« the diary, day five | Main | the guiltiest of pleasures »

sex and the sandwich [Updated -2-]

Over at Wizbang, they've posted the Playboy photos of Teri Polo (Meet the Fockers).

Now, I have a great appreciation for the naked (or even semi-naked) female body. It's no secret - if you're a regular reader - that I will ogle sexy women as much as I do sexy men (I've been called a bisexual man trapped in a woman's body and I don't argue much with that analysis). However, I'm just not that into Teri Polo. After seeing this photo of her when the movie first came out, I couldn't help thinking that watching her eat would be like watching a snake do the same - we'd actually be able to see her food sliding down into her belly. That's how thin she is.

If you're not at work or near small children or horny men, take a look at the Playboy photos. Now, be honest with me, guys; do you really, truly find this sexy? Do rib cages and bony knees turn you on?

Many years ago, I had a male friend who told me he dated skinny girls because he liked the idea of being able to lift them up and hold them against the wall during sex. Interesting criteria - well, I'll only sleep with you if I can bench press you. The funny part is, this guy was so out of shape, we used to remark that he was built like Fred Flinstone.

So what I'm really wondering here - guys, this is for you - is this: What is sexy? And I mean physically, so don't cop out and give me that "a woman with a brain is sooo sexy" line. Do you honestly like a woman who looks like she hasn't eaten since the last time the Mets won the world series? Is a woman whose protruding rib cage could conceivably pierce you during sex hot? Would you prefer a woman with a D cup and few pounds on her or an A cup with a child's waistline? Would you date a woman who is over a size 7? Over a size ten? Do you hold yourself to the same standards of physical perfection that you do the women you choose to date/pick up/marry?

I'm really wondering about the psychological reasons for idolizing a woman who weighs less than a the loaf of bread she binged and purged yesterday. Does it make a man feel more empowered, more masculine to date/sleep with a woman he could practically break in half? Is it a dominant thing? Or is it that your idea of perfection is such that the less actual substance on a body, the better?

I'm not trying to start a war here. I'm just really, honestly curious about all this. I don't hate Teri Polo because she's beautiful and I'm not disparaging her body because of jealousy. I have no problem with pointing out or even having a lustful attitude toward beautiful, sexy women. I just don't get the fascination with a naked sack of bones.

Update: Nevermind all this - I'd like to see some responses to Allah's comment.

Update2 I'm not asking if you'd marry Teri Polo. I'm just wondering why the starving-chick look is considered sexy enough for Playboy. And for those saying that she's not too terribly thin in the Playboy shoot, check out the other pic of her at Wizbang. I'm sure the Playboy pics are airbrushed. The Yahoo pics are not and those are some damn pointy ribs sticking out of her dress.

A lot of the comments below remind me of theBloodhound Gang song Three Point One Four:

You know what I really want in a girl? Me.

And yes, you deserve to know what it is I look for in a guy (or did before I found what I was looking for). More on that later.

[Guess I know what tonight's mp3 of the day selection will be]

TrackBack

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference sex and the sandwich [Updated -2-]:

» Yeah, Baby... from Sanity's Edge
Today Michele touched on something I’ve been laughing about for years. Do you hold yourself to the same standards of physical perfection that you do the women you choose to date/pick up/marry? I know plenty of fat, beer drinking guys.... [Read More]

» Skinny legs and all from dustbury.com
Michele has seen the Playboy spread, so to speak, of waifish Focker Teri Polo, and she is not impressed: What is sexy? And I mean physically, so don't cop out... [Read More]

» Um... from One Man's Vote
In response to Michelle, well, here's my lovely bride (the ugly guy behind her is me, in case you were wondering): Any questions? BTW, we've both lost weight since then (this was our engagement picture).... [Read More]

» Hot Focker from Geekable.com
A Small Victory asks: If you're not at work or near small children or horny... [Read More]

» What do men want? from A Bad Man in a Bad Place
Michele at A Small Victory asks: what do men want? Would we prefer a rail thin model bimbo to a more portly smarter girl? There's a false dichotomy there - I've found that the smartest and well rounded women I know are also the hottest, but then, ... [Read More]

» Scrawny Chicks from Transvigor
There's an interesting post on emaciated women at A Small Victory, which in the comments section has transformed into a discussion of dominance/submission and gender roles. Check it out. [Read More]

» Sex Wars, Continued from Ace of Spades HQ
Yeahp, everyone's into the conversation that never really goes away over at Michele's. Allah Pundit's comment (linked by Michele in an update) really stirs things up. Which raises another question: Do women want a guy to say what they want... [Read More]

» Um... from One Man's Vote
In response to Michelle, well, here's my lovely bride (the ugly guy behind her is me, in case you were wondering): Any questions? BTW, we've both lost weight since then (this was our engagement picture). LATER: OK, fine. Yeah, I... [Read More]

» For The Ladies from Gay Orbit
Copyright violations notwithstanding, this was difficult to resist. Here are the Playboy pictures of Teri Polo from Meet The Fockers. Michele wants to know "what do men want?" Hmmm...ahhh: Fat Big Beautiful Women.com: Traffic Today: 140 aver... [Read More]

» Items of Interest #5 from Multiple Mentality | www.multiplementality.com
In this issue: blue bracelets, Archie's equipment, and Teri Polo with her kit off. (Don't worry; there are no pictures in this IoI. Just links to them. Feel free to open this at work without fear of reprieve.) [Read More]

» Let me put it this way, Michele... from protein wisdom
Were I not married, and were Teri Polo to show up at my front door demanding I dress up like little Jack Horner and stick a thumb in my ass, I'd been trying like hell right now to pull a plum out of my rectum. Anything for my Teri.* [Read More]

» Morning Has Broken from hard times
It's been a long year of slogging through a dark vale of acrid, politically charged blogging - Iraq, the Dean Scream, Vietnam, yadda yadda, right up to Rathergate. The election didn't end the wailing, the name calling, the nyah-nyahing, it just sunk... [Read More]

» Random Stuff on a Tuesday Night from What's Brewing
All sorts of random stuff for y'all: 1. The flowers the Adorable Marc brought me on Christmas Eve still look pretty darned good. Three weeks! What did they do, sell their little flower souls for eternal life? Not that I'm... [Read More]

» Random Stuff on a Tuesday Night from What's Brewing
All sorts of random stuff for y'all: 1. The flowers the Adorable Marc brought me on Christmas Eve still look pretty darned good. Three weeks! What did they do, sell their little flower souls for eternal life? Not that I'm... [Read More]

» Female Physical Attractiveness; Maureen Dowd Betrayed 2 from Michael Williams -- Master of None
Glenn Reynolds links to posts by Michele Catalano, Cathy Young, and Ann Althouse asking "what do men want?" in a woman -- mainly on the physical side, it appears. Ms. Catalano writes: Now, I have a great appreciation for the naked (or even semi-naked) ... [Read More]

» Damn skinny blondes! from Silent Running
Seems there wasn't enough carping about them out there, so here's another reason. As mentioned in comments, if this is food pr0n, then this qualifies as a s'nuff flick. six.pounds.of.meat but whoa, before some of the male members of the... [Read More]

» Damn skinny blondes! from Silent Running
Seems there wasn't enough carping about them out there, so here's another reason. As mentioned in comments, if this is food pr0n, then this qualifies as a s'nuff flick. six.pounds.of.meat but whoa, before some of the male members of the... [Read More]

» Polo Grounds from The New SteveSilver.net
There’s a major cross-blog debate going on right now about an important topic that everyone seems to have an opinion on. Iraq? Social Security? Abortion? Actually, no- it's actress' bodies. At issue is a photo of actress Teri Polo (Ben... [Read More]

» Rube shrugs from You Bitch
Over at A Small Victory, they've started the ol' fat-chick/skinny-chick theoreticals up. Why in the world does anybody debate this point? The cool thing is, the extremes are out. There's people over there dredging up stories about that 300-lb.... [Read More]

» Well, Since You Asked...Why Women Are Attractive from Right Wing News
From Michele Catalano at A Small Victory... "So what I'm really wondering here - guys, this is for you -... [Read More]

» Meet the Hotdogs from Signifying Nothing
Actress Teri Polo, last discussed in comments here, is again becoming a topic of debate thanks to a new pictorial in Playboy magazine; Michele doesn’t get the appeal, while Jeff Goldstein does. I tend to think she looks quite a... [Read More]

» Bone Throwing (So, Kick Me) from baldilocks
Lazy poster? You betcha. Actually, some of it is due to again being gainfully (and temporarily) employed. It seems that no one wants to permanently hire a…ahem…mature woman with too much experience and too many skills to underpay. We take [Read More]

» Bone Throwing (So Kick Me) from baldilocks
Lazy poster? You betcha. Actually, some of it is due to again being gainfully (and temporarily) employed. It seems that no one wants to permanently hire a…ahem…mature woman with too much experience and too many skills to underpay. We take [Read More]

» WHAT'S HOT from trying to grok
It's cruel and unusual to ask a woman whose husband has been gone for over eleven months to describe who is hot. At this point, everyone is. The joke among my friends is that while our guys were in Kosovo,... [Read More]

» Space Pen, Playboy Airbrushing, And What Men Want from The Laughing Wolf
This post by Michele asks a good question, but at the same time makes a statement that tends to get my hackles up about as much as that base canard/urban legend about NASA and the Space Pens. While I can’t... [Read More]

» Public Service Announcement from it comes in pints?
As a special service to Kevin Aylward and his commenters, I offer a small bit of advice: Bony chicks hurt. You're welcome. That is all. (Via Michele, who is absolutely right. Anorexia is not sexy.)... [Read More]

» Playboy continues its downward spiral. from Maladjusted - Fair and Balanced
sex and the sandwich Again, Michele nails what I'm thinking. Skinny chicks don't usually do it for me, the one exception being Amy Acker. Even then I'd still prefer Amber Benson over her. And if this was 40-some years earlier, I'd add Audrey Hep... [Read More]

» What Looks Good. from Little Miss Attila
For the five blog readers who haven't seen it yet, Michele has a post up about whether Teri Polo is too skinny, and what makes women attractive in general. It takes the post a moment to load, as she's pushing... [Read More]

» MEET THE FOCKERS BABE from Deliverance
Wizbang posted Playboy photos (NSFW) of Teri Polo from Meet the Fockers and that caused Michelle at A Small Victory to ask what it is that men really want... [Read More]

» Hey Good Lookin' from The Rattler
If you're easily offended, you won't want to follow any of the links in this post. In fact, you're probably better off skipping this post entirely and scrolling down to read about Peyton Manning's Wheaties box. If you want to... [Read More]

» Skinny Women? no thanks from cinomed.blog-city.com
Michele over at ASV has asked the age old question, "Guys, is this really sexy?".The subject of this question is Teri Polo, and her oh so skinny self.Now as Allah points out, there is barely any man that would kick Teri out of bed if she [Read More]

» Explainign the unexplainable ... from The Peoria Pundit
Actress Teri Polo has doffed her clothing and posed for Playboy. Michelle over at A Small Victory finds her a bit on the skinny side. This prompted her to wants to ask: So what I'm really wondering here - guys,... [Read More]

» Other Remarks on the Thread That Would Not Die That I Never Got to Because I Was Too Busy Arguing with That Dickhead Muslim Deity from Ilyka Damen
Regarding this post, of course. I cannot be the only one who thinks "Purple Fury" would make a really good male porn star name. At least use it in erotica somehow: He pounded her repeatedly with his throbbing, purple fury,... [Read More]

» I Feel So Dirty from Watcher of Weasels
I wasn't quite sure what to think when I first heard the reports about that dirty bomb threat...  to be honest, it sounded like it could have been a hoax perpetrated by someone trying to scare the Bush administration straight... [Read More]

Comments

now if it were Babs...

Man, she is skinny.

I don't really go for the skinny look. Granted I don't want a cow either. I like some shape. This broad looks like a white Ethiopian.

I can give an explanation about why many guys do like the skinny look. Several people have mentioned to me that they think very skinny girls have a tighter vagina (don't shoot the messenger). I realize that's akin to tall guys have big tools.

I don't go for blondes, I don't know why.

My theory is that guys who go for girls with bodies like 11-year-old boys actually would prefer to be with 11-year-old boys.

" I just don't get the fascination with a naked sack of bones."

You kidding, sack of bones are hot! In fact I like to let them sit for a couple weeks after dead to,..

Just kidding. _ Whats makes a girl for me is the first the eyes and then hair then smile. I like both classic and sweet. The two that come to mind in this area are Audrey Hepburn and Anne Hathaway. Of course Audrey past away a while back but I think Anne isn't one fo those super thin types.
Heres one of Anne I think kind of shows what I mean
http://www.fan-sites.org/anne/images/albums/public/2003/Nicholas%20Nickleby%20Press%20Conference/05.jpg

It depends. Some skinny women have a shape. Some look like rails. Some have that .05% body fat, see-all-the-veins look (ewwwwwww.) and some look soft like a woman while still being skinny.

Guess which one I like in the skinny category? Now guess which one my wife is? :)

My daughter once dated a dashing young Mexican gentleman. He and I were sitting out on the porch having coffee when two, young, skinny, bony girls walked by. His reaction: "Bah, meat is for the man, bone is for the dog."

While I love the look of a woman who's in shape or can kick ass like Jennifer Garner or Lucy Liu, someone THAT skinny makes me kind of ill.

I prefer some meat of the bones...meat on the bones! But not chunky per se.

This woman is way to skinny. Personally, I prefer women with some well proportioned meat on their bones. It's all about the curves. Lots of curves and me with no brakes.

Nope, I'm not a big fan of skinny, though, I'm not one to be too picky. I like strong, athletic, and I actually like strong legs especially. Boney, knobby knees definitely don't do it for me.

On the other hand I don't find the Teri Polo pictures particularly apalling, either. She could stand to put on a couple pounds, true, but not exactly haggard and boney, either.

I've told my wife this time and time again, there is only one thing that determines for me if a woman is sexy or not: CONFIDENCE.

She can be thin, fat or somewhere in between. So long as I'm not able to count the ribs or the rolls, I'm fine with it. Confidence is the absolute key to any woman's sensual and sexual nature.

Ok, here is the point where I embarass myself. I like a little heft to a woman. The term I hear that seems most appropriate is 'child bearing hips'. I love wide hips which is why Playboy usually does nothing for me.

Hips & butt are my main attraction. I love breasts of any size, they just have to be well shaped and stand on their own, but they take second place to the thigh area.

My wife doesn't understand why I find her even more attractive right now since she's pregnant.

If you're not at work or near small children or horny men, take a look at the Playboy photos.

Um, it's kinda hard to ditch the horny guy when he's you.

I have a very broad (get it? broad?) definition of what makes a nice female figure. Not too bony (I might get bruises) but not obese either. I'd put Ms. Polo (what a name) toward the skinny end of the spectrum, but she still has a nice body, with some curves. Curves are key - narrow hips are gross, as the 11-year old boy comment above points out. And I think boobs aren't as important as a lot of people make them out to be. I'd take some pretty A cups over Tara Reid's frankenboobs any day.

Having said that, I married a woman with D cups and a few extra pounds that are nicely placed. Hella fun to rub up against and roll around with.

I'm sure there are millions of deep psychological reasons that people like what they like. I don't get the guys who go for scarecrows, and I don't get the guys who go for huge women. The biggest puzzlement is the women who don't go for me. But just remember that there's someone out there for everyone, and that's why everyone isn't attracted to the same type of person.

My preferences are kind of the opposite of your friend Mr. Flintstone's. I'm a big guy, and I've never really been interested in women I feared crushing like blown eggshells. I'm very keen on curves and tactility, and have usually been attracted to women who describe themselves as needing to lose 20-40 pounds.

But ultimately, I think one of your earlier posters nailed it with the confidence thing -- it's something I've called "wearing one's body with comfort." If that's happening, so is she.

Man, they must have reworked the hell out of those playboy pics with airbrushing. Her chest looks totally different.

As for me, I'm an ass man. As long as her chest isn't like a little boy and she has an ass I'm happy.

I know, low standards, but what did you want from a guy nicknamed Dirty Digger?

Skillzy wrote: Having said that, I married a woman with D cups and a few extra pounds that are nicely placed. Hella fun to rub up against and roll around with.

My brother once said, referring to a woman as thin as Teri Polo, that sleeping with her was like sleeping with a dozen wire coat hangers shoved in a cheap sock. I've always clung to that notion whenever extra pounds place themselves not-so-nicely on my body.

I used to have a big thing for Helen Hunt until I saw her at the Oscars when she lost all that weight. Same with Jenniffer Connoly and Jennifer Grey after their plastic surgery.
Now they just look fake.

Gotta echo Sharp's sentiment - pregnant is sexy. The ironic thing is, my wife (and I'd wager most women would agree) feels like she looks horrible and huge when she's pregnant, and I think she's stunning.

I thought the whole anorexic thing was going out - do we really need more Kate Moss lookalikes in Hollywood? That's a big reason why Gwyneth Paltrow bugs me - I keep wanting to force-feed her a double quarter pounder.

Great, now I've got "Baby's Got Back" stuck in my head.....

Forget her body. What's up with the 70s fringed hair?

I like curves. I've stopped purchasing the Sports Illustrated Swimsuit issue because they used to feature models like Ashley Richardson, Kathy Ireland, etc. Now they have the runway models doing the shoots, and it's just not the same.

There is NOTHING, and I mean NOTHING sexy about a woman who looks malnourished. Sexy? Women like Catherine Zeta-Jones and Marilyn Monroe are(were) sexy.

Some slim women are sexy. Charlize Theron is absolutely gorgeous, but she's slim, not thin. IE, she looks like she eats.

What is sexy?

Well, for me anyways, sexy is a lot of things. I'm not a fan of the really skinny girls. The Paris Hiltonesque physique just looks unhealthy. Personally, I prefer somewhere around a size 6 or 7, but I don't know that much about women's sizes. I like them 'athletic' I think is the term. Curves look great on a woman. But it truly doesn't boil down to the body. I've dated some beautiful women before that I wouldn't date again just because of their character (or lack thereof).

With her clothes on, she looks too skinny. In the Playboy photos she looks pretty good. The airbrush has a way of putting a few pounds on women (in a good way).

There are so many things that can be attractive about a woman. Women are such exciting creatures and they're so different from men that it's impossible to pinpoint one thing that makes them sexy. For me, the biggest turn on is just the simple act of being feminine. A woman who enjoys being a woman, being different in so many ways from a man is totally sexy. Could a man wear lingerie and get away with it? Of course not, lingerie is the epitome of everything woman and the pinnacle of sexy. Regardless of size or shape, a woman celebrating her appeal and her feminine qualities is sexy.

I’m not saying that a woman should be subservient or soft. I’m talking about self-confident qualities. I’m talking about a woman who is in touch with herself, her man, and is able work together toward a common goal (if you know what I mean).

Oh, sure, she's skinny. Oh, sure, I'd rather look at many other women. But darn it, she's not obviously old nor obviously ugly, and I AM A MAN, and since she is naked I find her TOTALLY hot.

P.S. That's the difference between having a semi-masculinized male brain, like Michele might have, and having a full-bloomed male brain: it is actually hard not to find women attractive.

One of those pics really looks like she has implants. (Which I would consider to be non-sexy as augmentation.)

I'm on the married diet, now, and have been for years, but I still look at the menu and have fond memories ... eye twinkle, smile, stride, laugh, wit, brain, posture, ... lots of things make a woman sexy (or not.) Some women whom I've thought were totally hot on screen or page were total duds in person, and some I've thought were "I don't see it" in the media were totally delicious in person.

Would any answer be better than the other? If you say you'd only date thin or fat, you're prejudging the person based on one of the least important traits.

bones = not sexy. Curves = sexy

also, something's weird with her face. Don't think I'd think her headshot is attractive, so it doesn't matter what her body looks like.

When I saw Meet the Fockers, thought to myself... awww, they could've gotten someone better looking. Oh, and someone who could act...

Interesting how not one of the men who commented included an answer to this portion of your query:

Do you hold yourself to the same standards of physical perfection that you do the women you choose to date/pick up/marry?

In my experience, the answer is a resounding HELL NO! Every fat and/or ugly guy I've ever met still thinks that he's entitled to a Teri Polo look-a-like. They expect women to overlook their physical flaws and see them for who they are inside but set them up on a blind date with a size 12 and they'll never speak to you again.

I like big butts and it ain't no lie
You other brothers can't deny
When a chick walks in
With a itty bitty waist
and that round thing in your face
You get sprunnngggg....

TheRedHead -
yeah, I do tend to hold myself to the same standards I hold MOST people to, not just the ones I date. Not strictly in physical attributes either, but in most everything (dignity, intelligence, integrity, etc.)

Oh, TRH, I forgot to answer that because it was a question that didn't have an answer. Kind of like "Have you stopped beating your wife?".

I never held girls to any particular "standard" because, while attractive girls are nice to look at, I honestly wanted much more than that. To claim I hold someone to have to have physical perfection is a silly thing to say.

I've dated skinny girls. I've dated women who could have benefited from a few sessions with Jenny Craig. I've dated females with double D's and a few who'd have a hard time filling an A-cup. I dated an aerobics instructor one time who was built like a brick shit house and dumb as a sack of hammers. Her body, as 'perfect' as it was, did nothing for me when I got to know her.

If you want to know who I find attractive on TV or in a magazine - fine. Their looks are the only thing I have to judge them by. But when it comes to someone I'm going to spend a lot of time around outside of the bedroom, the looks aren't as important.

But theres one thing that is even more important than everything else, and that is that she needs to be comfortable with herself. I hate makeup. My wife (by her own choice) does not wear a stitch of it. Most of the girls that I dated for any sort of time did not wear makeup because, for better or worse they were comfortable with who they were and that counted for so much. And, not to be a pervert, but they were always the best in the sack.

I hear ya Sharp. I dated a girl in college who was an Excercise Science major. Very nice to look at, but she couldn't think for herself. Not sexy.

I never had the ambition to verfiy this (until reading this post), but ever since I saw "Meet The Parents" (which sucked), I knew that she was the radio girl from Aspen Extreme. I really like her voice, I guess - that's what prompted my memory of her in that movie.

Michele, she's too skinny. But she is heavier in the p-boy shots than the earlier shot (not by much). She's still "attractive" but not the way she could be. Good examples, Jennifer Anniston and Courteney Cox from season one of Friends, vs. the last season. They each lost way too much weight and were less attractive for it.

Sexy: Women, size 12 through 18 and a few @ size 22.

I love that which jiggles.

