Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
Those attributes in potential partners that you find devilishly attractive / irresistably horny
Especially girls with quiffs
my weaknesses are fire and ice types
Met someone not like that. Fell in love with them and am now engaged to them.
Therefore types are bollocks
I like a partner who mostly leaves me alone.
or do a LOT of people make you very horny by virtue of their stature?
Not physically anyway.
As is talent
intelligence/talent out of the sack and in the sack in my experience
I can tell you you're wrong.
I can also tell you you're wrong :(
that they love and respect all animals. other than that its completely unpredictable.
Rather brash girls
the more it seems to just come down to 'is interested in sleeping with me'
nobody really has them do they? it seems a pointless way of attempting to define yourself and your tastes and how you view the world.
Just like people I think seem cool/nice/bit weird
look like they advertise prozac
love and hate themselves in equal measure
is dark-haired, tall, skinny, clever, funny and has a large Greek nose.
happily for me, there are quite a lot of men who fit this description.
particularly the cleverness.
with the ladies of DiS
Actually though - I stand by my post
(also: imaperv is in there as well)
normcore girls that are into pumpkin spiced lattes and the goldfinch and shit like that
Any description of anyone's type is only like an abstract consept, anyone who actually live by such rules (idk if anyone even does) are a bit silly.
An accent is good.
That said, I work in Birmingham and 90% of the office are brummies and yam-yams: not sexy
Absolutely delighted that my asian gf has dyed her wonderful dark hair grey...
that's me oot
In a partner - not too loud or brash. A nice person without being too meek or a pushover. Not too bothered if we share lots of interests or not
Looks - I go for the cute, pretty and chubby end of the spectrum. Not too into tall, gawky, scrawny types. Small feet. I have an odd fondness for chavvy types, but not for a prospective partner.
Patient (with me, not a mental patient etc lol etc)
Between short and average height
Very broad tastes in art and food
Massively knowledgeable about stuff I know nothing about
But that's basically it
and infantises them in a weird way by saying 'x types' are cute? idk
everyones so creepy
and creep *yourself* out.
Like I bet at least one person on here has only ever dated brunettes. And if they have, I bet their mother/father was also a brunette.
what if most people on here haven't dated someone with a visible impairment? is their 'type' people who pass as non-disabled? whenever people talk about stuff like this it always makes me think they have a sort of 'default' woman in their head who is non-disabled, cis, white, not fat etc. like there's definitely an implied whiteness behind 'blonde v. brunette (v. redhead)'. it's creepy and weird and unnecessary.
To be able to say "oh check it out, in hindsight everyone I've dated has been into cooking. And also of a certain height."
If you're looking back, there are patterns you can spot. It's not in relation to creating a default anything: it's literally history that has happened.
Maybe considering patterns in your own dating habits is a good way of challenging them too.
I think it's pretty tenuous to extrapolate that into people creating eugenics-informed moulds for their brides to be.
sounds like a completely pointless (and quite sad and creepy) thing to do.
no idea what your last sentence is meant to mean.
Because the human race is introspective and mulls over the past from time to time? Because what harm is there in thinking about your own subconscious nuance? Pick one.
From my perspective finding the need to label people sad for pondering patterns in their relationships just smacks of someone wanting to feel superior.
I stayed over and didn't wet the bed so you dumped me for someone who did.
which is a much more surreal reading.
Those bedwetting chefs ARE like gold dust tbf
but i would still love my boyfriend if he became incontinent. i think it's kinda sad that you would divorce your wife just cause she has bladder problems. i don't really understand marriage though :D
if I ever get to the point with my crohn's that I'll have to have an ostomy bag. Don't think I'd ever feel sexy again, it's already a struggle.
surely that's not quite how types work, in the sense that, people date based on numerous factors not least mutual attraction, there's numerous reasons as to why someone might not have dated someone with a particular description that lie completely outside of what they would define as their "type".
