What women like in men...

stpaddy99

therealme wrote: »

For me it's simple - eyes, height (I like men taller than me to look upto), I like him to have good arms (for the reassuring hugs), a good work ethic is essential. Genuine and kind, that's all I look for in a guy.

I don't care about hair/ money/ or the other misconceptions.

what about voice ? muscles? intelligence? experience etc

therealme

stpaddy99 wrote: »

what about voice ? muscles? intelligence? experience etc

Any of my x's had what I mentioned, they were well spoken and intelligent to be fair to them but honestly they are the traits that really attract me to a guy. Any other things are a positive after that

Soft Falling Rain

I tend not to pay much attention to these articles as they only encourage obsessiveness and feelings of inadequacy. I'm sure women feel the same about equivalent lists. Your lot is your lot for the most part and either do it for some or you don't. Not much more analysis is required beyond that.

Pawwed Rig

Soft Falling Rain wrote: »

I tend not to pay much attention to this articles as they only encourage obsessiveness and feelings of inadequacy. I'm sure women feel the same about equivalent lists. Your lot is your lot for the most part and either do it for some or you don't. Not much more analysis is required beyond that.

I don't think anyone here is taking it that seriously. At least I hope not.....

Soft Falling Rain

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

I don't think anyone here is taking it that seriously. At least I hope not.....

The general direction of the thread suggests that they are.

Middle Man

H3llR4iser wrote: »

<snip>

10) Chest/Shoulders muscles;
9) Penis;
8) Neck;
7) Hair;
6) Height;
5) Long Legs;
4) Eyes;
3) Flat stomach;
2) Thinness;
1) Buttocks;

</snip>

Again, it was always the men who treated women like commodities and poured over pictures of breasts (well I didn't myself), but this might now shed light on the other half of that story :rolleyes:...

In any case, if I wanted a relationship, this is what I'd be looking for in a woman...

1) Good Personality;
2) Tolerant (accepts me for what I am - I don't want a man changer);
3) Fair and Honest;
4) Human (not something out of the 'Hunger Games');
5) Intelligent;
6) and so on...


The other list regarding men - well...

1) Buttocks - What's the big deal??? ;

2) Thinness - Well yeah, that's a good thing IMO :cool:;

3) Flat stomach - something that most males would want :cool:;

4) Eyes - Good Eyes helps expression ;

5) Long Legs - well it's a good thing, but is it that important ;

6) Height - again, a good thing, but is it really that important ;

7) Hair - then again, many shaven heads look well and smart ;

8) Neck - again, do these women know we're people? ;

9) Penis - well obviously, there are some women (along with some men) without much of an upstairs department :rolleyes:;

10) Chest/Shoulders muscles - again, we're people, not commodities! ;

Fish Finger Pie

Middle Man wrote: »

1) Buttocks - What's the big deal??? ;

Might have something to with running and hunting back in caveman times. The arse muscles are unique to humans among the primates and help out a lot with running. A tight muscular butt may have indicated that a man would be a good runner and hunter.

Maybe.

jane82

Fish Finger Pie wrote: »

Might have something to with running and hunting back in caveman times. The arse muscles are unique to humans among the primates and help out a lot with running. A tight muscular butt may have indicated that a man would be a good runner and hunter.

Maybe.

But then wouldnt a big fat arse mean he was great at getting food.
A hunter with a tight little arse is one thats catching potatoes. A hunter with a fat arse fat belly catches loads of grub.
Anybody involved in exercise will tell you that youd have to be a super master hunter to get fat in the wild.

Pug160

Generally speaking, a man who looks as though he's robust or in good shape will catch a woman's eye more often than men with average Joe bodies (everything else being equal). Women are often complimented for their ''good figure'' even if they don't exercise a lot but I don't think I've ever heard of a man who doesn't workout being complimented on his physique. It's a bit different for the sexes in that respect. Also, when you're a man with a decent body, other men seem to really notice it and almost appreciate it. In this part of the world, if you're in half decent shape (or look as though you are) you're in the minority it seems.

Fish Finger Pie

jane82 wrote: »

But then wouldnt a big fat arse mean he was great at getting food.
A hunter with a tight little arse is one thats catching potatoes. A hunter with a fat arse fat belly catches loads of grub.
Anybody involved in exercise will tell you that youd have to be a super master hunter to get fat in the wild.

Maybe but being too fat would impair a man's ability to run and hunt. There must be some balance between the two.

Wibbs

Middle Man wrote: »

The other list regarding men - well...

Well indeed. It's the usual populist stuff, or researchers trying to justify grants, but there's likely something to it, or similar studies.

1) Buttocks - What's the big deal??? ;

Youth, vigour.

2) Thinness - Well yeah, that's a good thing IMO :cool:;

Indeed. Testosterone, in very basic terms builds lean tissue and reduces fat. Leaner guy usually means higher test, youth and reproductive fitness.

