# What's the most important thing that makes someone attractive to you?



## B3LIAL (Dec 21, 2013)

What's the thing that most often attracts you to a person.

Be HONEST - Votes are anonymous.


----------



## Bunny (Jul 11, 2015)

For me Intelligence has to be #1, so many reasons why.
Confidence and Looks would come in a close tie for 2nd.


----------



## Enxu (Dec 14, 2012)

Other- Same faith, loving and caring personality


----------



## Watchtower (Aug 20, 2015)

If it's instant attraction, then it's looks. Can't deny it, as much as I'd like to. Looks lure me in. Sense of humor, intelligence and confidence keep me in.


----------



## Tetsuo Shima (Nov 24, 2014)

Before I saw the poll, I was thinking hard about which physical feature I was the most picky about in the opposite/same sex (Tbh, if androgyny was an option, I would have picked it, because that's what I'm _really_ into.) I eventually settled on the tiny upturned Asian nose that I'm attracted to. But then, I saw the poll, and I saw all of these things I hadn't even considered because I was so focused on looks.


----------



## Toru Okada (May 10, 2011)

looks then spontaneity/humor


----------



## LibertyPrime (Dec 17, 2010)

I'm very curious how this will turn out >3


----------



## Strayfire (Jun 26, 2010)

I'm really attracted to something I can't put my finger on.

It's kind of like agreeableness.

Like how well you get along with the other person, is my main factor. 

If I feel like they are a kindred spirit, I will likely want a relationship.

I won't settle for looks or anything like that. Just not important enough.


----------



## SilverFalcon (Dec 18, 2014)

Voted other, attraction to me is my impression of the whole.

I think we are not generally attracted to single dimension of the other, and therefore our attaction can grow or wither as we discover different facets of the other.

BTW I think its more about mental compatibility that strictly intelligence itself.

And when it comes to beauty, its not just shapes. It's also what radiats via eyes, expression etc.


----------



## Dasein (Jun 11, 2015)

SilverFalcon said:


> Voted other, attraction to me is my impression of the whole.
> 
> I think we are not generally attracted to single dimension of the other, and therefore our attaction can grow or wither as we discover different facets of the other.
> 
> ...


I would agree here. I've had several situations where a really hot woman would come on to me, I assume from a physical attraction, but they know virtually nothing about me. I do have sexual desires of these women, but I typically don't act on pure visual sexual urges until we've made some kind of mental, compatible connection.


----------



## Snakecharmer (Oct 26, 2010)

It's a tie - intelligence + compassion/kindness


----------



## B3LIAL (Dec 21, 2013)

Some people have been putting "caring" or "kindness".

These traits are good traits, but are you seriously saying you can be ATTRACTED to someone based on them being nice?

Come on, I refuse to believe you're like "omfg he's so nice, that makes him sexy af".

Being nice is good, but I refuse to believe it's what makes you think someone is hot.

It needs to be something stimulating, something that grabs your attention.

Like being mysterious or something.


----------



## B3LIAL (Dec 21, 2013)

I'm very interested that confidence has the lowest amount of votes... I'm shocked actually.

Everywhere I go, people say "be confident".


----------



## Dasein (Jun 11, 2015)

B3LIAL said:


> I'm very interested that confidence has the lowest amount of votes... I'm shocked actually.
> 
> Everywhere I go, people say "be confident".



If I remember, the poll only let you make one choice? It may not be number one to many people, but it is not to say it is not near the top. The poll won't reflect this. Too few people have participated also.


----------



## B3LIAL (Dec 21, 2013)

INTonyP said:


> If I remember, the poll only let you make one choice? It may not be number one to many people, but it is not to say it is not near the top. The poll won't reflect this. Too few people have participated also.


Still, 14 votes and only 1 has said confidence. And I'm looking specifically for the most important trait.

So obviously most people so far could take a lack of confidence, to a certain degree, if it meant looks, intelligence or sense of humour.


----------



## Morfy (Dec 3, 2013)

Oddness.
Someone who stands out in a positive way.


----------



## B3LIAL (Dec 21, 2013)

Spooky Kitty said:


> Oddness.
> Someone who stands out in a positive way.


I can relate.


----------



## Handsome Jack (May 31, 2015)

Responsible.

Having your shit together is extremely attractive to me.


----------



## Dasein (Jun 11, 2015)

B3LIAL said:


> Still, 14 votes and only 1 has said confidence. And I'm looking specifically for the most important trait.
> 
> So obviously most people so far could take a lack of confidence, to a certain degree, if it meant looks, intelligence or sense of humour.


The point is, that it could be 2nd most important with all the people polled, and it won't show up in your poll.


----------



## Dasein (Jun 11, 2015)

Confidence is sexy, but also I can see the _*potential*_ of confidence in a woman who is not so confident. The potential is there, that I might help her become confident. So confidence is not necessarily high on my list.

A gentle Dom's view | fortheloveofasub: The essence of Dominance...


----------



## Popinjay (Sep 19, 2011)

@B3LIAL

I'm concerned...what if I want to change my vote in August of '18???


----------



## InspectorDoohickey (Nov 12, 2012)

Ambition is the most attractive thing to me. Someone as in invested in their future as I am in mine


----------



## Diophantine (Nov 24, 2011)

I honestly was in the minority of two who voted confidence. I'm so shallow.

But actually? An year ago I _would _have definitely answered "intelligence", being a highly analytical and supposedly intelligent person myself. And don't get me wrong, I actually _do _value intelligence more than any other trait, in general. However, being in the highly technical field I am in, I am surround by incredible intelligence and sky-high IQs about 99% of the time so it's not something that attracts me spontaneously anymore. 

I found I am attracted, rather, by passion. By someone's confidence in himself and his drive to follow his true interests and philosophies, without hesitancy. This usually manifests in confidence. I am for some reason instantly turned off by men with self-doubt or self-deprecation, or those who take themselves too seriously.


----------



## He's a Superhero! (May 1, 2013)

Faith, compassionate, loving, loyal, personality characteristics, good behaviour, good attitude...Things like that.

Of course, intelligence is very attractive as well, as is a good sense of humour.


