What attracts men to women?

[Anonymous]

^ ^

Beauty -- yes -- is she good looking? That's subjective, but that's ALL that matters, at least to spark the interest. Then after that, its if she likes YOU.

[Anonymous]

That's it: The guy thinks the woman is attractive. If the woman reciprocates, that's it. Done deal. Other things matters, beyond looks, and if there's isn't a core of compatibility beyond some sense of the male's attraction and the woman deciding to like the guy, it will go south. But that's how it starts and without that nothing proceeds.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a question I’ve been pondering about lately. I’m finding it very hard to find a nice guy to settle down with. I’ve been hearing different things from different people regarding the things men find attractive in a woman. However, they’re usually from a woman’s perspective. I would like to hear the men’s perspective regarding this, so I can understand them better and have realistic expectations.

I’ll list the qualities/attributes that a woman may possess:

Education levels [NO]
Youth [YES]
Wealth [NO]
Social Status [NO]
Career [b][NO, NO, NO][/b]
Fertility [YES]
Independence [NO]
Beauty [YES, YES, YES, YES, YES]
Confidence [b][NO][/b]
Athletic/Physically active [YES - but only matters if she's got youth and beauty]

If men were to select the top 3 attributes from the list that attracts them to a woman, what would they be?

And there's another one that will enrage the DCUM women, but you asked for a male perspective so here it is:

Reasonably low number of previous sexual partners. Meaning, less than ten. No man wants to marry a woman who has been with dozens of other guys.

This is depressing to read, pp. We all get old and won't all be beautiful. So you are saying you want to go back to the days when all women are at home and take care of the children with no independence or career of their own? You don't even want a confident SAHM?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a question I’ve been pondering about lately. I’m finding it very hard to find a nice guy to settle down with. I’ve been hearing different things from different people regarding the things men find attractive in a woman. However, they’re usually from a woman’s perspective. I would like to hear the men’s perspective regarding this, so I can understand them better and have realistic expectations.

I’ll list the qualities/attributes that a woman may possess:

Education levels [NO]
Youth [YES]
Wealth [NO]
Social Status [NO]
Career [b][NO, NO, NO][/b]
Fertility [YES]
Independence [NO]
Beauty [YES, YES, YES, YES, YES]
Confidence [b][NO][/b]
Athletic/Physically active [YES - but only matters if she's got youth and beauty]

If men were to select the top 3 attributes from the list that attracts them to a woman, what would they be?

And there's another one that will enrage the DCUM women, but you asked for a male perspective so here it is:

Reasonably low number of previous sexual partners. Meaning, less than ten. No man wants to marry a woman who has been with dozens of other guys.

This is depressing to read, pp. We all get old and won't all be beautiful. So you are saying you want to go back to the days when all women are at home and take care of the children with no independence or career of their own? You don't even want a confident SAHM?

Don't be stupid. No one indicated anything about not being in the work force. Have a job. Simply don't bring your resume on a date.

[Anonymous]

Oh whatever red pull/blue pull, I pull both colors off quite well in the right hue.

Men not interested in intellect are major losers. Sure, objective attraction matters but attraction is more than Barbie. Any man who states otherwise, is a fool not getting any female attention without the carrot of his wallet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Man here. When I'm looking at online profiles, there is a certain minimum acceptable level of youth and beauty that is required. I'm not even going to click on someone who is older or less physically attractive than that. And file "athletic" under beauty, meaning, you can't be fat.

After that I'll consider education a plus.

Wealth and career are not positive attractors. They can only be a negative (i.e., if you're an obvious loser that's bad)

Independence and Confidence, don't care about at all.

I really don't understand this. Why wouldn't an accomplished lawyer or physician or CEO be more attractive than one who dithered around in life and never got her shit together?

As a man who has dated both doctors and lawyers, I will tell you. It is mainly because they are busy, and have no time for you. They are so totally focused on their career (and that's fine, they have to be) that you are only ever a distant second to them. Also, generally speaking, women like that are aggressive, argumentative, unpleasant pains in the ass. They spend all day being "in charge" and they can't turn it off at home. Fck that shit, I don't need it. I would far prefer to date a pleasant paralegal or nurse practitioner than a lawyer or doctor.

It's mystifying, then, that most such women are partnered or married. Apparently there are some men who don't think of relationships in terms of who's "in charge."