That's my .02 cents worth.
Proof? I complained loud and long about Calissa Flockhart(?) being way too un-shapely. Really.

one word:

BE-DONK-I-DONK
(is that even one word? I have no clue)
If she doesn't have a healthy pooper, dont' bother passing it by my plate.

now, I don't want to say that I'd be interested in something over 170 beans cased in a 5 foot body, but a healthy 120-130 on a 5'5" frame is nice, possibly take it as far as 145, depending on the distribution. She should have some curves- remind me of the old 40's pin up girls, not the pins they used to put them up with.

Boobs are secondary.

I like a guy who likes Coop girls.

and to satisfy TheRedHead,

I hold myself to a high standard of what I would like to look like, but sometimes it doesn't always happen. I am 6', go between 215 and 220, but don't have too much of a belly to talk about, just very large quads (4 nights of hockey a week, heavy workouts the other nights). I never pressure my wife to look like anything, but she demands it of herself.

I'm most attracted to women who are relatively fit. I prefer someone who isn't significantly overweight, but the "heroin chic" look that seems to be persisting (at least in Hollywood) is grotesque, imo. Haven't seen the pics of Ms. Polo yet so I can't comment on her. I do love boobs, but I love them more or less indiscriminately. Size and shape doesn't matter much to me except for the one major turn-off - implants.

michele, chests be damned those Coop girls have the lower half I find exciting!

I was firewalled (at the office now) from the Coop link. Must be good stuff! hahahaha

Hmm, I think I can echo most guys when I say that I want to know what's upstairs, or not. That said, I'm married to a 5'4" 115 lb lawyer. Sexy and dangerous.

But, back to Teri. If she could shut up just long enough for me to get my groove on, I wouldn't kick her out of bed for eating crackers.

"In my experience, the answer is a resounding HELL NO! Every fat and/or ugly guy I've ever met still thinks that he's entitled to a Teri Polo look-a-like. They expect women to overlook their physical flaws and see them for who they are inside but set them up on a blind date with a size 12 and they'll never speak to you again."

I'm almost with you on this, but I'd replace 'Every fat and/or ugly guy' with 'many guys, regardless of looks or weight'. But you know what? Women do it, too. For every balding, middle-aged guy with a paunch that I encountered who emailed me after a blind date to tell me they were hoping for someone skinnier (and often younger, prettier, and with a job making more than $50K a year), I have at least one female friend or co-worker who wouldn't date a guy who had a hairy back or was losing his hair or was blue-collar or had a beer belly. I don't think it's a guy thing, necessarily. Just a people thing. But, since it still seems to be a little bit more of a stigma for a woman to be single at a certain age than it is for a man, it may be that we notice the attitude more in men than in women.

Or I could be full of crap. Totally depends.

When I look at the women in weight-loss product ads, 9 times out of ten I prefer the 'before' photo to the 'after' (but then, I never weighed more than 110 pounds until I was almost 30, so most every woman I've ever been with has had a weight advantage on me...)

Athletic girls are sexy. Not like Division 1 "that's a MAN" girls, but one's with hard asses/legs. Tits are an aside, they're boring. I never get tired of a nice ass/leg combo though. Also, that speaks to a woman's character IMO. Anyone can be born with a nice rack, or buy them, however getting hot legs takes work. Serious work at that. And good genes. If I were to stick with one kind of athlete for the rest of my life, I'd go for a swimmer chick. They're the best.

I'm going to stick up for skinny women like Teri (while backing away from the awful pun). My last extended involvement was with a woman who was 5' 8" and weighed 105, so my preference is pretty obvious. OTOH, blonde doesn't do much for me, and she looks like she has implants, which is deeply unappealing.

And my one other serious relationship was with a buxom blonde. Guys are completely full of crap on this issue; we just can't help it.

I'm a leg man -- preferrably two legs.*

I think confidence is the sexiest of all. If it comes in a package of D-cups and a bootie, then, hey! Jackpot!

  • I've always wanted to use that line.

I really don't think guys are all that picky about it. I think - and certainly could be wrong - that the weight thing has more to do with competition among women themselves.
It's Keeping up with the Janeses.
As for what I like - not obese, but more than just bones.
I think Teri looks a lot bonier in the non-playboy pix you linked. The whole concentration camp look is not good.
And I'm not a subscriber to the pop-psych "skinny girl = boy" thing, but you know what they say about opinions.

So here's where all the guys show up to reassure the fat girls by insisting we wouldn't eagerly bang Teri Polo. Good boys; you each get a cookie.

She looks way better in the Playboy photos than she did at the premiere. Whether that's due to expert airbrushing or a fondness for Chanticos in the interim, I don't know. Ribs notwithstanding (and I only see them in two photos), she's got the two most important attributes: nice skin and an hourglass figure, especially around the hips. Ain't a straight man on this site who'd roll that off a mattress.

As for why guys prefer women to be smaller than them, yeah, it's a dominant thing. Just like it's a submissive thing when women get turned on by men who "take charge" in their dealings with others. For all the mocking we do of traditional gender roles (and there's a lot to be mocked), the fact is that each of us derives a certain type of psychological gratification from playing those roles. The best way I can explain it is to quote a comedian who once said that, for guys, getting laid is like sacking the quarterback. Exactly. Because even though the former is physically pleasurable and the latter painful, they're both hugely satisfying for one's male ego.

Now, let's get to the real question.

Do you hold yourself to the same standards of physical perfection that you do the women you choose to date/pick up/marry?

Of course not. That's like asking Derek Jeter if he expects George Steinbrenner to be as good of a shortstop as he is. The two parties to that contract want different things from each other, and so it is between men and women. We want women to be hot. Smart and charming are big pluses, too, and we'll take them on their own if we can't get hot, but we want hot first. Ask a hundred guys if they'd rather date Teri Polo or the brainy, funny chick in the cubicle next to them at work, and you're looking at about 99 to 1.

As for what you want from us, it depends on who you ask. Ask a woman and she'll tell you wants a man with "confidence" and a great sense of humor and blah blabla blah. Ask me and I'll tell you she wants money. By either account, looks are a secondary consideration, much like smart and charming are for men vis-a-vis women. We all had a lot of fun goofing on that Bill Gates photo Michele posted yesterday, but if he came knocking on your door, ladies, I dare say you'd give that haircut of his a fresh look.

Let me say one more thing about seeking perfection in one's mate. Men eat shit about this all the time because we value looks above all and women, understandably, have a complex about that. In my experience, though, women are far more specific -- often right down to the eye color -- about what attributes they want their husband to have. The single guys I know will tell you that they want their wives to be attractive and good mothers, but they won't have a lot to say about height, weight, job, income, ethnicity, etc. Just doesn't matter. By contrast, the single women I know will run you a fucking list off the top of their head. "He needs to be 5'8" or taller! He can't weigh more than 195 lbs.! Brown hair preferred, black hair okay, blonde? UGH!" Etc. etc. I've heard people describe this phenomenon as "falling in love within a framework," and I would very gently submit to any woman reading this to whom it might apply that what you're doing there isn't called "love," sweetie. It's called "shopping." So much for men and their quest for perfection.

Well, Allah - I would say that for both the men and the women you've described, that would explain the high divorce rate in our country.

Count me as one of Allah's 1, then. No question about it. I've never seen Teri Polo before stumbling across this thread, and hopefully I'll not have to see her again anytime soon. Very unattractive.

i generally go for Victoria's Secret models. I like muscle tone, and I like slender, and I like enough fat on em to give them a softness to it all. But in the end, I will take a fat woman over a skeletor any day of the week. I am a 6'6 300 lbs man, and the boney girls make me think I will crush em when I get them in the sack. Not to mention they remind me of Ethiopian children. Not sexy.

Another example: Sarah Michele Gellar in the first two seasons of Buffy was perfect. Later on, as she became more and more emaciated, I stopped finding her appealing.

Kong

Allah : now with extra bitterness! Dude, you need to lay off that evil Turkish coffee...

I married that brainy, funny girl with lots of extra padding. The shallow idiots can have their Hollywood models with extra-fake everything; I found a "real" woman who could understand me.

[She has since had weight-loss surgery and dropped almost all the padding. Fortunately, the emotional ties are far far stronger than physical ones, as I found her more physically attractive at 190+ than I do now. The confidence and self-image boost are good to see, though]

So the original question: curves, padding and more of it! [from the purely physical standpoint. Sir Mix-a-Lot, Queen, and Spinal Tap sum up my feelings on .that. subject well]

Allah's comments: I agree with Carin about that attitude explaining divorce rates. Marrying someone for the exterior and ignoring the person is a waste of time...and, IMAO, a sign of immaturity.

Allah, as a (former, thank God) veteran of various online dating sites, I can tell you that men have just as much of a shopping mentality as women.

I don't, myself, have a 'shopping' mentality -- my only real deal-breaker was whether or not we shared the same religion and whether or not our values and outlook/disposition dovetailed well. I couldn't care less what color a guy's hair is -- or even whether he has hair. If he has a good heart, and we're on the same page regarding the important stuff, that's hitting the jackpot as far as I'm concerned. And luckily I DID hit the jackpot in that regard. But it took a lot of wading through guys who thought I wasn't worth the price of a cup of coffee unless I fit a very narrow set of criteria (blond or red hair, blue or green eyes, no more than 5'6", only 25 - 35 years old, no more than 5 lbs over ideal weight, PADI certified, making at least $50K a year but hopefully lots more, living no more than 10 miles from THEIR zip code, Red Sox fans only - Yankee fans need not apply, likes to dress up all the freakin' time... the list goes on and on and on....) before I found someone who thought my heart and my soul were much more important than whether they'd score 'dude you've got SUCH a hot chick!' comments from their buddies.

Bottom line: men shop, too. I'm just sayin'.

And Carin: word.

There IS a difference -- probably Darwinian -- between men and women when it comes to what turns them on (and there are surely exceptions to the rule, but). The female, who evolutionarily bore and raised the little ones, has more of an investment in the pairing and therefore looks for constancy. It's all about the look in the eye of the other that promises you are "the one." The male, goes the theory, is mainly looking to father as many offspring as possible. He goes for the eye candy -- one-night stands need apply -- and recognizing that, heterosexual women and homosexual men are deeply into looking good. Darwinians will tell you the female is looking for a healthy father for her child, but we think it's more basic: Girls just wanna have fun. If the eye is the window to the soul (Love is blind, don't forget), beauty is in the eye of the beheld.

Allah's got some valid points, but I don't think it's a simple either/or issue. As far as I'm concerned, a nice body without brains and charm (more accurately, tastes similar to my own) is just eye candy, not even worth a date. Conversely, similar tastes without a physical spark is the basis for friendship, not romance. I want to take pleasure in my partner's physical features, and I would feel uncomfortable if she regarded my body as some kind of distasteful obstacle course she had to run to reach financial or emotional security.

And Allah's dead right about the shopping lists. I'm not sure I've ever heard a guy talk like Shallow Hal when he's trapped in the elevator, but I've heard amazingly detailed physical checklists from women--which rarely match the guys they're seeing.

I think she looks fairly attractive in those photos. Breasts are a bit small for her frame, at worst.

Now, the purple dress is incredibly ugly, but that has nothing to do with the person inside it.

If it were up to me, I'd probably hook up with whomever sports the dominant look for one or two months at a time and then get a new whomever sports the dominant look.

It, however, is not up to me. So I am with someone who is much more attractive than I am but within the "I can see why they'd be together" range, someone who is much nicer than I am but within the "I can see why they'd be together" rand, and someone who is smarter and harderworking than I am but within the "I can see why they'd be together" range.

The secret is finding a mate who enjoys cunnilingus.

Get that thing down, and you can pretty much get at the top of your "I can see why they'd be together" range.

I think she's pretty sexy. But I've always liked women a little on the thin side. I'm a leg nut, not a boob guy (but for some reason, I ended up married to a woman with a large rack and unspectacular legs, so that may underscore Allah's point that men don't select mates based on a checklist). In any event, I'm a sucker for long, slender legs, as long as she's not too skinny. The Playboy pics have obviously been filtered to give this one a softer look, but it's hard to make a woman look plumper than she really is barring some major photoshop work.

And before you women start ranting that I'm into cadavers, I should note that I used to work in the film business, and I know what an anorexic female looks like. This woman is not anorexic.

Haven't read the other comments or looked at pics, since I'm at work, but...

I like em all. Petite girls, plump girls (not fat, with rolls, just juicy), all heights, all colors. It really just depends on the girl. Lara Flynn Boyle is damn skinny, but sexy. Calista Flockhart is attrociously nasty. I'm 6'4" and have dated girls as small as 4'11" and as tall as 6'. Big boobs, small boobs, doesn't matter, again, it really depends on the individual girl.

And no Teri Polo does nothing for me either, but it's not the skinnyness. Just my $.02

When I have a choice, I like thin women with strong legs and slightly-disproportionately large breasts.

But really, if a woman likes what she sees when she's naked and looking in the mirror, and if she's willing to share that with me, That gets me halfway there. The other half is letting me know that she desires me. (And sometimes, thes things are enough to affset ALMOST any limitations)

I'm not sure why Teri Polo is being portrayed as extremely thin. I don't see any ribs. I see girl flesh.

Thus, whatever good point you may have gets lost when I try to see what you're talking about re:Polo.

No, men don't like skeletal women. Duh. But using Polo as an example is kind of weird. Try using Paris Hilton as an example next time.

Serena Williams. Period.

First off, a woman needs to like men - not a man in particular, but men generally. A woman who only likes HER man will eventually begin to despise his masculinity. A woman who is constantly second guessing or trying to curb a man's masculinity, and his normal male desires is really difficult to live with. (Trust Me!)

Secondly, the eyes and face are really important. Bodies age. The eyes are key. Women who cut their hair short turn me off. I want a woman to look like a woman, not a man or a boy. Curves, particulary the curve of the hip is very important. Also proportion is key. A skinny woman with nice curves is attractive regardless of breast size. A distinguishable waist is important. Paris Hilton is a total turn-off. The girl has no curves.

Finally, a little bit of "slut" is nice, but not too much. I have found that most women dress for other women, not for men. Hair styles, clothing choices, etc. are selected for how other women perceive them. Most of the time, this is fine with men. But occasionally it is nice to be seen with a "trophy" on your arm. Occasionally it is nice to have all the other guys in the room think "Damn, that is one lucky guy." In other words, it is nice for our manly vanity to have a woman who is desirable and has the ability to occasionally flaunt it.

Men judge other men, in part, by their ability to attract and hold on to a desirable woman. I know many women find it difficult to understand and distinguish between flaunting it to attract a man, and flaunting to boost the ego of your own man. I realize the term "trophy wife" is mostly used in derogatory ways in female circles. But men do want to show their women off once in a while, and being willing to be the "object" of attention, not all or even most of the time, but occasionally means more than you know. Its awfully flattering to have a beautiful woman, who is obviously dressed to kill, pay just a little too much semi-intimate attention to you in public.

A woman who keeps herself in reasonable proportion, who likes men in general, and is willing to stroke her own man's ego without remorse is one helluva woman. A man will damn near kill himself trying to make her happy.

In my experience, the #1 physical characteristic that men admire in women is nudity.

Well let me ask a couple questions in light of Allahs long post. Did ya happen to see who Donald (money bags) Trump is marrying? Sure aint the girl next door. I think fantasy and reality get confused - men say they want and would love to have the hot babe. We really do but lets face it - we may never get it, we'd may never even go up to her in a bar. We like the Champagne look but when it gets right down to it we feel more at home with Budweiser.

Dont confuse the ideal with the reality. We want the trophy on the mantle but never throw out the boxers with more holes than a pound of swiss cheese. Six pack abs are replaced with the keg belly but it all comes down to the puppy factor - all men want is food, a warm smelly blanket and an occasional leg to hump.

Women are a different species. They know exactly what they want and love to shop for it. Then they spend years saying that "well it was on sale" and try to justify why they got that one. They want you to love them for the real person they are as they remove layers of makeup, get botox, nips and tucks, hair colored monthly, clothes to camoflage the flaws and accent the attributes and mood that - well let's not go there.

Everyone wants starbucks and wants to be seen with the green logod cup - but we all have maxwell house in the cabinet.

I gotta say that Miss Polo is thoroughly average for "Playboy chicks." And yes, I wouldn't kick her out of bed if I ended up there.

But here's the thing: I find just about every woman attractive. I find my girlfriend attractive and she could easily stand to lose forty pounds. She's sexy as hell all the time (great bed hair, too!) But here's the thing that drives me crazy: she's unhappy with her weight. Talks about it, complains about it, denigrates herself all the time -- that's the part that I can't stand.

If she were to stay at her current weight and never complain again, I'd be one of the happiest men alive.

We like the Champagne look but when it gets right down to it we feel more at home with Budweiser.

No, we drink Budweiser because we can't afford champagne.

Presumably Teri Polo is this thin because she wants to get work. Take it up with the casting directors, Michele. It's not like movies with real wimmin in them can't make money ( cough Titanic** cough . ) That's a shame: she's pretty, she should eat something once in a while.

**Not saying it was a good movie, just saying Kate Winslett looked like girl in it -- curves and everything, ya know.

J.Lo. Even with all the reasons to run screaming into the night, the girl is HOT.

I do like thin girls, but the concentration camp look is a bit too far. In my opinion, the average female packs on pounds as she gets older, so if you are into thin chicks, it's best to shack up with one who is initially skinny. ;)

I've had a few very thin girlfriends over the course of my dating life. I was with one of them - we'll call her Anna - for 7 years. Anna ate all the time but could not gain weight, staying around 112-118 lbs at a height of 5'8".

One thing Anna continually had to deal with was weight discrimination...for being skinny. It seems that thin females are not afforded the same legal protection from workplace anti-discrimination laws. Yes, I'm sure they are protected in theory, but in reality the more rotund women put my ex-gf through the ringer on a daily basis with comments like "You need to eat something" or "You really need to gain weight." Nothing was done to stem this behavior, even when managers were notified.

Imagine approaching a grotesquely fat person at work and saying, "Geez, you need to drop some of that weight or you're going to die from a heart attack soon!" Can you say sensitivity training?

This sort of thing happened with another thin gf of mine as well, so much that she would often be in tears over the constant insults.

Anyway, so yeah, I do prefer thin girls with smaller breasts. Not starved looking, mind you, but more long the lines of the ballet dancer look.

And yes, I do hold myself to the same standards.

I can't count the number of times I've seen guys leave their skinny 12-year-old-boy bodied women to be with other men. There's a reason guys who like girls who look like guys like guys!

E.

I've got a daughter who is naturally thin and tall with a boyish body and so she models haute couture, of course... She receives as many proposals of marriage from men based on her looks as she does because of her strong personality and functioning brain. Her hair has even been laid waste to because of overprocessing and styling, and the (not so shallow?) men overlook that fact. How good of them.

Allah's right about the majority of us. Men look for breeding potential (youth, good skin and conformation), and women look for good providers/ fathers (success, loyalty and strength). Looks are secondary for most of us women. OTOH, in addition to having lots of gray matter, testosterone and wit, the right man would be at least 6' 0, dark-haired, and fairly pleasing to the eye ...

Allah is spot-on, and I'm finally glad to hear someone else say it.

Back to the original question, I've never been attracted to the emaciated waif look. I like women of an average, healthy build, but given a choice between 10 pounds over or ten pounds under? I'll 10 pounds over every time.

"Would you date a woman who is over a size 7? Over a size ten?"

That you would ask this question in terms of dress sizes shows how little you understand men. I don't even have a very good understanding of how men's clothing sizes work. Women's sizes are a complete mystery.

My taste in women is probably a bit unusual (or at least it's something that most guys don't admit to). I like fakeness. I'm hostile to the concept of natural beauty in general. I'm an avowed atheist, so to me nature is just a random collection of molecules. I don't see the appeal. I'd much rather look at a skyscraper than a tree and I'd rather look at a surgically-altered woman than a natural one. Even if a natural woman and a surgically-altered woman look identical, I'd rather have the surgically-altered woman.

To answer that quote: I do hold myself to the same level of physical "attractiveness" as my mates. Frankly, it's a complete turnoff for me if the person I'm dating doesn't keep up their appearance. That's not to say she has to get dolled up and wear make up (I hate make up. With a passion), but if it's a nice day, I'd expect a "Hey, let's go for a run together", or "Let's go surf". If instead I hear, "I'm going to the mall" or "It's too hot out, I'm gonna sit inside and watch Oprah all day" - that's grounds for getting your ass dumped. All that being said I don't think my actions are unfair/lopsided/one-sided - tit for tat. If I were a fat ass slob it wouldn't be realistic of me to expect some hard-body girl. OTOH I'm a triathlete. I want to date triathletes, or their ilk.

However, throwing away everything I just said - there are gender roles and gender expectations, and things that slip through the cracks b/c one is male/female. With that in mind, I still pay for dinner, I still hold/open doors, I'm still polite...b/c that's the way my Momma raised me.

Oh, and Allah - avoid the bitches who say their husband has to be 195, 6'2" etc etc - it's a vapid scene, and an utter waste of time (as you know).

One comment about Allah's assertion that women fall in love with a "framework." Unfortunately, I married a woman who was in love with a framework, not me. As long a she believed I fit her framework, I was her knight in shining armor. Once she realized I wasn't "perfect" (seriously, she told me that when we were dating she thought I was perfect), suddenly I didn't measure up. I had not changed at all. But since that time (now going on 15 years), I have lived with a woman who is constantly disappointed in me. THAT is very draining. And trying to live up to her standards is damn near impossible. About two years ago, and emotional wreck, I stopped even trying, and surprise, now she is talking divorce - which of course would devastate my daughters, and embitter my son.

You might say I have regrets.

Like it or not, humans are programmed by evolution. Because of that, what women want are men who are good providers and protectors, and what men want are women who are good baby ovens.

Which is to say that each is looking for a mate who increases the chance of their offspring surviving.

Well, I find her too skinny but you never know; some guys like that. As to the type I do like: Lucy Lawless, if you're reading this, I love you. Really. And I'm rich; I just live a modest lifestyle so as not to be conspicuous.

By the way, I have entirely different standards for women I'd consider dating and women I want to look at in magazines. Those are not related to each other.

I've always been in better shape than the women I've dated and am in better shape than Beautiful Wife. Honestly though, that's mostly the Air Force's fault.

Compared to other photos of Polo, the ones in playboy make her almost attractive. Granted, she's a little to skinny for me, but she has nice breasts and they airbrushed out her sunken rib cage. Cudos to the photographer, the make up people and the touch artists.

Jesus, I don't know if she normally does.. but in that picture she looks like Courtney Love. Blech.

My lizard-brain taste certainly runs towards the petite, but there's a difference between petite and skeletor. My preference is towards healthy-looking, lithe, fit women. Not emaciated!