----------



## LandOfTheSnakes (Sep 7, 2013)

I did vote intelligence but on second though, maybe it's looks. But maybe it's just combination of both... Looks are a pre-requisite for me finding a girl attractive. But I don't think I have crazy high standards and can appreciate a wide range of physical characteristics that can be attractive to me. But at the same time, intelligence is also necessary if that attraction is ever going to be remotely sustained and maintained. So I guess I just need a certain level of both of these things to find a girl attractive. And honestly, I probably have higher standards for intelligence than for looks. So maybe I was right to choose intelligence in this poll after all :laughing:


----------



## shameless (Apr 21, 2014)

Other: Personality


----------



## Enxu (Dec 14, 2012)

B3LIAL said:


> Some people have been putting "caring" or "kindness".
> 
> These traits are good traits, but are you seriously saying you can be ATTRACTED to someone based on them being nice?
> 
> ...


You asked for the most important things that make someone attractive, not all the things that make someone attractive. Important things are different from the most eye grabbing things.


----------



## RyuukoGo (Apr 6, 2015)

What I see in her eyes...if she has a good soul. :wink:


----------



## OrangeAppled (Jun 26, 2009)

The "je ne sais quois". I get vibes from people. I just immediately know they are "my kind of person". 
But I didn't want to vote other, and being that intelligence is a big thing for me, I voted that. Absence of an intelligence I can respect is pretty much a dealbreaker. Intelligence itself is not enough though....kindness, morality, compatibility, physical attractiveness, emotional maturity, and depth are big factors too.


----------



## Kore (Aug 10, 2012)

Other: Intensity

Before I get yelled at... Of course looks, smarts, wit, etc are all great but it's all rather boring if the person isn't intense. Sort of riding that "reality is harsh and it's beautiful" train.

I had a knee-jerk reaction to a stranger once and it was his intensity, the look in his eyes, an intangible aura of focus that made me want to be with him immediately.

For example:

Starting at 1:35






Brad Pitt is attractive but his intensity in this movie makes him so much more interesting.


----------



## OrangeAppled (Jun 26, 2009)

B3LIAL said:


> Some people have been putting "caring" or "kindness".
> 
> These traits are good traits, but are you seriously saying you can be ATTRACTED to someone based on them being nice?
> 
> ...


You do realize that this forum is overrun with introverted intutives?
These answers are never going to represent the general population. 

People like stuff which flatters their own ego. INxx types fancy _themselves_ the mysterious ones.
Introverts in general may see that as their "role". 

Honestly, the last time I had a serious infatuation with someone, the cincher was seeing how kind and personable he was to small children and old ladies - people he had no need to "impress". Sure, he was smart, good-looking, funny, outgoing, etc, but none of that impacted me until I observed this quality. Also, his thoughtfulness made _me_ feel comfortable and accepted too.

Age may have something to do with this also...



B3LIAL said:


> I'm very interested that confidence has the lowest amount of votes... I'm shocked actually.
> 
> Everywhere I go, people say "be confident".


This is required to allow your other qualities to shine, but it is those qualities which will attract people. So yeah, it's important, but not what is registering as attractive to others. 

Mysteriousness can fend off the effect of familiarity breeding contempt and can attract extroverts, but more often it leaves you invisible because no one cares that much to figure you out. I learned that a long time ago as a shy, quiet person.


----------



## MuChApArAdOx (Jan 24, 2011)

Knowledgeable, not necessarily level of Intelligence

Clever and Interesting

Humble and curious

Preferable well rounded and experienced

Overall personality

World views and Philosophies 

Morals and values

Age and level of maturity


----------



## Strayfire (Jun 26, 2010)

OrangeAppled said:


> Honestly, the last time I had a serious infatuation with someone, the cincher was seeing how kind and personable he was to small children and old ladies - people he had no need to "impress". Sure, he was smart, good-looking, funny, outgoing, etc, but none of that impacted me until I observed this quality. Also, his thoughtfulness made _me_ feel comfortable and accepted too.


My current infatuation/whatever this is... is totally inspired by how accepting she is of my more sexual side... 

That's a embrace of being dominant (which she is naturally) and loving me crossdressing.

^^


----------



## Noctis (Apr 4, 2012)

Friendly

Warm 

Has a good sense of humor 

Cheerful/Upbeat

Caring

Fun to be with

Enthusiastic

Self-Confident 

Good with kids

Interested in people 

Polite/Good Manners

Genuinely a good person


----------



## GoodOldDreamer (Sep 8, 2011)

Out of the list presented, I voted for sense of humor. Intellegence and confidence will shine through with the kind of humor I'm into. Sarcasm, wit, word play, etc. Also, it tends to be easier to catch on to a person's humor than a lot of other things. Or at the very least, if it doesn't match up then the first lame joke I throw out there will go over awkward and that'll be it. :tongue:

I wish there were more options to the poll though. As others have noted, I'm also one who looks for good, compassionate souls. I don't want to be played by a partner, I want to be loved.


----------



## Enxu (Dec 14, 2012)

OrangeAppled said:


> Honestly, the last time I had a serious infatuation with someone, the cincher was seeing *how kind and personable he was to small children and old ladies - people he had no need to "impress"*. Sure, he was smart, good-looking, funny, outgoing, etc, but none of that impacted me until I observed this quality. Also, his thoughtfulness made _me_ feel comfortable and accepted too.


I absolutely love guys who are like that. I've long understood that a person shows his or her true self only with people he or she has no reason to please, and only when he or she is genuinely kind to them can he or she be considered a good soul. It's kind of odd that many people think that as long as he or she is good to you is enough, it isn't because ultimately their true sides will show, and that has nothing to do with how he or she treats you when there is a relationship ensuing. Many people are in for a rude awakening because they only paid attention to how the person acted in front of them rather than the true person within them that they show to complete strangers.


----------



## UraniaIsis (Nov 26, 2014)

Other: pheromones, the panty wetting gateway drugs


----------



## bruh (Oct 27, 2015)

I've read somewhere that sense of humor is the same as intelligence..
I really like intelligent sincere person with a bold demenour... and a soft side who will show only to me. ^_^


----------



## Gilly (Apr 22, 2012)

Motivations. <--good morals. Decent human. 
Rough around the edges. Not perfect. Passionate. Funny. 
This is the basic model I require.


