I'd say I am not a horrible looking dude but I don't really ever feel attractive. I never have felt like a woman would even like me in a sexual capacity. I think part of it stems from me not being a particularly flirty person so I never really engage with women on that level as much. I would like to go on more dates but even that is difficult. I have a sex drive but I don't feel like I am an active sexual being if that makes sense. What can I do to fix any of this? I think I have this predetermined notion in my mind that women won't find you attractive unless you are obviously physically attractive or your personality doesn't have massive flaws. Unfortunately for me I am an autsitic gym goer so my body is healthy(I wouldn't say jacked) but I am basically a complete retard when it comes to managing dating and potentially sex. I wish I could tell if a woman was obviously attracted to me but I just don't recall any expressing such a thing. A friend told me that most women never openly express that so you are left guessing until you actually try getting with her and she says yes. You basically wouldn't know before hand. Is that true?
>>34327808Don't feel attractive as a man, but don't feel ugly either. That's a woman's game, vanity and preening themselves in the mirror, being alive self conscious about looking good or not. It's female coded nonsense. Men shouldn't give if a shit if they look good or bad or beautiful or ugly or handsome or sexy, that's not what men should concern themselves about. A man should only care about what he is capable of in his actions, for the things he can do and cannot do and things he can do to do what he desires. That's how it's done.
>>34327815I see what you mean but is reality really like that?
>>34327887Yeah reality is really like that. You can continue with the reality of worrying over your looks as a man but it won't be a pleasant reality. Men are nowhere near as attractive as women, women are the gatekeepers of all things beautiful. You take the world's most attractive man and compare him to the world's most attractive woman and the man pales in comparison. And that's not a problem for us because women care more about what a man does with his life than how he looks.
>>34328040So fucking wrong holy shitMen and women are both capable of immense beauty and immense uglinessIt just so happens that women are rewarded for being the best whore soThey try to fit that box as desperately as possible even if they have no business being in that boxRather than splitting the world by man and woman, it should be split by beautiful and uglyBeautiful people should concern themselves more with beautiful things, and ugly people should fuck off and stop larping as beautiful people>A man should only care about what he is capable of in his actions, for the things he can do and cannot do and things he can do to do what he desires.And you do realise that 99% of "things" can be "done" to what you "desire" by being beautiful? Regardless of gender. Considering most people "desire" to be with a "beautiful" member of the opposite gender, being "beautiful" is an "action" in and of itself to attaining what you "desire". Oh but no just be betabuxx that's way more agency than be beautiful not having to lift a finger to attain your "desires". People get way more fraudmaxxing than "caring about what they are capable of in their actions". False inequivalence. Attractiveness is an action, a game, a stat, valid and valuable in and of itself, to be taken advantage of, not something to be dismissed as useless and replaced with muh actions.The real problem is ugly people force larping hard trying to be beautiful, leading to immense wastage in which women are the biggest culprit of this. If women just realised they ain't fucking capable of being beautiful (you ain't her, just like you're not him), they could stop force larping and frauding and just go do something useful. But men will lap it up cuz they're brainless dogs who see any feminine shape and think it's time to chase, not seeing that the actual figure behind the silhouette is some done up ugly cunt
>>34328040>>34328359you're both wrongthe body is just a vesselbeauty can vary literally by the distance away from something you are from it. Someone who is "ugly" from 5 feet away can become beautiful when you are 2 inches from her face, getting her pregnant. My wife and I are both pretty mid from distance, but when we're face-to-face making love she's an 11/10. Some people are 10/10 from distance, but up close they're mid. If you find a girl who's mid from distance, you're scoring gold because this fact has kept her single until the point that you come along and recognize her beauty, but only by getting close to her. The point is, if you're just reasonably healthy and in shape, there is someone out there who will find you attractive and vice versa. The idea that there is some objective standard of beauty is flawed. There isn't. If you get into the negative cycle of seeing yourself as unattractive you're already done. Snap out of it anon. SNAP.
>>34327808It’s gay that you care. Get a motorcycle.
>>34328414No, you're wrong too. The fact that she is ugly from a distance but beautiful up-close IS AN OBJECTIVE METRIC OF ATTRACTIVENESS in itself. Plenty of people are ugly afar and up-close too. You act as if only your case exists and nothing else.
>>34328593You people hand-waving attractiveness as if it's completely nothing and too incomprehensible and therefore should just be ignored are the truly mentally lazy ones.Attractive people exist. Unattractive people exist. And plenty of frauds in between. Get over itIf you think your wife is amazing 103938/10 then I'm inclined to say confirmation bias rose-tinted glasses but good for you, attractiveness (physical) is not the only trait in existence to measure a person. But it exists and it's not something to be ignored or reduced or distorted to fit whatever aggrandizes your narrative/agenda
>>34328615It is a stat just like any other./end
>>34328624/unendI will say your observation on some people looking attractive and unattractive in different settings is correct (ie the distance variable), but that doesn't make beauty invalid or free-for-all all of a sudden - that just means there's a whole lot more cases and nuances than just binary le fit into cookie cutter shape and be done with it. Hence there's so much fraudmaxxing as people think they can just force themselves into the cookie cutter generic mould and that passes as "beautiful"Be less mentally lazy and notice tiny things that make one unique and beautiful and ugly and everything in between, instead of thinking in lazy binaries
>>34328672you responded to someone else but I'll jump back in. my whole post was pointing out that beauty depends on many factors, one of them being literally how close you are viewing the object. that seems to be pretty fucking relevant in a thread about anon feeling unattractive. seems like you're invalidating my advice for some reason but i can't tell what it is
>>34328890I'm not talking about OP's post, didn't even readThe thing I'm invalidating is the notion that it's not objective. Distance is as much an objective variable as the rest. All those things combine to create an objective instance of beauty. Beauty is something that is objective. If you look beautiful close up, that is an objective instance of beauty. Others look ugly close-up, that is an objective instance of ugliness. The fact that these exist don't mean suddenly beauty is too immaterial or something to really exist - it exists right there, in that configuration and tuning of variables.Some people prefer to just ignore the entire thing and be mentally lazy. Others try to shove themselves into a box that says "beautiful" but not actually be beautiful. Beauty exists. It either is or it isn't. Don't gaslight people into thinking they're beautiful or they're ugly when they're not. Just intuitively feel if something is beautiful or ugly, including yourself, then figure out reasons why something is configured "beautiful" or "ugly". It's a subjective experience of an objective fact.Maybe the objective fact is that your wife looks attractive up close due to whatever variables that harmonise well. Then your subjective experience tunes this up to a million because it synchronises with your ideal narrative or whatever.I'm just giving my take on the notion of beauty, given the data in these posts, validating invalidating idc
