Discussion Why do people deny the importance of physical appearance?

[Unbearable Mr. Bear]

It makes me realize how superficial I was. Karma is getting me back in every single way I've ever signed. It continues to punish me because of how superficial I still am, it puts my pain at the forefront

Hey don't worry, we all make mistakes, and sometimes we can all be superficial in one way or another. Don't beat yourself over it, friend, it is human to do mistakes as it is human to forgive. And I, for one, forgive you.

 

[FoxSauce]

Well i guess this is my opinion beauty can be very subjective. Maybe I like for example blond and blue eyes and muscles. But some people don't and theres nothing wrong with that.

Can people be shallow and treat people differently? Yes. Sadly it does. It hurts really bad.


It stings for a long time. I think everyone deserves love. Ofc people can think I'm naive or just plain ignorant but thats how I think. Theres nothing wrong for wanting a romantic or platonic connection, everyone deserves someone.

I care bout looks but I don't put people in a super mega high standard cuz is impossible and your just gonna end up disappointed.

 

[Wolf Girl]

Physical appearance is really important and pretty privilege is definitely real. I am a little bit pretty, but I am fat and have somewhat masculine features, so that cancels out pretty privilege. I have realized in the last couple years that some things I have dreamed of are not realistic for me due to unchangeable physical characteristics. It hurts.

 

[OvercastingClouds]

Yeah this definitely get that. I was targeted for my appearance and now I'm deeply insecure about the way I look.
Had an argument with people online because I commented on how it's always attractive people saying there is no point in being insecure and self-confidence is key. It frustrated me badly because I'm trying to explain that even with self-confidence, it won't change the way I look, I'll always be perceived as ugly and it annoyed me when people who aren't say such things because I think they wouldn't understand what it's like to be left out and bullied because of the way you look.

However, I keep an open mind. As much as I get annoyed by the saying, looks really aren't everything, however they definitely matter to an extent. The first thing people see about you is your physical appearance and you will get judged for it as a first impression, but personality is what leads people to stay (unless you're superficial..which a lot of people are it seems). Attractive people with nasty personalities generally lack having genuine connections and relationships, usually when they have supposed large friendships it's really fake and hate each other behind their masks.

Of course I can't deny the fact that "pretty privilege" exists. Yes, people who are attractive generally have more of an advantage than those considered unattractive. They get treated better, they get more potential opportunities, they are approached more, etc. It's frustrating and can lead to envy, I understand that feeling a lot, but there's no point in feeling envious. I've also seen the perspective of those who are attractive naturally but desired to be less attractive because they can't tell if they're friends like them for them or only with them for their looks, plus having to deal with unwarranted jealousy and targeted for it. So I kinda just generally concluded that society is superficial as hell.

When it comes to physical appearance in romantic relationships that's a whole different ordeal, where looks are valued more per se. I'm not gonna judge people for not finding someone attractive, that's okay. Everyone has their preferences, and I'd expect someone to want to be physically attracted to their partner in some way at least. However, personality really does grow more attraction. Another thing I also realize that beauty standards really are super subjective when coming across social media. I would see videos of people I'd consider attractive but the comments would say otherwise, and vice versa. Also looking at beatury standards across race, cultures, and history and seeing how different it is, really made me realize that beauty shouldn't be taken so seriously, it's funny thinking about it. Now I don't see a problem of being deemed unattractive because standards really do vary and change a lot. Yeah I get there is being considered "universally less attractive" but it's whatever.

The bad part is people treating other differently for their appearance, judging them and criticizing them (especially for things they can't change, plus shouldn't be shamed to if there really isn't any need to). I will always dislike bullies and superficial people.

 

[usernamesarehard]

I think it's because people want to believe the world is a fair place. People want to believe that hard work actually pays off. That's mostly untrue. Most successful people were children of successful/rich people (elon musk is one example of this) or had opportunities others simply didn't have (bill gates had access to computers through his mother at a time when computers were only owned by wealthy people). A lot of people focus on the opra winfreys and LeBron Jamess who over came adversity, completely ignoring that their success is more of a luck thing, rather than a the system is actually fair thing.

