OrthodoxChristianity.net

Moderated Forums => Free-For-All => Non-Religious Topics => Topic started by: Dracula on July 14, 2015, 06:36:41 AM

Title: Love not for you?
Post by: Dracula on July 14, 2015, 06:36:41 AM
If you are ugly and you could only love a physical attractive woman does that mean that love is not for you? Who is to blame in this situation?
Title: Re: Love not for you?
Post by: Arachne on July 14, 2015, 07:17:36 AM
The one who is shallow enough to love looks only.
Title: Re: Love not for you?
Post by: TheTrisagion on July 14, 2015, 08:51:22 AM
If you are ugly and you could only love a physical attractive woman does that mean that love is not for you? Who is to blame in this situation?
I think just about anyone who meets my wife and I wonders why an attractive woman loves a less-than-attractive man. Fortunately, my wife was willing to look past that. I will say, however, that I was extremely persistent in my pursuit, so it is possible that she just became exhausted and gave up.
Title: Re: Love not for you?
Post by: Asteriktos on July 14, 2015, 09:08:09 AM
You can't be that unattractive then, since the eighty-seventh universal law of gender relations clearly teaches us that, when it comes to males pursuing relationships with females:

persistence + unattractive = creepy pervert
persistence + attractive = confident and strong
Title: Re: Love not for you?
Post by: TheTrisagion on July 14, 2015, 10:50:17 AM
You can't be that unattractive then, since the eighty-seventh universal law of gender relations clearly teaches us that, when it comes to males pursuing relationships with females:

persistence + unattractive = creepy pervert
persistence + attractive = confident and strong
I'm pretty sure that I was considered the creepy pervert for quite awhile. I had an ace in the hole though. We went to a Reformed Presbyterian college and if you weren't engage by senior year, you clearly were out of God's will.  When all you have is Presbyterian guilt to work with, you work it like Salt-n-Pepa!
Title: Re: Love not for you?
Post by: WPM on July 14, 2015, 10:51:57 AM
You can't be that unattractive then, since the eighty-seventh universal law of gender relations clearly teaches us that, when it comes to males pursuing relationships with females:

persistence + unattractive = creepy pervert
persistence + attractive = confident and strong
I'm pretty sure that I was considered the creepy pervert for quite awhile. I had an ace in the hole though. We went to a Reformed Presbyterian college and if you weren't engage by senior year, you clearly were out of God's will.  When all you have is Presbyterian guilt to work with, you work it like Salt-n-Pepa!

I'm not sure if I understand ... Why is this a creepy sex pervert when those magazines glorify sex? ... Plus all that XXX entertainment porn ... huh?
Title: Re: Love not for you?
Post by: TheTrisagion on July 14, 2015, 10:53:54 AM
You can't be that unattractive then, since the eighty-seventh universal law of gender relations clearly teaches us that, when it comes to males pursuing relationships with females:

persistence + unattractive = creepy pervert
persistence + attractive = confident and strong
I'm pretty sure that I was considered the creepy pervert for quite awhile. I had an ace in the hole though. We went to a Reformed Presbyterian college and if you weren't engage by senior year, you clearly were out of God's will.  When all you have is Presbyterian guilt to work with, you work it like Salt-n-Pepa!

I'm not sure if I understand ... Why is this a creepy sex pervert when those magazines glorify sex? ... Plus all that XXX entertainment porn ... huh?
Whoa, whoa, whoa! What exactly are you accusing my wife of here!
Title: Re: Love not for you?
Post by: Papist on July 14, 2015, 11:21:46 AM
You may just have to work on your shallowness a bit. Such is life.
Title: Re: Love not for you?
Post by: hecma925 on July 14, 2015, 11:23:15 AM
The Tris wooed his wife by implying he had posed for a tasteful modelling job in a variety of magazines.  Let dirty minds go where they are wont.
Title: Re: Love not for you?
Post by: minasoliman on July 14, 2015, 11:51:53 AM
You can't be that unattractive then, since the eighty-seventh universal law of gender relations clearly teaches us that, when it comes to males pursuing relationships with females:

persistence + unattractive = creepy pervert
persistence + attractive = confident and strong
I'm pretty sure that I was considered the creepy pervert for quite awhile. I had an ace in the hole though. We went to a Reformed Presbyterian college and if you weren't engage by senior year, you clearly were out of God's will.  When all you have is Presbyterian guilt to work with, you work it like Salt-n-Pepa!

