# The answer to too many of these threads



## Ocean Helm (Aug 25, 2016)

Figure out who is ideal for you, seek a partner out who matches some of that ideal (be somewhat realistic and pragmatic), and stop thinking of the 90% or whatever it may be of men/women who are not ideal for you. If their vibes and attitudes don't match up with your own. then do your best to move on.


----------



## dulcinea (Aug 22, 2011)

I'm surprised no one has replied to this.
It's a very rational approach I think.
I'd say too some criteria/deal breakers are more crucial that others. If he's someone who's core values are compatible with your own and with whom you feel like you can express yourself freely, it shouldn't matter so much whether, say, he's 6' tall or looks like Chris hemsworth.


----------



## pwowq (Aug 7, 2016)

Ocean Helm said:


> If their vibes and attitudes don't match up with your own. then do your best to move on.


Or try for a short time before moving on.


----------



## impulsenine (Oct 18, 2020)

Sometimes people gets attached and "If their vibes and attitudes don't match up with your own " becomes "Try whatever you can to make their vibes and attitudes match up your own, or make yours to match up them.
That's the problem.
The solution is "learn to detach/disengage" but...that's easier said than done when you project a ideal reality and you really want that to survive no matter what.


----------



## dulcinea (Aug 22, 2011)

impulsenine said:


> Sometimes people gets attached and "If their vibes and attitudes don't match up with your own " becomes "Try whatever you can to make their vibes and attitudes match up your own, or make yours to match up them.
> That's the problem.
> The solution is "learn to detach/disengage" but...that's easier said than done when you project a ideal reality and you really want that to survive no matter what.


Yes! I've always gotten over people relatively quickly with the belief: "If someone thinks I'm not right for them, they're not right for me." I never understood forcing something that won't just work naturally.


----------



## Dezir (Nov 25, 2013)

Ocean Helm said:


> Figure out who is ideal for you, seek a partner out who matches some of that ideal (be somewhat realistic and pragmatic), and stop thinking of the 90% or whatever it may be of men/women who are not ideal for you. If their vibes and attitudes don't match up with your own. then do your best to move on.


Sounds good, but it's not that simple, people are complex. While you should go out looking for people and talking to them, there's no guarantee you will have a great relationship even if your vibes and attitudes match.

And if they don't, I guess it goes without saying that you won't be attracted to people whose vibes and attitudes don't match with yours. But these so called vibes and attitudes are just the surface of a multitude of factors that make one seem as such.


----------



## mia-me (Feb 5, 2021)

I don't bother with ideal since he doesn't exist. 😄


----------



## Purrfessor (Jul 30, 2013)

Idealism is for INFPs


----------



## ENFPathetic (Apr 3, 2018)

If you rule out 90% of the population, and the 10% you'll accept also do the same, then what are the chances you'll be in your "ideal" partner's 10%?

I can't believe people think this is rational. You can't come to such a conclusion without being far removed from reality. Your standards are ridiculous. Lower them.


----------



## Purrfessor (Jul 30, 2013)

ENFPathetic said:


> If you rule out 90% of the population, and the 10% you'll accept also do the same, then what are the chances you'll be in your "ideal" partner's 10%?
> 
> I can't believe people think this is rational. You can't come to such a conclusion without being far removed from reality. Your standards are ridiculous. Lower them.


1%


----------



## WickerDeer (Aug 1, 2012)

ENFPathetic said:


> If you rule out 90% of the population, and the 10% you'll accept also do the same, then what are the chances you'll be in your "ideal" partner's 10%?
> 
> I can't believe people think this is rational. You can't come to such a conclusion without being far removed from reality. Your standards are ridiculous. Lower them.


10% of the population of the US is still like thirty million people.

Better get the washing machine started, because it's going to take a long time to even have sex once with that many people.

Even 1% is what...3 million?

I mean...it's very ambitious but what are you going to do if while you're busy trying out all 3 million people, your soul mate is at home reading a book?

And this is just the USA.

(also, I get your point--sort of, but just arguing anyway because of the idea of why do you have to try to be compatible with that many people anyway.)