----------



## B3LIAL (Dec 21, 2013)

Enxu said:


> You asked for the most important things that make someone attractive, not all the things that make someone attractive. Important things are different from the most eye grabbing things.


I'm sorry but you obviously misinterpreted what I meant. I never said "what's the most important thing to you when it comes to selecting a partner", I said what's the most important thing when it comes to making you attracted to someone.

ATTRACTED. It's not about principles, it's not about making a conscious logic decision, what ATTRACTS you to the person.


----------



## ReadingBeaver (Dec 30, 2015)

Depth of character


----------



## ScorpioRising (Dec 23, 2013)

I don't think you can single out one attribute.

For me it's someone who is genuine, compassionate and reasonably mature (I mean, who doesn't enjoy behaving like an 8 year old sometimes, but you have to be able to turn it off when it's not appropriate). Smarts and humour fall in there somewhere too.

Also common sense, but given that this is now considered to be a fucking "Super Power", I'm not sure we can include it.


----------



## kittenklyn (Nov 2, 2015)

@B3LIAL

I chose "other" because the thing I find most attractive about a potential partner is if they have the same values that I do (vegan, feminist, faithful, etc), and are outspoken about them. There's nothing sexier than watching my lover speak out on their own about their passions, if those passions match my core values. Instant attraction for me, without a doubt. 

If that's not there, none of the other things matter. Now, if that is there, then I can get turned on by a lot of things. If she wears lingerie, if sue speaks intellectually, if she laughs, etc.


----------



## piano (May 21, 2015)

a man who does what he wants and gets respect for it


----------



## Catwalk (Aug 12, 2015)

(A) --> Dumber than me (re: argumentative (re: brain-independent judo reduced / intellectual clashing reduced); 

(B) --> Lower libido than me (re: less likely to cheat / lower ''drool-face'' + self-control elevations | female/female competition reduced); 

(C) --> Less confident than I (via) low / moderate self-esteem w/ around 50% or higher narcissistic traits for balance --> (re: more likely to let me control things w/out being a ''push-over'').

(D) --> Acquires substantial amount of class (re: mannerism / dresses appropriately) 

(E) --> Must dislike ''socialized-stupidity'' + unwarranted  risk-taking feats (re: drugs / car raising / conformist attitude (via) others / authority).

(F) --> (2) friends or less. (re: self-efficient / self-dependent + ''friend / relationship'' drama + clashing reduced).

(G) --> Moderate extroversion / feeling judo. (re: ENFP)
_________________________________

Complied.


----------



## B3LIAL (Dec 21, 2013)

Catwalk said:


> (A) --> Dumber than me (re: argumentative (re: brain-independent judo reduced / intellectual clashing reduced);
> 
> (B) --> Lower libido than me (re: less likely to cheat / lower ''drool-face'' + self-control elevations | female/female competition reduced);
> 
> ...


Can I just ask why you type your comments like that? Are you disabled and writing on a portable computer?

It just seems extra effort for no reason.


----------



## Catwalk (Aug 12, 2015)

B3LIAL said:


> Can I just ask why you type your comments like that? Are you disabled and writing on a portable computer?
> 
> It just seems extra effort for no reason.


No, sir.


----------



## Acrylic (Dec 14, 2015)

Catwalk said:


> (A) --> Dumber than me (re: argumentative (re: brain-independent judo reduced / intellectual clashing reduced);
> 
> (B) --> Lower libido than me (re: less likely to cheat / lower ''drool-face'' + self-control elevations | female/female competition reduced);
> 
> ...


I was reading this as something you _wouldn't_ be attracted to haha. Like "dumber than you, of course, don't want a stupid person", "lower libido, of course, can't have chemistry with someone with lower libido", etc...

Then I said "wait a minute. the thread's called what would make someone _more_ attractive". Then that list looked totally different.

Man. That is extreme. Every part on that list is there to minimize risk. You must have really had some fucked up, awful people in your life, to make you this wary  God fucking damn you, world (punches world as hard as possible) (earthquakes felt across the globe)


----------



## Acrylic (Dec 14, 2015)

Sense of humor is second to last? Come on now... don't tell me my whole life's goals has been for naught lol.

... No, seriously, don't tell me that. This isn't funny. This is a life we're talking about here.


----------



## Catwalk (Aug 12, 2015)

Despotic Ocelot said:


> I was reading this as something you _wouldn't_ be attracted to haha. Like "dumber than you, of course, don't want a stupid person", "lower libido, of course, can't have chemistry with someone with lower libido", etc...
> 
> Then I said "wait a minute. the thread's called what would make someone _more_ attractive". Then that list looked totally different.
> 
> Man. That is extreme. Every part on that list is there to minimize risk. You must have really had some fucked up, awful people in your life, to make you this wary  God fucking damn you, world (punches world as hard as possible) (earthquakes felt across the globe)


_Hehe_. I kid, sometime.


----------



## PandaBoo (Apr 29, 2015)

Compatibility, kindness, intelligence, sense of humor, and maturity.

The others are negotiable.


----------



## Macrosapien (Apr 4, 2010)

Vocaroo | Voice message <--- got cut short -- only a 1:53


Vocaroo | Voice message <------continuation .. over 10 mins, so dont listen if you dont want too.


----------



## BenevolentBitterBleeding (Mar 16, 2015)

Catwalk said:


> (A) --> Dumber than me (re: argumentative (re: brain-independent judo reduced / intellectual clashing reduced);
> 
> (B) --> Lower libido than me (re: less likely to cheat / lower ''drool-face'' + self-control elevations | female/female competition reduced);
> 
> ...


Someone with this exact list who can live up to it and its opposite expectations.

I think this is why INTJ always come up as a perfect pairing for me. Although I think outdoor adventurous would also be a nice addition; as well: integrity and alignment of ethics/morals for long term sanity. Oh, and of course aesthetically pleasing since I'm so superficial.