I'm not sure if I understand ... Why is this a creepy sex pervert when those magazines glorify sex? ... Plus all that XXX entertainment porn ... huh?
Whoa, whoa, whoa! What exactly are you accusing my wife of here!

It's just WPM having a flight of unorganized thoughts online. :/
Title: Re: Love not for you?
Post by: vamrat on July 14, 2015, 11:56:29 AM
(http://rs1img.memecdn.com/picture-of-the-lead-singer-of-right-said-fred_o_3345969.jpg)
Here's a picture of me.
As you can see, finding a mate equal to me in attractiveness is a challenge.
I feel your pain.
Title: Re: Love not for you?
Post by: Arachne on July 14, 2015, 12:01:20 PM
(http://rs1img.memecdn.com/picture-of-the-lead-singer-of-right-said-fred_o_3345969.jpg)
Here's a picture of me.
As you can see, finding a mate equal to me in attractiveness is a challenge.
I feel your pain.

Poor pussycat. :angel:
Title: Re: Love not for you?
Post by: vamrat on July 14, 2015, 01:07:18 PM
(http://rs1img.memecdn.com/picture-of-the-lead-singer-of-right-said-fred_o_3345969.jpg)
Here's a picture of me.
As you can see, finding a mate equal to me in attractiveness is a challenge.
I feel your pain.

Poor pussycat. :angel:

You should see what it does to my travel plans.  Apparently I am too sexy for Milan, New York, and Japan.
Title: Re: Love not for you?
Post by: Dracula on July 14, 2015, 05:26:48 PM
You may just have to work on your shallowness a bit. Such is life.

I am not looking just for looks, but I can't settle just with the inside beauty.
Title: Re: Love not for you?
Post by: minasoliman on July 14, 2015, 05:30:44 PM
You know, despite the fact that many of your posts are open to the type of criticisms you get, you do have to admit, most of humanity tend to think like Dracula.
Title: Re: Love not for you?
Post by: vamrat on July 14, 2015, 05:46:13 PM
You know, despite the fact that many of your posts are open to the type of criticisms you get, you do have to admit, most of humanity tend to think like Dracula.

I am sure that most do think this way.  But basing your preferences solely on maximum physical suitability will likely lead to decreased mating opportunities for the majority of humans. 

I think to answer his question a number of variables must be addressed.  Two main points would be an honest assessment of his suitability displaying characteristics and a good description of what his range of preferences are.  If he is poor, idiotic, and deformed but finds anyone less desirable than Chloe Moritz to be absolutely undesirable he may very well have given us a living example of a genetic cul-de-sac.
Title: Re: Love not for you?
Post by: minasoliman on July 14, 2015, 05:48:23 PM
This whole discussion reminds me of the "Vicki Mendoza diagonal" as was described in an episode of "How I Met Your Mother."
Title: Re: Love not for you?
Post by: TheTrisagion on July 14, 2015, 05:52:03 PM
You may just have to work on your shallowness a bit. Such is life.

I am not looking just for looks, but I can't settle just with the inside beauty.
My theory is you first look for outside looks, then out of that narrowed down group, you look for inside beauty, and then you check out the outside looks again just to make sure you dig it.
Title: Re: Love not for you?
Post by: Papist on July 14, 2015, 05:54:25 PM
You know, despite the fact that many of your posts are open to the type of criticisms you get, you do have to admit, most of humanity tend to think like Dracula.
true
Title: Re: Love not for you?
Post by: Cyrillic on July 14, 2015, 05:56:11 PM
If you are ugly and you could only love a physical attractive woman does that mean that love is not for you? Who is to blame in this situation?

