Tinder weight filter

Sean Jolly Salsa

Sean Jolly Salsa wrote: »

that really bugs me, I reset it now and again when its all quiet or bored and its the same one, w as I went on a date with her about a year ago and she was on the aggressive side, deleted her on it and I kinda flick yes to everyone and she keeps adding me

Stop flicking yes to everyone then, problem solved? Surely you know it's her profile when you see it.

Bigbagofcans

professore wrote: »

Average height for a man most definitely IS NOT 5'10". In Holland it might be.

https://www.thejournal.ie/height-irish-2899850-Jul2016/

It definitely is :P

SusieBlue

completedit wrote: »

What are you on about? Men are absolutely crucified for everything, remember a man is only as good as his worst flaw. Men get absolutely abused for everything, hair, hairline, height, dick size, fat just isn't that high on the list for men.

Women are not obliged to find you attractive just because you are interested in them. They owe you nothing. Them not reciprocating interest doesn't make them horrible people.
By that logic you should be dating women you don't find attractive and aren't interested in, just because they happen to like you.
See how ridiculous that sounds?

completedit

Based off my friends this situation is mirrored here as well. Most of us never get with anyone, then a few of the lads just either have gf's or go through girls weekly.

It's absolutely outrageous out there tbh. Young guys today don't exist in the time most of you were dating. There is guys on here trying to push the personality bull**** or 'girls don't care about looks like men' bull****. We will only see the impact of this in a decade or two.

Think about it, most people have no hope of meeting people out and about anymore, online is their only option but online is insanely superficial so guys literally haven't a prayer. I tallied up my match rate, 30 per cent success rate which actually is REMARKABLE. I'd say there are plenty of guys with less than 5 per cent success.

What happened in Japan is going to happen here.

ohnonotgmail

and what is the point of that? And where did you take that conclusion from? I cant find it in the source text.

completedit

The problem is 20 years ago, the market was less restrictive, average guys had a chance.

Feisar

completedit wrote: »

Based off my friends this situation is mirrored here as well. Most of us never get with anyone, then a few of the lads just either have gf's or go through girls weekly.

It's absolutely outrageous out there tbh. Young guys today don't exist in the time most of you were dating. There is guys on here trying to push the personality bull**** or 'girls don't care about looks like men' bull****. We will only see the impact of this in a decade or two.

Think about it, most people have no hope of meeting people out and about anymore, online is there only option but online is insanely superficial so guys literally haven't a prayer. I tallied up my match rate, 30 per cent success rate which actually is REMARKABLE. I'd say there are plenty of guys with less than 5 per cent success.

What happened in Japan is going to happen here.

News flash good looking people get laid!

Tell me how

completedit wrote: »

Based off my friends this situation is mirrored here as well. Most of us never get with anyone, then a few of the lads just either have gf's or go through girls weekly.

The most successful 'womaniser' I ever knew personally was nothing special to look at (it was discussed at one point by a group of friends including females and males with him in it also). His position was that he just told them what they wanted to hear and crucially that it was different for different women. Some more could argue with that but the point being that he was exceptionally prolific and did not rely on his looks. At all.

Do you have platonic female friends or siblings who you could discuss this with? It is entirely misleading using female decision making as an excuse why you and your friends are unsuccessful.

Or someone else speak with someone professional.

completedit

I need some stats about this guy. Yeah maybe he didnt have the most attractive face but maybe he was a rugby player type, big brawny beefcake with a larger than life personality. Girls lap that **** up.

ohnonotgmail

completedit wrote: »

I need some stats about this guy. Yeah maybe he didnt have the most attractive face but maybe he was a rugby player type, big brawny beefcake with a larger than life personality. Girls lap that **** up.

He said why he was successful. He told girls what they wanted to hear. Unsurprisingly that can be very successful. The trick is knowing what each woman wants to hear. Which involves understanding them.

completedit

Okay so this guy had a once in a blue moon social intuition, charisma, charm....Next.

Tell me how

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

He said why he was successful. He told girls what they wanted to hear. Unsurprisingly that can be very successful. The trick is knowing what each woman wants to hear. Which involves understanding them.

One example which displays what I mean. It was a good few years ago but I think the Mo still stands.

There was a girl in college who was incredibly attractive. The sort that when she walked in to the canteen, all heads turned towards to have a look as she walked past. (Sounds dramatic but in a room full of 20 year old hormone driven individuals, you get the point).