----------



## Purrfessor (Jul 30, 2013)

WickerDeer said:


> 10% of the population of the US is still like thirty million people.
> 
> Better get the washing machine started, because it's going to take a long time to even have sex once with that many people.
> 
> ...


If your soulmate is at home reading a book that shouldn't matter cuz your soul is the mate, not your body. Fuck away.


----------



## tanstaafl28 (Sep 10, 2012)

Ocean Helm said:


> Figure out who is ideal for you, seek a partner out who matches some of that ideal (be somewhat realistic and pragmatic), and stop thinking of the 90% or whatever it may be of men/women who are not ideal for you. If their vibes and attitudes don't match up with your own. then do your best to move on.


The people who come looking here for advice aren't looking at it from the big picture, they are looking at it from the perspective of their individual issues, so the "one size fits all" solution isn't really what they are looking for. They are looking for support, affirmation, sometimes criticism.


----------



## WickerDeer (Aug 1, 2012)

Purrfessor said:


> If your soulmate is at home reading a book that shouldn't matter cuz your soul is the mate, not your body. Fuck away.


Ok but your body is how you navigate the world.

So if your body is fucking 3 million people, you're not going to be able to simultaneously be somewhere else, with your "soulmate."

But yes--obviously, if it is your soul's desire then fuck away. 

I just don't see what this insistence on "lower your standards" should be elevated--I would assume people should just fuck the people they actually want to. As their soul desires. It's no one else's business.


----------



## ENFPathetic (Apr 3, 2018)

WickerDeer said:


> 10% of the population of the US is still like thirty million people.
> 
> Better get the washing machine started, because it's going to take a long time to even have sex once with that many people.
> 
> ...


Yeah, but the whole world's population isn't lining up to speed date you. The number of people you're likely to meet long enough to get to know is going to be in the thousands, not the millions. 1% of that is closer to about a dozen potential suitors. And that's only if you spend a lifetime looking. And then what's the point? You've already lived your life. You're old and don't have the same kind energy and zest for life to share with this ideal partner. Why not just do away with the ridiculous standards and enjoy life with a good partner who loves you and shares your values.

I've noticed a dangerous pattern. A lot of young people start out dating with little to no standards. As you'd expect this attracts the worst kinds of human beings and they get scarred. Then those once young people do a 180 and go from no standards to impossible standards. As you'd expect, this attracts almost no kinds of human beings and they end alone and miserable. Take the middle route. Have standards, but be reasonable is what I'm saying.


----------



## WickerDeer (Aug 1, 2012)

ENFPathetic said:


> Yeah, but the whole world's population isn't lining up to speed date you. The number of people you're likely to meet long enough to get to know is going to be in the thousands, not the millions. 1% of that is closer to about a dozen potential suitors. And that's only if you spend a lifetime looking. And then what's the point? You've already lived your life. You're old and don't have the same kind energy and zest for life to share with this ideal partner. Why not just do away with the ridiculous standards and enjoy life with a good partner who loves you and shares your values.
> 
> I've noticed a dangerous pattern. A lot of young people start out dating with little to no standards. As you'd expect this attracts the worst kinds of human beings and they get scarred. Then those once young people do a 180 and go from no standards to impossible standards. As you'd expect, this attracts almost no kinds of human beings and they end alone and miserable. Take the middle route. Have standards, but be reasonable is what I'm saying.


I haven't noticed this pattern you've noticed.

I don't have the goal of "lowering" my standards to settle for a sexual partner. That sounds disparaging to me. I only have sex with the people I want to. I also wouldn't want someone to "lower" their standards for me--as sex isn't that important to me. I would prefer they just "lower" their standards and get a fleshlight, as I am sure it would be perfectly fine with it...and perhaps might think of it as a compliment.

Not everyone needs sex or needs to alter their life so that they can have mediocre sex with people to be happy.


----------



## ENFPathetic (Apr 3, 2018)

WickerDeer said:


> I don't have the conception of "lowering" my standards to settle for a sexual partner. That sounds disparaging to me. I only have sex with the people I want to. I also wouldn't want someone to "lower" their standards for me--as sex isn't that important to me. I would prefer they just "lower" their standards and get a fleshlight, as I am sure it would be perfectly fine with it...and perhaps might think of it as a compliment.


