It has been awhile since I have posted anything controversial, so I thought I would throw something up here with a little food for thought. Over the past couple of weeks, several of us have been "discussing" a variety of topics relating to men and women and relationships. The battle of the sexes rages on. What is on my mind is the subject of attraction. Attraction means different things to different people, but we all seem to agree that is plays a major role in relationships. However, how major and to what degree is where the divisions start.
Attraction is defined as an, "attractive quality, magnetic charm, fascination, allurement, enticement." As individuals we are attracted to someone for different reasons. What attracts one person to someone may not attract the next person to that same individual. Attraction is completely subjective because we all have our own desires, likes and dislikes that have been shaped by our own individual experiences and perspectives. In general, men tend to be more visual then women; therefore physical attraction to a person tends to rate higher on the list of qualities for a man when searching for his ideal mate. Now, before I get blasted by everyone for that statement, please read on.
Physical attraction is important for woman also and if you ask women they will not lie and say it is not, but many woman as they get older will tell you that, yes I have to be attracted to someone in order for that relationship to work, but it is not my number ONE priority. Women are looking for caretakers and caregivers in relationships and in doing so will balance their needs to achieve their goals. Let me demonstrate my point. Take a look around you and see the couples of today. You will observe many beautiful women with men that you would not expect to see them with (I am not trying to sound like a judgmental, superficial person) but by society's standards these men should not be with these women, BUT THEY ARE! How do you think they ended up here? By luck? By chance? By the grace of God? (ok- maybe this one) NO! Because the woman chose that man for some other quality that he had that she needed and wanted even though he was not a George (Clooney) or a Brad (Pit)or a Vin Diesel in the looks department. We see this ALL the time.
Men, on the other hand, will tell you that they HAVE to be physically attracted to a woman or they can't be involved with her in a relationship. One night stands - that might be another story. For one night you can probably put up with no attraction just for sex, but why would you? What would the point be? (Oh- yes I know, TO GET LAID.) I don't disagree with the need for chemistry or physical attraction. This is understandable, but forty years from now that attraction is not what is going to be holding your relationship together anymore. Granted, it will still play a part; the other important elements in building a solid foundation in a relationship are what keep that relationship going, not just the attraction. It only takes a spark to get the fire going, but not to keep it burning. (Please don't misinterpret this as me saying you don't need to be attracted to someone to keep a relationship intact.)
I am not trying to draw a battle line between men and woman here and say that men have it all wrong and women have it all right in this department. I have yet to find anyone one who has any of this figured out. What I am saying is physical attraction is only the beginning and if we base everything on a single element, we may miss out on the right person because we cannot moved past the first step. People change, grow and evolve and someone you were not attracted to before you may end up attracted to later if your eyes are open to it. I know that is something that we only think happens on TV and in the movies, but in real life, if we don't believe in second chances than what do any of us have to look forward to? In converse, you can fall out of lust with someone also; attraction can work in the reverse. If you used to be attracted to someone in the past and you may not be anymore as time and circumstances have changed.
Attraction is not a finite concept. I would hate to see any person miss out on an opportunity because he or she was bound by the laws of attraction. You might be confused by this statement, but take a few minutes and think about it. The right person might be right in front of you and you've never considered it or vice versa. Then again, that may not be what is supposed to happen for either of you. I will leave you with this parting thought. For all of you who are friends with members of the opposite sex, if you think that you are "just friends", you probably are, but it was not always that way. At some point in your relationship someone was attracted to the other person as more than a friend even if no one is now. Or, if you have just met someone and both of you insist that neither is interested in the other, this may be true at this point in time, but the scales will tip at some point. Men and women are not built to be just friends. That is biology. Plain and simple. And, people change. Feelings change. Attraction is not a finite concept. . .
4 comments:
I was with you on this post until about the last 3rd of it. Then you lost all reasonable logic and it went downhill from there. :-)
Seriously....let me sum up your 3rd paragraph. Men have realized this for a long time. If you have money, you get the chicks. Sorry, no need to sugar coat it. If you really want to believe all the other stuff, you are probably somewhat delusional. That's reality.
The last two paragraphs kind of lose me. Mainly because at the same time you pretty much are stating that you don't have to be attracted to someone to be in a relationship while the rest of your post was stating that you do! I think what you were getting at is that attraction can take many forms and physical attraction may not be the only thing going for a couple of people.
But I'll say this about myself. If I am not physically attracted to someone then I am not going to entertain the idea of a relationship with them. Because, for me, the physical aspect of a relationship is a very important one. And your statement about not having physical attraction for a one night stand may apply for some people, but not to me. If I am not physically attracted you can forget the rest.
It's not a "rule" or something self imposed as you might suggest. it's simply physiological. If I can't get a hard-on because I am not physically attracted to a person then there isn't going to be a one night stand or anything else.
I think that for most people the physical attraction has to be there first. The rest of it may come later, things may change, and I agree with all of that. But it has to start with a spark....you don't start with a fire (trying to use some of your words).
oh Bradford,
I understand your point, but you are not quite getting mine. I am not saying you don't have to be attracted to someone to be in a relationship with them. Attraction means different things to different people. What I said was that attraction to a person can change as you get to know them- that this is a fluid concept if you will. Physical attraction is something that most people feel early on in a relationship, especially men. And many women too. But, that physical attraction is not as important to some people. Some people will concede certain aspects of that element in a relationship to have the rest of their needs met. It is not as black or white as you make it. Before you say, either you are attracted to someone or you are not, that is not what I meant. What I am saying is, yes, that is true - but you can be attracted to someone's personality as well as his/her body and have one or the other be as much of a turn on. Generally speaking, it is the phyiscal appearance that evokes that response, but for some people, that is not the case and for the non-super model populous, we thank God every day that other parts of us can drive that response out of another human being.
My point to this post is that attraction is not a finite concept. People change and a person's feelings about them can change. As humans we are constantly growing and evolving into different people. With that, we may find ourselves attracted to someone who we never would have considered before. I am not discounting the importance of physical attraction and the level of priority of the physcial aspect of a relationship.
I just want someone to tell me how exactly we are willing to bank or not bank our potential relationships on never having any initimate physical contact with a person? ("That person does not turn me on - I can tell just by looking at them. . . ") It is just a question for the masses because we all have done it and we are all still doing it now. . .
I don't disagree with your second to last paragraph at all.
But the last paragraph doesn't make any sense at all.
It almost sounds like you are saying we should just have intimiate contact with people that we aren't attracted to....just to see if maybe we are wrong. That's fucked up.
I just changed my mind. I'd love to meet more women like you.
Me: Hi! I'd like to take you home and do mean and terrible things to your body.
Chick: I'm not attracted to you.
Me: how do you know?
Chick: because I'm not. But I'll be intimate with you anyway, just in case I'm wrong.
Post a Comment