We were out one night and saw her in the nightclub. One of the guys pointed her out to this guy and challenged him to chat her up specifically because this guy already had a reputation and the girl was well recognized as being very attractive. Over he went, quick introduction and after a few minutes, he had her at the bar and was having a drink with her. After 20 minutes , he came back with her number.

He was asked what had he said to her and his story was that he asked her what course she was doing in college as he had seen her there and then he just spoke about that topic for 20 minutes but made it about what she wanted to say about it. At the end, he asked if she'd like to go for a drink sometime. He got her number.

ohnonotgmail

Tell me how wrote: »

One example which displays what I mean. It was a good few years ago but I think the Mo still stands.

There was a girl in college who was incredibly attractive. The sort that when she walked in to the canteen, all heads turned towards to have a look as she walked past. (Sounds dramatic but in a room full of 20 year old hormone driven individuals, you get the point).

We were out one night and saw her in the nightclub. One of the guys pointed her out to this guy and challenged him to chat her up specifically because this guy already had a reputation and the girl was well recognized as being very attractive. Over he went, quick introduction and after a few minutes, he had her at the bar and was having a drink with her. After 20 minutes , he came back with her number.

He was asked what had he said to her and his story was that he asked her what course she was doing in college as he had seen her there and then he just spoke about that topic for 20 minutes but made it about what she wanted to say about it. At the end, he asked if she'd like to go for a drink sometime. He got her number.

It is amazing how far you can get by listening to people.

professore

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

He said why he was successful. He told girls what they wanted to hear. Unsurprisingly that can be very successful. The trick is knowing what each woman wants to hear. Which involves understanding them.

Speaking as a long married man this is utter bull****. Women go for looks primarily. Personality is a distant second. As it is for men.
If it wasn't there wouldn't be so many utter douchebag low IQ low vocabulary losers being successful with them.

Pretty much all the really decent fun guys I've known have had terrible success with women.

The diference is that women don't want to admit it for some reason.

SusieBlue

completedit wrote: »

I need some stats about this guy. Yeah maybe he didnt have the most attractive face but maybe he was a rugby player type, big brawny beefcake with a larger than life personality. Girls lap that **** up.

Your "stats" are irrelevant.
Have you ever seen the show on Channel 4 "Married at First Sight"?
Basically a team of esteemed experts in various fields get together and match up couples based on a whole range of criteria, from religious beliefs, to intelligence, to personality traits, to morals, to ambitiousness & of course, attractiveness, just to name a few.

On paper, all of these couple are absolutely perfect for each other. They tick each others boxes in terms of physical attributes, humour, family values, you name it.

Yet two seasons in and 10 couples and not one relationship has lasted. You know why? Because you can't fake chemistry, that instant connection, that initial buzz from meeting someone who is perfect for you.
The stats in these cases line up perfectly, yet the relationships fail.

You need to stop looking at this so clinically, you are obsessing over your outer self when you should be working on making your inner self more attractive to women.

professore

SusieBlue wrote: »

Your "stats" are irrelevant.
Have you ever seen the show on Channel 4 "Married at First Sight"?
Basically a team of esteemed experts in various fields get together and match up couples based on a whole range of criteria, from religious beliefs, to intelligence, to personality traits, to morals, to ambitiousness & of course, attractiveness, just to name a few.

On paper, all of these couple are absolutely perfect for each other. They tick each others boxes in terms of physical attributes, humour, family values, you name it.

Yet two seasons in and 10 couples and not one relationship has lasted. You know why? Because you can't fake chemistry, that instant connection, that initial buzz from meeting someone who is perfect for you.
The stats in these cases line up perfectly, yet the relationships fail.

You need to stop looking at this so clinically, you are obsessing over your outer self when you should be working on making your inner self more attractive to women.

One guy in the 10 couples is chased by all the women?

Tell me how

completedit wrote: »

Okay so this guy had a once in a blue moon social intuition, charisma, charm....Next.

What is your view on this question?

Do you have platonic female friends or siblings who you could discuss this with?
If you have done so already, what have they told you?

SusieBlue

professore wrote: »

One guy in the 10 couples is chased by all the women?

No???
10 couples are matched by professionals, 5 men and 5 women.
On paper, these couples are technically perfect for each other. Similar goals, morals, political stances, they find each other attractive, complimentary personalities, similar intelligence and ambitiousness, humour etc.