=darwin

I remember Teri Polo's first foray into the world of public nudity. Okay, topless. The movie was called "Quick". I thought she was pretty hot back then. She looked pretty good during the final season of "Northern Exposure", too. Apparently she's been enjoying the Hollywood female diet: water, speed and more water. Her formerly curvy, thin body has morphed into that of a hunger strike victim.

I remember an interview with Sarah Michelle Gellar in which she mentioned that she had dropped a full cup size since the first season of "Buffy". Take a look at the episodes from season one. She does NOT look like someone with a weight problem. I do not get the weird fascination that the Ethiopian look has for a lot of women.

Allah makes some good points about the behavior of women, compared and contrasted to that of men. Several of my woman friends have told me the following:

1) I could never date a guy that was shorter than me(this proved problematic because one of the girls was 5' 11")
2) I could never date a guy that's more than a little overweight
3) I think it's horrible that men don't want to date my overweight friends. They're soooo judgemental.

Somehow, the incongruity of statements #2 and #3 never occurred to them.

I can't go into my usual tirade over Allah's comment because, like 99% of female blog-readers out there, I secretly want to bang him into next week.

I'm willing to believe there are women out there who are only in it for the money, but it's always difficult for me to address this one because I seem to have missed that gene and not only have I missed that gene, I'm also apparently lacking the one that would make me bond in any substantial way with other women who do carry it. I'm not like that, my female friends aren't like that, but I strongly suspect the women we get most catty about and call rotten names are like that. I don't think being a heterosexual male is a prerequisite for hating on golddiggers.

Mainly I'm interested in two aspects of the Allah comment. First, this:

So here's where all the guys show up to reassure the fat girls by insisting we wouldn't eagerly bang Teri Polo.

Bless your black cynical heart, Allah, but don't you think there ought to be some gray area between "fat girls" and "my God, Sally Struthers wanted me to send money to starving children who weigh more than Teri Polo?" Because that's what disturbs me about our culture's increasing tendency to romance the thin: The definition of "thin" has changed. It's becoming an impossible ideal to attain for any length of time, now that it's to the point of negatively affecting one's health. In the early 1970s, Twiggy was considered ideally thin. Compare a photo of Twiggy to Polo, though, and tell me Twiggy isn't fat by comparison.

And you know, if a guy is going to limit himself to dating the emaciated, he damn well should have lots of money--for the personal trainer, the quack dietitian, the $7000 gowns to hang off a frame that makes wire hangers look supple, the clinics to treat nervous breakdowns, the emergency room visits . . . fuck yeah, let him foot the bills for his 86-pound trophy. It's been said it's not inexpensive to be fat, but it's not inexpensive to be that thin, either.

Second, this:

For all the mocking we do of traditional gender roles (and there's a lot to be mocked), the fact is that each of us derives a certain type of psychological gratification from playing those roles.

I can't argue that at all, but I notice the more rigidly someone, male or female, adheres to those roles, the less likely it will be I'll befriend them, male or female. I tend to avoid ultra-feminine women who define happiness as a $2000 handbag, and I tend to avoid hyper-masculine men who define happiness as a weekend fishing with the guys. I think rigid adherence to those roles is ultimately detrimental to both sexes. It leaves women who aren't petite and delicate feeling alienated and inadequate, and it leaves guys who didn't make the team feeling the same way.

One last thing. Regarding this:

I would very gently submit to any woman reading this to whom it might apply that what you're doing there isn't called "love," sweetie. It's called "shopping." So much for men and their quest for perfection.

I always like what Chris Rock said about it:

Young girls are full of shit. . . . They say "I want him to be this tall, want his hair to be like this, want his eyes to be like this, want him to walk like this, talk like this . . . ."

All of it's bullshit that's got nothing to do with anything.

But you find an older, single woman, and she says, "Hey, I just want a man! Got a dick and a job and I'll be happy."
So there's your woman who's not "shopping" and not just after money*. Too bad those older, single women probably don't look a damn thing like Teri Polo.

*The job thing is because nothing, not the most spoiled princess in the world, not the worst daddy's girl, not the bitchiest diva--I mean NOTHING is more high-maintenance than an unemployed guy. They sit around dirtying up your house, running up your bills, and then you get home from work and have to reassure THEM that they're not losers. And is there a meal on the stove for you? Did any laundry get done? Don't get me or any other woman who's ever done this gig started on it. The guy could be head fry cook at Burger King, I don't care, anything, but get a fucking job already and get off my couch.

I'm married to one of women often described as having a "child's frame" by other women. And it is not the fact she is small that drew me to her. Physically I, do like women with long slender legs, and then next I like is a neck like Audrey Hepburn and a pretty face. I saw her streched out with her feat put up at a hall in a sci-fi convention bidding in an art auction, and that was all I needed. She would be mine, I thought. ;)

I can tell you that the one thing that has made her life hell is her size. All through school and college, out in public, and in work today, she gets regular snide remarks to her face about how she needs to eat more, how she is starving herself, that she is an anorexic, that she needs psychological help with her supposed eating disorder. It drives her to tears, and fury when she is alone. She eats until she is full, and she stays tiny. Even when she was pregnant and her appetite exploded, she was thin. She has tried putting on weight and it never sticks.

Just a view from the another side of the issue.

Oh, and to further answer your question.. I don't have a conscious set of criteria that determines what is and isn't attractive. In other words, it's my body reacting, not my mind. I don't have control of it in a conscious way. If I did, I'd be in a very happy relationship with one of my super cool female friends who for some reason my lizard brain does not find attractive. No matter how much I want to, I can't make that subconscious part of me that decided what is attractive be attracted to, for example, very large women. It's not fair, it's not what I'd like.. but it's real.

=darwin

Sexy is attitude, not physique. It is a female who subscribes to a reasonable minimum of physical conditioning (which can range from 100 pounds to, say, 180 pounds depending height, how it is distributed, etc.), but after that minimal screen, wants you, and regularly. Phooey on the skin and bones types, we want women who want us. Teri Polo looks almost sick. I saw "Sideways" the other night, and even thought the chubby, but horny, waitress was appealing- because she was into sex, more or less for its own sake.

=Now, if only I were actually wantable......

Lucky me...my first visit here in a month or so, and I happen to be surfing using the lynx text-only broswer. :(

My tastes lean to a specific variation of the hourglass, with the shape of the butt more important than the actual size, and boob size not very important. Except for the emphasis on boobs, I've always enjoyed the women Playboy features because they are curvy, curvy, curvy. If the proportions I happen to like scale, I don't mind if the woman is 5'2" or 6'2".

I'm pretty active, and have an athletic build. I like women who look fit (without being too skinny). Neither Lara Flynn Boyle nor Rosie O'Donnell look healthy enough to me to walk up 10 flights of stairs.

Hmmm. Got to say Allah got it right. Hot sells for girls as well-to-do does for guys. That CW song is dead on: I'm a lot handsomer with a C note in my pocket.

That said, I'll honest admit she falls into the do-able range. I'd like a little more muscle, but then again when the mood is right Rubenesque is nice too. As long as you're not anoxeric or obscene, hell I'm going look. (I don't sample since the gold band went on 25 years agao)

Generalizing about what half of the planetary population wants? I can't do it.

I don't have much in the way of a checklist- I have to be attracted to her, and she has to have a brain. I dated a skinny blonde girl with a fantastic body and no brain for a summer, and that was plenty long enough. My bullshit tolerance is pretty low, so I don't put up with the petty head games and tit-for-tat checklist nonsense that seems to be so prevalent among the "beautiful people."

Ah, I can't rant coherently on this- I'll just go on for hours without getting anywhere.

Yes, Teri Polo is mad thin. I'd certainly say she could afford to gain a few pounds. That said, if she were a great match for me as an individual, I wouldn't kick her out of bed for being too skinny. Of course, the amount of time and concern that she likely invests in maintaining that skinniness would probably rule out her being a great match anyways. I like healthy women. Not too fat, not too lean- just healthy, and able to keep up with my hyperactive ass.

Right. Rambling. Sorry.

Skinny models for prestige and aesthetics. Chubby chicks for pleasure and MORE pleasure.

Men like women that look good to them.
Women like men with better jobs than them.

Ladies- how attractive is an good looking ambitionless man in a dead end job? Not very, I'll bet.

Men: How attractive is a that hot waitress? Job doesn't much matter, does it?

It's all about resources for the ladies, and looks for the men. There was a study of female physicians (!) that showed that they would not be comfortable marrying a male physician that earned less than they did. And we know how men think.

Please refer to this post here for my thoughts.

http://hobbesian.blogspot.com/2005_01_16_hobbesian_archive.html#110608199470874987

If you care, of course.

If I smile at her and she smiles back then she's sexy. If she smiles at me I will smile back and she's sexy.

Men like women that look good to them.
Women like men with better jobs than them.

Ladies- how attractive is an good looking ambitionless man in a dead end job? Not very, I'll bet.

Men: How attractive is a that hot waitress? Job doesn't much matter, does it?

It's all about resources for the ladies, and looks for the men. There was a study of female physicians (!) that showed that they would not be comfortable marrying a male physician that earned less than they did. And we know how men think.

After tracking down other [non-nude] photos of Teri Polo, it became obvious that she has lost a lot of weight for the latest publicity photos and it isn't for the better, in my opinion. Her face has become too angular. I'm going to guess she's lost even more weight since the Playboy shoot.

www.celebstation.org/picture/41701/Teri_Polo

Most men of my generation (I'm 29) prefer a woman with a little padding. I've often remarked about this to my male friends of the same age and we're in consensus, boniness is so 80s. We'd all like to see the current starlets with about 15-20 extra pounds.

Every man has a range beyond the ends of which a girl is too skinny or too fat. But he'll hedge his bets towards the skinny side since it's always easier to put on than take off, and everyone starts that slow slide up the scale after 30. A man may think you're just perfect at size 11, but that doesn't mean he'll be just as attracted to you at size 13. Most women only think of "those skinny bitches" and "us fat girls", regardless whether they themselves are a size 18 or a size 6. Therefore a man can't be too expressive over how much he likes a little more softness and a little more droop, for fear that you'll take it as a license to balloon up.

I'm also one of Allah's 1%ers. Personally, I prefer the short ladies, mainly on account of I'm big, adopted, and vehemetly opposed to someday finding myself on Jerry Springer. Outside of favoring the vertically challanged, personality & brains are more important to me that most physical atrributes. To pick two actresses I find hot on either end of the build spectrum, I find Victoria Lake (in her prime, of course) & Jeanne Garafalo to be equally hot.

This Polo chick is so skinny, she looks like she should have numbers tattooed on her arm and be wearing black & white striped PJs with a yellow Magen David sewn on.

I've skipped the first part of the comments since I'm late to the thread and Michele has asked an answer to Allah's question.

First off, we just might be talking two totally different things ... dating and marrying. If one is looking at fun and giggles and mere hookin' up, then going for the "hottest" thang in the club that night to take home and bed will be true for either gender. What one finds "hot" is then subjective and expectedly shallow.

Sooner or later, one needs to give up the appetizers and move on to the entree. Cuz, to be blunt and cliched, no one stays 20 something forever...and you have a choice of finding someone who can partner with while laughing together as you grow old and gain wrinkles and grey hair, or you can continue clubbing wearing those pants with the built in tummy control, get little hair plugs for the receding hairline and the different hot-thang 20 something you take home each Friday night will be charging you $100 an hour.

Old people in love are hot to each other. The reality of that was demonstrated to me when I was a teen and walked into the kitchen at home and caught my grandfather cupping my grandmother's boobs and her laughing and lovin' it. I was at first shocked (good lord, didn't teens invent sex? how can a couple in their early 70's act like that?) but later, it really gave me hope. (they were married for 59 years and died within months of each other)

Some would have it that of course they are into a litany of looks...but y'all, what would you think of a spouse who's mate lost a limb to an accident or cancer and decided to divorce them? Wouldn't you be horrified at the shallowness?

BTW .. look at Polo's purple dress pic, then at the layout..and also read she's had a baby. The woman has had boob surgery. Really good surgery, but surgery none the less. The boob in the dress is not the same as the ones in the layout. And puhleeze..let's not look at Playboy layouts and pretend she has "perfect" skin! It's fantasy, guys and gals, airbrush or Photoshop fantasy.

Men cant win. If they prefer large breasts, they have a mommy fetish. If they prefer petite waifs, they are sexually conflicted and/or pedophiles. And if they claim no preference, they are revealed as mambi-pambi feelings guys and never get laid anyway. Fortunately men that do the best making a practice of not caring what other people think of their motivations.

Sparkling eyes (color doesn't matter), with fine laugh lines at the corners.

An effortless smile and ready laugh. Soft shoulders, sexy collarbones and a neck you want to nibble right up to her ticklish ears.

A voice that can be strong or soft but is most often merry, and occasionally sultry.

A small waist and with nicely distingushed hips and nice natural cleavage.

A tiny littel "pooch" of a belly can be cute, too.

Sizes? Who cares?

Most single digit twigs just don't fit, (I'm 6'3", you figure it out), and look like teen boys anyway. Marilyn Monroe or Ana Nicole (the first time around) would be just about perfect in my eyes, and I think they were both in the 10-14 range.

That works for me.

Let's take a step back a moment. Michele merely asked about what we considered sexy. Bringing it around to people that we find attractive after some time is a different story altogether.

Often we find ourselves working with or spending a lot of time with women that initially we didn't think much of. As time goes by and you get to know that person, your overall outlook on them could change and they could easily become that much more attractive. The same works in reverse. We could work with a woman that could gorgeous. But she could also be shallow as a puddle and dumb as a stump. For me personally, I need to have an intelligent conversation with a woman. The subject can vary, but how many times guys, have we thought to ourselves, "What did I ever see in this person?"

Based on looks alone, I would say right now that Catherine Zeta-Jones is sexier than Teri Polo. However, time spent with each woman could change that opinion, regardless of what I initially thought of them based on their looks. Of course, that will never happen, but I was just making a POINT!

I think what it all boils down to is that attractiveness is basically a matter of taste, both with men and women. And this is a very good thing. Unless you are a fringe specimen who could be mistaken for a mutant from deep space, there is a certain set of the opposite gender who consider you to be hot looking, even if you don't quite fit their ideal of physical perfection. It seems like a good system to me.

Teri Polo might not exactly jive with my idea of feminine perfection, but she's close enough, by God. As the saying goes, "ask for too much and sometimes you get nothing at all."

I live in a country which seems to be overstuffed with astoundingly good-looking women. Every day I see at least half a dozen true head turners. But the greatest thing is that a really high proportion of the women here are genuinely nice. What do I find sexy? A woman who will talk to me, as an equal, who laughs a lot and actually seems to enjoy my company. I'm a pretty easy guy to get along with, so that's not asking that much, but girls, please, remember that even though we generally want to get in your pants, we'd usually rather it was the old-fashioned way. If a guy starts talking to you in a bar it is just possible he is merely trying to be friendly. I value my platonic friendships with women very highly. I like flirting. That's probably the biggest turn-on for me. And when they say that brains are the biggest aphrodisiac, well count me in. In my experience I've found that really dumb chicks, even great-looking ones, don't have the imagination to be good in bed.

As for looks - I genuinely like a very wide spectrum. Tall, skinny girls are great. Tiny, petite pocket venuses are great. I love girls who are a little bit plump - they're so cuddly. I prefer long hair, but the gamine, Audrey Hepburn look works for me as well. Big boobs are a plus, bit it's not a deal-breaker. As in general life, I don't discriminate by race. I've been out with girls from all four corners of the earth.

If I were to pick a sort of template, I'd go for Christina Ricci over Christina Aguilera. Teri Hatcher over Teri Polo (although she seems a very healthily-proportioned woman judging by the pics). Charisma Carpenter over Sarah Michelle Gellar. Megyn Price from 'Grounded for Life' is sexy as all get-out. I'd rather date Delta Burke than Milla Jovovich. And I'd rather date (and marry) a plain Jane with an IQ of 160 than an Elle McPherson with the IQ of a tomato.

In other words, I'm pretty normal.

Curves beat bones every time. I'm a butt/leg man and there is nothing sexier than a big(ger) girl neeling back on her haunches increasing the grade of that curve.

Of course, being a guy, I'd throw Ms. Polo out of bed. There is, afterall, more room on the floor.

Seriously though, I like women period...my wife included. Especially if they go both ways...

As for myself do I keep to the same standard? Yes. Since my standards are really low... I meet them as well.

Another point, I'm suprised at all the hateration towards skinny girls. Some of them really can't help it. Everyone can look like a movie star when they can write off a 6-hour-a-day personal trainer as a business expense (not to mention discreet surgeons). One of my best friends never broke 115lbs, despite her trying to keep pace with me frequently at all-you-can-eat buffets. One thing that is not attractive is a plump girl who is constantly kvetching and pissing about how much she hates skinny girls. That's just displaced self-loathing, right there.

I've dated some sumptuously-sized women, and part of their appeal was their complete comfortability with their own size. That kind of confidence is very sexy. Also, they all had great hair.. oh.. the things they could do with it..

I must also note that my references to sizes were just picked at random. As was mentioned before we men know f*ck all about women's sizes.

I like any nationality/ethnicity. Natural blonde okay, but brunette preferred. Any height over 5', though I've dated a woman who was shorter. Being proportionate to her height is more important than a specific weight. Too skinny is a turnoff.

Generally, I don't hold women to a higher standard than myself, but I also don't turn down any who are in better shape than me. :)

I've long tended to think that it has something to do with gay fashion designers decided what is sexy in a woman. If you're not in a position to, or simply can't appreciate curves and softness, then why not promote the concept that women should look like skinny boys?

I'm just one guy, but I know a lot of them, and, some of our more self-destructive proclivities aside, I have observed the following:

Curvy, jiggly, bouncy is sexy. Skinny, boney, desicated and hollow is not sexy. Women who feel good about themselves are sexy. Women who are uptight and insecure about thier figures are not sexy. Men like to look at things. We're very visual. This is often interpreted as objectification. Maybe. Women who don't care about this are sexy. Women who like us the way we are are sexy. Women who want us to be different than we are are not sexy. Feminity is sexy. Feminism is not sexy. Women who like to have sex are sexy. Women who don't enjoy the act of passionate physical coupling are not sexy. Coop girls are sexy. Fashion models/actresses are status symbols. They're the cupie doll you win at life's little state fair. I find women much more interested in them than men. You wanna see what men like, look at some strippers. They aint that skinny.

Condie Rice is sexy. Kinda stern. Like a school principal. Still waters run deep. And bookish women are always so pleasantly suprised...

I gotta go.

Teri Polo looks fantastic. I see more than enough padding, and she doesn't have that "iguana" look we associate with Lara Flynn Boyle and Calista Flockhart. Sorry, fat girls. But then if you read my blog, you already hate me, except when I post recipes.

Allah says men value looks "above all." I wouldn't go that far. For example, Susan Sarandon was hot when she was young, but I wouldn't go near a crazy bitch like that if she pooped gold bricks.

If I had a choice between a moderately attractive woman with a great personality and a steaming hot supermodel with less going on upstairs, the supermodel wouldn't stand a chance. I'm not going to date a fat gross pig, but when it comes to looks, the test is whether you look so bad sex would be a problem, and that's not a real high threshold.

So to recap: 1) no fat gross pigs; 2) beauty is no substitute for a three-digit IQ. Sorry, fat girls. And also stupid gorgeous girls.

To address, at least in a way, Allah's comments.

Long ago, I was one of the programmers for a computer-matching plan for student mixers at the university I was attending. As everyone who was signing up had to come to the union lounge and fill out the form, I secretly recorded other marks indicating which of the girls I and my two buddies prefered. I then ran the numbers on the girls I'd selected and found my "ideal" from over five hundred girls -- and then told the computer to find that girl. (Found her, forced a match to her, but she didn't come to the dance, none of her soriety sisters did either.)

Did the same for my buddies; didn't work for them, either, the girls didn't like the guys.

Before and since, tall and short, fat and skinny, 32aa to 40dd, white, black, Amerindian, ..., smart and stupid, all eye colors except violet, all hair colors, athletes and potatoes ... it's in your head (and in her head.)

I suspect that those who are on the line between the perfect model 8 and the USA median are probably the "most desired" because they're the most commonly encountered samples. Thin is better for a model because of how fabrics drape, you don't need to dispose of as much fabric going back to the waist from the bust and hips.

I'd say that the most desireable are those that desire me, but there's a limit there, too, as I've been stalked and that's not desireable at all.

I still think that the sexiest character on Buffy was Joyce (perhaps because the rest of them look too young to be legal.)

Any guy who bases his opinion of a woman upon her gorgeousness is bound to end up with a string of ex-wives, and he's getting what he deserves.

I've been married for seven years. My wife has gone from being very thin to somehwat heavy to think-but-healthy.

I have found that, over the years, my wife's body shape has been the center of my "attraction zone". When she was at her heaviest, I was drawn to women like Kirstie Alley, Nia Vardalos, and Titanic-era Kate Winslet. When she sliimmed down, I found my "attraction zone" scaling down as well; the abovementioned women are now less attractive to me than they were when my wife was heavier.

I guess the short answer is that I'm attracted to women who look like my wife. I hope that's no crime.

Most men like women with some (not too much!) meat on their bones. Proof: look at the women in women's magazines: pencils. Now look at the women in men's magazines (this Teri Polo photo spread is an exception to the rule): meat.

Women also dress for other women. Proof: ask any man if he would prefer to see you in a sexy dress or naked. I rest my case.

and then told the computer to find that girl.

Filed under "Why computer programmers place consistently among the least laid, Part 47,352."

In the movie premier pics, she looks cut but not anorexic -- in other words, she looks as if her trainer has been working her a bit too hard, but not like she isn't getting enough food, a la Ally McBeal. Ally McBeal looked like Skeletor. Teri looked like she was shredded in the movie pics -- a bit too masculine, but not sickly.

In the Playboy photos she looks softer -- and better, IMHO. Women generally don't look their best when they're below 15-20% bodyfat.

As for Allah's comments, can I get a "Hell yeah"?

Guys and gals judge each other according to different criteria -- actually, it's not so much completely different criteria as different rankings of those criteria. All things equal, most women will prefer an attractive man. All things equal, most men will prefer a smart, personable woman. But of course, all other things are not equal, and thus the priorities.

And I think it needs to be said that, functionally, the more you think you have to offer, the less you will compromise on your priorities.

What's fat? What's too-thin? The answer to both is something like obscenity -- I'll know it when I see it. Ms. Polo clearly needs to eat something.

I have to agree with the Supreme Being in his jadedness. Clearly attractiveness (and therefore corresponding ego and prestige) in women is most desirable to men, whereas resources (and therefore corresponding security and prestige) in men is most desirable to women. This does not change, nor is it necessarily a bad thing.