We're not talking about the same thing at all. You're talking about lowering your standards for someone else's sake. I'm talking about lowering your standards for your own sake. If you think 90% of the population would take settling to get with, you're probably blowing smoke up your own arse. Lowering your standards would be good for you.

I say this in general terms. This logic will work for some people who are special. But for the average person, the idea that they can rule out 9/10 suitors and end up happy is a tremendously stupid one.


----------



## WickerDeer (Aug 1, 2012)

ENFPathetic said:


> We're not talking about the same thing at all. You're talking about lowering your standards for someone else's sake. I'm talking about lowering your standards for your own sake. If you think 90% of the population would take settling to get with, you're probably blowing smoke up your own arse. Lowering your standards would be good for you.
> 
> I say this in general terms. This logic will work for some people who are special. But for the average person, the idea that they can rule out 9/10 suitors and end up happy is a tremendously stupid one.


Not everyone wants to have sex with over 10% of the population. It doesn't have to do with having "too high standards."

But if you want to find "the one" then it's not ridiculous to not want to have sex with 10% of the population.

People want different things.

Personally, I would prefer to at least be able to get something out of it if I was going to do that. Like money. Or something to compensate the lost time. I don't think it sounds fun or enjoyable or happy to do what you're proposing. And it's got nothing to do with having high standards.

Maybe you should consider that just because something makes you happy, it's not necessarily what everyone else would need or want in their life. People are actually individuals.


----------



## ENFPathetic (Apr 3, 2018)

WickerDeer said:


> Not everyone wants to have sex with over 10% of the population. It doesn't have to do with having "too high standards."
> 
> But if you want to find "the one" then it's not ridiculous to not want to have sex with 10% of the population.
> 
> ...


Lost time? Are you talking about time you lost looking for "the one"? Why would that be anyone else's responsibility. You're the one who fell for a red herring. If anything, you owe it to any future partners that you first work through your emotions before you meet anyone because no self respecting human being will put up with that kind of attitude.

You talk about money as something to settle for. What exactly are your standards?


----------



## mia-me (Feb 5, 2021)

And boom, social values in your face since it presumes that everyone values the same things in partners.


----------



## mia-me (Feb 5, 2021)

This thread has become a dumping ground for social values, including gender roles.


----------



## Meliodas (Nov 16, 2016)

Tbh this topic isn't very complicated. If you cannot find a suitable partner, you can either:

1. Lower your standards
2. Change yourself to become more attractive
3. Change your environment
4. Stay single and jerk off to porn

Options (1.) and (4.) have already been discussed at length, so I will talk about (2.) and (3.).

So you want to become attractive? Where to begin? There is the obvious, which is to improve your diet, lose excess weight and take care of your hair and skin. If you refuse to work on that, don't complain about being single. Beyond that, ask yourself who you are trying to attract. All too often, single people suffer because they are attracted to someone who has very different needs and priorities in life. Nerds who try to date fitness models, tarot readers who try to date stockbrokers, and divorced parents who try to date young, childless people are not likely to have much success. This brings me to (3.), which is to find your people. What are you good at? What do you enjoy, and what are you interested in learning more about? Find people who share these objectives.

For example, I am good at writing and playing classical music, public speaking, playing cricket, and creating fun car trips to go on in the weekend. I enjoy chess, dog training, and sampling different cuisines, and I am keen to learn a new language, re-enact historical battles, join a comedy troupe, invest in stocks, and perform aikido - likewise, I am not interested in rap music, social activism, cuckoldry or crossdressing.


----------



## ENFPathetic (Apr 3, 2018)

Meliodas said:


> Tbh this topic isn't very complicated. If you cannot find a suitable partner, you can either:
> 
> 1. Lower your standards
> 2. Change yourself to become more attractive
> ...


100%. It only becomes complicated when people are unwilling to accept that life is not fair.