However, the truth is looks may bring people in (sometimes) but personality makes them stay. I know people hate hearing they're "to young to understand" but the truth is life experiences come through time usually.

Yeah, I do think this is true.

I also want to say what is attractive and what is not even from just looks alone is totally subjective. My sister and I have completely different tastes. I have never found any of her boyfriends attractive.

This is also true. I always thought I was terminally ugly, but I did manage to get a boyfriend. He broke up with me, but I guess that's for the best in the end. I want to be with someone who's going to be with me during the good and the bad, not someone who's going to leave just because their feelings changed.

Idk you or what you want out of life (a partner it sounds like?) but this line of talk is concerning. And it seems like youre already sure that looks are the only things that matter and that anyone disagreeing is not only lying to you but to themselves. I understand your pain, and there's some truth to this but honestly this kinda sounds a bit like something right out of a looksmaxxing forum where everyone is giving eachother body dysmorphia and encouraging people to become angry redpilled incels. This mindset isn't any more real than the cherrypicked examples you gave, one is overly positive and the other is overly negative. Plenty of people here will validate you for thinking this but that's bc were in an echochamber of unhappy people, not because the average person thinks like this. Most people are average and women's (and men's) standards aren't as high as you think. You can focus on uncanny valley models who apparently have perfect jaw dimensions, and the 80/20 rule all you want but it doesn't line up to reality. I've seen a lot of fat/short/ugly guys date attarctive women and you know how they do it? They make them happy not through mewing but bc they have good personalities. Looks can get your foot in the door but it really is a personality that makes people stay. And yeah depending on the job looks sometimes wil help or hurt you but so does other arbitrary bullshit like race, age, and gender.

Yeah, I've been down the incel rabbit hole despite being a woman. It really isn't a place you want to go.

I hope everything you guys are saying is true. I don't want to give up on love, but FUCK it's hard out here.

 

[theboy]

They do not deny it
They omit it

 

[hippiedeath]

I've heard it said, "rich people often say money is not important, and beautiful people often say looks don't matter." I try to treat everyone the same, until someone burns me. Then I walk away and don't turn back. You can definitely be ugly inside, no matter the surface. Inner beauty is much more important in truth. People don't like the truth..

 

[LittleMagician]

If you ever try to tell someone that your low self-worth is based on your physical appearance, you will almost certainly get responses along the lines of:

• It's inner beauty that matters, not outer beauty!
• That's just your perception/cognitive distortion, you're beautiful!
• I know x person who isn't conventionally attractive and they have a loving partner and family, or, my x isn't conventionally attractive and I love them anyway!
• Self-worth doesn't come from others' perception of you, but from your own appraisal of your positive attributes (ie. self-love)
• It's confidence and the way you present yourself to the world that makes you attractive, not your appearance

All of this just sounds like cope to me.

Of course, there are some grains of truth in there, like the fact that there genuinely are ugly people who have happy, fulfilled lives surrounded by people who love them. But that doesn't negate in any way the fact that physical appearance matters; it just means that in their case, some combination of lucky circumstances (ex. being born with extreme traits such as high-intelligence, being in the right place at the right time, etc.) made up for their lack of beauty. It might also be true that confidence makes you appear more attractive, but this is relative: if you're starting from a low point, gaining a few points still won't get you to where someone naturally beautiful with low-confidence would be.

And it's absurd to think that a human being, part of a species that is so deeply social to the point where 99.99% of them cannot survive with nothing but their own devices, shouldn't take into consideration the opinion of their peers. There's a limit to that, of course, but for almost the entirety of our history, our peers valuing us highly was literally the difference between life and death -- and, especially for women, beauty is the main (though not the only) value-giver.