Personally, I think that it's a good thing that women find greater resources more attractive. Gives me some much-needed long term perspective while sitting in my cubicle, you know what I mean?

What is changing is that as the purchasing power of women accelerates in the marketplace, so does their purchasing power in crease in the sexual marketplace. Some women seem to be objectifiying men more, as a result, and the desire for more physically attractive men is undeniable -- seen any Bowflex ads lately?

What women want is baffling. My granma always used to tell me that old-school Mexican women had only three criteria when they looked for a man -- the three "f's": fuerte, formal, y feo (strong, mannered, and ugly). Ugly in the sense of not pretty, i.e. "rugged good looks". No Rob Lowe for her, thank you very much. Ah, for simple days.

Now-a-days, it seems that women suffer because they think they know precisely what they want -- "falling in love with a framework" -- and, unlike men, it would appear that the shopping list of desired features and requirements does not decrease over time. An example might include "Is he cute?" leads to "Is he popular" leads to "Is he fun and fun-loving?" leads to "Is he rich?" leads to "Is he presentable?" leads to "Is he good with kids?" leads to "Is he a good conversationalist?" leads to "Is he a good companion?", etc. (This example is not uniform nor universal, just a possiblility to illustrate the evolving taste of women.) Unfair to pass judgement? Maybe. Then again, I'm not the one that's going to have to deal with a biological clock and that burgeoning shopping list, so, whatever. I can always turn her in for this year's model -- she'll find me attractive, for the next year or so.

As for myself, I'm attracted to a woman's beauty (I stay for different reasons: intelligence, character, humor, interests, etc.) As an object, a woman is always more than the sum of her parts. She's not like fried chicken -- do you want breast, thighs or wings? -- she's more like a work of art: the complete package. The aesthetic value of the woman (or the artistic object), is determined by the proprotionality of the parts to the whole, and the unity then projects artistic value. Big hips, small hips, big breasts, small breasts, big butt ,small butt, however you look at a woman, it's all contingent on the rest of her. Look at Minnie Driver -- gorgeous woman but has a man chin -- or Elizabeth Hurley -- gorgeous woman but has a man nose -- the whole overrides the parts (and thank god for that!)

Art and aesthetics, however, are not just about objects, they are about transformative events and dynamic experience. What transforms the object from simply being an object and into a drop-dead gorgeous or butt-fugly human being is the incarnation of the non-physical into physicality. I've known women who were, physically nothing special, until they started to interact with you, and the mannerisms, the expressions, the raw movement of her body transformed her into a goddess. Likewise, I've seen conventionally good looking women turn to complete hags with the smallest change of expression.

There is no either/or -- it's the complete package. You're attractive on the outside and the inside, and they determine each other endlessly. This entails several things: 1) There is no such thing as "type", not really: that's more a reflection of utility than beauty, 2) People can change their minds, 3) Stupidity makes somebody uglier than shit, 4) "Beauty happens" -- it's unexpected and a complicated event of numerous variables, 5) a virtuous woman and a woman who can rock a baseball cap are worth more than rubies, and 6) Taste, like good design, matters.

Hopeful? Picky? Realist? You be the judge. Bear this in mind: fat girls, whether they're I-like-you-just-the-way-you-are if they are rich, well mannered and groomed, incredibly graceful and fluid, remain fat.

Tastes vary too much to generalize, but I personally don't find the emaciated look sexy, and I don't think many men do. And I would contend the assertion that these actresses and models are losing all that weight because they think that men like it. It is because decision makers in their worlds think the slimmer the better. When I compare, for instance, Cameron Diaz in The Mask with her appearance now... she is way too skinny now, I don't find her attractive any more. I have similar reactions to the changes in other actresses. What really scares me is that if it is true that the camera makes one look heavier, then how skinny would they look if you met them in person?

Back in the 19th Century, big girls were more highly valued. Hell, with the exception of that “flapper” thing in the 20s, bigger, more voluptuous girls were all the rage.

Now, just past the turn of the 21st Century, skinny chicks are in. I blame globalization and all those chain-smoking Europeans and their sense of “beauty”.

Or look at it this way. Big girls were all the rage throughout history. Now, for about 30-40 years, skinny women are popular. For about 99.9999999% of history skinny girls have gotten the short end of the stick. Now the roles are reverse.

I think that justice says that they’re allowed to be popular now.

Kate Winslet. I like the curves.

Allah--

Bettie Page (NSFW) had an hourglass figure. Raquel Welch had an hourglass figure. Sophia Loren had an hourglass figure.

Teri Polo has a female pelvis, mammary glands, post-shoot processing, and not much else.

Beyond that, I've got no little to say about your specific claims--mainly because I think making generalizations about two groups that comprise roughly half the US population apiece is a fools' game. You'll find entirely different standards of female beauty when you compare white, black, and Latino populations, or urban and rural populations. The same goes for male image, not to mention gender relations.

-- What is sexy? --

Big tits and a bigger trust fund.

Do you want a life-partner or a sex-partner or a mother for your children?

Some guys luck out and get a woman that fits all three.

Almost all women on TV & in movies are way too thin; not so much on the screen but when you see them in real life. Callista Flockhart (to name just one) had a pretty face, but her bod was not appealing at all. The gal in the Playboy spread looks okay; not my type, but hardly emaciated. I'm sure she could add 10-15 pounds and only the camera would notice.

Of course, we men seldom get our types anyway; I always seem to end up with short girlfriends even though it's not something I think of when I'm contemplating the ideal woman (and I'm 6'2", so it's not as if many women would DQ me on that basis).

Above Allah makes a fundamental error in comparing women's expectations with men's. He assumes that the greater specificity of women indicates a greater interest in the superficial details of a partner's physical nature than men have. And he is confusing cause with effect. The reason that women have such greater specificity is that more of women's dialogue both with themselves and their women peers is centered around relationships. Women's nature - probably as a function of biology - is to focus upon relationships in great detail. Forming them, analysing them, modifying them. As a result, because they spend a lot of time thinking about them, women then have great specificity on the details.

Men do not as a part of their nature have the same deep introspection upon relationships in and of themselves. As a result, men do not as a rule have the same detail in that aspect.

I do not find this Teri Polo chick anything more than ordinarily attractive. Don't get me wrong - were I single, I'd do her (the bar there was always rather low, alas). I'm not sure I can put a finger on it, but it almost seems she ought to be more attractive than she is. The total is definitely lesser than the sum of the parts with her. Yes, she is too skinny (but that is not, in and of itself, a deal breaker). Her face is not very feminine looking or something. Can't quite put it in words.

As for what I do like - I am a sucker for round boobs (size not as important as shape) and bubble butts (not J-Lo bubbly, but toned, muscular butts) on girls. And legs. Long, toned, well-tanned legs slay me (Ms. Polo's are far too skinny). I prefer brunettes to blondes, and there MUST be something going on upstairs. I never could stand being in the company of dumb women for more than, ahem, a few minutes.

That said, my wife is 37, 5'5" and approx 140 lbs. She is dark-complected Greek, and the mother of my two sons. Though she doesn't have the figure she had in college (I blame her mother), she is still the sexiest woman in my world.

Until Catherine Zeta-Jones enters my world, that is.

Yes, I like women who aren't fat.
Trim. Slim. Athletic. Size 14? No. You aren't trim, slim, or athletic, unless you're a female shotputter.

5'6" to 5'10". 125 to 150 lbs or so. With that weight, probably B to C cups, max. something to hold, nothing too massive. And a waist. A nice narrow waist. I love navels.

Why don't I like fat chicks? I don't like fat. I don't like tummy rolls, I don't like saggy arms. I don't like floppy boobs or falling butts.

Do I hold myself to the same standard? Yes. I'm in my 30's, still weigh the same I did my senior year in high school (180 lbs, 6'2"). I have a pretty decent body.

David

You want to know what is attractive. Get a piece of paper and a pencil.

Draw a large capital "X".

Now, draw an upside down "U" that crosses the "X" a little above the intersection of the two legs of the "X", and the verticle portions of the U are outside the bottom most part of the X.

Now, erase part of the X between the upper curve of the upside down "U" and the intersection of the two legs of the "X".

Draw a horizontal line to cap off the top of the "X" and between the bottom of the "X" and the Upside down "U" (three horizontal lines)

That is the shape men like. The size is mostly irrelevant. Shape is what is important.

I can't remember the comedian that said this, but it has always rung true to me. The context was some Hollywood guy getting busted cheating on his totally hot girlfriend/wife (it might have been Hugh Grant or Tommy Lee or some one):

"Show me the hottest chick in the world, and I'll show you a guy who's tired of [banging] her."

This goes to the point that a lot of the men are making here, but a lot of the women are finding hard to believe. It does matter to (most) men that a woman have brains - at least if there is any prospect for anything other than short-term carnal pleasures.

Otherwise, even the hottest chick on earth inevitably and invariably grows tiresome.

Bright
Cheerful
Medium build
Dark Skin
understands the world
fun in bed
can kick my ass in video games

but somehow I married the opposite :/

Ilyka:

I'm willing to believe there are women out there who are only in it for the money, but it's always difficult for me to address this one because I seem to have missed that gene

I've had women tell me flat out that they won't date me because I'm not rich, so I assure you, they do exist. On the other hand, I understand how you might think they don't. Intellectual women are probably less likely than most to be gold-diggers, and since intellectuals tend to associate with other intellectuals, it stands to reason that they'd be acquainted with fewer gold-diggers too. Doesn't mean they're not out there.

that's what disturbs me about our culture's increasing tendency to romance the thin: The definition of "thin" has changed.

Click here and scroll two-thirds of the way down for a photo of Twiggy. She looks like a Giacometti sculpture. Her calves are about the same thickness as an average man's upper arms. She barely looks like a woman at all. Do you really see no difference between her and Polo?

I agree that the definition of "thin" has changed, but for every guy nowadays willing to call an emaciated woman healthy there's a woman out there willing to call a healthy woman emaciated. Teri Polo doesn't look emaciated in those photos. She could stand to gain a few pounds, but she's still a cute blonde with a hot ass and great skin (post-airbrush, at least).

I should add that I see just as much of a tendency to romance the fat as the thin. There's some sense now that a woman who refuses to lose weight to make herself more attractive to men is nobler than those who don't, just as a guy who'd date her is somehow nobler than guys who don't find her attractive. Me, I believe in competition and thus shed no tears for those who fail because they weren't willing to compete.

I notice the more rigidly someone, male or female, adheres to those roles, the less likely it will be I'll befriend them, male or female.

Me too, because it turns them into a cartoon and I don't want to date Betty Boop. People like that always make me think they're acting out of some sort of affectation or ulterior motive, although for whose benefit or for what reason I have no idea. See, e.g., Chris Carter in "American Beauty."

We're getting off topic, aren't we?

But you find an older, single woman, and she says, "Hey, I just want a man! Got a dick and a job and I'll be happy."

Ah, but the key word there is "older," isn't it? When that clock starts to tick, women are forced into a choice: Stick with the shopping list and risk spinsterhood, or take whatever shit you can get. I'm in my 30s and I'm keenly aware of the fact that there's no woman who has a list with me on it, so if a woman my age shows interest, there can be only one conclusion re: why she's interested. The question for me then becomes, do I want to be this chick's consolation prize? Because I know she's still got that list somewhere tucked away in a drawer in her mind.

Like I said above, we drink Bud because we can't afford champagne. That's true for women as much as it is for men. Perhaps more so.

I'm always amused at men that say they only date women with big tits, or long legs, or blonds, you know the drill. I mean when a guy sets limits like that they cut themselves off from a lot of truly hot ladies. Me? I genuinely love women, all different types of women. I have no preferred type, heck I find all different types of women to be attractive and I've dated every body type from thin with mousy brown hair to buxom blond with some junk in the trunk. From thick chicks to skinny minis I've dated them all. My main requirement is that they have really nice skin. Something about a women covered in moles and scars just doesn't do it for me - tats are ok though - and I won't date anyone who weighs within 50 lbs of what I weigh, but then I way 310 so that's not too restrictive.

I can't count the number of times I've seen guys leave their skinny 12-year-old-boy bodied women to be with other men. There's a reason guys who like girls who look like guys like guys!

Always should be someone you really love...

"if a woman my age shows interest, there can be only one conclusion re: why she's interested. The question for me then becomes, do I want to be this chick's consolation prize?"

Jesus, Allah, the old 'you wouldn't want to belong to a country club that would have you' bit? You're way better than that.

"Me, I believe in competition and thus shed no tears for those who fail because they weren't willing to" you say wrt fat women who stay that way.

And, yet, you decry women wanting men with money and say you haven't got enough of it. Then get it, if you wanna play by your own rules.

Ouch man. Allah, you're in NYC right? You should come out to SoCal and try things out here for a little bit. If you stick around USC, it's worse than NYC, but if you head to San Diego, the chicks are actually 1) really hot 2) really cool 3) really fun. That includes everyone from 21-35 - or whatever your preference. East coast bitches are the worst. I know, I lived there 95% of my life. Even after only living here for 6 months, I went home to visit my family and thought to myself, "Where the f__k did all the hot girls go?!?!?" Nowhere was the answer. They were all still right there, but they were just unattractive to me. Not only were they unattractive, but I couldn't even get the time of day from any of 'em. Then my cell phone rang with one of the aforementioned cool/hot/fun Cali girls that I'd met, and all was well once again.

I didn't look at the nudy pics - I prefer the girls with some clothes on - but I must say, a woman should be able to fill the kind of dress she was wearing. It wasn't really that much...

As for what is sexy; I would have to say the face is a big part. The face is what you see the most, and if that is something you can't deal with...well, the bag over the head is not really an option...

And I just go for the red hair...I don't know why...and I don't much care for blond at all. Laura Prepon in That 70's show. She was almost perfect(and not just with the hair, either). Until she dyed her hair blond. Blegh.

And the ginormous breasts...ewww. Pam Anderson just disgusts me. I don't really like anything too out of proportion like that. Just doesn't feel right.

And I have to say that brains are sexy, too; and in my case, at least, a preresiquisite to any sort of relationship. One of the very few things that piss me off is stupidity. And it angers me greatly. I can hardly stand to be near someone stupid, let alone be in some sort of relationship with them. That being said, even if someone seemed mighty fine before, if they turn out to be dumb, or have a bad attitude, suddenly they not bein' so fine.

As for putting myself up to my own standards? Of course. Especially considering my standards are pretty broad...

I'd like to see some responses to Allah's comment.

How about: This world view of yours must be working out well for you because your apparent happiness with your life is overwhelming.

I hate to disagree with Den Beste - but I really don't think many of today's runway models have what it takes to make a good "baby oven." Many women THAT thin don't even menstruate. I would say that the obnoxious level to which we hold female beauty has nothing to do with her ability to bear children. Just as there are many men, in fine jobs, who can provide for families. Having "child bearing hips" are probably pretty low on most men's "want" list.
But I would say to a man that claims to have repeatedly met with bitches who give them the shove-off because they fail to live up to their standards ... perhaps you should re-examine how you go about choosing your dates?

Re: Allah's comment

Allah's pretty much ded on IMO. I mean , do I hold myself to the same standards as the women I date? Hell no. First of all I, like most men, don't really have a problem with my looks. Hell, I think I look pretty good. Sure, I weigh 310 and I'm only 5'10", but I'm used to play some college ball and I did some amateur lifiting - I mean I can still bench 290 and can deadlift 395 - so a lot of my weight is muscle mass. I'm not saying I don't have a paunch, but flabby I'm not. Of course I don't mind if a woman has some "love handles" on her, even "love roll-bars" aren't bad really, but I do draw the line at the "love mudflaps and off-road roll cage" combo, 'cause that ain't right.

Cadaverous is not sexy.

Since when is "a woman with a brain is sooo sexy" a cop-out? It's reality. It's also rare. And the smart ones too often think it's cute to act dumb. They're wrong.

Voices are good. Squeaky voices aren't too attractive. Not repellant either, but not sexy.

Allah is about 80% full of crap. And the 20% that isn't crap is misinterpreted. Women don't actually know what they want, but they think they do - hence the shopping list. Freud made the same mistake - he wanted to know what women want, and asked a woman. He never did find out.

Those who think the emaciated waif look is de rigeur should see Jayne Mansfield in The Girl Can't Help It, the scene where she walks up the stairs. It's ridiculous. It's also unforgettable.

There is something that makes some women supernaturally sexy, and it's apparent instantly. I can't figure out what it is, but it's something to do with walking. It never shows on closer examination - they look very ordinary then. I've seen it maybe twice, ever. And maybe two or three times on TV (no, Jayne doesn't have it). Sorry, I know this isn't much help. In the meantime, smart will do. But no cadavers!

On the Polo issue, it's pretty easy. She just doesn't do it for me. That's not to say that skinny-ish women dn't, though. Gwyneth Paltrow does it for me and so does Bridget Fonda.

But what I like the most is a women with curves, whether that means she's 4'10" or 6'1". I want some proportion and something to hold onto and I don't mind extra to hold onto. I've dated thin and I've dated bigger and in every case, I've thought the woman I dated was great-looking.

I can safely say that I don't have any one "framework" (to steal Allah's term) and a look through the women I've dated - though that's not been a bazillion - will bear that out. I do date, at least in part, for looks. The woman has ot be appealing to me physically.

I can safely say, though, that in every case, the women I dated dug my mind or my personality first - long before they dug me physically. I'm far form the type of guy who can pick up a woman in a bar because I just don't have "the look". I'm average height, fat, wear glasses, and smile a whole lot. I'm not the bad boy or the surfer guy or the rugby jock, or the fashion plate. I don't win based on looks and it's cost me goodness knows how many dates over the years.

So I do agree with Allah that women are every bit as "looks hungry" as men are. They're just a lot more coy about it, and are allowed to be so by society in general.

Oh and as an aside, Venomous Kate is a real dish!

I like a strong woman, powerful, muscular, and confident.

As for where to find the perfect modern female archetype?

BEACH VOLLEYBALL!

Even other women don't complain when men rhapsodize over the goddesses of beach volleyball. I've known women to actually stare at a beach volleyball match in silent awe, mesmerized by the statuesque perfection.

Title IX rules.

"What is sexy?"

Brains.

Title IX rules
Feh. I disagree. Volleyball, at least in CA and HI, have always been able to support themselves. The sport is HUUGE out here.

In any case, getting off topic - back to talking about sex-kittens.

When I quit smoking I weighed 98 pounds and wore a size 2. Now I'm about 30 pounds heavier - most of it muscle from working out but a fair amount of it is curvy, squishy bits. Other women say I look great, much healthier, etc. but the only man who has said I look good is my brother. Other men have gone from whistling and gawking to treating me like someone's mother... which I am.

I used to hate my collarbones sticking out and the boney sternum thing is just too gross. Personally, I'm quite proud to actually have a chest now but I do think the majority of men prefer the starving look.

The "attractive" look that most women struggle to achieve when they diet, pick out clothes, do their hair, etc. isn't really the look that attracts men. It is the look that makes their friends jealous. They shouldn't call it "attractive," they should call it "yourfriendswillhateyou." You look at the pictures in women's magazines and read the articles about what's in and what's out. Do you think those magazines are put together by a group of heterosexual men? No, they are put together to the standards of other women and of homosexual men. Heterosexual men aren't going to reject a woman because she is wearing last years hairstyle or shoes. Most heterosexual men don't even know the difference between last years fasion and this year's fashion.

I agree with the first "Chris"'s comments. If a woman want's to know what men find attractive, look at some Men's magazines. Those women aren't going to be pencil thin and they aren't going to be wearing the latest fashions. Marilyn Monroe and Bettie Page in their prime were much more attractive to the average guy than Twiggy or Ms. Polo.

If you ladies starve yourselves and spend fortunes buying this week's styles so that other women will be jealous of you, don't turn around and blame us guys for setting unrealistic standards for you. We men would be much happier if you were just in healthy physical condition and wore something simple and flattering... like one of our dress shirts unbuttoned too far over some lacy underwear with a pair of season passes tucked in a strategic location.

Do I find Teri Polo attractive? I really can't say, because I don't know her. That's not a cop-out; that's what I really think. A little conversation over an adult beverage (hot and caffinated, of course), and I'll be able to answer the question. In my mid-30's, I've learned that even the hottest looking girl can't compensate for severe emotional, intellectual, or personality defects by showing more skin. The opposite is true, also; an average looking girl can become irrisistible after you get to know her. That's part of the fun, anyway.

Sticking strictly with the physical aspects, the answer is no. The female body was intended to carry a higher body fat percentage than men. Drop below a certain percentage, and you stop looking like a woman. Healthy appearance = good; unhealthy appearance = bad. Men don't care about how much you weigh. They are more holistic in their approach to female appreciation.

An example of attractive, healthy appearance? Summer Sanders. She's definitely not overweight, but obviously -- being an Olympic athelete -- has a healthy approach to her body. She looks awesome.

You might as well ask why Arab men seem to go for obese women (they do, the women sue for being forced to eat). I thought Teri Polo had great breasts, that's all I responded to in her case... skinny and blond didn't register. I guess I'm a highly advanced objectiviser.

Teri Polo? Mneh.

That 100-pound gal who ate the giant burger, now...

Well, I wouldn't kick her out of my hammock, but she's not my ideal. I prefer women who are about 10 lbs overweight. And if I have trouble holding them against the wall as I...I'll go to the gym more.

And no, I don't hold myself to the same standards. I hold myself to higher standards--though I don't always meet them.

Read Matt Ridley's "The Red Queen" for a far, far better explanation of this aspect of human behavior (from evolutionary psychology) than you will get from any ordinary psychology, anthropology, or sociology course youu took in college.

Mostly, I'm just wanting to correct some of the stuff people are saying about evolution. I'd be the LAST person to contradict that men's and women's preferences are shaped by it, but it's a considerably more complicated picture than is typically thrown out there.

Mainly, it's the fact that human females are concealed ovulators. Since our asses don't light up like a Christmas tree every time we're fertile, that makes the "bang everything with a nice ass" a considerably less successful strategy for human males than most other mammals. Basically, you have to be a very successful Don Juan of a male to have equal or better success in terms offspring being produced and surviving to reproduce themselves than the guy who picks out one woman and spends all his time banging her- and making sure she's not banging anyone else. His investment is not just in her health and attractiveness, but also in her trustworthiness and potential as a parent, since human infants are so fragile that it takes a minimum of twelve years of dedication, mostly on her part, just to get one to reproductive age. She, meanwhile, has not only an interest in making sure her mate is a good provider likely to stick around, but also in HIS attractiveness; with as much investment per child as she's got to go through, she has a very powerful motivation to select someone with good genes that will produce children that are not only healthy but attractive themselves. Since the real winners in natural selection are the ones with the best grandchildren, handsome male offspring are one of a female's best bets. (Note that both the female's best interests and the male's lie in cheating on their mates while trying to make sure the mate isn't cheating themselves.) Not only that, but females have as much interest in selecting for relatively gentle men that are likely to treat offspring well as they do in selecting for an aggressive one that will be at the top of the troop heirarchy and a good protector/hunter. One of the major causes of infant mortality in almost any social primate species is aggression from the males, and as much monkey tail as the bastard alpha male gets, there are going to be a few more laid-back guys in the middle rankings that "his" harem is sleeping with behind his back as often as possible.