----------



## eeo (Aug 25, 2020)

ENFPathetic said:


> Yes, their standards should remain the same. It's not as special as you think. Most people work hard on their appearance, regardless of whether they are naturally attractive or not. I know it hurts to hear, but *you don't set your standards based on the level of work you've had to put in, you set them based on how desirable you currently are*. There are people who were born with natural beauty, in a wealthy family, were taught great manners as children, and are naturally agreeable. People like that can have the highest of standards and they will get what they want without working for it.
> 
> That last sentence is it. Life is not fair. For what it's worth, I don't like it either. But what can you do. It's what we have and all we can do is make the most of it.


It doesn't hurt me at all, I don't plan on doing anything to impress others. But to the bolded, that's exactly what I mean. The standards cannot remain the same as they were. Unless you're saying that whatever ugly people do to become more attractive won't matter anyway because they'll still be seen as formerly ugly and will be treated as such, so they should still keep their standards low.



Meliodas said:


> So you want to become attractive? Where to begin? There is the obvious, which is to improve your diet, lose excess weight and take care of your hair and skin.


Are you just assuming that all unattractive people are overweight, with bad hair and skin?


----------



## Meliodas (Nov 16, 2016)

eeo said:


> Are you just assuming that all unattractive people are overweight, with bad hair and skin?


Obviously, there are exceptions, but I do think that unsightly, jarring, and obnoxious aesthetics are some of the most common reasons that people can't get laid.

I mean, 99.99% of men won't be aroused by this:


* *















So yeah, you can either lose weight or become a lesbian


----------



## eeo (Aug 25, 2020)

Meliodas said:


> Obviously, there are exceptions, but I do think that unsightly, jarring, and obnoxious aesthetics are some of the most common reasons that people can't get laid.


To be honest, everybody is hideous if you look close enough.


----------



## ENFPathetic (Apr 3, 2018)

eeo said:


> It doesn't hurt me at all, I don't plan on doing anything to impress others. But to the bolded, that's exactly what I mean. The standards cannot remain the same as they were. Unless you're saying that whatever ugly people do to become more attractive won't matter anyway because they'll still be seen as formerly ugly and will be treated as such, so they should still keep their standards low.


I agree with that. It doesn't matter whether you used to be repulsive looking or a runway model in the past. What matters is what you look like today.

The point I was arguing for was when someone is in a position where they've lowered their standards to the point where they can't go any lower without opening the doors to toxic suitors and they still can't find someone. In that situations, lowering your standards is no longer a reasonable option. Improving your desirability means you didn't have to lower your standards. That's why it wouldn't necessarily make sense to up your standards.


----------



## mia-me (Feb 5, 2021)

eeo said:


> To be honest, everybody is hideous if you look close enough.


You're being patronized by being told that your (female) worth is premised on your physical attractiveness and agreeableness so you can serve your master's bidding.


----------



## Meliodas (Nov 16, 2016)

mia-me said:


> You're being patronized by being told that your (female) worth is premised on your physical attractiveness and agreeableness so you can serve your master's bidding.


You know, it's funny, because while several women on PerC have observed correctly that men don't have a right to their bodies, you don't seem to understand that the reverse is also true. If you are ill-tempered, fugly, and cover your body with obnoxious tattoos, you won't get fucked by a hot guy. Deal with it.


----------



## mia-me (Feb 5, 2021)

Meliodas said:


> Life isn't fair. If you are fugly and cover your body with obnoxious tattoos, you will not get laid. Deal with it.


Luckily, not all males are wannabe patriarchs and white supremacists.


----------



## eeo (Aug 25, 2020)

mia-me said:


> You're being patronized by being told that your (female) worth is premised on your physical attractiveness and agreeableness so you can serve your master's bidding.


I know, I'm laughing out loud because of it.


----------



## Meliodas (Nov 16, 2016)

mia-me said:


> Luckily, not all males are wannabe patriarchs and white supremacists.


The other types of men are white knights/simps whose thirst has overtaken their ability to exercise reason. They lack good taste and have no self-respect.


----------



## mia-me (Feb 5, 2021)

Meliodas said:


> The other types of men are white knights/simps whose thirst has overtaken their ability to exercise reason. They lack good taste and have no self-respect.


Classic black and white thinking which is a false dichotomy. It's also an age old social tactic to shame other males into abiding by your white supremacist patriarchial beliefs or be considered less than. It's all manipulation and frankly, bullocks.