Even if the consequences are not so extreme in the modern-day, being ugly will still deeply affect your life, impacting the jobs you do or don't get, the people who do or do not attach themselves to you, the doors that are or aren't open to you, even the way you view the world, because pretty people are generally treated better -- people will automatically assume that a pretty person has other good qualities, whereas an ugly person has to work doubly hard to prove it. Many, especially in the dating world, aren't willing to wait long enough to see the proof. Beauty gets your foot in the door, and allows you to leverage your other qualities.

Bit of a ramble. But anyway, what I'm wondering from you guys is why people have such a hard time accepting this? Is it because I'm genuinely wrong on this count? is it because the reality would be too painful for them? Is it because they don't want to accept that they, too, value people based on their appearance, even if subconsciously?

@Forever Sleep

Most people are average by nature. A lot of people have a self inflated image of what they are because of positive reinforcement and social media. As long as you're not a complete eyesore you are okay generally (as a woman) not sure about men. They have it quite harder.

 

[Bxtra]

I've been on both sides. Before I started my meds I was considered quite pretty. Four years later and I've since doubled my body weight, shaved my head and eyebrows. I get treated differently now. People ignore me. They shoot me funny looks if I smile their way. Strangely, I find it comforting. I feel safer in my body now than I ever did when I was considered pretty. I'm no longer considered something to take or conquer. I'm considered something to be avoided.

Once I'm done healing from my trauma, I'll go on the perilous journey to lose the weight and grow my hair back but right now, being avoided is the best I can do for myself.

 

[WhatCouldHaveBeen32]

I do think most people judge people based on looks, I personally don't, I also don't care about looks that much, for me it doesn't matter, it doesn't matter if you are considered "smoking hot" or an "abomination" , I'll treat you the same, I always did.


Problem is, it's not something uncommon, it's not like people who wouldn't talk to you or befriend you or date you because let's say you are into gothic stuff, that's a minority of people, it barely affects you, you can quite easily ignore them, you can't ignore 90% of the population and their premeditated thoughts which they base on looks.


Side note but this is why the patriarchy also needs to go, the patriarchy also enforces even more beauty standards and bullshit; it's death by a thousand unavoidable cuts because it's baked into our culture.
This is why it's dangerous, this is why believing anything without any sort of critical thinking involved and parents teaching bad social conditioning and trashy behaviors is dangerous, even if it's at the most base level; it encourages the worse-er people and enables them to do heinous stuff.


The ones who are not participating in the heinous stuff will call it "an unfortunate fact of life" , "overreacting" , etc. They aren't confronting the evil people because the core idea is something they were also taught and they think it's just an extremity of that core idea, which is fcking stupid. It's like cat calling, yeah, try and tell me how rape is an EXTREMITY of cat calling and not that cat calling is the PIPELINE to rape. Most people can't actually see this FACT by the way. Nazism works like this too btw.


Coming back to the main subject, you'll see people sometimes bring up semi-eugenics when it comes to looks and not bat an eye when you call them out; my people, you are literally advocating for eugenics and you are unaware of it because a small seed was planted into your noggins as children, see this from a bird's eye view, use that critical thinking you've been bestowed by pure luck and understand that life is truly unfair in some aspects and you shouldn't treat others differently because muh society said so.

 

[Dejected 55]

Side note but this is why the patriarchy also needs to go, the patriarchy also enforces even more beauty standards and bullshit; it's death by a thousand unavoidable cuts because it's baked into our culture.
This is why it's dangerous, this is why believing anything without any sort of critical thinking involved and parents teaching bad social conditioning and trashy behaviors is dangerous, even if it's at the most base level; it encourages the worse-er people and enables them to do heinous stuff.

I'm a man, but I can't defend things that come from the patriarchy... I think we would all be better off with a more equal distribution of responsibility and powers... but, that said. You can't blame the patriarchy on beauty standards. Women are every bit as picky about the way men look as men are about the way women look. Actually, if you look at statistics, it seems women might actually be worse as they have increased ability now to act on their preferences.