Nope. They are far more likely to be single than women who are not so well-educated and career-oriented. The reason for this is not really a mystery. Most men want a pleasant and agreeable woman, not some careerist harpy.

I forget, is this thread about asking men what they want, or about women telling men what they should want? So hard to keep it on-track.

I'm sorry, that's simply not true. More educated, higher-income women are more likely to be married/in long-term relationships than poorly educated, lower-income women.

This makes total sense to me but I personally feel very differently. I have an incredibly fast paced, high powered job, but all I want when I get home is to turn off my brain and let my partner call the shots / make the decisions instead of me for a change. I’m very submissive in bed, too (somewhat related maybe?). I guess I just have two very different sides, but my guess is that a fair number of “high powered” women feel this way, if you take the time to peel back the layers...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a question I’ve been pondering about lately. I’m finding it very hard to find a nice guy to settle down with. I’ve been hearing different things from different people regarding the things men find attractive in a woman. However, they’re usually from a woman’s perspective. I would like to hear the men’s perspective regarding this, so I can understand them better and have realistic expectations.

I’ll list the qualities/attributes that a woman may possess:

Education levels [NO]
Youth [YES]
Wealth [NO]
Social Status [NO]
Career [b][NO, NO, NO][/b]
Fertility [YES]
Independence [NO]
Beauty [YES, YES, YES, YES, YES]
Confidence [b][NO][/b]
Athletic/Physically active [YES - but only matters if she's got youth and beauty]

If men were to select the top 3 attributes from the list that attracts them to a woman, what would they be?

And there's another one that will enrage the DCUM women, but you asked for a male perspective so here it is:

Reasonably low number of previous sexual partners. Meaning, less than ten. No man wants to marry a woman who has been with dozens of other guys.

This is depressing to read, pp. We all get old and won't all be beautiful. So you are saying you want to go back to the days when all women are at home and take care of the children with no independence or career of their own? You don't even want a confident SAHM?

Don't be stupid. No one indicated anything about not being in the work force. Have a job. Simply don't bring your resume on a date.

Wow, aren't you a pleasant person.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Man here. When I'm looking at online profiles, there is a certain minimum acceptable level of youth and beauty that is required. I'm not even going to click on someone who is older or less physically attractive than that. And file "athletic" under beauty, meaning, you can't be fat.

After that I'll consider education a plus.

Wealth and career are not positive attractors. They can only be a negative (i.e., if you're an obvious loser that's bad)

Independence and Confidence, don't care about at all.

I really don't understand this. Why wouldn't an accomplished lawyer or physician or CEO be more attractive than one who dithered around in life and never got her shit together?

As a man who has dated both doctors and lawyers, I will tell you. It is mainly because they are busy, and have no time for you. They are so totally focused on their career (and that's fine, they have to be) that you are only ever a distant second to them. Also, generally speaking, women like that are aggressive, argumentative, unpleasant pains in the ass. They spend all day being "in charge" and they can't turn it off at home. Fck that shit, I don't need it. I would far prefer to date a pleasant paralegal or nurse practitioner than a lawyer or doctor.

It's mystifying, then, that most such women are partnered or married. Apparently there are some men who don't think of relationships in terms of who's "in charge."

Nope. They are far more likely to be single than women who are not so well-educated and career-oriented. The reason for this is not really a mystery. Most men want a pleasant and agreeable woman, not some careerist harpy.

I forget, is this thread about asking men what they want, or about women telling men what they should want? So hard to keep it on-track.

I'm sorry, that's simply not true. More educated, higher-income women are more likely to be married/in long-term relationships than poorly educated, lower-income women.

This makes total sense to me but I personally feel very differently. I have an incredibly fast paced, high powered job, but all I want when I get home is to turn off my brain and let my partner call the shots / make the decisions instead of me for a change. I’m very submissive in bed, too (somewhat related maybe?). I guess I just have two very different sides, but my guess is that a fair number of “high powered” women feel this way, if you take the time to peel back the layers...

Yes, there are many individual differences and there’s nothing wrong with seeking the dynamic that suits you. I meant the statement only as a matter of stats: educated high income women are more likely to be married, and have lower divorce rates, than poorly educated women do.

There’s one or two guys on the thread who want to insist that looks are the end of the story, but people are more complex in reality.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

NP. I think the man PP here is basically right about a lot of men not wanting to date high-powered women. BUT I also think the kind of man who is married to a high-powered woman is not the kind of man who is posting on DCUM during the workday

What does this mean? What "type" of man posts on DCUM? I am a single father and read the posts in a number of different areas (e.g., threads regarding schools, etc.)