Also, not that this is a positive thing, but if you've ever looked at any statistics based on dating, it's easily one of the most biased forms of human behavior.
when it comes to dating. most people will never date someone who is visibly disabled for example. therefore it's pretty silly to talk about your "type" as if it's just about hair colour and a very limited number of other "attributes". people obviously don't think it's even worth mentioning that all of their previous girlfriends have been non-disabled, thin etc. cause obvs it goes without saying everyone would want a fat, disabled girlfriend!
that they find certain physical or personality traits attractive? Maybe if it meant you wouldn't entertain the idea of a blond if you liked dark hair it would be too far. Surely it's the basis of most attraction in people?
Have you or your friends never said 'I go for tall/short/skinny/stocky' guys'?
'they have a sort of 'default' woman in their head who is non-disabled, cis, white, not fat etc' - and that's just obviously wrong.
makes me cringe when people still talk about other human beings using terms like 'a blond'
but yeah do i really have to explain that "i prefer women with blonde hair" is still very much coded as "i prefer white women with blonde hair"?
it's a random example and a comment thing people refer to when talking about types?
and bring up something about race that I'm not talking about.
why would it make a difference that it's a "common thing" ?
and hair colour is prob the most common trait that people would bring up so it's an obvious example to use.
I struggle to trust blond/fair haired men. Probably Hitler*'s fault, idk.
I don't mind it.
(is there really nothing you'll try to read sub-text into?)
Really? It's just an aesthetic sensibility?
No one has put like 'someone with perfectly symmetrical feet' or anything a bit serial killery like that.
I guess the phrasing could probably have been better, maybe I'll avoid saying asian next time?
'asian girls' is really problematic because it homogenises asia - it's an entire continent. usually people who say they like 'asian girls' don't simply mean a woman from asia.
misogyny, racism, fetishisation
but i don't underestimate your common sense and ability to look into things yourselves
He was pretty much just saying that his girlfriend is Asian and that he likes hair of the sort she has, which is most prevalent on Asian women.
jfc are you seriously advocating the fetishising, generalising and homogenising women from an entire continent?
As I'm pretty mortified if that's the case
for things all the time?
well evidently most of the time when you guys all post awful stuff on dis, nobody even says anything. georgiabeth can't be everywhere all the time.
but if someone says something disgusting i'll let them know it's not on
i don't know about you but i wouldn't want to be part of a community that excuses and tolerates racism, misogyny, transphobia and classism 100% of the time
to start calling people creepy and try to shame them for racism and misogyny for saying that they find their girlfriend's hair type really attractive.
it was that they 'like asian girls' or 'asian hair'
which is the problem
the homogenising and complications of that - thats when racism, misogyny and fetishisation comes into it
couldn't resist the opportunity for a bit of banter.
I'm actually pleased to be called out on something unacceptable. Like I said, I can see that using 'asian' in a descriptive sense is something I should stop doing and I apologise for it.
I really hope this little subthread has turned into discussion of fetishisation and homogenisation independent to what I posted though as it genuinely was just me saying I like dark hair. My gf's ethnicity means that she has (had) dark hair that I find attractive, that's literally all I was trying to say.
This is both sad and problematic.
I don't like it as much as I did but it's literally nothing to do with me.
I read your post exactly like that.
I read it as "I like XXX HOT ASIAN BABES XXX"
Then get concerned about it I'd say. If I brought this up with my sister-in-law she'd just tell me to stop being a dickhead.
Exactly the same as using Africa as a country I guess. I'll stop saying it.
Was literally just saying I like dark hair, that's all really.
is used to describe both people from say India and Japan.
(Not that I think we should be saying oriental obviously)
But when I say 'asian' I'm nearly always referring to Indian/Pakistani/Bangladeshi etc, the sub-continent in Cricketing terms and I'd probably say east-asian to refer to what used to be referred to as oriental I guess?
btw I wasn't having a go at you Ant* more the American's for butchering the English tongue.
