. I've always felt if you don't find your man as attractive then the odds of it working are slim.
  • E_84

    Posts: 201

    Jul 23, 2012 12:27 PM GMT
    Initially: 7-8/10

    Have to be somewhat attracted to them.


    Overtime: 5-6/10

    As I get to know the person and things progress, personality is key to me. Physical attraction is not a key player, but supplementary to the package.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 23, 2012 12:30 PM GMT
    Anocxu said
    sbstn_frncsk said10 in the first two weeks of an acquaintance, lowering by 1 with each following week till it reaches 5. But by the time it gets there the guy has to be real something (the very idea that he would stay for more than two months is strangely exhilarating).


    OMG..You have a subtractive system..???
    So the subtractions are automatic...A 10 never stays a 10..???
    Interesting....icon_neutral.gif

    A 10 never stays a 10. "10-ness" is to some extent a projection of your sense of his perfection and unattainability. But once you wake up to the same face week after week, he's no longer perfect and unattainable.
    Fortunately by that point you have shifted the focus of your attraction to those inner qualities that make someone a keeper. But if you haven't, you will be finding out why relationships based solely on physical attraction don't last.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 23, 2012 12:33 PM GMT
    10.

    Being attractive is the most important thing there is.
    If you want to catch the biggest fish in your pond
    you have to be as attractive as possible.
    Make sure to keep your hair spotless and clean.
    Wash it at least every two weeks.
    Once every two weeks.
    And if you see Johnny-Football-Hero in the hall,
    tell him he played a great game
    tell him you liked his article in the newspaper...
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 23, 2012 12:35 PM GMT
    There has to be SOME physical attraction. Id say like a 6. If you like the person but have no physical attraction to them it's more like a best friend.
  • Karl

    Posts: 5787

    Jul 23, 2012 12:42 PM GMT
    3 for me ...
    No one is ugly.
    A person can be not good looking in the eyes of some people but he's also cute in other people 's.
    Just be who he is , dont try to change anything.
    I need things inside him icon_smile.gif
  • Latenight30

    Posts: 1525

    Jul 23, 2012 1:08 PM GMT
    what a strange question?
    You can't change ugly with out lots of money and work. Physical attraction is very important and I won't say otherwise. I can like you, I can fool around with you, but if I can't see myself waking up next to you,,,I sure won't!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 23, 2012 1:20 PM GMT
    Disclaimer: I've probably got issues as I am a serial non-monogamist and get sexually bored with only being limited to the same guy after not very long.

    At present, if I were to truly consider locking into at least an open relationship with a guy, looks would probably an 7/10 for me, with some wiggle room for either face or body. As narcissistic and shallow as this seems, the more well kept a guy is, and the more well he keeps himself will tend to directly reflect the amount of time I am willing to invest in the relationship.

    That said, I'm not as picky about looks if I'm just looking for non-sexual physical contact (a "cuddle-buddy" if you will).

    I do recognize my flaws with this, and wish I could love the person deeper inside; but perhaps as I get older and my sex drive diminishes, I will learn to value a partner on more than just his looks.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 23, 2012 1:22 PM GMT
    TexDef07 said
    Anocxu said
    sbstn_frncsk said10 in the first two weeks of an acquaintance, lowering by 1 with each following week till it reaches 5. But by the time it gets there the guy has to be real something (the very idea that he would stay for more than two months is strangely exhilarating).


    OMG..You have a subtractive system..???
    So the subtractions are automatic...A 10 never stays a 10..???
    Interesting....icon_neutral.gif

    A 10 never stays a 10. "10-ness" is to some extent a projection of your sense of his perfection and unattainability. But once you wake up to the same face week after week, he's no longer perfect and unattainable.
    Fortunately by that point you have shifted the focus of your attraction to those inner qualities that make someone a keeper. But if you haven't, you will be finding out why relationships based solely on physical attraction don't last.


    Basically... this x100.