----------



## Catwalk (Aug 12, 2015)

BenevolentBitterBleeding said:


> Someone with this exact list who can live up to it and its opposite expectations.
> 
> I think this is why INTJ always come up as a perfect pairing for me. Although I think outdoor adventurous would also be a nice addition; as well: integrity and alignment of ethics/morals for long term sanity. Oh, and of course aesthetically pleasing since I'm so superficial.


----------



## Doktorin Zylinder (May 10, 2015)

Catwalk said:


> (A) --> Dumber than me (re: argumentative (re: brain-independent judo reduced / intellectual clashing reduced);
> 
> (B) --> Lower libido than me (re: less likely to cheat / lower ''drool-face'' + self-control elevations | female/female competition reduced);
> 
> ...


Oh, come, now. This is no way to go about picking a partner. 

(A) With a partner who is of blatantly lower intelligence than you, you'll be hard pressed not to get bored unless you just want arm candy and from what I gather, you are both the candy and the arm. 

(B) Libido level has very little to do with cheating in most cases. You might as well pick an asexual who is willing to accommodate your needs at your whim rather than someone who is just flat and disinterested. 

(C) Confidence is a matter or perspective in many cases. You could actually have someone with more healthy confidence than you and still have a very good balance. 

(D) Class is very difficult to acquire outright. It is either imbued at a young age or learned over a long period of time. Mind you, those of a lower confidence level lack class because with class comes confidence. 

(E) I'll agree with you on most of this, but there are some speed freaks and adrenaline junkies who do quite well for themselves. At their level of skill, such risks are not unwarranted. 

(F) A lack of friends by no means correlates to self sufficiency nor independence. Unfortunately, our world is so incredibly interdependent that you'd be hard pressed to separate yourself to any meaningful extent other than being reclusive. 

(G) The moderate extroversion seems to have a slight clash with the lack of confidence. An extrovert without confidence is just annoying but, then again, too much confidence is also annoying because it becomes arrogance at that point. 



Despotic Ocelot said:


> I was reading this as something you _wouldn't_ be attracted to haha. Like "dumber than you, of course, don't want a stupid person", "lower libido, of course, can't have chemistry with someone with lower libido", etc...
> 
> Then I said "wait a minute. the thread's called what would make someone _more_ attractive". Then that list looked totally different.
> 
> Man. That is extreme. Every part on that list is there to minimize risk. You must have really had some fucked up, awful people in your life, to make you this wary  God fucking damn you, world (punches world as hard as possible) (earthquakes felt across the globe)


Relationships do not require sex to be meaningful. Physical contact in one form or another is usually required but not outright sex. I will agree that her list seems to portray her jadedness and extreme insecurity.



RedPandas said:


> Compatibility, kindness, intelligence, sense of humor, and maturity.
> 
> The others are negotiable.


This list I would consider much better. It's not so specific and is flexible. Hard cut requirements are usually never met leaving the person longing as to why they can't find a mate and blameful of the world. 



BenevolentBitterBleeding said:


> Someone with this exact list who can live up to it and its opposite expectations.
> 
> I think this is why INTJ always come up as a perfect pairing for me. Although I think outdoor adventurous would also be a nice addition; as well: integrity and alignment of ethics/morals for long term sanity. Oh, and of course aesthetically pleasing since I'm so superficial.


From my interactions with you, I wouldn't call you dumb by any means. Submissiveness might also not be what you're going for with something like this. She may not be the droid you're looking for and you don't want to buy death sticks; you want to go home an rethink your life. 



So, Ms Catwalk, let's go down the roster once again, shall we?

(A) Having someone dumber than you isn't always the best match. It is rarely so. Deviating any more than about fifteen to thirty IQ points can put you in for major compatibly issues resulting in frustration, resentment, and miserableness on both sides. A partner around or of higher intelligence allows you to learn and grow and better yourself. You can strut right past stagnation on that one and the fact is, intelligence likes intelligence like misery loves company. To bounce ideas and theories and specifications off one another is a joyous force unto itself. It is hard to match. 

(B) As mention above, libido seldom has anything to do with cheating. It's about frustration and resentment and insecurity, which are some things I listed in A, ironically enough. So, just at this point, there is a high potential for relational failure. The structure is being build upon a faulty foundation and has not been calculated for seismic activity. If you could find someone of a similar mindset to you and of a monogamous nature or even an asexual bent, you'd probably be much better off. I will tell you that some asexuals are willing to engage in amorous activities for their partner and only their partner as a display of affection and loyalty. Asexual does not necessarily mean aromatic, by the way and picking a female over a male may be a better choice, especially one of a more logical persuasion. 

(C) The matter of self confidence is a big one. You really don't want someone with low self esteem. It is the source of many self image problems and insecurities. You're essentially setting up yourself up with someone who is likely to by clingy and resort to substance abuse for an escape from reality, which flies in the face of (E). I don't think you're going to want to have to keep propping someone up psychologically to maintain a shaky at best baseline of minimal confidence. People like that turn into nutcases in short order. What you would be better off finding is someone who exhibits a cool, calm confidence that isn't overbearing. One that subtly exists but does not really outshine yours. 

(D) As I said in another thread, which if I recall correctly was yours, class is nearly dead on this side of the pond. It is hard to find and even harder to acquire. People with class exude it. It is part of them as if innate and underlying. It cannot be stripped from them nor is it a superficial mask. Some of it is learned, I grant you that, like knowing what utensil to use at a formal dinner, but how someone walks and the way they hold themselves is a matter of the confidence you don't seem to want. Would you rather have a monkey with a silver spoon or an intelligent and learned human being willing to engage in a relationship with you? 