A couple of generations back, at least here in the US, when women were more subject to the patriarchy... they had less choice in their potential mates... kind of had to accept whatever man came their way. But now, we see women supporting themselves and exercising more choice than ever before in who they accept as a partner. IF you compare statistics on studies made of how men find average women attractive vs average women finding men... you see a standard bell curve for men with most women being acceptable to them as mates, with a minority of "ugly" at the bottom and a minority of "super hot" at the top.

But with women, most men are viewed as unattractive by women, with only a small minority at the top end considered acceptable. This isn't new perception, it's just women now have the ability to act on how they've always felt. So while men are actually more accepting of women's varying appearance on average... it turns out women are not. When women had to accept lesser men in their eyes to survive, they did... but now that they don't, a whole lot of average to slightly-above average men are tossed by the wayside.

You can look this up. It's a real phenomenon. Men have to pretty much be exception to even get the attention of a woman these days, much less to find a relationship... whereas women still are seen as more attractive across the board by most men.

 

[WhatCouldHaveBeen32]

But with women, most men are viewed as unattractive by women, with only a small minority at the top end considered acceptable. This isn't new perception, it's just women now have the ability to act on how they've always felt. So while men are actually more accepting of women's varying appearance on average... it turns out women are not. When women had to accept lesser men in their eyes to survive, they did... but now that they don't, a whole lot of average to slightly-above average men are tossed by the wayside.

You can look this up. It's a real phenomenon. Men have to pretty much be exception to even get the attention of a woman these days, much less to find a relationship... whereas women still are seen as more attractive across the board by most men.

That sounds like BS tbh, the women or men who are attracted to men, like men because they are men; this seems like a perspective made by a man who likes women, of course it would seem this way because they don't find men attractive, they only find women attractive.

Also it might be because not everyone out on the street wants to get a relationship? I mean, it's a pretty simple explanation, most women are not interested in most men because in public spaces they aren't really looking for a relationship right then and there; and according to your sayings it must mean that most men would be interested in a relationship so they are ogling at every woman.

There was no accepting your husband 100-200 years ago, it was forced; unless you are talking about a really small percentage of men who weren't abusing their power and actually asked their partner if they wanted to be together.

I personally don't care about "mating" or reproduction so I can't offer input here.

Also I didn't reply to the first part but why would the ability to act on your preference be a bad thing anyways, wouldn't that be good as it would lead to less honest relationships? I'm not joking. Who cares if someone more beautiful would reject you outright? what if they accepted being with you and then they just dropped you for no apparent reason? wasting 2 years for nothing and essentially creating a lot of emotional turmoil into your life?

People should really learn that incompatibility exists in every aspect of life and it's a good thing. It leads to more natural friendships or relationships. At least this is my view on it, personally I don't care for a relationship , I just don't find most people attractive, they can be aesthetically attractive but that's kind of it, they can be cool looking or beautiful looking, congratulations to them I guess?

 

[Dejected 55]

I feel like you missed the point. The claim was that the patriarchy was why beauty was important. I was pointing out that the patriarchy has nothing to do with how women perceive men. The patriarchy made it so women had less choice... but now that they have more choice, the data shows that something like 80% of men are unattractive to women, whereas men do not have the same low opinion of women's appearance.

Men got a reputation for judging women harshly on how they look... but it turns out that when men and women answer honestly, men overall rate most women more favorably in appearance than women rate men. The patriarchy made it so women had less choice. Which means women always found most men unattractive but had no choice... now that women have more choice, reality is reflecting that women are harsher judges of appearance than are men.

Also, not mentioned in my previous post... but women are actually harsher on the appearance of other women than men are. IF men and women rate a group of varied women based on appearance, that group of women would get overall higher grades by the men than they would from the women.

So it isn't the patriarchy's fault that beauty standards are a problem in society. It is people's fault... and on average it's more a problem of women disapproving of appearance than it is men... because on average men are actually more apt to find you attractive than women are.

 

[Dyingoportunity]

I personally prefer to judge people for their personalities and morals over their looks because I know how difficult it can be to have someone only care about your looks and not WHO you are.