Beggars can't be choosers.
Title: Re: Love not for you?
Post by: Papist on July 14, 2015, 05:56:26 PM
I love this conversation from Seinfeld:

"JERRY: Elaine, what percentage of people would you say are good looking?

ELAINE: Twenty-five percent.

JERRY: Twenty-five percent, you say? No way! It’s like 4 to 6 percent. It’s a twenty to one shot.

ELAINE: You’re way off.

JERRY: Way off? Have you been to the motor vehicle bureau? It’s like a leper colony down there.

ELAINE: So what you are saying is that 90 to 95 percent of the population is undateable?

JERRY: UNDATEABLE!

ELAINE: Then how are all these people getting together?

JERRY: Alcohol."
Title: Re: Love not for you?
Post by: Papist on July 14, 2015, 05:57:21 PM
If you are ugly and you could only love a physical attractive woman does that mean that love is not for you? Who is to blame in this situation?

Beggars can't be choosers.

Also true.
Title: Re: Love not for you?
Post by: minasoliman on July 14, 2015, 05:58:06 PM
lol at the Seinfeld reference!
Title: Re: Love not for you?
Post by: Papist on July 14, 2015, 05:59:17 PM
lol at the Seinfeld reference!

I think Seinfeld might be right too. If you walk through mall, well, it's not pretty.  ;D
Title: Re: Love not for you?
Post by: Papist on July 14, 2015, 06:00:05 PM
I think what is considered good looking is so relative too. An 8 in New Mexico would probably be a 4 in Los Angeles.  ;)
Title: Re: Love not for you?
Post by: TheTrisagion on July 14, 2015, 06:03:45 PM
I think what is considered good looking is so relative too. An 8 in New Mexico would probably be a 4 in Los Angeles.  ;)
Maybe we need to stipulate to pre-makeup. LA girls are mostly hot because they all all professional makeup artists.
Title: Re: Love not for you?
Post by: Dracula on July 14, 2015, 06:05:33 PM
You know, despite the fact that many of your posts are open to the type of criticisms you get, you do have to admit, most of humanity tend to think like Dracula.

Well I am a perfectionist. As I said. I don't think I could love someone who is not looking great on the outside also. But I do care about the soul. I could never love someone who is just pretty on the outside and has nothing on the inside. At least I think i wouldn't. The soul is important, but i believe love to be something really great, beyond everything, beyond measurements, perfect, etc... So physical attraction is a must. So I don't think I could get myself to love someone who is of average low looks and a beautiful soul. I believe in exceptional things, and I believe love is also like that. Is it wrong to have this bar?
Title: Re: Love not for you?
Post by: Papist on July 14, 2015, 06:07:30 PM
You know, despite the fact that many of your posts are open to the type of criticisms you get, you do have to admit, most of humanity tend to think like Dracula.

Well I am a perfectionist. As I said. I don't think I could love someone who is not looking great on the outside also. But I do care about the soul. I could never love someone who is just pretty on the outside and has nothing on the inside. At least I think i wouldn't. The soul is important, but i believe love to be something really great, beyond everything, beyond measurements, perfect, etc... So physical attraction is a must. So I don't think I could get myself to love someone who is of average low looks and a beautiful soul. I believe in exceptional things, and I believe love is also like that. Is it wrong to have this bar?

Probably.

Look, if you are not the best looking guy, you can help remedy that by lifting weights, getting really muscular, and dressing stylishly. These will at least make you appear more attractive, and perhaps you would then be able to snag the kind of woman you are looking for.

Or, you could start talking to a priest about the sin of vanity.

It's your call.
Title: Re: Love not for you?
Post by: Mor Ephrem on July 14, 2015, 06:08:02 PM
You know, despite the fact that many of your posts are open to the type of criticisms you get, you do have to admit, most of humanity tend to think like Dracula.

Well I am a perfectionist. As I said. I don't think I could love someone who is not looking great on the outside also. But I do care about the soul. I could never love someone who is just pretty on the outside and has nothing on the inside. At least I think i wouldn't. The soul is important, but i believe love to be something really great, beyond everything, beyond measurements, perfect, etc... So physical attraction is a must. So I don't think I could get myself to love someone who is of average low looks and a beautiful soul. I believe in exceptional things, and I believe love is also like that. Is it wrong to have this bar?