They should statistically be matches made in heaven, yet not one couple has lasted the distance. My point being that statistics mean feck all, either the chemistry and connection is there (regardless of looks) or it isn't.

completedit

Tell me how wrote: »

One example which displays what I mean. It was a good few years ago but I think the Mo still stands.

There was a girl in college who was incredibly attractive. The sort that when she walked in to the canteen, all heads turned towards to have a look as she walked past. (Sounds dramatic but in a room full of 20 year old hormone driven individuals, you get the point).

We were out one night and saw her in the nightclub. One of the guys pointed her out to this guy and challenged him to chat her up specifically because this guy already had a reputation and the girl was well recognized as being very attractive. Over he went, quick introduction and after a few minutes, he had her at the bar and was having a drink with her. After 20 minutes , he came back with her number.

He was asked what had he said to her and his story was that he asked her what course she was doing in college as he had seen her there and then he just spoke about that topic for 20 minutes but made it about what she wanted to say about it. At the end, he asked if she'd like to go for a drink sometime. He got her number.

ABSOLUTE BOLLOX. Man, if I did that in a club the girl would barely recognise my presence and if she did if I start talking about college in a club/bar, she would walk away within 30 seconds. This guy sounds like ****ing Russel Brand by the sounds of it.

Tell me how

completedit wrote: »

ABSOLUTE BOLLOX. Man, if I did that in a club the girl would barely recognise my presence and if she did if I start talking about college in a club/bar, she would walk away within 30 seconds. This guy sounds like ****ing Russel Brand by the sounds of it.

Don't know why you started the thread my friend.

Good luck with singledom. I'm out.

SusieBlue

completedit wrote: »

ABSOLUTE BOLLOX. Man, if I did that in a club the girl would barely recognise my presence and if she did if I start talking about college in a club/bar, she would walk away within 30 seconds. This guy sounds like ****ing Russel Brand by the sounds of it.

Self fulfilling prophecy. Negative thoughts and attitudes usually lead to negative outcomes.

completedit

Tell me how wrote: »

Don't know why you started the thread my friend.

Good luck with singledom. I'm out.

I just think there's something you're not revealing.

TBH, I'm nearly 30, I won't be bothering dating once I hit 30, I wanted a carefree young romance and I never got it.

professore

completedit wrote: »

I just think there's something you're not revealing.

TBH, I'm nearly 30, I won't be bothering dating once I hit 30, I wanted a carefree young romance and I never got it.

Don't give up now !!!! All the baby rabies crowd will be after you, for your good steady job and companionship after they've had their fill of guys as described in the last few posts. Sure women aren't interested in sex anyway.

professore

SusieBlue wrote: »

No???
10 couples are matched by professionals, 5 men and 5 women.
On paper, these couples are technically perfect for each other. Similar goals, morals, political stances, they find each other attractive, complimentary personalities, similar intelligence and ambitiousness, humour etc.

They should statistically be matches made in heaven, yet not one couple has lasted the distance. My point being that statistics mean feck all, either the chemistry and connection is there (regardless of looks) or it isn't.

You're not getting it. The women all secretly fancied the 1 guy, so of course their relationships wouldn't work out.

professore

SusieBlue wrote: »

No???
10 couples are matched by professionals, 5 men and 5 women.
On paper, these couples are technically perfect for each other. Similar goals, morals, political stances, they find each other attractive, complimentary personalities, similar intelligence and ambitiousness, humour etc.

They should statistically be matches made in heaven, yet not one couple has lasted the distance. My point being that statistics mean feck all, either the chemistry and connection is there (regardless of looks) or it isn't.

Statistics like that scary Finnish graph mean an awful lot !!!!

SusieBlue

professore wrote: »

You're not getting it. The women all secretly fancied the 1 guy, so of course their relationships wouldn't work out.

You're the one not getting it, none of the couples even met each other.
The couples were filmed individually (as in, each couple was filmed together separate from the rest) in different parts of the UK. You aren't understanding the concept of the show.
None of the couples met each other, so there was no "all fancying one guy".

A man and a woman were set up based on the criteria previously mentioned, and they were filmed while the various relationships played out. None of the relationships lasted the distance.

You're getting it confused with The Bachelor or one of those types of shows. Completely different.
If you still don't understand the concept of what I'm talking about, please google it.

professore

completedit wrote: »

I just think there's something you're not revealing.

TBH, I'm nearly 30, I won't be bothering dating once I hit 30, I wanted a carefree young romance and I never got it.