I believe it's a perfectly applaudable sentiment that one might want to examine one's worth by their character rather than their outward manifestation. When people say "looks don't matter", they often mean that "looks shouldn't be the ONLY thing that matters". you don't have to look like a Hollywood or porn star in order to have a good life.

Unfortunately, humans are animals. Like all other animals, we have built in urges to reproduce with the healthiest members of our species available to us, and what is considered beautiful is more often than not is the set of traits that are best adapted to whatever environment our species faces. A lot of what Dejected 55 said about how beauty standards have shifted throughout all of time ties back to this.

the thing is that pulchritude is rare - most people are average to unattractive. Beauty ,like intelligence and wealth, is not distributed evenly among the population. This fact along with the special treatment and all the attention that beautiful people receive creates envy in the have nots. As a result some say looks don't matter, it's so shallow to care about looks but we are wired to care about looks. but looks are not the only thing that matters.

even if you're conventionally beautiful, you can be seen as ugly by your words and thoughts.

It's why some people are beautiful, but unattractive because they're so miserable, mean, and negative

 

[Angst Filled Fuck Up]

It's definitely cope to some degree. People want to believe that life's an equal playing field. It's like when we tell children "you can be anything you want to be when you grow up" knowing full well they're just going to be John or Mary who grinds in an office making 40k a year with bratty kids of their own just like everyone else.

Then again, I wonder if beauty itself is overrated. I had one particularly beautiful ex girlfriend. I couldn't even have her make her own way back from the store. She'd be followed, accosted, all kinds of shit. I tend to think there's a significant dip in quality of life that comes with being universally appealing. As cliche as it is, you're probably better off being average to somewhat above average, and an especially good fit for whatever partner you're with.

 

[Alexei_Kirillov]

I feel like you missed the point. The claim was that the patriarchy was why beauty was important. I was pointing out that the patriarchy has nothing to do with how women perceive men. The patriarchy made it so women had less choice... but now that they have more choice, the data shows that something like 80% of men are unattractive to women, whereas men do not have the same low opinion of women's appearance.

Men got a reputation for judging women harshly on how they look... but it turns out that when men and women answer honestly, men overall rate most women more favorably in appearance than women rate men. The patriarchy made it so women had less choice. Which means women always found most men unattractive but had no choice... now that women have more choice, reality is reflecting that women are harsher judges of appearance than are men.

I agree with your overall point that lookism isn't due to the patriarchy (my personal take is that it's just biology and is thus unfixable).

But the experiment you brought up is actually measuring male sexuality, not female sexuality. If you told me the design of the experiment, I could've predicted the results just based on that. Because women tend to not respond as much to visual stimuli, and even more importantly, they tend to not experience attraction to men on first glance -- it's a feeling they develop over time. We don't even necessarily need to find the man we're attracted to particularly handsome.

So the fact that women might be "harsher" on appearance doesn't actually have much bearing on who we choose to partner up with. (At least, historically that was the case; dating apps may have changed the game because it doesn't allow us that period of slow familiarization leading to attraction).

 

[Dejected 55]

I agree with your overall point that lookism isn't due to the patriarchy (my personal take is that it's just biology and is thus unfixable).

But the experiment you brought up is actually measuring male sexuality, not female sexuality. If you told me the design of the experiment, I could've predicted the results just based on that. Because women tend to not respond as much to visual stimuli, and even more importantly, they tend to not experience attraction to men on first glance -- it's a feeling they develop over time. We don't even necessarily need to find the man we're attracted to particularly handsome.

So the fact that women might be "harsher" on appearance doesn't actually have much bearing on who we choose to partner up with. (At least, historically that was the case; dating apps may have changed the game because it doesn't allow us that period of slow familiarization leading to attraction).

Yes, but the playing field has changed. While the patriarchy doesn't influence how men and women see each other as attractive or not... the patriarchy did mostly force women into relationships with men because they were forced to need men in order to survive. A hundred years ago, heck even 50 years ago, it would be difficult for a woman to support herself alone... so she was forced into a relationship with whomever she could find, and if there were no handsome men around in her eyes, she would have to couple with whomever was around.