So, evolution predicts exactly what we've got: a species that's deeply confused about what exactly the hell it is it wants in a mate and spends a lot of time sleeping around behind said mate's back.

Allah,

"we drink Bud because we can't afford champagne."

I'd offer that we drink Mirror Pond because what passes for champagne in America is just fizzy, tasteless swill.

There's a lot to be said about comfort and fullness in beauty. 5'8", 135 and athletic (significant hips and a modest rack) is truly a beautiful thing. (Victoria Zdronk is a nicely buxom archetype of perfection). Were I single, sure Polo would have some attractiveness (body wise, she's a butterface otherwise), if nothing else than just for viewing pleasure. But in the flesh, there's a lot to be desired there.

But to say that men settle because they can't get a high-maintenance, almost boyish, stick figure with small tits, dude, that's just not so.

You're right about gender roles and attractiveness, though. Nothing else on earth explains how Trump managed to get so many beatuiful women in the sack.

I don't look for a man that's filthy rich. I would turn down a man just because he's rich, of course, but it's not a requirement. I do, however, look for someone that earns enough to support a family. Or, as I'm at college, someone who gets good grades and looks like sometime in the future they could earn enough money to support a family. If you're working at McDonald's, I don't care how nice and intelligent you are--what are you going to do if I have quadruplets? And it's a distinct possibility; twins run in the family and with them the possibility of other multiple births.

I'd like to stay at home and homeschool the children, which means I'd like a man that has a good, steady job, can KEEP that job, and knows how to save and spend money responsibly. If you don't meet those requirements, don't even bother. It's not entirely out of selfishness, either. I have a responsibility to my unborn children to marry someone who'll make a good father.

And, yes, my friends and I talk all the time about getting married. One of them already has her wedding dress picked out and knows what kind of flowers she'll carry in her bouquet--and she's not even dating someone right now! So it's no surprise that women spend a lot of time daydreaming about their Perfect Guy... probably as much as the average man spends watching porn.

Steve:

Allah says men value looks "above all." I wouldn't go that far.

Imagine a woman who's drop-dead gorgeous and a complete dial tone otherwise. Now imagine a woman who's a sparkling conversationalist but not at all physically attractive. Who would you rather ask out?

You're basically arguing that looks are a necessary, but not sufficient, condition for dating. I agree. But among the necessary conditions, it's the most important.

Ian Wood:

Beyond that, I've got no little to say about your specific claims--mainly because I think making generalizations about two groups that comprise roughly half the US population apiece is a fools' game.

Sure, in the sense that when you're dealing with that large a group, you're going to find countless exceptions to the rules you're trying to lay down. But I don't think that point eviscerates the generalization. It's called a "generalization" because it's generally true, not always.

I also think you overstate the differences in cultural standards of beauty. Beyonce and Jennifer Lopez might be a little thicker in back than most white girls, but there aren't many white guys who'd be rolling them off a mattress either. However wide the bottom is, it's still an hourglass shape.

Robin:

The reason that women have such greater specificity is that more of women's dialogue both with themselves and their women peers is centered around relationships.

The shopping lists I've encountered have very little to do with attributes that would make a "relationship" work. They don't deal with personality traits. They deal with physical traits and shit like how many flowers their ideal man should be bringing them on Valentine's Day.

Side note to any guys or gals reading this whose shopping list includes anything as superficial as hair color: You have no business being anywhere near an altar. Seriously. Do yourself, and the children you're eventually going to torment, a huge favor by staying out of the dating game entirely. You need a fucking shrink, not a spouse.

c:

"Me, I believe in competition and thus shed no tears for those who fail because they weren't willing to" you say wrt fat women who stay that way. And, yet, you decry women wanting men with money and say you haven't got enough of it.

That's an eminently fair point, and I need to address it. My problem with the money-humpers isn't their behavior; as I said last month in a thread on Steve H's site, I think that that sort of thing is largely evolutionary, much as men's emphasis on looks is evolutionary. And you can't fault people for their biology. My problem with them is that they deny they're gold-diggers, even to themselves. They'll actually take grave offense at the mere suggestion. I promise you, let a reporter go up to Donald Trump's fiancee and ask her what it's like to marry a man for his money and the indignation will be palpable.

Wow, lots of comments.

Summary (quotes from earlier in the comments):

"But really, if a woman likes what she sees when she's naked and looking in the mirror, and if she's willing to share that with me, That gets me halfway there. The other half is letting me know that she desires me. (And sometimes, thes things are enough to affset ALMOST any limitations)"

"Sexy is attitude, not physique. It is a female who subscribes to a reasonable minimum of physical conditioning... but after that minimal screen, wants you, and regularly. Phooey on the skin and bones types, we want women who want us....the chubby, but horny, waitress was appealing- because she was into sex, more or less for its own sake."

...Or you could read "The Red Queen", though I'm more enamored of Jared Diamond's "Why Is Sex Fun"?".

Myself, I was comfortable with being alone and refusing to play the game until someone I really liked that really liked me came along. Worked out great for me, as my marriage is practically idyllic, but I recognize there was a large dose of luck involved.

I fell in love with my wife for her brains. Her looks are fine, but that is not what attracted me. Turns out she has a body very much like the woman in question. My wife can not gain weight no mater what, even after two kids.

Allah's comments are true and funny. I'm writing a series for my blog ("A Guide to Men, for Women") which essentially tracks for women what exactly they are dealing with when they are looking to score a man (I won't pimp it - you can go to the "Articles" on the site if you're interested). But the question - "Men, do you really like this?" - has a certain "plea" element to it that is a common theme in most advice columns given to women on men. It also smells a little like when a comic delivers a line for applause on his or her sense of social justice ("I mean, really, Bubba, if you can't shower with a man in the Army, how can we expect you to kill all the evildoers? [cue hoots and claps from the like-minded do-gooders]." Give me the joke.

It's really simple. If you want to turn your man on, for example, don't pick a different time to be "naughty" or spread rose petals on the bed. Be a porn star. Don't be your version of what you think he wants. Get base. Get root.

Similarly, don't ask if Teri Polo naked does it for you, or any other slim, shapely blonde. She universally hot, she's naked, she's trimmed in the style of the day, and she's naked.

She does it for you. Even to the folks who say "Oh, no . . . not my type" or (sorry blueguitar) "I'd have to have a coffee with her."

No. You wouldn't. Allah's 99-1 stats are correct.

Has anyone besides me seen Meet the Fockers yet? Teri Polo looks wrinkled and haggard. She seems to have aged quite a bit in the four years since Meet the Parents was released.

As for me, I like a woman with a head on her shoulders. I hate necks. Seriously, brains and a sense of humor (and a lovely singing voice) go a long way.

"Show me the hottest chick in the world, and I'll show you a guy who's tired of [banging] her."

That'd be Chris Rock again. I think that bit leads off into a whole thing about how nothing clears a man's head like new pussy. I've never had a straight male friend who wouldn't back that assertion up, at least to me. To their girlfriends? "Oh, honey, of course I still find you as sexy as the day we met. Maybe more sexy, even."

C'mon, people! Didn't we stop reading Playboy in high school?

As for the thick or thin question, let me just put it this way: I don't want to be picking any bones out of my teeth when I go for my dinner, all right?

'nuff said.

Wow!

Ok, straightforward question, straightforward answer. Playboy made her look much much better, not enough to pull the "boing" meter to 10, but as Allah said, I wouldn't kick her out of bed.

The Yahoo pics...yech.

What do I find attractive that she sports? I love nipples. She has extreme nipplage in my book.

The extreme thin thing does nada for me.

But, no matter, the most important thing to remember,

is that no matter how pretty they are, no matter how sexy they seem,

no matter who they are,

somewhere,

there is some guy,

who is tired of her shit.

My problem with them is that they deny they're gold-diggers, even to themselves

OK, Allah, then you need to be "competitive" and make more money and date a woman without asking whether money makes any difference to her, since the answer is offensive to you, just as it is for women to hear men lie and say they love us for our minds when we really know they mostly like us for youthful bods which we know will be an uphill battle to maintain through children and age and gravity. That's a pretty square deal, isn't it?

It's difficult to believe, though, that ability and wit alone can't get you a thin hot babe with a few brains. Hang out in library stacks or lurk in university facilities (without getting arrested). Just don't get all Democrat-like defeatist. You've got to project that confidence the women you'd like want to see in a guy. Alpha males bluster and sometimes even believe their act.

On second thought, maybe the NE urbanites really groove to Dem defeatism and you should wear a blue bracelet as a dim Dem metrosexual.

On topic, some men like them thin and some not. But, a woman's looks usually DO count first, foremost and forever.

Compare a photo of Twiggy to Polo, though, and tell me Twiggy isn't fat by comparison.

Ilyka, I will do so freely and gladly. Do a search on images.google.com for pics of Twiggy at her peak. She was a stick. And I seem to remember arguments about how she set a bad image for young girls because she was so slim. Keep in mind that when she broke onto the scene, she was 5'8" and 97 lbs. Medically anorexic, in short.

Dave in Texas,

You are absolutely right. My wife is a 10 on most people's scales. She never exercises, eats what she wants and stays thin. She is 38 yrs old and people think she is 23. She has gone from a size 6, to a size 8 in the 18 years we'v been together. And yes, I am sick and tired of her shit.

Michele writes:

And for those saying that she's not too terribly thin in the Playboy shoot, check out the other pic of her at Wizbang. I'm sure the Playboy pics are airbrushed. The Yahoo pics are not and those are some damn pointy ribs sticking out of her dress.

Whenever a woman goes into this mode of how-can-any-man-possibly-fer-friggin-chris-sakes-find-that-woman-attractive?!, there is absolutely nothing right that a man can other than nod and mutter, "Yes, you're right. She's ugly." Luckily, I'm not married to Michele, so I get to actually write what I think ;-)

I looked at the picture of Ms. Polo on Wizbang, and what I saw is a picture of a woman who is at a very high level of physical fitness -- i.e., she probably has a much lower body fat ratio than most women, but just by observing her pectoral and arm muscles you can see that it's due to her being in tip top shape, not due to being anorexic. I read somewhere that this actress is a professional dancer by training, which would explain a lot, but in any event she does not appear to be unhealthily thin. Anorexic women lost both fat and muscle tissue; this woman definitely has very well-toned muscle.

Allah--

>But I don't think that point eviscerates the
>generalization. It's called a "generalization"
>because it's generally true, not always.

I would argue that your particular points are "untrue" often enough to make this generalization mostly meaningless--your personal experience notwithstanding.

>I also think you overstate the differences in
>cultural standards of beauty. Beyonce and >JenniferLopez might be a little thicker in back >than most white girls, but there aren't many >white guys who'd be rolling them off a mattress >either.

What makes you think that Beyonce and Jennifer Lopez are representative of black and Latino beauty standards? I'm talking about real people, not media icons. They are no more representative of their respective ethnicities than Teri Polo is of hers.

There are countless studies outlining the differences in body-image, beauty & relationship standards among various ethnicities. Yes, they're generalizations--but they have data to back it up.

I'll weigh in before I read everyone else's response so I won't be influenced.

Like pretty much every other hetero male out there, I would not kick Teri Polo out of bed, unless there was more room on the floor - based on the probably airbrushed, idealized photos shown in Playboy. That's the key, though - IDEALIZED.

If she's actually as bony as the other photos seem to indicate, then I would not find her anywhere near as attractive.

You asked, when it comes to physical attractiveness, "what is sexy?" HEALTHY is sexy. It doesn't really matter if the woman is relatively skinny or a little bit heavy, does she have that healthy glow about her? Does she look capable of working up a healthy sweat for a good long time? That's physically sexy. You want to give her a run for her money, so to speak.

Having said that, it's hardly the only thing that I find attractive. After all, my wife is 5'0" and at least 50lbs overweight. I love her and find her sexy, but I'll be the first to admit that it isn't her physical charms that do it for me.

Well, I'm sure Playboy could do wonders with a nude of me too - because she did look gross in that first shot - the NON-Playboy pic.

And, truer words are never spoken than those of Chris Rock and Scott Harris (above.) No matter how good looking (or how rich a man is) ... if you married for looks or money, you're gonna get a divorce. And, if this conversation isn't ultimately about the "proper" way to look for a spouse, than it really has little relevance.

I was reading the first responses with a bit of disgust at the mixture of white lying and pandering. Allah is correct here IMHO.

And yes, a literal bag of bones or a truly anorexic chick is not attractive. But then obese women often call every fit and trim woman "anorexic", even if they aren't. The trim and athletic build is great. A little weight in the form of curves is good to great. Potbellied and just given up on seeing your feet anymore is sad psychologically as well as physically, but some people are into that too.

Michele,

FWIW, Allah is right on the money, when it comes to money.

I heard it somewhere (I wish I oculd give the credit) but when and where does a woman marry a guy for his "Inner Millionaire"?

And as far as Teri Polo being "too skinny", I have to disagree. She is thin, no doubt, but she is thin. Could she use 10 or twenty pounds? Perhaps.

But remember, there are estimates that 40% of all women in America have an eating disorder, many of them are anorectic. And she may be anorectic, but she is not painfully thin. She's just thin. OK, she's really thin, but I don't think she looks unhealthy.

I've dated elite athletes, dancers, yoginis, models, actresses, all lean, some thin, all muscular. They all struggled with their weight.

And yes, there is tremendous pressure on women in Hollywood to be super-thin. I used to date an actress in LA, I learned this from her.

How many times has a woman said "Does my ass look big in these jeans?"

My answer is, "Look big? I hope it is big."

To each his own, I suppose.

I realize I'm not a "normal" sort of girl. (After all, I dearly love to play video games.) But I never wanted a man with gobs of money. Men like that always wanted to live a much fancier life than I want. They wanted to move in a higher society - too snobby for me. I'm the sort of girl who'd far rather pay X for a new dress at Target than 5X at Macy's. I have no need for or interest in fancy new cars, big houses, boxes of diamond jewelry, name brand clothing and furniture, expensive European vacations, or any of the other status symbols so many women value.

I want enough money so I don't have to live from paycheck to paycheck, but I don't need all kinds of extra money to waste on new clothes. I know there are women like that. I just don't understand their priorities. Money-grubbers and girls who play mind games are the kind who make me ashamed to be a woman.

As to what I think is sexy in a man, I must admit to having a preference for thinner men. I have a thing about flat stomaches. They're really sexy, IMO. I like a bit of muscular definition, but not a whole lot - no highly pronounced six-packs, please.

But that's in an ideal world. In the real world any man who wasn't morbidly obese, was polite, and didn't give me the creeps was, when I was single, almost certain to be well received by me.

I don't know what kind of girls you're meeting, Allah, but you're clearly not looking in the right places.

There's a floor.

If you rise above the floor, you are desirable to men.

If you rise above the floor, men may suggest particular preferences, but the floor has been met. You will be bedded.

So, a discussion of preference is fine. Teri Polo may net be someone's preference. Kate Winslet may be that preference.

But Polo and Winslet are so far above the floor that any suggestion otherwise is untenable and accordingly, suspect.

Carin,

The really ironic thing is that when I originally asked my wife out, I was choosing between 3 women who I thought would be willing to go out with me. One of the ones I did not choose actually appeared in Playboy's Girls of College in 1989. At the time, I thought she dressed too suggestively, and opted for my more conservative now wife. Sometimes I would like to have that choice back. Looking back, I think maybe I was too concerned with what my women friends would think if I started dating her.

My problem with them is that they deny they're gold-diggers, even to themselves.

Well, a woman just can't win with a man who has an attitude like that. She's already damned regardless. That attitude sure is a turn off.

Let me put it like this:

You can have your shopping lists, your preferred body types, your hopes for brains, personality, interests, proclivities, income levels. You can look for outsized body parts or skinny physiques. You can try for any demographic measurement you want.

But...

When you fall in love, NONE OF IT MATTERS. You'll drop your "standards", your "requirements", and even your pride. You will not be able to imagine why any of that stuff ever seemed important.

I don't know what men want. I've given up even worrying about it. I figure that if I worry about what my boyfriend wants, that's something I at least have a chance of determining.

In truth, I don't think there is such a thing as what men want, any more than I think there's such a thing as what women want. Certainly there are things that most men or most women want, but there are always exceptions. And the myriad of different things that most men and most women want don't adhere to rigid groupings. That is to say, that a particular man might want one thing that most other men want, but not another thing that most other men want, and so on and so on.

As for attraction, I think Jay is spot on when he talks about how it's really determined by psychological factors. If you were to ask me the type of man I'm most frequently physically attracted to, I'd say tall and thin. However, if you were to ask me what the boyfriend I was most attracted to looked like, I'd have to tell you he was 5'8" and pudgy. Which is why I've never had a long shopping list. Even back in my college days, when I already knew I had a thing for tall, thin guys (nearly all of the guys I dated having been tall and thin), the guy I was most attracted to was also average height and pudgy. It was then that I learned that shopping lists are meaningless, because you can be very attracted to someone who doesn't fit what you think your qualifications are.

I also realize that this makes me different from a lot of other women. Some of my female friends drive me insane with their laundry list of things they must have in a man.

I don't know. I don't like his accent. It makes him sound ignorant.

What? Does he act ignorant?

No.

Is he nice? Does he treat you well?

Yes.

Then what does it matter what his accent sounds like?

Of course, I have male friends who drive me crazy for the same reason.

I really want to find a woman who has no baggage. You mean, you want a 12-year-old. Sadly for you, that's illegal.

Knowing these people, I'm convinced that they really don't want to be in a relationship. Because if they did, they wouldn't be so ridiculously picky.

To echo the words of studman69

"Her knees are too sharp. She is waaayyy below my standards"

[insert picture of total dork in basement]

[sorry, retarded Fark reference.]

Jeff, I gotta say that the floor moves, too, for different guys. When the super skinny (hipless) girls get up on stage at the strip bar, I look for the other stage or go buy a drink from the (usually voluptuous) barmaid.

Polo might (though not seeing her in person, one can't tell) have those thoroughly un-arousing boy hips. That just saps any sex appeal right there.

Give me the 1:1.3 waist to hip ratio any day. But seriously, some men can find a certain body type wholly unappealing.

I'm of the "different men want different things" school. Also, it's just - who is sexy?

Sexy is different things - Marilyn Monroe, not a size zero by any accounts, was sexy, but then, the chick who plays Elektra, who is a stick figure is sexy too (although her face is a little mannish in the photo I recently saw...)

Things that accentuate the feminine (hips, tits, ass, eyes, hair): sexy.
Things that don't (bones, blubber): Not usually sexy (but there are exceptions, too).

Claw

Two questions.

You have a floor and you have a standard. What do you suppose the odds are that the person with who you fall in love is above the floor and approximates the standard? I'm thinking 100% and 95%.

Second, you fall in love with a woman who is not only your standard, but she is your ideal. You marry. Within 2 years, though she remains similar in every other way, she is 150 lbs. heavier and carries on her an inexplicable whiff of bacon. Odds on falling out of love? I say 99%.

Hobgoblin

The floor rarely moves. There is what you'll have, and what you won't countenance, and that's a constant.

Preferences, well, they go haywire on the introduction of the next porn starlet or temp secretary.

I cannot imagine having such distinct determinant for whether a woman is attractive. You could put out a cattle call for 50 women of roughly the same age, height, and weight you believe you prefer but still find that they range from uninteresting to wildly attractive. Different women carry their attributes... differently. I've met women who were overweight if you just considered their height and weight against a chart but were incredibly sexy in a belly dancer's manner. Other women with the same numbers could be grossly sloppy in appearance. The same can be applied at the other end of the spectrum. I've met women with willowy figures who could bend any straight man to their will while others who would enter the same numbers on a questionaire are just scrawny starvelings. Genetics is a funny thing. There is no one perfect human genotype for me.

Sarah Michelle Gellar got mentioned above a few times. It should be kept in mind that she started Buffy as a 19 year old and ended it as a 26 year old. Damned few women are going to have the same figure across those years. If you look at her in 'I Know What You Did Last Summer' she is somewhat heavier and curvier but also a lot clumsier. While I find Charisma Carpenter more attractive, it is little wonder she didn't get the lead role on 'Buffy' that she first auditioned for. She doesn't have the agility needed for the action scenes where a double cannot be used and she is a very limited actress. Gellar may not be great herself but she can change character. I've never seen Carpenter play anyone other than herself.

Bottom line for any women wondering what a man wants.

First focus on genuinely caring about other people, all people, men, women and children. Learn to like humanity with all of its faults. A person who is friendly, humble, optimistic and looks first for the good in others without being critical will have no problems finding a man unless she is morbidly obese or has some other physical/health problem.

And when you do find a man, don't stop caring about and for him and start criticizing and nitpicking. A thankful, grateful, attentive woman who takes pleasure in pleasing her man is a treasure, and an man who finds such a woman will set out to conquer the world for her. And with her encouragement instead of her criticism, he just might be able to accomplish that feat.

Damn, you’ve really racked up the comments on this one… Must be something dear to your reader’s hearts LOL. As or me, a dear friend that featured herself for a time on a soft porn site told me that it didn’t matter what you looked like, what mattered was that you would show something that men didn’t usually get to see. So, it’s not the appearance, it’s the bare skin that turns us on. I really prefer someone with a little more meat on her bones, but she has nice tits and that’s really enough when you cut through the BS.

For me, the most important thing in a chick is gas money.

Sure, a nice rack is great, but it ain't gonna get my Boogie Van over to Family Dollar.

Jeff,

The floor may not move but it's in different places for differnet people.

My take on Allah''s comment was that he figured this woman was good enough for anybody to bang.

Maybe if all I saw the whole time was her tits, but otherwise, I'm not so sure.

Allah equated skinny with primo-quality babe, and that men settle for less (meaning more). I just can't buy into that logic.

Now, looking at the pics again, she might look amazing in real life (certainly her nipples are). Definitely not too "bony." It's all a matter of proportional shape, though.

Your take is right. Polo is good enough for just about any man to bang her, and someone who denies it is confused or trying to be all Alan Alda and shit or sober.

Which makes the predicate - "Is it just me, or is she too bony" - so silly.

I mean, line up 10, and I may pick another.