You were looking for romance. That's where you went wrong. You should have been looking for sex. There's no such thing as romance.

completedit

professore wrote: »

You were looking for romance. That's where you went wrong. You should have been looking for sex. There's no such thing as romance.

Legit man, I got too caught up in the romance that exists in music. I honestly never thought I'd go through my 20's without a girl. My teens made sense, I was awkward, shy and reserved but I really felt I blossomed in looks over last few years. Obviously I didn't in reality but yeah.

It's sad out there for a lot of guys, but I can't really hate on girls either.

How Soon Is Now

I've downloaded tinder once or twice went threw it see what everyone does be on bout!

I'm not single but ya I wasn't "looking" the app was only on my phone for hour or two.

Anyway never came across any fat women!!

All these tarted up airhead Instagram types so ya thank **** I'm not single! Gimme the fat girls anyday!!

professore

SusieBlue wrote: »

You're the one not getting it, none of the couples even met each other.
The couples were filmed individually (as in, each couple was filmed together separate from the rest) in different parts of the UK. You aren't understanding the concept of the show.
None of the couples met each other, so there was no "all fancying one guy".

A man and a woman were set up based on the criteria previously mentioned, and they were filmed while the various relationships played out. None of the relationships lasted the distance.

You're getting it confused with The Bachelor or one of those types of shows. Completely different.
If you still don't understand the concept of what I'm talking about, please google it.

I do get it. I was being tongue in cheek about them all fancying one guy. Let me ask you this : which one of them, the man or the woman, decided it wasn't "working out" first?

if it's anything like First Dates it's at least 80% of the time the woman doesn't fancy the guy and the guy says sheepishly "yeah I like you as a friend too" when it's painfully obvious it isn't the case. Of the 20% that actually succeed, in a lot of cases the guy acts like an absolute dick, says virtually nothing, makes painfully boring conversation, or any combination of the previous three, yet somehow has a "magical personality". It's rare that I see a couple on there at least that actually match well and get on well together other than a physical attraction.

Mrnew

professore wrote: »

Speaking as a long married man this is utter bull****. Women go for looks primarily. Personality is a distant second. As it is for men.
If it wasn't there wouldn't be so many utter douchebag low IQ low vocabulary losers being successful with them.

Pretty much all the really decent fun guys I've known have had terrible success with women.

The diference is that women don't want to admit it for some reason.

This is the absolute truth women are just like men and looks is top of the agenda, im afraid if your not physically attracted to a person the likely hood of you trying to get her number, chat her up ect ect is very slim

ginandtonicsky

Jesus professore and completedit, ye're absolutely exhausting to listen to. Absolute drains the pair of ya. I'd say some self-reflection wouldn't go amiss if the absolutely fickle horrid women you seem to be surrounded by aren't giving you a look in.


And yes professore I know you've already got a wife. Which makes the tedious incessant bile about women only fancying arseholes and giving ordinary decent men the swerve all the weirder.

SusieBlue

professore wrote: »

I do get it. I was being tongue in cheek about them all fancying one guy. Let me ask you this : which one of them, the man or the woman, decided it wasn't "working out" first?

if it's anything like First Dates it's at least 80% of the time the woman doesn't fancy the guy and the guy says sheepishly "yeah I like you as a friend too" when it's painfully obvious it isn't the case. Of the 20% that actually succeed, in a lot of cases the guy acts like an absolute dick, says virtually nothing, or makes painfully boring conversation yet somehow has a "magical personality". It's rare that I see a couple on there at least that actually match well and get on well together other than a physical attraction.

Well it was a silly comment and made no sense seeing as the couples never even get to meet one another, I have no idea how it could be perceived as tongue in cheek.

In the most recent series, in 3 of the couples it was the mans decision to call it quits.
In one couple it was mutually agreed they weren't suited
And one couple where the woman called it off.

So out of 5 couples, three were finished by the man not feeling it and wanting out.

SusieBlue

completedit wrote: »

Legit man, I got too caught up in the romance that exists in music. I honestly never thought I'd go through my 20's without a girl. My teens made sense, I was awkward, shy and reserved but I really felt I blossomed in looks over last few years. Obviously I didn't in reality but yeah.

It's sad out there for a lot of guys, but I can't really hate on girls either.

I'm trying to word this as tactfully as possible, but if you are having no luck at all over a sustained period of time with a wide range of women, maybe the women aren't the problem.
Maybe you need to look inwardly and address how you carry yourself and come across to others. And I don't mean in a physical sense.