(E) I'll agree with you outright on the drugs. I had an ex who was a covert addict. It was not a pleasant experience that I paid dearly for. The part about unwarranted risk taking I will expand upon. For instance, if I were to run a FOREX trade at six million USD at forty to one leverage, which is nearly a quarter billion dollars, and pulling a one cent conversion on it over nearly a day, you'd probably have not clue as to what I was doing, but when I pull in a cool two million and change on that trade, you'd probably be pretty happy with that. To you, that may be unwarranted; to me, that is life and my level and area of expertise. I don't do that every day, by any means, but it's not an uncommon thing. If the average person were to try that, they'd probably freak out and lose their shirt, but I wouldn't give a child a loaded shotgun, either. This goes back to confidence. This is confidence. It's not arrogance. Arrogance is being over confident to the extent of stupidity, which I know you dislike with a passion. The last part about conformity and authority once again alluded to a person who lacks confidence unless of course you want to tell them what to do and think, as well.

(F) Someone who lacks friends is likely to be a loner or someone who is reclusive or an aspie. I can definitely understand your want for reduced drama between people. There are some people who are addicted to drama, whether they are willing to admit it or not, which is disconcerting at best. I would consider one or two close friends to be a very good number. A very tight circle for friends with a looser circle of acquaintances would fit the bill very well. 

(G) Extroversion may not necessarily be what you're after, here. You essentially want someone to deal with the feels for you, or at least be able to walk you through them or take over that part of the interaction for you. If you do indeed find an extrovert for such things, they may overshadow you and I don't think that's what you're going for as you come across as wanted to be the off-center focus of attention as long as no one else is actually the focus. A wall flower would do well for such a partner, one who could watch for your emotional distress or know a shared secret signal to come to your aid. 

So, it seems your list is quite contradictory when analyzed even a little bit. You do want someone with confidence, and quite a bit of it, but a quiet, serene sort of confidence that not many have and is quite hard to find. Compatibility in both intelligence and class is something you also want. Smarter than you isn't a bad thing nor is experience. It's an opportunity to learn and better yourself, to grow. I can guaranty that if you had someone of significantly lower intelligence, you'd be bored and resentful in short order. You want someone smart, but smart in a way that is different from you personally. A lot of this is about confidence, yours and theirs. If you have someone with low self esteem and poor confidence, they'll be all over you thinking you're cheating on them because of your greater intelligence, confidence, and sex appeal. And, by the way, looks fade; stupid last forever and is more than skin deep. 

Since we're making lists, maybe if will be easier for me to make one for you. You want a partner who is:


Intelligent but of a different intelligence than yourself. 
Asexual, but willing to accommodate your libido as a relational desire for both party's comfort.
Cool, calm, and subtly confident but not showy, overbearing, or overpowering when compared to you. (This confidence will add to many things for your partner and you including emotional security and safety in the relationship.)
Classy with a unique but professional sense of personal style. 
Not into the general stupidity of the masses but capable of taking calculated, well executed risks for personal gain as well as that of the couple.
Attached to one or two very close friends who offer support and advice but also willing to see that you bring them happiness, as well; most likely an aspie.
Able to deal with the feels in order to help you out in that area of life along with dealing with some socializing. 


XNTP
INTX
INTX
ENTJ, INTJ, INTP
INTX
INTX
ENFX

So, this leaves you with an interesting set of clues and patterns. The first one is probably the most or second most important. You're not going to want INTJ for this, because that's what you are and you don't want to be with someone who has the same intelligence as you. That being said, watch what happens when we go through the roster, now. Ruling out INTJs as being too similar to yourself and being left with five (or so) out of seven NTs that cannot be INTJ but have an X on the end, it looks like your match could very well be a quiet, confident, asexual, female aspie INTP. Some of us get very good at it at a superficial social interaction level and are able to deal with emotional things to quite an extent. Females are usually a bit better at this than the males in my experience. 

I understand that your list comes from a place of hurt, betrayal, jadedness, and insecurity and that you're looking to protect yourself to minimize future emotional pain, but I think you're going about it in a way that will cause you just as much hurt and possibly self blame. 

Think about what I've said. 

Good evening, Ms Catwalk.


----------



## g_w (Apr 16, 2013)

Doktorin Zylinder said:


> Oh, come, now. This is no way to go about picking a partner.
> 
> (A) With a partner who is of blatantly lower intelligence than you, you'll be hard pressed not to get bored unless you just want arm candy and from what I gather, you are both the candy and the arm.
> 
> ...


So you're just hitting on her, then. :wink:


----------



## Acrylic (Dec 14, 2015)

Doktorin Zylinder said:


> Relationships do not require sex to be meaningful. Physical contact in one form or another is usually required but not outright sex.


Okaaay... that's good for you to have that opinion, but it's got nothing to do with me lol. It seems like you're taking giant, assumptive leaps, and inserting things into my post that aren't there, to set up something for you to be a contrarian about.

She said someone with lower libido, and I said you can't have chemistry with someone with lower libido. She has made a thread about having high libido. Pointing that out does not then = "I think it's impossible to have meaningful relationships without sex". That's a whole separate topic altogether. I know you want to say that so you can have another thing to add to your 'big post of rebukes'... but I never said I think you can't have a meaningful relationship without sex... you're reading that into what I said lol.



> I will agree that her list seems to portray her jadedness and extreme insecurity.


It's not possible to agree with something I didn't say lol. I said she sounded wary, not 'jaded and insecure'. Those are words I would use if I wanted to be derogatory about something. If you're being wary, but being a douche about it, and not caring about negative collateral effects it's having... then I'd use a word like jaded. 

Others might use it differently, and it might not be how you're using it here; simply saying 'jaded' doesn't amount to meaning it negatively (although since your whole post sounds preachy/sanctimonious, it tends to blend in with that instead of sounding neutral) But I just want to make the distinction that I don't agree that it sounds jaded... jaded, to me, has negative connotations, to something that begins as (rightfully) discontented. I was calling it the latter, not the former.



> (F) Someone who lacks friends is likely to be a loner or someone who is reclusive or an aspie.


That's both ironic (considering who it's aimed at) and incorrect. I thought the people on here were smart enough to recognize introverts for introverts, and not condescend them for being who they are? Why is it if you lack friends, it has to cast a negative light on you... does it work the other way around? Can an extrovert have too much friends?

Is 'aspie' supposed to be slang for asperger's? When trying to moralize to people, it's best not to be flippant/indifferent about things such as physical sicknesses that one can't help but either have or not have.