But line her up as the only suspect and every single man is saying "Okay."

And another thought.

Karen Carpenter.

I haven't forgotten. And miss her still.
I tell my nieces and young women in general that it is not worth it to hurt yourself to please someone else. So I do prefer a woman built for comfort not built for speed.
I can get all the speed I need from a pleasingly plump woman.

Forgive me if this is tmi. Its just the way it is.

Polo is good enough for just about any man to bang her, and someone who denies it is confused or trying to be all Alan Alda and shit or sober.

Sorry, but I wouldn't touch it with a pole.

That woman is just completely and totally unattractive. Granted, men may want to fuck her just for the sake of fucking someone, but damn! She looks like she just stepped off the spaceship.

Well, you won't get me to look at the nekkid pictures. But I've seen her elsewhere. I thought Polo looked very good in the first movie, but as often happens in Hollywood, it appears that she freaked out and lost too much weight after having a baby.

Allah? Allah's overgeneralizing, although I'm sure he speaks for a lot of guys on each of his points. It's certainly true that, nature or nurture or whatever, most of us have some basic ideas about gender roles that operate at way too deep a level to fight them or sometimes even notice them. As far as women wanting money, I tend to think that what a lot of women really want is help, help with the whole world of domesticity and raising children, even if these are things that, when they are single, they don't think about all that much yet themselves. A man who makes money suggests both responsibility and, of course, the resources to buy help. A man who's considerate or a good listener shows a potential inclination to be of help. At a minimum, men consistently underestimate the extent to which women are, deep down inside, looking for a guy who will pick up his socks and read to the kids, not as bonus features but as the essential of what women expect from men.

What makes women sexy? Frankly, one thing that was always very important to me was a friendly face. There are some famous women who seem unpleasant but are nonetheless sexy - Zeta-Jones, Cybill Shepard - but those are the exceptions. If you don't want to be around her, why would you want to have sex with her?

As to body types, I suspect men's standards are more variable than Hollywood admits, especially as far as hips and thighs. Hollywood women tend to have big breasts, small waists, pretty faces, nice hair . . . each of which is valued by men, and each of which is common enough in the general population, if not in the combinations found in Hollywood. But women on TV in particular very disproportionately have no hips to speak of, which is much rarer in the population as a whole, and I think I speak for a fairly sizeable group of men in saying that on most women, that's not a particularly good look. A woman should look like a woman, not like a teenage boy or a little girl.

Double standards? Wait, you are asking if I would prefer to be married (as I am married) to an attractive woman despite being a skinny, dorky-looking guy? C'mon here. We'd all rather do better than ourselves.

Allah: I get that golddiggers exist; I just don't get them. I don't get the mindset. I don't think it's because I'm intellectual, though (but thank you for the implied compliment). I think it's because I'm a control freak and dating a rich guy means giving up more control than I would be comfortable with, because whoever's got the money gets to decide how to spend the money, and I'd rather that person were me at least some of the time--plus golddigging is rotten manipulative behavior, of course. I think if you genuinely like and enjoy the company of men, you shouldn't use them like that.

As for the Twiggy shot--the main difference I can see is that her bones aren't jutting out of her skin, and she appears to actually have boobs; A-cup boobs, but boobs nonetheless. I don't think I'd find her sexy if I were a man, but then, I don't think I'd find Polo sexy if I were a man either. (I'm going by the Polo photo used on Go Fug Yourself--there's no point discussing airbrushed ones. We might as well discuss who's hotter, Cinderella or Snow White.)

There's some sense now that a woman who refuses to lose weight to make herself more attractive to men is nobler than those who don't

I think that's partly a backlash phenomenon. And like most backlashes, it solves nothing, perpetuates the problem, and masks the issue. It's not any nobler to be Cathryn Manheim, or whoever the fat chick on the Practice was, than it is to be Teri Polo. Janeane Garofalo tried that whole "I don't have to conform to rigid, unrealistic Hollywood standards of beauty" thing, and it worked so well for her career that a year later she was on the cover of magazines showing off her recent weight loss. Fight the power, Janeane!

But I'm not saying "fat good, thin bad." I'm saying there's something messed up when I can see your sternum poking out of your chest, but you wind up in Playboy anyway. And I really hate that when someone points out, "that girl needs a sandwich," it's automatically assumed that they're some kind of champion of the fat. Like I said, there's a lot of gray area between "fat" and "Karen Carpenter is my role model."

The question for me then becomes, do I want to be this chick's consolation prize? Because I know she's still got that list somewhere tucked away in a drawer in her mind.

And you know this how? I mean, I'm not seeing how that's a foregone conclusion, unless you're telepathic. I definitely think "consolation prize" is overly harsh.

Older women are easier to please because a collision course with reality will do that to a person, sure. That doesn't mean a re-ordering of their priorities makes the next man to come along a mere consolation prize. I don't know what goes on outside my own circle of women friends and relatives, but within it, I know the end result is usually, "Wow, I wish I could go back in time and tell my younger self not to be so particular, because just think how many cool guys I must have missed out on."

Most women I know are HAPPY they got some perspective on the whole thing, happy they dropped most of the trivial bullshit off the shopping list--they're not boo-hooing about getting a crappy consolation prize. And usually what they wind up with is better. A really good-looking, affluent man can be a total bastard, because he can afford to be; plenty more where she came from! But an average-looking guy with a so-so job is probably going to be pretty sweet to his woman most of the time. I don't see how that's a consolation prize at all. I see that as a bonus..

Just a thought from one of the gals, and perhaps this theory has been alluded to above..

These women claim to diet and exercise because they can't find work in Hollywood unless they do. They are, evidently, willing to starve to death in order to get a job. Yet, we know from watching television and movies, that that simply cannot be the case. There are plenty of healthy, working, women in Hollywood.

What kind of character flaw allows a woman to torment her body for a job? Or, for a man?

I believe that it requires a particular type of neediness and desperation to starve oneself.

Perhaps it's the neediness and lack of self-esteem to which men are attracted. Hmmm?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Wouldn't the Olsen Twins serve a useful purpose in this particular discussion?

Who's more attractive MaryKate or Ashley?
_______________________________

I love a woman, size 12, who is old enough to be confident, and who has taken good care of herself. Hair brunette. God is that SEXY!!!

I think Polo is hot. I'm generally attracted to thin girls. I'm thin myself (being an athlete) so hold myself to the same standards. Looks are important to me and I'd never claim otherwise to make others think me noble. I'm somewhat a fatist I guess (how awful of me).
As to whether it makes me feel physically "empowered" or "dominant", quite possibly. However, personality traits I find most attractive are: feistyness, being outspoken/opinionated (with intelligence), self-assurance. So maybe sexually I like to be "in control", but otherwise I want an equal (or a better) and have no interest in passive or deferential personalities in women. That's my honest take.

A lot of guys get turned on by extremely skinny women in photographs because angularity and symmetry are exaggerated (to fetishistic degree) in fashion and celebrity photography. However, many of the same men, when facing such a woman in real life, would probably be disgusted. One of the drivers of extreme skinniness is the camera, and the need to grab attention in a world where so much is vying for it.

The flip side of this is female athletes. They can look phenomenal in real life, but slightly chunky (or at least "meaty") in photos.

I've been in three major relationships...the first girl was 5'4", about 115. the second was 6'1', about 170, and built like a prototype WNBA power forward. the girl I'm currently head-over-heels for is a rail-like 5'8", 110. in between I also had a semi-serious thing with a jazz singer with double-D cups who weighed over 250. so I guess it sort of goes without saying that a girl fitting a certain "type" isn't my first priority. not to say that "looks" don't matter, just that, in my world at least, they're not the first priority and there's no single standard by which sexiness is measured. I'll also add that I don't much care for allah's generalizations with respect to what women OR men are looking for.

all that said, the fockers girl (as presented in the playboy photos, anyway) is smokin' hot. yes, most men find a body like that very sexually appealing. why? eh, i'm sure there are all sorts of reasons -- biological, cultural, psychological.

but MY question is...why do most WOMEN seem to harbor such resentment toward really skinny women? it can be venomous, and, ironically, every bit as dehumanizing toward those women as men gawking in lust at their naked photos. michelle's post seems to be yet another unfortunate example. they don't seem to feel the same resentment toward women with naturally huge cans, or toward someone like jennifer lopez with some of that hypnotic junk-in-the-trunk. just toward the skinny ones. any idea why?

Allah's right -- how many women hold themselves to the same financial standards they look for in a man?

Salma Hayek is hot, Daisy Fuentes is hot, and Catherine Zeta Jones is hot. Skinny is not.

Here I sit at the bottom of 135 comments. I haven't read them all, but I'll just say this: I don't know that I could go out with a woman who looks so much like Robert Redford, Warren Beatty or Ted Kennedy in the jaw.

I'm not too fond of the Ethiopian famine look, either. the Kate Moss figure is not my favorite.

Wait a second. . . Mike Patton is "the pinnacle"?!?! I don't think you represent the average girl.

Responses to many things:

Anorexia is a self-induced thing. Men aren't the issue, the woman's (usually a woman's) thoughts of what men want are the issue. Karen Carpenter was sick in the head, not a victim of society.

As for whether or not Teri Polo is sexy, I saw the photos and was more intrigued with her comments regarding pubic hair than her picture. I find the ridiculous vertically-elongated Hitler moustache thing silly and prefer a more natural shape. I admit to liking the clear-cut look, too, which confounds people (feminists, those who think I'm a perv, and my wife) to no end.

Her look is overly-done Playboy: idiotic porn princess stuff with no pink. I like my porn a bit more raw: give me the hamburger shots! Or not, but be sexy. Indienudes.com has all types, which is why I like that site over any of the glossy porn mags. I like reality: show me someone pretty, not well-presented.

As for whether or not I am above thinking someone is sexy for her looks alone? Guilty as charged. How did I choose my wife over all the other available women? I found her interesting: beautiful face, nice legs, the fact that she looked progressively less annoyed that I was staring at her in that college class, that she didn't run away when I told her I was a cheapskate, and the fact that I fell in love very quickly. I could have fallen for many others, but didn't. I dated prettier ones and less-pretty ones, had sex with skinny girls and somewhat overweight ones, and found her.

As for which athletes are the sexiest, I love the female soccer players and the swimmers and divers.

And as for the sexiest thing a woman can be: enthusiastic in bed. If sex is a chore for a woman, she isn't good for a long-term relationship. Or I am really bad at it. I prefer to think she'd just not be a good match.

This seems appropriate.

http://xo.typepad.com/blog/2005/01/images_of_the_c.html

I am a great appreciator of the female form but my preferences are for natural athletic looking toned women. I do not like overly skinny women and I do not like fake breasts or overly made up women who look like harlots. I like the original playboy ideal, the girl next door who just might sleep with you. Playboy has fallen quite a ways since then.

Why do so many women hate the super-skinny ones?

Because a certain type of women regards herself as in a competition (with every other single female on the planet), and the prizes range from male attention in general to marriage to the "best" (most successful) men. This starts in grade school and the favorite measuring stick for how you stack up as a competitor is how skinny you are. Some of the women who loathe ultra-skinny women are competitors who were never really very good at the game, some of them were victimized by these women and are now ultra-bitter, and some are just plain self-loathing and jealous. A lot of the skinny women in question, naturally, just have high metabolisms and frequently have no idea why they attract female venom like lightning rods.

I suppose the guy equivalent would be seeing every huge, muscular guy as the troglodyte from gym class who liked to shove your head in the toilet for kicks.

Some of the women who loathe ultra-skinny women are competitors who were never really very good at the game, some of them were victimized by these women and are now ultra-bitter, and some are just plain self-loathing and jealous.

And some of us just think the girl needs a sandwich. Jesus. This is the classic cigar that's just a cigar here, dude. No one's loathing her.

NO ONE applies the same standards to themself as they do to others -- that's why we always get annoyed by people who exhibit the flaws we ourselves exhibit.

As for me, I'm definitely chubby (and that's being nice). But I want a guy who is in shape. Doesn't have to be perfect, but I'd like for him to be at least trying. Does that mean I wouldn't date/be attracted to a man who isn't? No. It's just ify ou asked in theory what I'd prefer, that would be it. But I certainly don't look like I'm trying too hard. Double standard? Sure. But that's the way it is.

I don't know why, but I'm really into stereotypes: the severely blond, petite, austere, waifish, Nordic chick; the lithe, bubbly, fashionable Asian chick; the curly haired, slightly husky, deep-voiced Mediterranean chick; and the shiny black, shaved head, big-boned Nubian chick... Too much World Movies, maybe.

As for men holding themselves to the same physical ideal, I think there's a tacit understanding in the larger culture that it's nice but not necessary. Women's magazines promote the pursuit of men; men's magazines promote the pursuit of pleasure. (FWIW, I'm 6'6" and about 20 lbs overweight.)

My wife is Korean, and looks like a stylish pixie. When she goes out shopping in the mall or the grocery, she's like a gazelle among beef cattle, compared to the rotund American women in this part of the country. I'm completely faithful to her, and the thougth of being otherwise makes me shudder. But I grew up among white and black Americans, and am still imprinted with the ideals of sexiness of those formative years. I daresay that men who went through puberty lusting after the generous--and natural--pulchritude in the Seventies have a hard time warming up to the silicone waifs in today's fantasy mags.

This discussion indicates to me that the obesity epidemic in the United States has skewed people's tastes in body types about 50 lbs upwards.

People like averages - other people who are near the statistical mean. The mean in this country is now pretty darned fat, so peoples tastes have gotten fatter as well.

Also people like other people like them - if you're fat rather than skinny, you may tend to like other fat people more than skinny people.

The girl in the photos is thin, but not extremely so. It's just that compared to most obese Americans, she seems like an extreme.

Also Allah hit the nail on the head - for American women. Their "checklists" are detailed, specific, and non-negotiable - vastly more so than men. A man's checklist has one item: "Is she hot?"

In other cultures, women are much more flexible because they have to be. Apparently, for some reason there has been a surplus of males in the United States in the last generation or so, allowing women to be extremely selective.

Michele....Coop Girls? That's fine, but...

If you dig cartoon girls, there are some who aren't so...cartoonish. these, for instance.

Ilyka: Like I said to another commenter up above, I have no problem with gold-diggers aside from their unwillingness to cop to their true motives. If a woman wants to trade sex for money, god bless her; another triumph for free markets. What I can't stand is when she then turns around and tries to justify her "attraction" to Moneybags on less mercenary grounds. One gold-digger I know actually told me with a straight face that she wants to marry rich not because she wants a wealthy lifestyle but because she wants it for her children. That's like me arguing that the reason I want to nail Jennifer Lopez isn't because I'd derive any pleasure from it but because I want my kids to be attractive. Be proud of who you are, aspiring marital prostitutes!

Re: Twiggy versus Teri. I'm focusing on the Playboy photos because those are the ones Michele specifically took issue with. I agree that Polo looked awful in the premiere shots but she looks plenty tasty in her nude spread.

As for this:

A really good-looking, affluent man can be a total bastard, because he can afford to be; plenty more where she came from! But an average-looking guy with a so-so job is probably going to be pretty sweet to his woman most of the time.

Smells like rationalization to me. It's like a poor man saying, "Who wants a European sports car? They're pricey and a hassle to maintain. No, it'll be a used Saab for me, thanks." Besides, since when does sweetness count in a guy's favor? Granted, no woman wants a man who's abusive, but as you said to me before re: fatness versus thinness, there are many gradations between the two poles. In my experience, women find men on the aggressive end of the spectrum to be much more attractive than the sweetie pies. As well they should.

One more thing about the "consolation prize," just because it's been on my mind. As an eligible guy in my 30s, I find I'm getting fresh looks now from single women who wouldn't have given me the time of day five years ago. Back then they were off chasing the roguish, aggressive types -- and again, who can blame them? -- but now they're a little older and thinking about kids, and the roguish type just isn't daddy material, you know? In other words, they've had their fun, sampled their share of cocks, and now they're graciously willing to let stable old me try out for the role of family provider. Know what I tell 'em? "Lean in close, sweetie. Real close. I want you to hear this nice and clear. Good. Ready? Go fuck yourself."

"You have a floor and you have a standard. What do you suppose the odds are that the person with who you fall in love is above the floor and approximates the standard? I'm thinking 100% and 95%."

You'd think so, wouldn't you? And certainly it helps if you're attracted to the person. I'm not suggesting that it's always out-of-the-blue. But, in my experience at least, when you get the L-bomb dropped on you, physical considerations become entirely secondary. The first time I fell in love it was with a very beautiful, sexy girl, and how she looked was entirely inconsequential to me. My desire for her was so intense that it transcended sexual attraction and became something akin to a spiritual experience. I was a seventeen-year-old normal horny kid, and all of a sudden I had this great, gorgeous girlfriend...and all I wanted to do was stuff like gazing longingly into each other's eyes, holding hands while we walked on the beach, talk about the wedding...all that mushy shit that girls like and boys never want to do. (I learned then and there never to say never.)

"Second, you fall in love with a woman who is not only your standard, but she is your ideal. You marry. Within 2 years, though she remains similar in every other way, she is 150 lbs. heavier and carries on her an inexplicable whiff of bacon. Odds on falling out of love? I say 99%."

Well, again, I don't wish to sound condescending, but if you've ever really been in love, you know this isn't true. (It takes four, five years, minimum. Ha! I kid.)

Seriously, if the relationship is healthy and if you are both in love with each other, it doesn't make any difference what either of you look like. When you look at your lover, you see the person inside.

At least, it's like that so far. Been almost six years now.

I go with jbrookins: Salma Hayak is SOOOOO hot.

And, I agree with every man here about the beauty of round hips. If a woman is shaped like a man, then you might as well date a man.

That's why Playboy (usually) shows voluptuous women. Only women's magazines seem to focus on the bony girls.

Howdy. Came here from IMAO.

I haven't looked at any of the photos of whatshername. I've read Michelle's post (including updates), and read down to Allah's post a little beyond.

I think that this all confirms the fact -- as known to men but lesser known to women -- that: Men don't find model-thin women attractive.

Look at the women in Vogue and then look at the women in Penthouse. There's a huge difference! The women in Penthouse have curves! Boobs and butts! Rail-thin gals aren't what men want, they're what fashion designers want.

"I just love how my clothes hang on you," they'll tell the skinny ones. They want their clothes to look as good on a model as they look on a hanger.

The whole stoopit idea that men want a bag o' bones is a myth created by the fashion industry. The designers want the girls to be hangers for their designs; the fashion magazines and runways are filled with stick-figures, and; shazzam! women think that men want them to be skinny.

And, as a aside, I'm with most of the previous commenters. A woman sexiest from the neck up, and from the waist down. Boobs are secondary (or thirdary), but, are best when they're hers.

I just hope everybody saw that iowahawk is here.

I need to get a blog. Been a while since somebody banged me into next week.

Allah, my man...right on. You've nailed it.

Back then they were off chasing the roguish, aggressive types -- and again, who can blame them?

Apparently you do:

"Lean in close, sweetie. Real close. I want you to hear this nice and clear. Good. Ready? Go fuck yourself."

But hey, at least you're not bitter.

But hey, at least you're not bitter.

I don't blame them for having fun with the roguish types. I do, however, blame them for then turning to guys like me after they've had their fun and are ready to take on serious responsibilities. That's not a heck of a lot different from what the gold-diggers are doing, really. The goldies are simply shooting for a bigger payday, is all.

C'mon, ladies. Give that unemployed, weed-smoking bass player you dated when you were 25 a second chance. You never know -- he might make a great dad.

Gotta say, reading Michele and Allah here, I don't think I've ever seen anyone fisk naked pictures in Playboy Magazine before.

Crank, you need to take a women's studies course. Fisking naked women can get you an MFing doctorate, provided you are good with footnotes.

Ilyka: I never said anyone here was hating on Teri Polo. Someone asked why some women- in general- hate the superskinny ones- in general, and I answered honestly. I don't hate other women just for being skinny, but I've definitely met my share of women who DO, as well as some very confused skinny chicks who wonder what the hell is going on.

I am one of those "sickos" that like scrawny, straight-as-a-stick, flat-as-a-board, less than 1% body fat women. At least to look at. I have found them to be, in general, very mean spirited and inherently unhappy. Having dated many in the category, I gave up on them.

My wife makes about 2 or so of Ms. Polo, at 5'1". I have, as the XO of the "Red October" put it, a round american wife. And although I don't raise rabbits, she still cooks them for me (and they are awfully darned tasty, along with the rest of her cooking).

I love my wife, and will not be leaving her until I am called away to the next life, but I still to like the looks of "scrawny" women.

I too am but a flawed human...

"Allah : now with extra bitterness! Dude, you need to lay off that evil Turkish coffee..."

"Allah" isn't bitter; he's cynical without bitterness. No less powerful an intellect than Nietzsche praised this type, claiming that anyone who wants to understand human nature can learn much by listening attentively to a cheerful cynic. Here we have a case in point--"ladies."

Jon - I am proud to have never taken a class in college or law school with the word "studies" in it.

Pity that, Crank. They're good for a laugh, and your future wife might be laughing along with you. Mine was. We both loved the guy in Islamic Studies who said Arabic terms in the same way SNL characters say "Guatemala".

I'm going to assume here that Allah never dated any woman on the basis of looks or any other frivolous notion of what might make the experience fun. If he did, and then began showing interest in stabler/smarter/more emotionally healthy women, I hope one of them whispered in his ear, "go fuck yourself."

I fell in love with my husband because he's funny, stable, smart, and highly ethical. And when I fell for him he didn't have a pot to piss in. Since we've been together our finances have gone way up, and way down, but it never mattered to me in terms of my commitment to the marriage. (When we're broke, there's stress, but we deal with it together.)

The notion of a market assumes that everyone has the same list, and the same scale of importance for the attributes on that list. Which is just BS. Though it's worth noting that I haven't been single for more than a few months since I was 17 years old. Why would I be? I'm smart, and I've always known that. I'm good-looking, and finally grew to accept that this was so. Men have always been drawn to me, and the more I knew this, the more it kept happening.

There are more things on heaven and earth than are dreamt of in your philosophy . . . truly.

Oh. And whatherface? Too thin. And I like my women slim, brunette, and small-breasted. But not with the bones showing through. No.

Yes, I like women who are slender and I don't like large breasts in particular. Yes, I hold women to a higher standard of physical appearance than I do myself.

Contrariwise, women hold me to a higher standard than they do themselves in several areas. They expect me to make real money, both now and in the future. I'm expected to be more assertive in conflict situations, even when this may involve physical danger. I'm expected to manage my own emotions without requiring the support of the woman or my friends. I'm expected to be available for sex nearly every time she wants to, regardless of what's going on at work or in other parts of life, or else female CW tells her that I am loosing interest/having an affair/not much of a man.