But, the shift in balance of "power" away from men and towards women... means that more than ever before, women can act on their natural perceptions of men. Which means, if the men they don't deem as handsome are the only ones asking them out, they can ignore those men as if they don't exist. It's pretty clear if you talk to women searching for relationships they place value on the appearance of a man and are now able to act on that. Women don't need men to survive anymore, and so they aren't forced to settle for a man they don't find attractive...

That's the shift. Men still find most women attractive on average even with the shift in power dynamics towards women. Men haven't become unattracted to women. But women were always kind of unattracted to men... but now they can act on that. So, women are increasingly more likely to stay single rather than settle for a man they don't see as attractive than they would have even a generation ago.

On some level men deserve this a little bit for the patriarchy and how women were oppressed in the past. But it's also kind of like slavery. The slave owners were never really punished for their transgressions towards black people. Same for the old guard who oppressed women, they got away with it. Unfortunately who gets punished in modern society are men that never owned slaves and never oppressed women... because as humans we always seem to have to blame someone even if the someone who did the crime isn't around.

It's like... if someone breaks into your house and robs you... but gets away and the police can't find him and get your stuff back or punish him... so you decide to harass your neighbor because he is there. Or when the police arrest someone who kind of looks like the guy who did it and that guy has to spend time and money defending himself and prove the police have the wrong guy, and sometimes the wrong guy goes to jail for years. We will blame and punish the wrong person if it is easier to do that than hold people accountable for what they actually did wrong.

 

[Alexei_Kirillov]

Yes, but the playing field has changed. While the patriarchy doesn't influence how men and women see each other as attractive or not... the patriarchy did mostly force women into relationships with men because they were forced to need men in order to survive. A hundred years ago, heck even 50 years ago, it would be difficult for a woman to support herself alone... so she was forced into a relationship with whomever she could find, and if there were no handsome men around in her eyes, she would have to couple with whomever was around.

But, the shift in balance of "power" away from men and towards women... means that more than ever before, women can act on their natural perceptions of men. Which means, if the men they don't deem as handsome are the only ones asking them out, they can ignore those men as if they don't exist. It's pretty clear if you talk to women searching for relationships they place value on the appearance of a man and are now able to act on that. Women don't need men to survive anymore, and so they aren't forced to settle for a man they don't find attractive...

That's the shift. Men still find most women attractive on average even with the shift in power dynamics towards women. Men haven't become unattracted to women. But women were always kind of unattracted to men... but now they can act on that. So, women are increasingly more likely to stay single rather than settle for a man they don't see as attractive than they would have even a generation ago.

On some level men deserve this a little bit for the patriarchy and how women were oppressed in the past. But it's also kind of like slavery. The slave owners were never really punished for their transgressions towards black people. Same for the old guard who oppressed women, they got away with it. Unfortunately who gets punished in modern society are men that never owned slaves and never oppressed women... because as humans we always seem to have to blame someone even if the someone who did the crime isn't around.

It's like... if someone breaks into your house and robs you... but gets away and the police can't find him and get your stuff back or punish him... so you decide to harass your neighbor because he is there. Or when the police arrest someone who kind of looks like the guy who did it and that guy has to spend time and money defending himself and prove the police have the wrong guy, and sometimes the wrong guy goes to jail for years. We will blame and punish the wrong person if it is easier to do that than hold people accountable for what they actually did wrong.

We're in agreement about the factual observations, but the difference is that 1) I don't necessarily think women choosing to stay single is a bad thing, and 2) I don't think this choice has much to do with how they judge men's physical appearance.