5) Long Legs - well it's a good thing, but is it that important ;

6) Height - again, a good thing, but is it really that important ;

Taller men tend to live longer and tend to get promoted more often than shorter men. Height, or a difference in height depending on the population is considered more attractive to women. The protective factor?

7) Hair - then again, many shaven heads look well and smart ;

They can, but again a head of hair suggests youth. Few 20 year old men are fully bald, but many 50 year old men would be(again it depends on population. IE Amazonian tribesmen almost never suffer from male pattern baldness).

8) Neck - again, do these women know we're people? ;

Not sure if serious.

9) Penis - well obviously, there are some women (along with some men) without much of an upstairs department :rolleyes:;

Why? At the extreme a micropenis may well leave a woman sexually unsatisfied, particularly if her sexual response is more intercourse geared. Yes such a man might get her off by other means, but all things being equal a guy with a larger penis is gonna hit the spot more. Reverse it. Imagine a woman whose vagina is so large the guy feels nothing or next to nothing. Yes she'll be able to get him off in other ways, but that could also cause major frustration. Now if every other aspect of the relationship is brilliant then OK, but it's certainly going to be a weak spot in the fabric of the relationship.

Put it another way; among the great apes, human males have the largest penises. This was most likely selected by human females throughout our evolutionary history, so it seems it is or was important.

10) Chest/Shoulders muscles - again, we're people, not commodities! ;

Aye, but if one wants to be utterly reductive about it we do view each other on a very basic level as relationship and, or reproductive commodities/attributes. The more choices in mate selection a man or woman has these attributes will be more in play.

jane82 wrote: »

But then wouldnt a big fat arse mean he was great at getting food.
A hunter with a tight little arse is one thats catching potatoes. A hunter with a fat arse fat belly catches loads of grub.
Anybody involved in exercise will tell you that youd have to be a super master hunter to get fat in the wild.

In some societies the fat man is considered the better, because he has amassed so many resources or delegated people who provide him with resources. In our society the "fat cat" businessman with the "dollybird" might be an example of that.

Quite the number of studies have found that all things being equal people tend to end up with people who are of a similar level of age(within ten years), attractiveness, social background and educational status to them(but with subtly different immune systems). Where outliers occur it's usually, but not always because of the man's status(this will surely change with changes in female equality). Women who fit closest to their cultures beauty ideal and men with high status have the most mate choice.

Pug160

Wibbs wrote: »

Quite the number of studies have found that all things being equal people tend to end up with people who are of a similar level of age(within ten years), attractiveness, social background and educational status to them(but with subtly different immune systems). Where outliers occur it's usually, but not always because of the man's status(this will surely change with changes in female equality). Women who fit closest to their cultures beauty ideal and men with high status have the most mate choice.

Although that sounds logical, how is the attractiveness part actually measured or determined? It sounds very vague.

Legs.Eleven

Middle Man wrote: »

Again, it was always the men who treated women like commodities and poured over pictures of breasts (well I didn't myself), but this might now shed light on the other half of that story :rolleyes:...

In any case, if I wanted a relationship, this is what I'd be looking for in a woman...

1) Good Personality;
2) Tolerant (accepts me for what I am - I don't want a man changer);
3) Fair and Honest;
4) Human (not something out of the 'Hunger Games');
5) Intelligent;
6) and so on...


The other list regarding men - well...

1) Buttocks - What's the big deal??? ;

2) Thinness - Well yeah, that's a good thing IMO :cool:;

3) Flat stomach - something that most males would want :cool:;

4) Eyes - Good Eyes helps expression ;

5) Long Legs - well it's a good thing, but is it that important ;

6) Height - again, a good thing, but is it really that important ;

7) Hair - then again, many shaven heads look well and smart ;

8) Neck - again, do these women know we're people? ;

9) Penis - well obviously, there are some women (along with some men) without much of an upstairs department :rolleyes:;

10) Chest/Shoulders muscles - again, we're people, not commodities! ;

Women have differing tastes. What I like in a man is a couple of the above, not all. I'd say almost all women are the same. This is not a set list of what all women want in a man. It doesn't specify exactly what those things should look like either, just that those particular women have a particular taste in those particular things.


Reasonably fit (no beer belly but not a wash board stomach either), average height (I don't fancy tall men), average willy (not miniscule), broad and kind eyes would be my preferences from the list above.


Personality trumps it all though. Kind, sincere, mentally stable, reasonably intelligent and good fun would be the main attributes I'd want in a man.


Job title or status has never been important to me although I wouldn't go for a terminally lazy man either.

Wibbs

Pug160 wrote: »

Although that sounds logical, how is the attractiveness part actually measured or determined? It sounds very vague.

The usual way, or at least in a few of these studies I've perused, is that they get say 50 couples and take separate photos of the men and the women, give the mens photos to women from outside the test and vice versa and get both to rate the attractiveness based on the photos. When the results are collated it generally shows that those rated as 5 out of 10* are with other 5's, 8's are with 8's and so on. There are outliers of course, but I mean in general.