> So, Ms Catwalk, let's go down the roster once again, shall we?
> 
> Since we're making lists, maybe if will be easier for me to make one for you.


(hoity-toity voice) I do declare, many thanks to you for making it... if you need a list done properly, do it yourself, I always say... it did make it easier, thanks so much. Why didn't she think of prostrating herself before you, before? All that typing could have been avoided had she realized how inferior doing it herself would be.


----------



## Macrosapien (Apr 4, 2010)

Doktorin Zylinder said:


> Oh, come, now. This is no way to go about picking a partner.
> 
> (A) With a partner who is of blatantly lower intelligence than you, you'll be hard pressed not to get bored unless you just want arm candy and from what I gather, you are both the candy and the arm.
> 
> ...


well now.... As the kids say today, why'd you have to roast her like dat tho? You went in on our resident computer, catwalk. Don't you get it, her comments are exactly how a computer would answer, if it were programmed to give its robotic deliberations


----------



## Sunn (Mar 12, 2014)

Someone that doesn't need to be babysat to feel a drive in their life or to achieve their dreams (at least 24/7. all of us need encouragement every now and then)

Someone with goals outside of just existing

Someone who's willing to help others without hope of a reward

Someone I can argue with and not grow contempt for; vice versa

Someone that I can wake up to and not wonder what I'm doing with my life after night(s) of disagreements

Someone I can look in the eye and respect; not just as a member of society but also as an individual.

Hopefully someone I can call my equal' or whatever that truthfully means.

Everything else I'm looking for is pretty common after that.. I'd hope that we both have a level sense of maturity/honesty and sexual attraction to one another. Maybe a sense of humor but that's pretty low on my priority's. Most issues after that can be worked through.

E Z stuff.


----------



## BenevolentBitterBleeding (Mar 16, 2015)

Doktorin Zylinder said:


> Oh, come, now. This is no way to go about picking a partner.


Although I think most of your points make sense, I also think you've missed the mark. Because you're including considerations that were never mentioned, but should also be assumed - by the reader - because it's a) quite obvious; alluded too(at least for me) and b) taking into consideration the intelligence of the poster.

Also, the list is great. However, it would be true that in theory it may be better than reality. Because boredom kills. Or rather that people who aren't comfortable with boredom will kill. Although, I'd argue that every relationship will hit those peaks and valleys, so why not have a list that helps one to avoid a few of those... milestones.

So to go through the points:



> (A) With a partner who is of blatantly lower intelligence than you, you'll be hard pressed not to get bored unless you just want arm candy and from what I gather, you are both the candy and the arm.


From experience I wouldn't want to be with someone I didn't think was intelligently close enough to myself. And not that I'm smart, or an encyclopedia of knowledge, but if a person has an inability to think or see things past a certain level, resentment can grow. That isn't to say compatibility can't be reached; it's that one side will be left feeling desiring. Obviously.

And arm candy, of course! Why not? :rolldeyes:



> (B) Libido level has very little to do with cheating in most cases. You might as well pick an asexual who is willing to accommodate your needs at your whim rather than someone who is just flat and disinterested.


I think the point is that they would like someone who can keep their pants on; who isn't constantly - seriously - trying to pursue anything that - they find attractive or - moves. Is loyal so that it's not an added stressor on the relationship. i.e. security.

Does this have to do with insecurity of an individual? Maybe. But I think it's fair to assume that some people will purposely take advantage of power games to leave others feeling more insecure.



> (C) Confidence is a matter or perspective in many cases. You could actually have someone with more healthy confidence than you and still have a very good balance.


I think this had to do with wanting someone who looked up to them to an extent. If the person thinks they found a catch that is better than them, they're less likely to go looking for more catch. Everything else with the narcissism and control/pushover is self explanatory.



> (D) Class is very difficult to acquire outright. It is either imbued at a young age or learned over a long period of time. Mind you, those of a lower confidence level lack class because with class comes confidence.


I didn't read it as wanting someone with low confidence. It's having lower confidence than them. So if their confidence is over 9000 and they find a partner with confidence at 8000 it's all good.

I don't think desiring class from a partner is unreasonable regardless of it's hard to come by. And I don't think _not_ wanting to settle for someone without class is a bad thing. This isn't to say that class equates to stiff pretentiousness or rich aristocratic society and living a lavish lifestyle. It's as you said, a matter of confidence, the way they carry themselves, how they treat others, etc... Though class in this context can be debated.



> (E) I'll agree with you on most of this, but there are some speed freaks and adrenaline junkies who do quite well for themselves. At their level of skill, such risks are not unwarranted.


I think this is just about not wanting an abuser who is too far gone in their own addictions. i.e. Having enough intelligence to know when to stop and having the will to do so. The conformity stuff should be self explanatory if it's something you already desire.



> (F) A lack of friends by no means correlates to self sufficiency nor independence. Unfortunately, our world is so incredibly interdependent that you'd be hard pressed to separate yourself to any meaningful extent other than being reclusive.


I think they just want a partner who is self sufficient and independent with a few close friends for themselves. That way no one has to be the single crutch for the other. i.e. not co-dependent. And also that there's enough time to be shared between each other + less distractions or outside obligations.



> (G) The moderate extroversion seems to have a slight clash with the lack of confidence. An extrovert without confidence is just annoying but, then again, too much confidence is also annoying because it becomes arrogance at that point.


Again it's not lack of confidence but less confidence compared too.



> Relationships do not require sex to be meaningful. Physical contact in one form or another is usually required but not outright sex. I will agree that her list seems to portray her jadedness and extreme insecurity.


_Seems to portray_ is key; although I might be bias as I'm jaded and insecure, but I know how I am and how I _can_ be. A list specific like this is to save everyone's investment of time and emotion(s). Not that a list so specific will guarantee a perfect ending in the real world; because maybe you fall for someone that goes against everything you thought you wanted. But that's where compatibility - the list - comes in; after the hormone rushes subside.



> This list I would consider much better. It's not so specific and is flexible. Hard cut requirements are usually never met leaving the person longing as to why they can't find a mate and blameful of the world.


I agree that RP list _reads_ better; but it's too vague and cliché.