The way I see it, it's not so much that women are staying single because they don't want to settle for someone they don't find physically attractive, or that they're trying to take revenge on men for the sins of their forefathers; it's that heterosexual relationships are, in general, a bad deal for women. This isn't a universal experience of course, but a significant percentage of women end up being the ones putting in most of the effort (scheduling dates, doing all the grocery shopping, doing all the laundry, doing all the cleaning up, scheduling his doctor's appointments, etc.) while reaping most of the risks--especially as related to sex (pregnancy, pain, UTIs, bacterial infections, STDs, consent violations)--and few of the benefits. This imbalance tends to get even worse once they have kids. So, understandably, a lot of women just conclude that it's not worth it, or, alternatively, that in order to be worth it, the man has to be bring a lot more to the table -- which yes, can sometimes mean money or physical appearance, but more often would mean high levels of conscientiousness/responsibility/effort.

 

[Dejected 55]

We're in agreement about the factual observations, but the difference is that 1) I don't necessarily think women choosing to stay single is a bad thing, and 2) I don't think this choice has much to do with how they judge men's physical appearance.

The way I see it, it's not so much that women are staying single because they don't want to settle for someone they don't find physically attractive, or that they're trying to take revenge on men for the sins of their forefathers; it's that heterosexual relationships are, in general, a bad deal for women. This isn't a universal experience of course, but a significant percentage of women end up being the ones putting in most of the effort (scheduling dates, doing all the grocery shopping, doing all the laundry, doing all the cleaning up, scheduling his doctor's appointments, etc.) while reaping most of the risks--especially as related to sex (pregnancy, pain, UTIs, bacterial infections, STDs, consent violations)--and few of the benefits. This imbalance tends to get even worse once they have kids. So, understandably, a lot of women just conclude that it's not worth it, or, alternatively, that in order to be worth it, the man has to be bring a lot more to the table -- which yes, can sometimes mean money or physical appearance, but more often would mean high levels of conscientiousness/responsibility/effort.

Women, or men, choosing to be single is fine. If that's what they really want. Lots of men and women are single not by choice exactly, by which I mean they want a partner but for whatever reason they are unable to find one. No one is owed or guaranteed one, though.

The main thing I was refuting was that the patriarchy has anything to do with importance of appearance.

Beyond that... Men could make all the same arguments that relationships aren't good for them. In breakups/divorce, men tend to lose more than women do. Both lose their partners, but often men end up having to pay to support their ex financially as well. Men often lose custody of any kids as well and might lose the house too.

As for the "chores" part of marriages or relationships. That never made sense to me. I'm single. I have to do everything by myself, so I cook and clean and whatnot. Some of it I even enjoy, but I digress. I would assume a single woman has to do all that stuff too... so if two of us partner up in life and romance... why wouldn't we share in the chores? We each get to do less in order to maintain the standard of living we already had. It's a win-win. There's no reason for either to arbitrarily refuse to do any chores around the house. If you're alone, you're responsible for everything. This goes for both men and women who suddenly stop doing everything in a relationship. Makes no sense to me.

I grant you that pregnancy is more of a direct burden on women than men. Can't argue that. But that is biology and the continuation of life. No women owe anyone babies... but if enough don't want them, the species dies out and that's the end of everything for everyone... so I shudder to think what happens if the majority of women look at pregnancy and child-rearing as that much of a burden.

Meanwhile, men in record numbers are apparently deciding to not date and remain single. Since men are the ones in society expected to initiate relationships... it's not so much that women are opting out like you suggest, but men are apparently getting tired of being jerked around and the unfavorable outcomes of divorce, so they are just remaining alone by choice. IF men do that, then it doesn't matter what the women do, because the men will have tapped out.

If I interject my own experience. I love women. I don't love all women, of course. Some women just like a lot of men are jerks. But I love women as a gender, and I'm attracted to them and I wish I could have connected and formed a meaningful bond and relationship and shared experiences and burdens and loved and been loved, maybe kids maybe not... but my setbacks in life didn't ever make me hate women or change how I evaluated appearance or personality to "get back" at them. I've just reached a point where I realize it isn't going to happen and I have no other reason to stay alive without that in my life. It's not even anyone's fault. I just don't have a place in this society. I do wish it would change and improve for others who will live beyond me, but honestly the trend seems to be towards isolation and transactional relationships and people being too picky for their own good. I don't have to care that much since I'll be gone.