I'm not complaining. I like being a man. I like being assertive, I like to make money, and I don't want any shoulder to lean on when bad things happen. I had a cat for over 17 years - when he died, I processed my grief and loss without calling any friends or eating any chocolate.

But please, get over this whining mentality. It's not fair that men are attracted to women by certain characteristics and not others? By youth and beauty rather than money and power? Take it up with natural selection. You'll find men and women on the edges of the bell curve who aren't a good fit to this profile, maybe one of them will have tastes that suit you.

It's as if the notion that women should be equal to men in the eyes of the law (mostly - excepting things like age of consent/marriage laws, military conscription, combat duty, etc.) does not mean that everyone should treat a man the same as a woman, or that men and women should be alike in some fundamental way. Men and women are different. They think differently, they act differently. You should accept this and manage yourself in the light of it rather than cavilling about it.

An hourglass figure. An hourglass figure that makes an hourglass look like a test tube.

I don't mind the weight, it depends on where it goes.

I have to say that I do not find Teri Polo that attractive. The photo of her at the premiere of "Meet the Fockers" just frightened me. She is just way to skinny.

Yum! As Allah said, I wouldn't roll her out of bed. ;)

That said, I wouldn't chase her either, and if she as a choice out of multiple equally good looking women at a party, she wouldn't be my first choice - I don't care much for the predatory blonde look. Never have. I go more for the "curvy brunette look". ;)

I think Allah hit things pretty spot on. With one caveat: looks count above all generally for sex. For a mate, other considerations take precedence over just looks. In a relationship, character counts over looks - but looks still count.

Skinny chicks with big boobs! Boobs, that's the key for me. can't help it...the bigger the better (up to a point but that point is pretty far away). My wife often comments that the boobs I'm looking at on other women are fake. My response: if I can touch 'em, they're real. I always said that Dolly Parton was carrying around her retirement, that all she ever had to do to make several million bucks immediately was to contact Playboy magazine. I'll be the first in line.

In other words, they've had their fun, sampled their share of cocks, and now they're graciously willing to let stable old me try out for the role of family provider. Know what I tell 'em? "Lean in close, sweetie. Real close. I want you to hear this nice and clear. Good. Ready? Go fuck yourself."

Oh, so they didn't grow and learn- that those men are no good? It was obviously an evil plot all along do deny you fun and sex in your 20s with the hotties? REally, who the fuck are you looking at? Allah, it's like you have your eyes set on some 5% of women who dissed you for the lead singer of the band (oblivious to the other 95% who would have probably danced if you asked them.) Perhaps I'm too old, because most women I knew grew out of that by the time they were 21 ... the ones who didn't were fools. So you missed the opportunity to have sex with fools? Is this what the bitterness is about?

HOo boy. I'm not sure how Allah got his heart broke, but I hope it gets fixed by a hot girl who loves him.

If Lileks can end up with a knuckle-bitingly gorgeous wife, dream home and dog, I don't see why Allah can't.

Of course Lileks has a really sexxxy voice. Allah might sound like Selma Diamond for all I know.

I don't understand why Allah would blame a chick for sowing wild oats, then getting serious with him because they now appreciate he's what they could want forever. ::shrug::

A happy fact, for men like Allah, 30-ish and unmarried and stable- the pickings only get richer and richer, even if he doesn't. Which I don't see why he couldn't, it's not as though he's poor in the talent department. Hrrmmph.

Nope. Not my type. More because her face looks like that of a drag-queen (and I wonder if they had to airbrush out an Adam's Apple) than because her ribs are sticking out. Aren't chicks supposed to be the "softer" gender?

Michele, I don't get the skinny thing either. It's NOT attractive.

Allah makes some very valid points, but his 99 to 1 ratio is probably more like 80/20. And I'm in the 20 percentile.

Sure - I'd have sex w/Teri Polo because she is who she is. And probably just for bragging rights. I seriously doubt that her personality and/or intellect would be anything but annoying. She's not what I would look at and consider marring material.

On the other hand, skanks like Paris Hilton and/or Twitney Spears I wouldn't go near if I was paid for it. Yuck.

SarahW says: "I don't understand why Allah would blame a chick for sowing wild oats, then getting serious with him because they now appreciate he's what they could want forever."

All I can say is that I find it just a bit too coincidental that women tend to discover the wonderfulness of nice guys right around the same time they start wanting children. To me, that's a textbook example of them not wanting to face the ugly truth about their real motives -- namely, that they want the guy simply as a means to the end of providing financial and emotional support for their kids -- by convincing themselves that, in fact, their motives are much nobler. It's precisely the same M.O. as the gold-digger I wrote about earlier, who justified her materialism on the loftier grounds that she's only doing it for her kids. In this case, rather than simply admit to herself that she's looking for a daddy-type and is willing to hire him out with sex, a thirtysomething single woman persuades herself that she's actually attracted to such guys -- because she's much more "mature" now, you see. How noble!

It's also quite a coincidence that women discover nice guys just when their looks start to fade and they can't land the hot, roguish types anymore, isn't it?

Carin -- I don't know how to address your comment any better than I've addressed Sarah's. For one thing, as any shlubby guy could tell you, we're talking about a hell of a lot larger number here than your 5%. For another thing, it's not a question of missed opportunities, it's a question of manipulation. As I said to Ilyka, I don't fault women at all for wanting to run with the thoroughbreds when they have the chance. I just don't want them coming to me, the plow horse, to pull their fucking cart after they've had their fun, you know? All work and no play makes Mr. Ed a dull boy.

I like to think I'm an ordinary guy. Neither I nor any of my male friends find women who are way too skinny attractive. Certainly nobody likes flab, but if we had to choose we'd prefer too much flesh to too little.

So why then are so many of the women in movies, TV, magazines, etc., so damn bony?

One of your earlier posters suggested that "guys who go for girls with bodies like 11-year-old boys actually would prefer to be with 11-year-old boys."

I think he's onto something. Remember that the men in the fashion industry (makeup, clothing, photography ...) are overwhelmingly homosexual. I think that at some subconscious level, these men are pushing these models and actresses to be closer to their sexual ideal. That, I think, is why the women so often look like young, slender boys.

Compare that to place like a strip club, which caters much more closely to the fantasies of heterosexual men. In those clubs I often see zaftig women -- and you never hear any complaints from the patrons about that.

Straight men like healthy women. It's the gay influence in showbiz that causing these women to go malnourished

jesus christ.

first, as many have noted, she looks very different in the playboy photos. not any thinner than other actresses really. i'm female but i'd definitely "do her" if that were my persuasion.

but as far as allah. are there women out there who are simply out for the benjamins just as there are men out there just for the nookie? well, it certainly wouldn't be surprising or unfair, although that is not at all my interest. i'm a professional with three degrees and yet i met an attractive and charming man at the tire repair shop today that i would love to go out with. allah should consider that perhaps his tastes in women are what ensures that he will continue to deal with this superficial type of woman. and he has no call to complain. if he insists on skinny, blonde model types--well, what do you expect?

and i don't blame him for wanting a smaller woman. i suppose i prefer a guy to be larger as well. but sex is like sacking the quarterback? i hate to say it, but i must question the authenticity of allah's heterosexuality. perhaps his ego is so in need of boosting b/c secretly he questions this also. otherwise, we're talking about a relationship, even if it's nothing more than a sexual relationship. but it should not be like a game or a hunt, with a winner and a loser.

i hate to say it, but i must question the authenticity of allah's heterosexuality.

Oh lord. Well, I was expecting many more insults than I've gotten so I suppose I shouldn't bitch too much at this one.

For the record, andrea, I was comparing sex to "sacking the quarterback" in terms of conquest/dominance and how that gratifies the male ego. Not in terms of getting a chubby from lying on top of a guy in a helmet. But carry on.

Someone above touched on the ethnicity thing:

1. Middle-eastern / Italian / Hispanic / Greek

2. Dark, large eyes, but not bug-eyes.

3. Dark brown to jet-black hair

4. Olive skin. Tans easy.

5. Curves. Anywhere from 20 lbs to 80 lbs. overweight is perfect. Large thighs a huge plus.

Yum.

Also - I agree with the commenter above about Serena Williams. I couldn't have said it better.

TV (Harry)

Allah:

"One more thing about the "consolation prize," just because it's been on my mind. As an eligible guy in my 30s, I find I'm getting fresh looks now from single women who wouldn't have given me the time of day five years ago. Back then they were off chasing the roguish, aggressive types -- and again, who can blame them? -- but now they're a little older and thinking about kids, and the roguish type just isn't daddy material, you know? In other words, they've had their fun, sampled their share of cocks, and now they're graciously willing to let stable old me try out for the role of family provider. Know what I tell 'em? "Lean in close, sweetie. Real close. I want you to hear this nice and clear. Good. Ready? Go fuck yourself."

who can blame them? well, obviously you can and do.

One of your earlier posters suggested that "guys who go for girls with bodies like 11-year-old boys actually would prefer to be with 11-year-old boys."

I think he's onto something. Remember that the men in the fashion industry (makeup, clothing, photography ...) are overwhelmingly homosexual. I think that at some subconscious level, these men are pushing these models and actresses to be closer to their sexual ideal.

Got stats to back up that claim?

The thinning down of the ideal woman as seen by the media has nothing to do with your perecieved gay agenda.

Allah: "No, we drink Budweiser because we can't afford champagne."

since you proclaim honesty to be the key here, do you then admit to your sexual partners (assuming you have any) that they are the female equivalent of Budweiser and that you prefer champagne but can't "afford" it?

So, Polo is a trifle thin. If she were a trifle fat, would we be having this conversation? No.

For every Teri Polo (slightly thin celebrity) there is a Kate Winslet (slightly plump celebrity). If a girl were commenting on how overweight Winslet is, it would be considered mean. Why isn't this post considered mean?

And, yes, I'd prefer Kate Winslet , but then, I like her face and hair better, so it's complicated.

Re: Michele's comments,

Two points: A) It's just a theory based on observing the difference between the thin women in magazines and the relatively larger women in strip clubs. I have no stats to back it up. I mean, what stats could I give? I don't think the Bureau of Labor Statistics measures this.

B) I did not suggest a "gay agenda." I merely pointed out that what gay men find attractive is (obviously) different from what straight men find attractive and this may influence why so actresses like Teri Polo feel a need to be so slim. I said it was "subconscious."

Michele - C'mon, the predominance of gay men in the fashion business is not exactly a state secret. It's like saying there are a lot of black guys in the NBA. I don't think it's some sinister "gay agenda," and part of the fashion business' obsession with thinness is due to not wanting the women to have figures that interfere with an ideal vision of the clothes, but it's hardly controversial to suggest that gay fashion designers may have a different idea of what constitutes an attractive woman than your average heterosexual male, or at a minimum be less susceptible to what straight guys would consider to be a powerful attraction. I suspect that's less of an issue in Hollywood than in the fashion scene.

Hey, this Allah guy is good, he should get his own blog. ;)

It's also quite a coincidence that women discover nice guys just when their looks start to fade and they can't land the hot, roguish types anymore, isn't it?

Oh, it's one of those really unfair things about life. As Carol Burnett (I think it was Carol Burnett) once said, "Once I got my head together, my ass fell apart." You mature as you get older. Unfortunately, other shit happens when you get older to, like your body isn't as easy to maintain as it used to be. Now, do people mature because our bodies ages which is what you're implying? Or do we mature because enough life experience has taught us that being shallow isn't all that damn fulfilling?

I think it's the latter. Men mature as they get older, valuing different things in prospective partners than they did during their salad days. Certainly this isn't because their marriage prospects get lesser as they age, because they don't. I really don't think that as men get older, they mature, but as women get older, they just settle for the only thing they can get.

As I said to Ilyka, I don't fault women at all for wanting to run with the thoroughbreds when they have the chance. I just don't want them coming to me, the plow horse, to pull their fucking cart after they've had their fun, you know

Well, I don't know why you'd want to be plowing with such a chick anyway. And, I take issue with the idea that women are "using" men to get babies - comparing them to the gold digger with merely a different agenda. A gold digger woman wants something for herself - a lavish lifestyle. The desire to mother is much different. A woman doesn't want a baby for herself ... or at least most women don't. She wants a family. Often, that family includes a dad ... not a sperm donor. The gold digger just wants the cash deposits. The woman in search of the baby equivalent would want nothing but a sperm donation. Actually, I don't see what is so insulting about being considered "marriage" material. I know I personally would rather be wanted for a relationship, versus just being a fuck buddy. Especially considering how low some of men's standards are for that job.

I know I personally would rather be wanted for a relationship, versus just being a fuck buddy.

That reminds me of something. If I had a dollar for every nice, stable guy* I dated in my 20s who said something to me like "You're the kind of girl you marry, but I'm not looking to get married now," I could buy myself a nice dinner in a Manhattan restaurant. And they weren't just saying that because I have a "good personality", if you get my drift. I'm not unattractive, and I had an even better body in my 20s then I do now (and it's nothing to sneeze at now).

*They really were nice, stable guys. All of them guys in their late 20s with decent jobs.

Well I have to agree with Allah on this one. Terri Polo, in the Playboy "touched up" photo shoot, actually has a body very simular to my last serious girlfriend. There is something about a skinny girl with curves that just drives me crazy!

So, here's the question: could any woman ever want Allah without him suspecting the worst of her motives?

Given his mindset, I can't see it ever happening: he's programmed himself for lifelong bachelorhood.

Enjoy youself, big guy.

Oh, and one more thing: I wanted an emotionally stable guy because I valued constancy for its own sake. I've been with my husband for fifteen years, and we're infertile as a couple, which has been painful for both of us.

It wasn't about wanting a father for my theoretical children, although he would/will be a good one. I wanted him.

A buddy of mine married a playboy bunny... and no... they don't look so hot in person (much shorter then you'd expect) and yes... the socially engineered attention-hound issues eventually come out.

As that comic said... women who have big boobs don't have low IQ's... men in a room with women who have big boobs have low IQ's.

Once I crossed "what-have-you-done-for-me-lately-blondes" (and I mean "blondes" in the stereotypical, not hair color, way) off my list and started hanging out with gals I liked talking to... I discovered I had a best friend and married her.

And honestly...

Beyond the look in her eyes I see nothing...

But I must confess she was pretty cute when I met her... and still is.

A buddy of mine married a playboy bunny... and no... they don't look so hot in person (much shorter then you'd expect) and yes... the socially engineered attention-hound issues eventually come out.

As that comic said... women who have big boobs don't have low IQ's... men in a room with women who have big boobs have low IQ's.

Once I crossed "what-have-you-done-for-me-lately-blondes" (and I mean "blondes" in the stereotypical, not hair color, way) off my list and started hanging out with gals I liked talking to... I discovered I had a best friend and married her.

And honestly...

Beyond the look in her eyes I see nothing...

But I must confess she was pretty cute when I met her... and still is.

One more thing (after making breakfast for my husband, and taking it down to his office on a tray):

I'm still caught between anger at Allah and pity for him. I know he's lashing out like a wounded animal and all that, but I'm experiencing a constant, irrational temptation to defend my sex.

Removing my passions, one might make a flow chart: either Allah does want kids, or he doesn't. If he does, he can choose among the women who are courting him now (most of whom, apparently, are interested in children), deciding which one he'd like to spend a few decades with and which he would not.

If he doesn't want kids, he should make sure the women in his life know that. (And, BTW, not assume that they are looking for a father for their future children. Some women don't want to be mothers.)

And in the case that he doesn't want kids, but is getting offers from women who do, one possible response would be, "thank you so much; that's very flattering. However, children aren't part of my life plan."

Or, he can continue to say, "fuck you for even thinking of me," in which case he'll be as impoverished WRT friends as he has been in the past WRT dates.

The whole thing truly amazes me: we have a guy who could be coming into his own, who is clearly more in demand now that the women in his life are growing up and beginning to notice his virtues. And his response is rage that they didn't ask sooner.

But I do know that deep anger can be part of the makeup of any guy one considers "funny." Hell, I married one.

It's just a matter of how they cope with it, and whom they choose to take it out on. That is all.

And his response is rage that they didn't ask sooner.

Apparently, I have to explain this again. For a third time.

It doesn't irritate me that they weren't interested before. It irritates me that they're interested now for what I suspect are largely mercenary reasons. Their age is circumstantial evidence: They get older, the biological clock ticks, and then, coincidentally, their tastes change and they come looking for shlubs like me who are good bets for a steady paycheck and doting daddydom. It's a question of bad faith on their part, not of me trying to spite them for having a little fun while growing up.

You say you pity me. Let me tell you who I pity. I pity the shlubs who actually take this bait and then a few years later, if they're one of the unlucky 50%, find themselves divorced and alone and paying alimony and child support for kids they get to see one day a week because their ex-wife was awarded physical custody. Now that's a plow horse. And that only accounts for marriages that actually break up. How many of the other 50% are unhappy but remain intact because the two people involved are afraid of being alone or of disrupting their children's lives, etc.?

The point is, there are many -- many -- worse fates than bachelorhood. Pity your divorced friends, not me.

Lesley wrote:

That reminds me of something. If I had a dollar for every nice, stable guy* I dated in my 20s who said something to me like "You're the kind of girl you marry, but I'm not looking to get married now," I could buy myself a nice dinner in a Manhattan restaurant. And they weren't just saying that because I have a "good personality", if you get my drift. I'm not unattractive, and I had an even better body in my 20s then I do now (and it's nothing to sneeze at now).

Les, if I only had a dollar for every girl who said to me that I was great marriage material, and all they could ever want in a husband, but they couldn't see past their shopping lists (disclaimer: all but one was under 30) long enough to recall that before you marry marriage material, you've got to date him first!

The real question is: How many comments are considered "too many"?

Allah, I find it really sad when people with children get divorced. That's the pain that keeps on giving. But, I haven't seen a bunch of mercenary weddings?? Does this happening? Bad pairings happen, and people do grow apart (oftentimes through their own actions in life.) But, a bunch of guys who were married simply because a woman had a desperate desire to procreate- after age 30, I must add? I must live in a cave, because I don't know these people.

Many of these arguments sound like the ugly duckling girl who was hooted and hated in school, grew into a beauty, and is offended by any man that looks at her twice. Her newfound sex appeal/appearance is her stock in trade and she should use it to good advantage instead of dwelling on other's motivations.

And guys, if you're making some good money now, it's your stock in trade. Use it to your advantage to find what YOU want. Why do any of us worry about what the opposite sex wants? That's a recipe for co-dependence and disappointment.

If I want a man with reasonable money, stability, good sense, and you don't fit that criteria, what is that to you? If I want a man with hot looks and good connections and social status, that's my choice. If a man thinks I'm not his type, no matter what his type is, why should I care? It's a big world, and I've got things to do and places to go. If I resent his choices, I can cry and complain and feel like a victim, or I can try to be that type for him...neither of those options end well.

As an aside, it seems many men (and women) are surprised and offended by a woman who displays an ego. Not a self-centered-bitchy-princess thing, just a calm inner assurance of what she wants, and what's pleasing to her psyche. Honest Men want looks. Honest Women want money.

So be yourself. No one else is more qualified. After that, know what you want and don't apologize for it.

Now, LOVE is a completely different subject...

Here's a real-world example of the type of thing I think Allah is talking about...because I can relate SO well to what he is saying.

I'm in my 30s, single. I'm not a complete physical wreck, but I hardly think anyone would confuse me with Matt Damon. The hair's thin on top, I'm not particularly tall... you get the idea. I am, however, talented, smart, and have managed to provide a pretty secure living for myself and earned a fair amount of career respect and some stability.

A couple of weeks ago I get a call from an attractive female acquitance I know, divorced, 30-ish with two young girls, each from a different marriage. I know her because she was dating a friend of mine. Now, she barely knows me (don't even know how she got my number), but she calls in tears because the guy she was dating (my friend) just dumped her.

Well, it unfolds over the course of several evenings and several phone calls that she doesn't just want to cry on my shoulder. She wants us to try and hook up. This follows many long heart-rending stories about how hard it is to raise two young kids alone.

It turns out that this young lady used to be an entertainer. She is shapely, blonde, and very sexy. However, you can definitely see that a lot of that physical beauty has started to fade, and she lets on that she's become very insecure about how she looks.

Now, esteemed commenters, tell me why she's interested in ME, really.

She's not my type. Might be if all her personality attributes outweighed her skrawniness. But on looks alone, nope.

Give me Elle (the plus size model right?) any day over this one.

There are women out there who are users.

And there are women to whom looks are not the top priority, because character is more critical, and we have to trust someone before we bed them, and we're not the gender to which eroticism is hard-wired (so to speak) to the visual.

Not needing the guy to look like Brad Pitt does not make a girl a whore; it has to do with the fact that female sexuality works differently than male sexuality.

Allah:

Apparently, I have to explain this again. For a third time.

It wasn't a question of my reading comprehension skills, Allah. It was my conviction that you're full of shit.

It doesn't irritate me that they weren't interested before. It irritates me that they're interested now for what I suspect are largely mercenary reasons. Their age is circumstantial evidence: They get older, the biological clock ticks . . .

And they become more mature and less ditzy/superficial, which puts them in a good position to appreciate a man's true goodness, rather than taking the immature Tiger Beat approach to dating. You're seeing a correlation, and inferring the wrong causality—the one that reinforces your conviction that you'd be better off alone. Which probably has a lot to do with fear about the compromises you'd have to make if you were in a relationship, and whether you could succeed in one.

. . . and then, coincidentally, their tastes change and they come looking for shlubs like me who are good bets for a steady paycheck and doting daddydom. It's a question of bad faith on their part, not of me trying to spite them for having a little fun while growing up.

If this were the case, you might look among women who were raised in Christian or conservative homes, and never felt the need to "act out" and do the youthful experimentation thing. But I suspect this isn't the real issue. It's just an excuse for your safe, celibate (or near-celibate) lifestyle.

You say you pity me. Let me tell you who I pity. I pity the shlubs who actually take this bait and then a few years later, if they're one of the unlucky 50%, find themselves divorced and alone and paying alimony and child support for kids they get to see one day a week because their ex-wife was awarded physical custody. Now that's a plow horse.

Then, for crying out loud, make it a point to only date women who don't want kids. And/or only women who make more money than you do, so you can be absolutely certain that her motives aren't mercenary. This isn't fucking rocket science.

And that only accounts for marriages that actually break up. How many of the other 50% are unhappy but remain intact because the two people involved are afraid of being alone or of disrupting their children's lives, etc.?

Well, the only way I can be sure I won't be hit by a car when I venture from my home is to never leave. But I refuse to live that way.

The point is, there are many -- many -- worse fates than bachelorhood. Pity your divorced friends, not me.