Only if it lasts more than four hours and is not given immediate medical attention. 
Title: Re: Love not for you?
Post by: Papist on July 14, 2015, 06:09:12 PM
I think what is considered good looking is so relative too. An 8 in New Mexico would probably be a 4 in Los Angeles.  ;)
Maybe we need to stipulate to pre-makeup. LA girls are mostly hot because they all all professional makeup artists.

That a good point, but don't LA men and women take fitness very seriously as well? And don't they tan and dress well and get plastic surgery?  ;)
Title: Re: Love not for you?
Post by: Dracula on July 14, 2015, 06:10:48 PM
If you are ugly and you could only love a physical attractive woman does that mean that love is not for you? Who is to blame in this situation?

Beggars can't be choosers.

What pops into my head is that many people get married just because of that, with this thought without loving each other. Perhaps your parents married without loving each other, and many others. Too many non-loving matrimonies. What do you think?
Title: Re: Love not for you?
Post by: Dracula on July 14, 2015, 06:12:43 PM
You know, despite the fact that many of your posts are open to the type of criticisms you get, you do have to admit, most of humanity tend to think like Dracula.

Well I am a perfectionist. As I said. I don't think I could love someone who is not looking great on the outside also. But I do care about the soul. I could never love someone who is just pretty on the outside and has nothing on the inside. At least I think i wouldn't. The soul is important, but i believe love to be something really great, beyond everything, beyond measurements, perfect, etc... So physical attraction is a must. So I don't think I could get myself to love someone who is of average low looks and a beautiful soul. I believe in exceptional things, and I believe love is also like that. Is it wrong to have this bar?

Probably.

Look, if you are not the best looking guy, you can help remedy that by lifting weights, getting really muscular, and dressing stylishly. These will at least make you appear more attractive, and perhaps you would then be able to snag the kind of woman you are looking for.

Or, you could start talking to a priest about the sin of vanity.

It's your call.

I don't believe in priests like you do.
Title: Re: Love not for you?
Post by: Papist on July 14, 2015, 06:13:50 PM
You know, despite the fact that many of your posts are open to the type of criticisms you get, you do have to admit, most of humanity tend to think like Dracula.

Well I am a perfectionist. As I said. I don't think I could love someone who is not looking great on the outside also. But I do care about the soul. I could never love someone who is just pretty on the outside and has nothing on the inside. At least I think i wouldn't. The soul is important, but i believe love to be something really great, beyond everything, beyond measurements, perfect, etc... So physical attraction is a must. So I don't think I could get myself to love someone who is of average low looks and a beautiful soul. I believe in exceptional things, and I believe love is also like that. Is it wrong to have this bar?

Probably.

Look, if you are not the best looking guy, you can help remedy that by lifting weights, getting really muscular, and dressing stylishly. These will at least make you appear more attractive, and perhaps you would then be able to snag the kind of woman you are looking for.

Or, you could start talking to a priest about the sin of vanity.

It's your call.

I don't believe in priests like you do.

You could always bite a beautiful woman, transform her into one of your undead minons, and have her forever.
Title: Re: Love not for you?
Post by: minasoliman on July 14, 2015, 06:15:19 PM
While it is funny, what I have always experienced is not alcohol, but actually getting to know the person more might actually make her far more beautiful than you initially thought of her.  Be friends, get to know her personally, and allow her to know you personally.  The closer you are, the more the external beauty will be transformed from the inner.
Title: Re: Love not for you?
Post by: Papist on July 14, 2015, 06:15:59 PM
While it is funny, what I have always experienced is not alcohol, but actually getting to know the person more might actually make her far more beautiful than you initially thought of her.  Be friends, get to know her personally, and allow her to know you personally.  The closer you are, the more the external beauty will be transformed from the inner.
+1
Title: Re: Love not for you?
Post by: Arachne on July 14, 2015, 07:15:12 PM
If you are ugly and you could only love a physical attractive woman does that mean that love is not for you? Who is to blame in this situation?