State what you mean by this clearly (i.e., please grow a pair of balls and come out say what type of men post on this website).



DP I hate this expression. We all know what women are called if they come out and say what they want to say. Just look at this thread for examples!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Oh whatever red pull/blue pull, I pull both colors off quite well in the right hue.

Men not interested in intellect are major losers. Sure, objective attraction matters but attraction is more than Barbie. Any man who states otherwise, is a fool not getting any female attention without the carrot of his wallet.

Well how do you feel about women who are only attracted to the man’s wallet? Tell us!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh whatever red pull/blue pull, I pull both colors off quite well in the right hue.

Men not interested in intellect are major losers. Sure, objective attraction matters but attraction is more than Barbie. Any man who states otherwise, is a fool not getting any female attention without the carrot of his wallet.

Well how do you feel about women who are only attracted to the man’s wallet? Tell us!

Also losers.

Exhibit A: Melanoma and the Orange Fuhrer.

[Anonymous]

Education levels - Not too important

Youth - Yes, I go for younger women

Wealth - I'd like her to be able to support herself. Actual wealth is a plus, but not what I look for

Social Status - Not all all. If that's important to her, it's a turn off to me.

Career - Not important but again, she should be able to support herself and if she's stuck in a job/career she hates, that could impact the relationship.

Fertility - nope. Not fertile myself and past the baby making days

Independence - This is important. She shouldn't need me or any man

Beauty - Beautiful in my eyes, doesn't have to be the popular version of female beauty.

Confidence - Yes, confidence is sexy. I'm turned off by women with low self-esteem

Athletic/Physically active - Yes. Doesn't have to be a gym rat, but should be able and willing to engage in activities like hiking in the mountains, etc.

Beyond that, her sexual libido should be on par with mine and I like women who can easily orgasm from sex. Sorry, but the ones I've been with who have a hard time getting off are a turn off for me. I know how it sounds, but I've paid my dues. She also has to be sexually adventurous with me and open to some kinky activities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Oh whatever red pull/blue pull, I pull both colors off quite well in the right hue.

Men not interested in intellect are major losers. Sure, objective attraction matters but attraction is more than Barbie. Any man who states otherwise, is a fool not getting any female attention without the carrot of his wallet.

Like many women in this thread and on DCUM, you are missing the point.

Men are interested in intellect... and a lot of the other things like career and education... AFTER she meets the basic standard of attraction.

A woman who is a total beast can have a great intellect and it will not matter because he will not be attracted. He will look at her and there will be no lead in his pencil. Any man who states otherwise is lying. Any woman who thinks this is not true is deluded about men. A man who needs a woman to meet a certain level of "attractiveness" regardless of her other qualities is not a "loser".

Frankly you sound like a bitter female who has been rejected for being physically unattractive and now blames men for not being attracted to her supposed intellect.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh whatever red pull/blue pull, I pull both colors off quite well in the right hue.

Men not interested in intellect are major losers. Sure, objective attraction matters but attraction is more than Barbie. Any man who states otherwise, is a fool not getting any female attention without the carrot of his wallet.

Well how do you feel about women who are only attracted to the man’s wallet? Tell us!

Also losers.

Exhibit A: Melanoma and the Orange Fuhrer.

^^ women who talk like this don't actually have the "intellect" they think should be interesting to men.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh whatever red pull/blue pull, I pull both colors off quite well in the right hue.

Men not interested in intellect are major losers. Sure, objective attraction matters but attraction is more than Barbie. Any man who states otherwise, is a fool not getting any female attention without the carrot of his wallet.

Like many women in this thread and on DCUM, you are missing the point.

Men are interested in intellect... and a lot of the other things like career and education... AFTER she meets the basic standard of attraction.

A woman who is a total beast can have a great intellect and it will not matter because he will not be attracted. He will look at her and there will be no lead in his pencil. Any man who states otherwise is lying. Any woman who thinks this is not true is deluded about men. A man who needs a woman to meet a certain level of "attractiveness" regardless of her other qualities is not a "loser".

Frankly you sound like a bitter female who has been rejected for being physically unattractive and now blames men for not being attracted to her supposed intellect.

So how do you account for all the plain women (“beasts” in your estimation, I guess) who are partnered?

Although anyone who calls women “females” is probably uninterested in discussion.