*despite you being a race fetishizing monster ;)
any race, size etc etc can have a wazzo pair of jugs!
Either I fancy a person or I don't. The wherefores have not been analysed.
and she let me analyse her!
Romeo has some explaining to do
This is my new answer.
12 hands or more
Theres a girl started here who has hair that is literally like a mane. Shes so posh it freaks me out
she sounds nice :)
how many hands?
perky long whiskers
likes cuddles and walks
why is the T in type capitalised in the thread title?!
You can tell everyone here is a virgin :')
she isn't any 'type' - excepting that we're rather made for each other, two special snowflakes conjoined through life's gay descent
this is a silly thread but I wanted to brag
but Caesar's (or Delaware's) she ain't
she has brought me nothing but intense joy, and tonsillitis, but even that is joyous as I can lounge around in bed thinking of her, writing epic love-texts or the occasional poem
I quite prefer that Phillippe Foloppe guy. You got his number?
a) everyone is different in infinitely varying and subtle combinations
b) WHY on earth would you want to artificially limit your options, by an artificially contrived idea by even thinking that 'you have a type' ....even idly contemplating it, means that you are pigeon holing yourself to an extent.
its great that so many different people CAN be attractive to oneself.......why the fuck do you want to not consider everyone?
surely everyone has had the experience where they have presumed someones character/nature/values based on their looks, only to be delighted when this is not the case at all.
PS for unreconstructed dumb reactionary males (who talk about fancying women that they think will meet with their 'groups' approval) perhaps you should consider whether or not the best blowjobber is necessarily going to be linked to external appearance? (although of course blowjobbing expertise in itself is an irrelevance.....it just that I am under the impression that unreconstructed male groups DO consider it to be relevant)
Kinks and preferences are subconscious not chosen, presumably.
Although I agree calling out the cultures that promote and instill those preferences is useful to try and make those trends less common, though even then things like 'types' are a product of such a mangled combination of influences who can predict what calling out certain cultures actually does? I dunno.
due to subconcious preferences.....thats fine (within reason).....let them stay that way..subconcious.
The instance that you catagorise and name this causes you a problem in that you may later compare someone that you are attracted to when you get to know them, if you were to use this (now named and conciously thought of) comparrison template, then it would be not good to deny something (again within reason, to protect yourself and others).
By naming publically or in a group, your 'type' is slightly unhealthy socially (obviously on here people will try to be amusing and ironic so it wont be so cliched and hackneyed types) because people looking for leads and guidelines (towards acceptance within groups......adolescents really want to be accepted by particular groups, or demographics) then it could mean people ending up limiting themselves according to group choice.
Whilst you may counter with saying that people do not apply such templates whilst making such choices, you may be right in that they do not conciously follow 'stated/named preferences' but, such stated/named prefereces WILL be some influence on some of your subconcious decisions.
Female. Between the ages of 18 and 30. Not related to me.
my last two girlfriends were both very different to each other but I loved them both very much. e/g
Younger than me/older
Zero interest in politics/activist
Liked shit music/liked good music
Stable job/rarely in a job more than 2 months
Loads of other differences, I realise these are pretty superficial.
I guess what makes me feel serious and fall for someone is seeing another side of a person, eg seeing my more introverted ex become passionate about something in conversation or kicking off at someone, or the more extroverted one showing vunrubilities or talking about her worries. Is this sexist? I hope it isn't. Maybe what you can get from that is I get the feeling you see something in someone that not everyone will see... Maybe sometimes it isn't typically attractive but I suppose when you love someone their "failings" are equally as important. I dated someone once who was absolutely beautiful (like model/film star attractive) did charity work, had the same music taste and was probably the most lovely, caring and generous person I've ever met in my life but I ended the relationship because I couldn't fall in love with her, that spark wasn't there.
There is no such thing as having a type