Beggars can't be choosers.

What pops into my head is that many people get married just because of that, with this thought without loving each other. Perhaps your parents married without loving each other, and many others. Too many non-loving matrimonies. What do you think?

Don't confuse loving with being in love. Sooner or later, even the most textbook romantic couple falls out of love. Only if they have learned to actually love each other for what they are can they stay together. Love, like pretty much anything that matters in life, takes practice and effort.
Title: Re: Love not for you?
Post by: biro on July 14, 2015, 07:18:07 PM
Somebody even wrote a song about it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eh0wL-PN5dQ
Title: Re: Love not for you?
Post by: DeniseDenise on July 14, 2015, 07:36:57 PM
Several people actually...

this one is even closer to the topic..




https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y1ZJiBHh-Yw
Title: Re: Love not for you?
Post by: scamandrius on July 14, 2015, 11:05:25 PM
The Tris wooed his wife by implying he had posed for a tasteful modelling job in a variety of magazines.  Let dirty minds go where they are wont.

Just threw up in my mouth.  Thanks.
Title: Re: Love not for you?
Post by: TheTrisagion on July 14, 2015, 11:14:56 PM
The Tris wooed his wife by implying he had posed for a tasteful modelling job in a variety of magazines.  Let dirty minds go where they are wont.

Just threw up in my mouth.  Thanks.
I'm PMing you the pics now.
Title: Re: Love not for you?
Post by: hecma925 on July 15, 2015, 12:04:36 AM
The Tris wooed his wife by implying he had posed for a tasteful modelling job in a variety of magazines.  Let dirty minds go where they are wont.

Just threw up in my mouth.  Thanks.
I'm PMing you the pics now.
scamandarius has a dirty mind.  Send your whole portfolio.
Title: Re: Love not for you?
Post by: Mor Ephrem on July 15, 2015, 01:39:20 AM
I'm as heterosexual as they come, but last year when I met up with TheTrisagion for dinner, I thought about giving gay a chance.  That's how awesome he is. 
Title: Re: Love not for you?
Post by: seekeroftruth777 on July 15, 2015, 01:58:46 AM
If you are ugly and you could only love a physical attractive woman does that mean that love is not for you? Who is to blame in this situation?

Can someone only love because of looks? I mean that person no matter how good they look could be a terrible person on the inside while someone with average looks can be a great person. I mean I had crushes on Women who were hot but once I realized they were not nice people, stuck up, etc. it a big turn off while women who at first were okay looking or kind of good looking but not "hot" turned out to be such great Women I fallen for them once I got to know them. Also what is Love nowadays? to a lot of people it seems like just sexual attraction while I thought it suppose to be more?
Title: Re: Love not for you?
Post by: Cyrillic on July 15, 2015, 04:03:52 AM
You know, despite the fact that many of your posts are open to the type of criticisms you get, you do have to admit, most of humanity tend to think like Dracula.

Well I am a perfectionist. As I said. I don't think I could love someone who is not looking great on the outside also. But I do care about the soul. I could never love someone who is just pretty on the outside and has nothing on the inside. At least I think i wouldn't. The soul is important, but i believe love to be something really great, beyond everything, beyond measurements, perfect, etc... So physical attraction is a must. So I don't think I could get myself to love someone who is of average low looks and a beautiful soul. I believe in exceptional things, and I believe love is also like that. Is it wrong to have this bar?

Probably.

Look, if you are not the best looking guy, you can help remedy that by lifting weights, getting really muscular, and dressing stylishly. These will at least make you appear more attractive, and perhaps you would then be able to snag the kind of woman you are looking for.

Or, you could start talking to a priest about the sin of vanity.

It's your call.