 

[liza]

Who gives a fuck about attractive people? None of us choose to look a certain way. They were just born and made to look the way they do. I don't give a single shit if you're attractive or not because you don't get to choose how you look like when you're born. It just happens

 

[Alexei_Kirillov]

Women, or men, choosing to be single is fine. If that's what they really want. Lots of men and women are single not by choice exactly, by which I mean they want a partner but for whatever reason they are unable to find one. No one is owed or guaranteed one, though.

The main thing I was refuting was that the patriarchy has anything to do with importance of appearance.

Beyond that... Men could make all the same arguments that relationships aren't good for them. In breakups/divorce, men tend to lose more than women do. Both lose their partners, but often men end up having to pay to support their ex financially as well. Men often lose custody of any kids as well and might lose the house too.

As for the "chores" part of marriages or relationships. That never made sense to me. I'm single. I have to do everything by myself, so I cook and clean and whatnot. Some of it I even enjoy, but I digress. I would assume a single woman has to do all that stuff too... so if two of us partner up in life and romance... why wouldn't we share in the chores? We each get to do less in order to maintain the standard of living we already had. It's a win-win. There's no reason for either to arbitrarily refuse to do any chores around the house. If you're alone, you're responsible for everything. This goes for both men and women who suddenly stop doing everything in a relationship. Makes no sense to me.

I grant you that pregnancy is more of a direct burden on women than men. Can't argue that. But that is biology and the continuation of life. No women owe anyone babies... but if enough don't want them, the species dies out and that's the end of everything for everyone... so I shudder to think what happens if the majority of women look at pregnancy and child-rearing as that much of a burden.

Meanwhile, men in record numbers are apparently deciding to not date and remain single. Since men are the ones in society expected to initiate relationships... it's not so much that women are opting out like you suggest, but men are apparently getting tired of being jerked around and the unfavorable outcomes of divorce, so they are just remaining alone by choice. IF men do that, then it doesn't matter what the women do, because the men will have tapped out.

If I interject my own experience. I love women. I don't love all women, of course. Some women just like a lot of men are jerks. But I love women as a gender, and I'm attracted to them and I wish I could have connected and formed a meaningful bond and relationship and shared experiences and burdens and loved and been loved, maybe kids maybe not... but my setbacks in life didn't ever make me hate women or change how I evaluated appearance or personality to "get back" at them. I've just reached a point where I realize it isn't going to happen and I have no other reason to stay alive without that in my life. It's not even anyone's fault. I just don't have a place in this society. I do wish it would change and improve for others who will live beyond me, but honestly the trend seems to be towards isolation and transactional relationships and people being too picky for their own good. I don't have to care that much since I'll be gone.

True, for every "movement" on the part of women, there's an equivalent for men (ex. MGTOW) and vice versa (ex. femcels). At the end of the day though, despite the disadvantages on both sides, people tend to lead more satisfying lives when in (good) relationships, and a functional society should facilitate coupling up -- which it is failing miserably at. I don't think anyone is to blame for that; it was perhaps inevitable that relationships would be the next thing to be swallowed up into the sphere of commodification. Most people below a certain age have only ever known deeply unsatisfying "situationships," if they've had any experience whatsoever, and have no hope for anything better.

All fixed, fast-frozen relations, with their train of ancient and venerable prejudices and opinions, are swept away, all new-formed ones become antiquated before they can ossify. All that is solid melts into air, all that is holy is profaned, and man is at last compelled to face with sober senses his real conditions of life, and his relations with his kind.

 

[Dark Moon]

Looks absolutely matters especially for us men in 2025 as society is getting more and more lookist thanks to dating apps/social media/tiktok etc. It's easier to sell people a lie and give people false hope (personality/confidence) I hate that because I would just rather have the truth and reality even if it's harsh. Personality/confidence can't take an ugly or average man to an 8 or 9. It means something but not much, also people in general will probably just treat you better if you're attractive. I wasn't convinced about my looks, sure I got compliments in the past but I don't know.