----------



## Meliodas (Nov 16, 2016)

mia-me said:


> Classic black and white thinking which is a false dichotomy. It's also an age old social tactic to shame other males into abiding by your white supremacist patriarchial beliefs or be considered less than. It's all manipulation and frankly, bullocks.


You are what you consume, and this is as true for information and culture as it is for food and drink - if you consume junk, you will become trash.

The reality is that equality, in any domain, necessitates a loss of standards and thus it appeals first and foremost to the most mediocre of people. These are the people who, regardless of their state of birth, drown themselves in a constant stream of vapid, superficial entertainment that dulls their wits and promotes ugliness and sickness as virtues.

I instead believe that we should strive for excellence and aspire to express the ideal forms. This means cultivating an image of formal unity and surface complexity, which should be reflected not only in one's appearance but also in speech and tastes in art. After all, a healthy mind leads to a healthy body, and I am distressed by how little discernment is shown by my peers in these matters.


----------



## mia-me (Feb 5, 2021)

Meliodas said:


> You are what you consume, and this is as true for information and culture as it is for food and drink.
> 
> The reality is that equality, in any domain, necessitates a loss of standards, and thus it appeals first and foremost to the most mediocre people, who drown themselves in a constant stream of vapid, superficial entertainment that dulls their senses and promotes ugliness and sickness as virtues.
> 
> I believe that we should strive for excellence and aspire to express the ideal human form. This means cultivating an image of nobility and beauty, which should be reflected not only in one's appearance but in his speech and tastes in art. A healthy mind leads to a healthy body, and vice versa. Consume trash, and you will become trash.


In other words, consume what false dichotomists are disgorging or be considered less than. Luckily, the males I prefer, aren't stupid enough to fall for that because they understand that reality works in various shades of grey.


----------



## Meliodas (Nov 16, 2016)

mia-me said:


> In other words, consume what false dichotomists are disgorging or be considered less than. Luckily, the males I prefer, aren't stupid enough to fall for that because they understand that reality works in various shades of grey.


Powerful, expansive people and nations do not celebrate irrationality, ugliness, and sickness, so the extent to which these things are depicted positively in their art is one of the best measures that you can find of cultural potency.

I agree that people whose minds are weak and are ill at heart need our support and encouragement, but they should never be placed in positions of authority and celebrated as icons, which, alas, is exactly what happens in Western countries today, and therein lies the difference between compassion and stupidity.


----------



## WickerDeer (Aug 1, 2012)

eeo said:


> The most basic of standards in romantic relationships - physical attractiveness. Does that make me a difficult person to love, and should I address that?


I have to say that I don't know anything about you or what others think of physical attractiveness, but I think you have a very nice voice, from the voice thread--you remind me of one of my favorite singers, Ana Moura:






I think her voice is so pretty as I also noticed your voice sounded pretty (which is physical--so I figured I'd let you know my subjective opinion on it...lol since this thread is all about sharing unsolicited opinions lol)


----------



## mia-me (Feb 5, 2021)

Meliodas said:


> Powerful, expansive people and nations do not celebrate ugliness and sickness, so the extent to which these things are depicted positively in their art is one of the best measures you will find of cultural potency.


More of the same hot air being blown out through a false dichotomy. Do you not read your self-inflated posts?



> I agree that people who are ill need our support and encouragement, but they should never be placed in positions of authority and celebrated as icons. Therein lies the difference between compassion and stupidity.


This applies a strawman and a non sequitur fallacy.


----------



## Meliodas (Nov 16, 2016)

mia-me said:


> More of the same hot air being blown out through a false dichotomy. Do you not read your self-inflated posts?


Name one example of a civilization at its zenith that has done what I described. Just one.



mia-me said:


> This applies a strawman and a non sequitur fallacy.


There is no fallacy, as we can treat people with dignity without giving them equal authority.


----------



## ENFPathetic (Apr 3, 2018)

mia-me said:


> You're being patronized by being told that your (female) worth is premised on your physical attractiveness and agreeableness so you can serve your master's bidding.


Be honest. Your methods are not working for you. You're alone and miserable. Stop dragging other women down with you.


----------