Yeah Dan, come over to the menswear thread and we'll teach you every sort of vanity. The blonde bimbos will be all over you after your enlightenment.
Title: Re: Love not for you?
Post by: TheTrisagion on July 15, 2015, 08:44:33 AM
I'm as heterosexual as they come, but last year when I met up with TheTrisagion for dinner, I thought about giving gay a chance.  That's how awesome he is.
I KNEW that I hadn't just dreamt up the sexual tension between us!
Title: Re: Love not for you?
Post by: vamrat on July 15, 2015, 09:34:47 AM
I'm as heterosexual as they come, but last year when I met up with TheTrisagion for dinner, I thought about giving gay a chance.  That's how awesome he is.
I KNEW that I hadn't just dreamt up the sexual tension between us!

Duuuude...do gay marriages get two Best Men? 

That'd be awesome.  It'd be like raining men or something.
Title: Re: Love not for you?
Post by: Asteriktos on July 15, 2015, 09:38:17 AM
I'm as heterosexual as they come, but last year when I met up with TheTrisagion for dinner, I thought about giving gay a chance.  That's how awesome he is.
I KNEW that I hadn't just dreamt up the sexual tension between us!

Here's a fairly inexpensive hotel (http://www.americasbestvalueinn.com/googlemap.cfm?idp=1935) that I believe is close to halfway between you two. Could you please leave here and go there and finish this? If you post pics you will feel my wrath.
Title: Re: Love not for you?
Post by: TheTrisagion on July 15, 2015, 09:52:35 AM
I'm as heterosexual as they come, but last year when I met up with TheTrisagion for dinner, I thought about giving gay a chance.  That's how awesome he is.
I KNEW that I hadn't just dreamt up the sexual tension between us!

Here's a fairly inexpensive hotel (http://www.americasbestvalueinn.com/googlemap.cfm?idp=1935) that I believe is close to halfway between you two. Could you please leave here and go there and finish this? If you post pics you will feel my wrath.
Don't be daft, man!  The Poconos would be a way better option and they have all sorts of wonderful amenities!

(http://be478d95e8aa404656c1-d983ce57e4c84901daded0f67d5a004f.r11.cf1.rackcdn.com/covepocono/media/cache/cove-haven-resorts-garden-of-eden-apple-suite-tub-1212-700x430.jpg)
Title: Re: Love not for you?
Post by: Mor Ephrem on July 15, 2015, 09:54:30 AM
I'm as heterosexual as they come, but last year when I met up with TheTrisagion for dinner, I thought about giving gay a chance.  That's how awesome he is.
I KNEW that I hadn't just dreamt up the sexual tension between us!

Not at all.  An evening with you is a life-changingly transformative event.  It's that good.
Title: Re: Love not for you?
Post by: DeniseDenise on July 15, 2015, 11:11:03 AM
I'm as heterosexual as they come, but last year when I met up with TheTrisagion for dinner, I thought about giving gay a chance.  That's how awesome he is.
I KNEW that I hadn't just dreamt up the sexual tension between us!

Not at all.  An evening with you is a life-changingly transformative event.  It's that good.


The transformation in question was a  sudden shift toward Monasticism, I thought there was something different.
Title: Re: Love not for you?
Post by: Arachne on July 15, 2015, 11:12:27 AM
Here's a fairly inexpensive hotel (http://www.americasbestvalueinn.com/googlemap.cfm?idp=1935) that I believe is close to halfway between you two. Could you please leave here and go there and finish this?

Don't be such a party pooper. How often do we see a True BromanceTM blossom around here?

If you post pics you will feel my wrath.

Is that what them crazy kids call it now?
Title: Re: Love not for you?
Post by: Mor Ephrem on July 15, 2015, 02:39:16 PM
I'm as heterosexual as they come, but last year when I met up with TheTrisagion for dinner, I thought about giving gay a chance.  That's how awesome he is.
I KNEW that I hadn't just dreamt up the sexual tension between us!

Not at all.  An evening with you is a life-changingly transformative event.  It's that good.


The transformation in question was a  sudden shift toward Monasticism, I thought there was something different.

There's nothing monastic about me. 
Title: Re: Love not for you?
Post by: Severian on July 16, 2015, 12:29:50 PM
You can't be that unattractive then, since the eighty-seventh universal law of gender relations clearly teaches us that, when it comes to males pursuing relationships with females:

persistence + unattractive = creepy pervert
persistence + attractive = confident and strong
+1