Bigbagofcans

Oh man. What's wrong with going for looks? You can't choose who you're attracted to so why should we go for someone we don't like the look of? To get approval from others who deem us 'not shallow'?

Gimme A Pound

ginandtonicsky wrote: »

Jesus professore and completedit, ye're absolutely exhausting to listen to. Absolute drains the pair of ya. I'd say some self-reflection wouldn't go amiss if the absolutely fickle horrid women you seem to be surrounded by aren't giving you a look in.


And yes professore I know you've already got a wife. Which makes the tedious incessant bile about women only fancying arseholes and giving ordinary decent men the swerve all the weirder.

That can be the case all right - men who have such an issue with women strangely having a wife/partner despite how awful we are. And daughters! (And indeed, women who bitch about men can have husbands/partners and sons).

The lack of self awareness is good craic

But I cannot for the life of me figure out why completedit is perpetually celibate - i mean he seems like such a sound, well adjusted, level headed guy.

professore

ginandtonicsky wrote: »

Jesus professore and completedit, ye're absolutely exhausting to listen to. Absolute drains the pair of ya. I'd say some self-reflection wouldn't go amiss if the absolutely fickle horrid women you seem to be surrounded by aren't giving you a look in.


And yes professore I know you've already got a wife. Which makes the tedious incessant bile about women only fancying arseholes and giving ordinary decent men the swerve all the weirder.

I actually did OK with women back in the day and they still like me - however it wasn't anything to do with my wonderful personality. In fact the less interest I had in them the more interest they had in me.

And I don't think women are bitches at all ... they are just more like the stereotypical image of what men are supposed to be like, when in fact there are more men with romantic ideas of relationships than women IMO. If you think of women like that you will have a lot more success than the "romantic" or "i'll woo them with my personality" approach.

Of course there are exceptions blah blah blah

Gimme A Pound

Who are all these women who say looks don't matter a jot?

I've never heard any woman say that. What I have heard them say is that a guy doesn't have to be absolutely drop dead gorgeous for her to fancy him. That's not the same as saying looks don't matter at all whatsoever.

professore

Bigbagofcans wrote: »

Oh man. What's wrong with going for looks? You can't choose who you're attracted to so why should we go for someone we don't like the look of? To get approval from others who deem us 'not shallow'?

Who said there was anything wrong with it? It's human nature. People are getting the wrong end of the stick. This isn't somehow about hating women. It's about women's actual dating preferences, and the totally wrong way it's presented in the media and society in general.

professore

Adam Massive Druggist wrote: »

Who are all these women who say looks don't matter a jot?

I've never heard any woman say that. What I have heard them say is that a guy doesn't have to be absolutely drop dead gorgeous for her to fancy him. That's not the same as saying looks don't matter at all whatsoever.

Women forever say that personality is very important, "just be yourself" etc and never mention looks as a factor. Men on the other hand say it constantly. If they actually said "look, you are pretty ugly, go for those girls, or be forever celibate" it would be better advice.

Never once have I heard a woman saying "I go for guys primarily on looks". Yet that's what most women do.

Bigbagofcans

professore wrote: »

Women forever say that personality is very important, "just be yourself" etc and never mention looks as a factor. Men on the other hand say it constantly. If they actually said "look, you are pretty ugly, go for those girls, or be forever celibate" it would be better advice.

Never once have I heard a woman saying "I go for guys primarily on looks". Yet that's what most women do.

Yes we do say personality is important but also looks are too. You don't have to just go for one or the other. There are plenty of good looking people with great personalities.

Gimme A Pound

professore wrote: »

Women forever say that personality is very important, "just be yourself" etc and never mention looks as a factor.

NEVER mention looks as a factor? Well that's not true. As said, personality and being yourself IS important, but that doesn't automatically mean zero concern for looks.

Never once have I heard a woman saying "I go for guys primarily on looks". Yet that's what most women do.

Well of course on Tinder.

Dalomanakora

Of course we go primarily for looks - at least in the beginning. Then when we get to know the guy, his personality makes him MORE attractive.


If you don't feckin know someone, of course you're going primarily for looks.


Looks make you want to shag.
The person makes you fall in love.

professore

Bigbagofcans wrote: »

Yes we do say personality is important but also looks are too. You don't have to just go for one or the other. There are plenty of good looking people with great personalities.