*I dislike the out of ten scale and I'm sure they have a better one in play, but that's the gist of it.

Pug160

Wibbs wrote: »

The usual way, or at least in a few of these studies I've perused, is that they get say 50 couples and take separate photos of the men and the women, give the mens photos to women from outside the test and vice versa and get both to rate the attractiveness based on the photos. When the results are collated it generally shows that those rated as 5 out of 10* are with other 5's, 8's are with 8's and so on. There are outliers of course, but I mean in general.


*I dislike the out of ten scale and I'm sure they have a better one in play, but that's the gist of it.

Well as I said, it sounds logical enough, but it would be interesting to look at a really extensive study. Taking one photo (if that's what it is) doesn't really do it justice I would have thought. I think women would tend to be kinder than men when asked to give an opinion about someone's appearance in a situation like that as well.

Call Me Jimmy

What about all that fibonacci ratio stuff, sacred geometry etc. that ye read about. Also, a computer-processed 'average' image of a group men or women seems, from an aesthetic point of view (discounting emotionally-based personal tastes) gave a good picture of the 'perfect' face from what I saw.

Russ T Banger

A chocolate willy that shoots money

Pawn

H3llR4iser wrote: »

Curious to see what you think

Confidence.

awec

This post has been deleted.

Aidric

Wibbs wrote: »

Oh oh H, if 6 feet tall(well 5'11) and 160 lbs is super skinny(knock 20lbs off for me), I'm gonna be on next years Trocaire box.

I'll drop a 20c in your collection box. :pac:

5'10 myself and 155 lbs. Not exactly super skinny but lets go with athletic.

Someone mentioned confidence earlier and it shouldn't get overlooked in this conversation. I have mates who wouldn't be stand outs in a crowd but they have a confidence that allows them punch well above their weight. If you can combine it with charm you're on to a winner.

Call Me Jimmy

Oh yea I completely agree. I think confidence works for ye in all aspects of life but the difference between when I'm feeling good and confident and... not on nights out are unreal.

DrFloppy

You mean the confidence that comes with being rich and/or good looking? :pac:

The Wild Bunch

Any females I've ever known love chest hair on a guy

Slightly buttoned down shirt with a bet of carpet on show is the way to go

H3llR4iser

Pawn wrote: »

Confidence.

Problem is, we're talking physical, visual-only characteristics. If you spot someone you like (man or woman makes no difference) in a nightclub, at the supermarket or on the bus, truth is that you know exactly zero about their conficence, ingelligenge, funnyness nor anything else; Yet there are certain characteristics that make you look twice and maybe want to know more about that person.

A lot of people seem not to be able to make a distinction between "what you find physically attractive in the opposite sex" and "what would you look for when looking for a relationship".

strobe

H3llR4iser wrote: »

If you spot someone you like (man or woman makes no difference) in a nightclub, at the supermarket or on the bus, truth is that you know exactly zero about their confidence

Really don't think that's true. I'd say the perception of confidence is predominantly based on visual cues. How someone walks, moves, stands, etc. I'd say you can know quite a bit about someone's confidence without ever speaking a word to them. And most people, whether they themselves realise it or not, develop an impression of whether someone is confident or not (at least initially) based on the above more so than any other factor.

mr_putin

they like a man who pays for everything , i tried internet dating last year for six months , went out with ten different women over those months , the only women who offered to pay were foreign women , irish women are awful shy about full equality

Jack Skellington

strobe wrote: »

Really don't think that's true. I'd say the perception of confidence is predominantly based on visual cues. How someone walks, moves, stands, etc. I'd say you can know quite a bit about someone's confidence without ever speaking a word to them. And most people, whether they themselves realise it or not, develop an impression of whether someone is confident or not (at least initially) based on the above more so than any other factor.

+1 I like the idea, if you're really comfortable in your own skin there's not much more you have to think about saying or doing to be attractive to someone, which kinda should take the pressure off in theory.

stpaddy99

what type of confidence?

entropi

A +1 to strobe's post there. Speaking as a man, I presume what women may like is usually going to be at first a visual experience (unless it's some kind of Blind Date/Cilla Black scenario). How a man holds his posture, his facial expressions, what he is presently doing (looking confident and/or skilful performing in a hobby/pastime, maybe how he interacts with people around him, engaging in something interesting) or a number of other factors can be present. Looking content or happy seems to be a good thing, having an interesting look/style/something about him might pique a certain interesting trait she likes.

Only once contact has been made can presumptions be played out and a broader, brief understanding of a guy can be made.

Seems to apply to both sexes though. I would have certain things initially attract me to a woman...and mostly from afar initially.

Riskymove

The Wild Bunch wrote: »

Any females I've ever known love chest hair on a guy

Slightly buttoned down shirt with a bet of carpet on show is the way to go

only if a medallion is also on show