Who wouldn't want those things in a partner? Whereas the list Catwalk provided shows that they know exactly what they want because they know exactly who they are(at this time). That's more inspiring for someone like me because it cuts through all the filler in its specificity and creates common ground from the get go. 
* *




Although, it may not be for everyone as I _do_ have quite a peculiar way of being. :abnormal:



Sure we all change and can adapt or compromise, but I'd argue that their are specific personality traits we all have - quirks, requirements and deal breakers - that are non-negotiable. These things are probably self learned through experience.

A fling or short term thing is easy to deal with and doesn't require any of the desires on the list.



> From my interactions with you, I wouldn't call you dumb by any means.


I'd say, only just about smart enough to be trouble. :tongue2:



> Submissiveness might also not be what you're going for with something like this. She may not be the droid you're looking for and you don't want to buy death sticks; you want to go home an rethink your life.


Could you expound on this; I'm not sure I understand what you're saying with any of it. In my mind I fit everything on the list.

I'm sure there are other types besides INTJ that are compatible with me personally because I have different fits? But the list is pretty spot on when looking at from a certain perspective.


* *






> So, Ms Catwalk, let's go down the roster once again, shall we?
> 
> (A) Having someone dumber than you isn't always the best match. It is rarely so. Deviating any more than about fifteen to thirty IQ points can put you in for major compatibly issues resulting in frustration, resentment, and miserableness on both sides. A partner around or of higher intelligence allows you to learn and grow and better yourself. You can strut right past stagnation on that one and the fact is, intelligence likes intelligence like misery loves company. To bounce ideas and theories and specifications off one another is a joyous force unto itself. It is hard to match.
> 
> ...





I agree with everything for the most part, but I think you're just reiterating in more words what the list actually is; looking for. Hence the original comment of missing the mark.


* *






> You do want someone with confidence, and quite a bit of it, but a quiet, serene sort of confidence that not many have and is quite hard to find. Compatibility in both intelligence and class is something you also want. Smarter than you isn't a bad thing nor is experience. It's an opportunity to learn and better yourself, to grow. I can guaranty that if you had someone of significantly lower intelligence, you'd be bored and resentful in short order. You want someone smart, but smart in a way that is different from you personally. A lot of this is about confidence, yours and theirs. If you have someone with low self esteem and poor confidence, they'll be all over you thinking you're cheating on them because of your greater intelligence, confidence, and sex appeal. And, by the way, looks fade; stupid last forever and is more than skin deep.





From my own interpretation of the original, I don't disagree with any of this.


* *






> Since we're making lists, maybe if will be easier for me to make one for you. You want a partner who is:
> 
> 
> Intelligent but of a different intelligence than yourself.
> ...





Your list is pretty much exactly how I interpreted the original; except for the part about professional sense of personal style.


* *






> XNTP
> INTX
> INTX
> ENTJ, INTJ, INTP
> ...





I'd say that there are other NF's and ST's that could be a good fit as well. But an S vs. N and J vs. P problem could possibly arise. Though in terms of best compatibility you could be right; minus omitted type(s).

Of course, it's all dependent on individuals and their maturity too.

And Happy New Year! :redface:


----------



## Daffy (May 11, 2016)

Kindness: not the kindness where you're just trying to feel good and be liked. I mean empathy grounded on respect. So when you are worn out and don't have it in you to empathize, you're still left with a respectful attitude that shows you truly value the human being. 
That said, kindness is expressed in multiple ways, I guess I just like seeing people caring for others in their personal way, in a manner that is just and uninterested.


----------



## strawberryLola (Sep 19, 2010)

Daffy said:


> Kindness: not the kindness where you're just trying to feel good and be liked. I mean empathy grounded on respect. So when you are worn out and don't have it in you to empathize, you're still left with a respectful attitude that shows you truly value the human being.
> That said, kindness is expressed in multiple ways, I guess I just like seeing people caring for others in their personal way, in a manner that is just and uninterested.


I've always been attracted to kindness in people.

The people who have always stood out to me most were always those who showed genuineness and respect towards others.

There is a sense of empathy in kindness, looking inwards, and seeing the other person as they are, accepting them, and providing a catalyst for change in a positive reassuring manner. I love that in people.

Courage, empathy, genuineness seem to go hand-in-hand with kindness.. seems like a rare breed these days. When I see kindness in a man, I see him for who he is: an Upstanding human being. Quite admirable.


----------



## Wolf (Mar 20, 2016)

Looks are definitely a preliminary baseline. 

Intelligence is also very important. You can't just have one or the other.


----------



## Daffy (May 11, 2016)

I really have a hard time understanding those who find that looks are most important. I simply can't fathom it. Typical INFP of me I suppose. It seems like an unecessary barrier to finding a soul mate.

Could you tell me what the reasoning behind it is?

In terms of general appearance, I would mostly analyze the signs that the person has respect for themselves and for others. (decent, clean etc)


----------



## Zeta Neprok (Jul 27, 2010)

Nothing attracts me to women more than compassion and kindness. They don't have to be the best looking, the smartest, most talented, etc. As long as they genuinely mean well. 

When I was in high school during my angsty teen years, I remember I was really upset about something (I can't remember what exactly), and a girl who sat beside me was really concerned. She gave me a bit of an uplifting chat and even offered to buy me lunch without me having to pay her back. I never really noticed her before then, but after that I had a pretty big crush on her. I didn't ask her out because she had a boyfriend but that always stuck. As a matter of fact I probably STILL have a crush on her after all these years.


----------



## Tucken (Dec 13, 2009)

its a mystery I don't know. maybe its better that it stay that way.


----------



## strawberryLola (Sep 19, 2010)

Daffy said:


> *I really have a hard time understanding those who find that looks are most important. I simply can't fathom it. *Typical INFP of me I suppose. It seems like an unecessary barrier to finding a soul mate.
> 
> Could you tell me what the reasoning behind it is?
> 
> In terms of general appearance, I would mostly analyze the signs that the person has respect for themselves and for others. (decent, clean etc)


Amen. I think it is how a person makes us feel. It's the essence of who they are that shines. Different qualities resonate more so for others, and it's all very individual. But, a guy who's kind to me speaks volumes about who he is. So sexy!!