Exactly - or they can fake great personalities. Or it's the halo effect, where people assume someone who is good looking is good at everything too. They are the ones getting laid all the time.

This guy : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_G._Harding was elected US President because he looked the part, but was a notorious womaniser, pretty dumb, and an alcoholic.

Bigbagofcans

professore wrote: »

Exactly - or they can fake great personalities. Or it's the halo effect, where people assume someone who is good looking is good at everything too. They are the ones getting laid all the time.

This guy : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_G._Harding was elected US President because he looked the part, but was a notorious womaniser, pretty dumb, and an alcoholic.

Well they do say that good looking people generally fare better in life. It doesn't surprise that some people fake great personalities!

Tell me how

professore wrote: »

Exactly - or they can fake great personalities. Or it's the halo effect, where people assume someone who is good looking is good at everything too. They are the ones getting laid all the time.

This guy : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_G._Harding was elected US President because he looked the part, but was a notorious womaniser, pretty dumb, and an alcoholic.

He married his Oxford University sweetheart Allegra Mostyn-Owen in 1987
This ended when he had an affair with Marina Wheeler, who he married in 1993
In 2004 his four-year affair with journalist and author Petronella Wyatt emerged
In 2006 he then allegedly had an affair with another reporter, Anna Fazackerley
In 2009 hefathered a child with art consultant Helen Macintyre
Marina Wheeler said to have thrown him out as claims of a new affair emerged


Who was this dashing looking Lothario?

Bigbagofcans

Tell me how wrote: »

He married his Oxford University sweetheart Allegra Mostyn-Owen in 1987
This ended when he had an affair with Marina Wheeler, who he married in 1993
In 2004 his four-year affair with journalist and author Petronella Wyatt emerged
In 2006 he then allegedly had an affair with another reporter, Anna Fazackerley
In 2009 hefathered a child with art consultant Helen Macintyre
Marina Wheeler said to have thrown him out as claims of a new affair emerged


Who was this dashing looking Lothario?

A blond bombshell some might say!

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

ginandtonicsky wrote: »

Jesus professore and completedit, ye're absolutely exhausting to listen to. Absolute drains the pair of ya. I'd say some self-reflection wouldn't go amiss if the absolutely fickle horrid women you seem to be surrounded by aren't giving you a look in.


And yes professore I know you've already got a wife. Which makes the tedious incessant bile about women only fancying arseholes and giving ordinary decent men the swerve all the weirder.

Yeah, if professore hadn’t said he was married (and for quite for a while too! :eek:), I’d never have guessed he was. You really don’t come across as somebody who is married, professore, to be brutally honest. You’re very invested in the politics of the dating world. I’m with my fella for seven years and married for two of those and I feel completely out of the loop when it comes to dating.

If you notice my post, professore, could you answer a question I asked you in the Irish v foreign women thread? You said groups of women on nights out all always fancy the same guy. Did you really believe that generalisation? How did you come to that conclusion?

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

completedit wrote: »

I just think there's something you're not revealing.

TBH, I'm nearly 30, I won't be bothering dating once I hit 30, I wanted a carefree young romance and I never got it.

With all due respect that’s nobody else’s problem but yours. There are no online charities providing girlfriends to people who think they’re entitled to have whatever girlfriend they want. Why not just buy a mail order bride and be done with it.

TerrorFirmer

Any amount of men or women will tell you that attraction is a multi-faceted thing.

No-one's saying that women will flock to Shrek's doppleganger in a nightclub, but in the general scheme of things, most people go for something that just works for them, and that can be split any which way between looks and personality. That could be anything from a 90/10 to a 10/90 split, but usually for the majority of people it just falls in the middle or leans more towards personality.

Obviously there's usually an initial attraction based on appearance but that in itself is completely subjective too....and it's not unusual either to be indifferent to someone initially and find yourself falling for them as you really get to know them on a personal level and all the quirks of their personalities.

We could all probably admit to fancying people in the workplace/social circle that if we passed by in a nightclub we know we wouldn't give a second glance to based purely on their appearance in isolation. Nothing wrong with that whatsoever, but a perfect example of how personality accounts for a lot more we sometimes admit or even realise.

I would say myself, and the majority of my friends, are incredibly average looking people - not in a negative sense, but we wouldn't be gracing the covers of any magazines for sure - but none of us have ever had any issue with attracting women whatsoever, and most people would say the same.