----------



## RansomthePasserby (Sep 26, 2015)

Short term: Looks, intelligence, humor, and confidence.

Long term: Those four aren't as important as respect and admiration of my accomplishments as our relationship deepens.


----------



## Miniblini (Jun 4, 2014)

1. Kindness
2. Passion 
3. Intelligence 

What do the last 2 usually add up too? NERDS!

NERDS! NERDS! NERDS!

Ultimate seduction technique: Naming all 151 Pokémon (all 721? Impossible!), and then showing me your awesome magic deck (water decks immediately disqualified, and you should feel bad).


hello! <3 whatever Tapatalk!


----------



## 7rr7s (Jun 6, 2011)

Ass. .


----------



## BenevolentBitterBleeding (Mar 16, 2015)

BlueChristmas06 said:


> Ass. .


They're awesome to ride, a sign of healthy wealth, maturing responsibility and make for a great gift come wedding day. 

Bondage NSFW:
* *


----------



## HerpDerpette (May 1, 2016)

At first glance, their hair must fit the shape of the face, can't be too fat because I want an active partner. 
Second, intelligence. Third, black humor and how much they can take. 
Although if a guy is more intelligent than looks, I'd date him too. 
High standards, but I found him...he has a nice ass too lol


----------



## daleks_exterminate (Jul 22, 2013)

Intellegence/honesty/humour


----------



## etherealuntouaswithin (Dec 7, 2010)

Genuine sense of what compels their life..even if honestly confused.

Emotional honesty and directness

Strength of will and independence 

Someone....that you can simply look to..and tell that the capacity to love is so great..that you'll be consumed by it..to my benefit of self disclosure and passionate will to honesty. Nowhere to hide and love is the promise of completion for both people...its in the eyes.


----------



## Miniblini (Jun 4, 2014)

BlueChristmas06 said:


> Ass. .





BenevolentBitterBleeding said:


> They're awesome to ride, a sign of healthy wealth, maturing responsibility and make for a great gift come wedding day.
> 
> Bondage NSFW:
> * *


Swiggity Swooty


----------



## kaleidoscope (Jan 19, 2012)

Sense of humor tells me so much about a person. It is definitely a sign of intelligence, especially if subtle, witty and sarcastic. It can be a sign of how socially attuned they are to others, because to be truly funny, you have to be good at reading your audience, knowing when/how to joke. And most importantly, sense of humor is a great way of establishing a connection with someone, and strengthening it through laughter and funny banter. It can create so much intimacy.


----------



## isamanthax (Mar 22, 2016)

mentally compatible 
likes physical contact
honestly &
humor 

are my most important


----------



## Gossip Goat (Nov 19, 2013)

Physically? Long hair. 

Also, intelligence (IQ & _*EQ*_), maturity, ambition & sense of humor


----------



## badwolf (Jun 17, 2012)

I chose intelligence, but that encompasses a lot more than IQ in my eyes. To me, the most important aspects of intelligence are competency, critical thinking, adaptability, etc. What I'm saying is I like extended response questions, not just multiple choice.


----------



## Magic447 (Jun 7, 2012)

Boobs....


And ass


----------



## Aenye (Jul 13, 2013)

Everything matters but looks are the starting point.


----------



## Static Void (May 28, 2016)

I'm most attracted to quirky women with bubbly, friendly personalities so I picked 'other'. Women like this make me feel happy and want to be spend time with them. I feel like I'm the best version of myself when around someone like this.


----------



## Clyme (Jul 17, 2014)

I selected "other." For me, it's a mutual sense of empathy that derives from shared experiences and proceeds toward a close companionate relationship. While the other factors tend to be important, what matters most to me is a shared, meaningful experience that fosters a kind of empathetic connection and reciprocity.


----------



## MonieJ (Nov 22, 2010)

The first thing that I'm attracted to is looks, if however you turn out to be dumber than a bag of hammers or have a shit personality that attraction died faster than a snowballs chance in hell. 
Second thing is obviously personality,have a great personality(imo) and I'm almost putty in your hands.


----------



## series0 (Feb 18, 2013)

Other - to me the most attractive thing about them is that they seem genuinely attracted to me. I say that because:

a) Attraction to me is sadly rare enough (I think).
b) Genuine attraction is even more rare.
c) All other factors are more subject to change.

Only far after that fact come other traits in roughly this order:

1) Wisdom
2) Intelligence
3) Confidence
4) Looks

That being said I am not in general attracted to people who are not at least above average in all 4 and also attracted to me.


----------



## ientipi (Oct 17, 2013)

For me it would have to be Confidence first and Intelligence second to back up said confidence. If someone is confident but I realize they aren't intelligent, they become completely unattractive in my eyes


----------



## Riven (Jan 17, 2015)

Looks, but this is what I see first from someone; if I can talk to them, then their personality and interests matter to me as well.


----------



## Gossip Goat (Nov 19, 2013)

Must believe in a higher power: 


Me.


----------



## Eren Jaegerbomb (Nov 13, 2015)

If its a stranger then obviously looks. But if said stranger isn't intelligent AND I don't like their personality then no.
If its someone I already know Intelligence/other (Personality!!)
Also this isn't really an "attractive' thing but more like a flag: if they have the same beliefs as me, ie if they're atheis, christian or agnostic. I mean, it wouldn't really work if you don't believe in the same thing especially if they're dead set on their beliefs.


----------



## TTIOTBSAL (May 26, 2014)

Brainbox and wits, kindness and integrity.. So I voted other because it's all or nothing.


----------



## IdealTruths (Jun 30, 2016)

Other: Spending a lot of time around them, some sort of superiority over me.


----------



## srpurdy (Jun 22, 2016)

Sense of humor, and than intelligence. To me a good sense of humor requires intelligence. So they go hand and hand. It's also attractive when a woman can take care of herself. is actually independent, doesn't say it. Does it.


----------



## INFPsyche (Nov 13, 2014)

Probably sense of humor and kindness..


----------