At least my divorced friends were willing to take a chance, rather than playing it safe and lonely.

Look: if you want to stay single, have fun with your romantically risk-free life. But don't place it on my sex because we're whores for wanting anything at all out of the men we live with.

Allah, perhaps it is bad faith on their part. I'm sure that for some of them it probably is. But as girls these days can spread their blooms and flit from bee to bee in the spring (as I did from flower to flower) I'm also sure that for some of them it's that they've decided to plant roots and grow in their summer years. What any particular female -- or male -- is doing is usually a complicated thing that even they are are not fully aware of.

Our culture had a set of practices (and laws that provided for the consequences of those practices) that mostly worked for a century or two and then The Pill came along, tossing the established practices into the dumpster and leaving the laws behind. Then there was the Right to Abort, and then DNA paternity testing. Things are going to be in a turmoil for a couple of more decades, at least, until the new standards are worked out. (Assuming that they ever will be.)

There are always going to be those who are willing to exploit other's sexual desires, and it's always going to be up to those involved to pay attention. And there are always going to be those who get tripped up.

Purple Fury -- sounds like an invitation to a round of "Let's You and Him Fight (LYAHF-3) http://www.ericberne.com/games/games_people_play_LYAHF.htm

My guess is that my personal reaction to Ms. Polo would be "Sorry, no spark", but I've learned over the years not to make such predictions, either way, because I've been too frequently wrong. What's that Jimmy Buffet song line?

...
Cause I will play for gumbo
Oh Yeah I will play for gumbo

A piece of french bread with which to wipe my bowl
Good for the body, good for the soul
It's a little like religion and a lot like sex
You should never know when you're gonna get it next

Allah, I think there's a line between self intrest and using a guy for money and daddy material.

You weren't going out with these women when they were younger because they could do better. You can't blame anyone for wanting the best they can get.

Now how can you tell the difference between a 30-something woman who realizes she needs to settle down, and a 30-something who realizes she better find Mr Daddy before she becomes a spinster.

It seems to me you're acting like a shop owner who pissed off at the customers his store is attracting. Where are all the rich perfect customers? These people are all seriously flawed, ask too many questions, and don't just fork over the money when I tell them the price!

Deal with the reality, decide what your goal is, and get the chip off your shoulder. Cause it will scare away the good and the bad women.

Now, esteemed commenters, tell me why she's interested in ME, really.

Of course you want to avoid that one like the plague. OF COURSE. And I can say "of course" because instead of generalizing and saying it's "all women," you were kind enough to provide a specific example, with detail.

And that's how I can assure you that your story isn't a story any woman I know, self included, doesn't also have in reverse. This woman you mention is looking for a support system for her children, while, say, the guy who calls me after breaking up with one of my girlfriends is looking for rebound pussy instead.

Oh--rebound pussy, and also maybe someone to pick up his drycleaning, fold his socks, clean his toilet, fix him a meal that doesn't include ramen--all the stuff my girlfriend did for him before he got tired of fucking her, or she got tired of him, whatever.

We get this one too, is all I'm saying. Only the details are different.

But here's the thing: A woman dates that guy, finds out he was just "using" her, picks up the phone to cry to one of her girlfriends--and you know what she hears? She hears, "Well, shoot, girl, what the hell did you expect?" She hears about what a dumb mistake SHE made by falling for his shit.

You guys, I don't know whether you talk to each other about this stuff much. It doesn't seem like you do. But you certainly all have been doing a lot of talking to the women here, and you know what most of that talk has been?

"Women: What a bunch of mercenary bitches."

No "Hey, maybe you pick the wrong women." No, "Hey, rule #1 is never start out being a woman's shoulder to cry on (let her girlfriends and family be that)." No honest self-examination about your own behavior, your own mistakes, whatsoever.

I don't care if the motivation behind those mistakes was entirely innocent--it usually is. I don't care if it really is her fault for being a mercenary bitch. That's not the question. The question is, how come all the women you end up with turn out to be mercenary bitches? Because either we have to accept that all women everywhere are mercenary bitches--and that's not realistic or likely--or we have to accept that all women you wind up befriending are mercenary bitches, which fits the realistic and likely criteria much better.

If all the women you wind up meeting and befriending are mercenary bitches, but not all women everywhere are mercenary bitches, then I'm sorry, amigo, but the only logical conclusion is that you're doing something, however innocently or unconsciously, to wind up surrounded by mercenary bitches. The question is, is there something you could be doing differently that might change the outcome? The question is whether what you're doing in pursuit of your own happiness is effective. If it is effective, why are you all here bitching?

Oh, dear God, stop me before I become Tony Robbins.

Anyway. There's a post above this one about personal responsibility. Maybe some of you could read it.

Give me a fleshy, busty, curvy, Marilyn Monroe type anyday!!!

You know what the shrinks say: we either pick it, provoke it, or project it.

Ilyka appears to think Allah--and others--are picking it or provoking it.

I think that a good deal of the time they are projecting it.

htom: GOOD call. Thought-provoking link. Had heard of Beirne but not checked him out until now.

Thanks.

Long story short. Bony, stick-thin chicks need not apply. Marilyn Monroe was a size 14 or 16 by today's measurments. I have always preferred a girl with more curves, even if those curves added some lateral dimension. Mind you, I'm not into flab or overweight. Give me a toned and smooth-skinned, curvaceous size 12 to 14 any day.

And yes, D cups are preferred.

I'm dismayed to see this comment thread turn into a pile-on-Allah fest. But I too must add my .02. I believe that there is someone for everyone out there. When I reflect on the tenuous chain of happenstance that led me to mine, I quiver.

I also know that people change over time. Some mature, some mellow, some sour. I hope Allah isn't taking the specific women he obviously has in mind, and making an unfair generalization about a whole set of women. Probably there are women who really are only now able to see past "flash" and appreciate A's qualities. Like H. L. Mencken said, no man ever attains the level of commonsense as the average woman of 48. But women have a learning curve they have to go through--just like normal folks! :) Why assume bad faith every time, if that's indeed what's happening in real life? It'd be terrible if Allah were giving the back of his hand to someone who has grown wiser over the years, and would be a great match for him.

Cause it will scare away the good and the bad women.

WORD.

Geez, Attila. What kind of nerve did I hit here?

Three points. One: How do you know I'm inferring the wrong causality? Granted, I have no ironclad proof that I'm inferring the right one -- but then, you have no proof that your psychoanalysis of me is correct, either. We're each drawing conclusions based on the data we have, except that I'm not stomping my feet and telling you how much I "pity" you for making assumptions about my motives. Really, I enjoy debating this stuff, but lose the condescension, okay?

Two: Your advice about wealthy women/women who don't want children is smart, but those women (in my experience) are vastly outnumbered by the daddy-hunters. This brings us back to the point about generalizations: How prevalent within a population does a characteristic have to be to support a reasonable extrapolation? I already conceded to Ilyka many comments ago that you can't paint all women with the same brush, and that intellectual women in particular are probably less likely to behave in the manner I'm describing. Meanwhile, you've already conceded that some women are users. I happen to think the users outnumber the rest, and you, I assume, think the opposite. Good luck to both of us in trying the convince the other.

Three: The rest of your comment is borderline hysterical. I never said women shouldn't expect anything from men. My argument all along has had to do with whether women are less than fully ingenuous about why they're interested in a particular type of guy. As for your point about divorce and car accidents, you're joking, right? You're not honestly comparing a 50% risk to a risk on the order of several thousand to one, are you? Because if so, you're welcome in my casino anytime. And finally, if you have friends who came through divorce so cleanly that they can honestly take a "better to have loved and lost" approach to it, that's great. I'm glad for them. I have a few friends, though, for whom divorce has been a terrible ordeal. We can go back and forth on whether the risk is worth the rewards, but I think the subject warrants a little more thoughtfulness than "you're a pussy for not taking a chance." Then again, that's just me.

I'd be happy to lose the condescension, especially now that you've lost some of the hostility.

I'm sorry, but with all the frivolous marriages out there, I can't buy the idea that someone who practices due diligence and dates someone for multiple years before marrying still faces a "50% risk" of divorce: behaving sensibly has to bring down those odds dramatically. And I also suspect that the older one is, the more likely it is that the pairing will work. (Only, of course, if both parties continue to work on it--because it's an uphill climb to see those vistas.)

I also think divorce is like crime: there are a small number of people out there generating a large number of failed marriages, which skews the numbers if you're looking on a "per marriage" basis, rather than a "per person" basis. (For instance, my father is on marriage #3, and his wife is on marriage #4. So between the two of them they've racked up five failed marriages.)

And then, there's the thing everyone points out when I get discouraged about my job search: all it takes is one. You just have to find that one woman who isn't a gold-digger, and it's a big planet with a lot of people on it. Roughly half of them are women.

Physical type? Ultra cute Japanese girls do it for me. It's the face. Why? I have no idea. Cross culteral curiosity, forbidden fruit... Whatever is going on there is below my level of self-awareness. I married mine going on 30 years ago and I am a happy guy. She's still cute and motivates me in every way to do my best for her.

You really should procreate and multiply, Allah. Don't let your dark wit and bright genius die with you. I could be very wrong, but suspect you would love children- at least they would have fun with you. Try not to over-intellectualize the game.

Of course, all you need is advice from people who don't know you. If you start blogging again, then we'll lay off, promise.

Ilyka: There's no third option between "all women are mercenary" and "mercenaries are a small minority which my own personal failings are causing me to seek out"? How about, "enough women are mercenary that it's kind of hard to avoid them"?

I take your point about personal responsibility. I really do. The best argument I've heard here thus far from the other side is, "Yeah, women want money. So shut the fuck up and start making money." Ain't no refuting that -- although I'll say again, it'd be nice if the ladies would be as forthcoming about what they want from us as we are of them.

The personal responsibility argument works a lot better when failures can be explained rationally. E.g., a man who only chases model-quality babes complains that many of them behave in a mercenary fashion. Diagnosis: dumbass. Of course they're behaving like mercenaries; great-looking women are the most likely candidates for gold-diggerism. Recommended treatment: stop chasing model-quality babes and lower your standards a bit. (Whether it's possible for someone to lower their standards with respect to physical tastes is a separate question. Let's pretend that it is.)

Great, so dumbass has taken personal responsibility for his actions by focusing on chicks less likely to exploit him financially. What if he finds that many chicks he meets now still want to exploit him financially, albeit to a less extravagant extent than the gold-diggers did? What personally responsible actions should he then take?

The P.R. argument is appealing because it's libertarian in nature and because it hints at the possibility that you can have virtually anything you want in life if you work hard enough at it. There's always a little bit more each of us can do to improve ourselves, after all, so theoretically there's no limit to how much we can improve our lives. ...Which of course is a big fat lie, per the concept of diminishing returns. So what I want to know is, if I play your game and grant you that yes, there probably are things I (like everyone) can do to improve the quality of my babes, when do you join in and say yes, there does come a point where you've done just about all you can and that point is right here at X? I guess what I'm saying is, does the personal responsibility argument have a ceiling? Or is it just a device to shift all the blame back to me?

"Hey, maybe you pick the wrong women."

This would be fine if it were men doing the picking. But sociologists have shown that it's mainly the women who do the choosing.

I have seen no evidence that either lust or love are rational.

Well, of course, I've been arguing all along that sometimes for you gold-diggers = women who are interested in nice guys. And that this is self-defeating.

I also take issue with your notion of a linear scale of attractiveness. When my mother was in high school she was very discouraged by the fact that the less-desirable guys (the ones who weren't that smart) showed no interest in her. "How," she thought, "am I ever going to get the good ones, if the lousy ones don't find me attractive?"

Then she went to college, and discovered that among bright men she was very much in demand. She was beautiful as a young woman: a real hour-glass figure, large breasts, just-broad enough hips, dark hair, nice smile. Articulate, and whip-smart.

At 5'1" she wasn't "model quality." No short women are, and few buxom women. But a lot of men like real women more than they do models.

So it's a question of deciding what you like.

The archeaologists who maintain that women determine mating rest their argument on the notion that men will basically sleep with anything, any time, and this therefore gives women "the right to first refusal."

It essentially rests on a notion of extreme male sluttiness that probably doesn't apply to a lot of Michele's readers, and almost certainly doesn't apply to the issue of long-term/lifetime matings, aka marriage.

I guess what I'm saying is, does the personal responsibility argument have a ceiling? Or is it just a device to shift all the blame back to me?

Okay, now that's a good question. And it's reminding me that several times throughout this thread I've thought the guy who said, essentially, "get the hell out of NY and date San Diego girls" might have been more on target than anybody. Meaning no disrespect to Michele or to any of the other charming women from NY, but it's a tough town for singles, and can we just admit that some East Coast women are fourth- and fifth-generation ballbusters without anyone flying off the handle? I hope so.

But on the second part of your question: I differentiate between "blame" and "responsibility." I was in an intensely nasty relationship that sucked up four years of my early 20s. I assign very little blame to myself for most of what went on during it, but it was nonetheless my responsibility to wake up, hop aboard the clue bus, and get out . . . just as I think it was my responsibility to spend the next couple years working out why exactly I ended up with a horrendous person like that, and how to prevent it ever happening again, before I went back into the dating game. I didn't want to be the girl with all that baggage, you know?

These things were my responsibility by default, for the simple reason that they were things no one else on earth could possibly do for me.

So for the record, no, I don't blame you, and I'm sorry if you or anyone else feels this has become a "pile on Allah" thread, as I think someone above put it.

But I do think (as nauseating as it sounds) that there's some validity to the whole power-of-positive-thinking approach. It's put cruelly sometimes as "you get what you believe you deserve." I wouldn't go that far, but I would second again what ErikZ said.

I'm sorry if you or anyone else feels this has become a "pile on Allah" thread

That's okay. I knew going in that it would be pretty lonely on this side of the table. Aside from the occasional insinuation that I'm (a) to be pitied and/or (b) a homo, it's been a very civil exchange.

One more question re: the concept of personal responsibility, as I sense a tension between it and our modern-day religion of self-esteem. An illustrative hypothetical: Imagine a single woman in her early to mid-30s, well educated, shoulder-length brown hair, attractive but not someone for whom conversations stop when she enters a room. Imagine further that this woman is perfectly comfortable with her appearance -- likes the way she looks, no self-esteem issues -- but she's quite unhappy with the fact that men haven't paid her much attention lately. Finally, imagine that she's a big believer in taking . . . personal responsibility.

She resolves to do something about her loneliness. She grows her hair out and bleaches it blonde. She goes on a starvation diet and turns her size 8 into a size 4. She empties her savings account and buys herself a big ol' pair of fake titties. And suddenly, she's a knockout. Heads turn when she walks into a room. Her social calendar quickly fills up. She's the belle of the ball.

Now, query. Did this woman, who was happy with her appearance before she turned herself into a Barbie doll, do something wrong? Or should we applaud her for having made herself more attractive to the opposite sex by being proactive and taking . . . personal responsibility?

One other query. If we do applaud her, then why isn't every single woman reading this right now also planning to bleach her hair, starve herself, and get breast implants? Awaken from your stupor, ladies! Awaken, and take . . . personal responsibility.

Funny you should mention all that. When I finally did get serious about dating again, I:

(a) Grew my hair out longer and got highlights put in;
(b) Dieted and exercised;
© Quit smoking (eventually restarting later, but never mind that for now)
(d) Didn't buy the fake titties because, uh, those were like two things that didn't need fixing up. Thank God, because fake titties are expensive and dangerous, and frankly I don't like that two-cantaloupes-hugging-the-collarbone look.
(e) Bought more fashionable clothes. (You guys always say you don't care about the clothes, but you don't ogle women in JC Penney fashions either.)

I can't argue about your suggestions because I think generally women already do follow those suggestions--or they sit around watching Lifetime and crying, in which case, as you once said, "Bottoms up on the Drano, honey."

Women have hundreds of industries making those suggestions to us every day of our lives. Racks of magazines. Shelves of self-help books. Stupid daytime talk-show hosts with their makeover episodes. Exercise DVDs. Gym memberships. Dieting gurus. Do I really need to go on here? And we whine and say it's so unfair, and we hate the 19 year-old girls who don't have to pay hundreds of dollars for highlights, don't have to work out and eat right to stay thin--we bitch about all of it, but we eventually get to work when we're sick enough of watching Lifetime.

You wanna make some money? Make up some stupid product, buy some advertising, and say, "Ladies, you don't look very good. But WITH MY HELP, you can look FABULOUS." You could sell dog turds just by claiming that your "elite team of scientists" had isolated "an enzyme" that "actually reverses the aging process!!!" Bingo: Solves your money problems and helps you meet chicks at the same time.

I can't argue about your suggestions because I think generally women already do follow those suggestions

You do? I see them reading the self-help books and magazines, but when the rubber meets the road the attitude I always encounter is LOVE ME AS I AM!

God help the man who ever proposed this deal to his girlfriend: "Honey, I'll go the gym for three hours a day/five days a week, plus get a new wardrobe, plus look for a higher-paying job . . . if you'll dye your hair blonde, get fake tits, and lose a few inches around the middle." Oh, the humanity. Do the words "nuts in a vise" mean anything to you?

You do?

Keep in mind that I live in Dallas, Texas. Women here--and I'm totally generalizing again--don't see as much conflict between doing girly self-improvement things like getting their nails done, and being independent. It's a huge laugh to me that I spent most of my life thinking Southern women were these little delicate bimbos, slaves to the men in their lives, when, generally, it's more just that they LOOK like little delicate bimbos. And they ain't slaves to nobody.

Do the words "nuts in a vise" mean anything to you?

Oh, THAT'S where I put them.

You're probably right on that deal getting rejected. Women don't want to hear improvement suggestions from the men they love. That hurts too much. They'll hear suggestions from their girlfriends or their gay friends, and the girl and gay friends don't usually suggest blonde hair and big boobs, which of course is how they got to be the woman's friends in the first place. You're dead on about that.

I think Ace linked this by wondering whether women want the truth, or just want to hear what they want to hear. I think it's just that we don't want to hear it from the guy we're with, anymore than the guy wants to hear from us that maybe it's time to consider hair transplants.

On the other hand, you notice there were a couple guys in this thread who said things like, "I weigh 300 pounds and am 5'10" and I think I look great?" Dude, 5'10" and 300? Think whatever you want, but you don't look great. I just think women delude themselves on this score less, 'cause that ain't the first guy in discussions like this that I've seen claiming his spare tire "is no big deal." A woman who's 5'10" and 300 pounds knows it's a very, very big deal. Just ask Oprah.

"What if he finds that many chicks he meets now still want to exploit him financially, albeit to a less extravagant extent than the gold-diggers did?"

What if, indeed. A man who think this way needs to hold tight onto his money, only dutch date unless she reciprocates promptly or puts out, and on nights he doesn't have a blonde big boobie or even desperate 30ish date cry into his Budweiser about how disappointing most women are. Cuz most of us are either mercenary whoring bitches or, EGADS, stability, spouse and sperm seeking exploiters. Of course, the fault lies with us because female hair emits dangerous rays that will compromise good men, and our fathers didn't teach us better because they were too cuckolded by their fishwives, maybe.

Fuckin' A, Isabel--ease up on the vise a minute. You've just given my ovaries a sympathetic pain response.

You're the girl I always dreamed of, isabel. You had me at "EGADS".

Fantastic! I almost did OMG but needed something a little more retrograde to match the attitude. Anyway, you won me over with "Know what I tell 'em? "Lean in close, sweetie. Real close. I want you to hear this nice and clear. Good. Ready? Go fuck yourself." Well, that and so much more.

I knew we were perfect for each other. I could tell right away that you're not the type who's easily offended. What a shame you didn't show up until the discussion petered out, huh? Ah well.

Offended, no. My ovaries don't even hurt, despite everything said about most of us being either mercenaries or daddy-hunters and needing to be super hot looking for you guys. I'm ashamed that we've made a muck of it for you and other good men.

I've been listening all along, but can understand if you're all petered out... I'll just go put highlights in my plain brown hair.

Hm. Very difficult to relate to this, especially since I've always suspected my mom became obese when she was just a bit older than I am now because they didn't then (and still don't) market a spray called "Man Off."

And I'm pretty sure that when/if my husband leaves me for the next plane of existence (he's ten years my senior, and his own parents died early), I'll settle into widowhood, make peace with it, and never marry again. I'll learn to knit, and read the mocking letters Allah (happily married by then) will send me about my decision to stay single at that point. ("You know, I really pity you. Are you a latent dyke?")

The one thing I will do is breast-reduction surgery. I'd feel a little guilty doing it now, because wouldn't that be "bait and switch" from my husband's point of view? But that would be terrific, and well worth the cost (it's a LOT more expensive than making them bigger).

And I'll keep wearing the ring, because they don't yet make "Man Off," and it might just help.

("You know, I really pity you. Are you a latent dyke?")

Ha. Y'know, I was gonna say....

No, kidding. Your hetero credentials remain in good standing. Speaking of hackneyed insults, though, I can't believe no one's accused me yet of not getting enough hugs from my mommy when I was a kid. Angry feminists just ain't what they used to be.

Well, I would say maybe you got too many, but I'm no feminist. Sorry.

Allah, I hear and understand what you're saying. And what you've described bothers the hell out of me too. I understand your unease about the motivations of the women who are now approaching you. If I was in your shoes, or if I found myself suddenly single, I'd be every bit as cautious.

Did I understand you are in NYC (from something I read up there)? If so, that might be part of the problem with the generalization you're making. If you want to see the ratios of gold-diggers to good women who are not motivated by a scheme to procure an alimony check substantially improved, look south or west, particularly in smaller cities and towns. Oh they may still want you to make them comfortable, but the payback is so much greater at a much lower risk, particularly in the south.

I actually went around and around on this issue with my wife years ago. I tried to make the case that being treated as a "success object" is every bit as offensive as being treated as a "sex object". Unlike the women you describe, she was not particularly coy about the fact that she wanted me to be financially successful, that I ought to shoulder the lion's share of the financial burden, and pamper her to boot. It bothered the SNOT out of me for the longest time. Eventually I came to accept that both those concepts originated from the feminist indoctrination I had suffered under as a teen boy. She was raised in small-town Minnesota, and I had to unlearn a lot of the crap that I thought was true about men and women.

Most women don't really want to be "equal" to men, no matter what they say. Every little girl dreams of being a princess, and when they grow up, unless they are spoilt by feminism, they expect to find a man who will place them on a pedestal and worship at their feet, then take them down, coddle them and protect them from the dragons that are out there. And they expect you to take their hand and take the lead when you walk through the deep dark scary forest.

Okay now THERE is a generalization and an exaggeration for you, but to some measure it is true. If there is simply no way you'd want to play that role, then that's understandable. But figuring that out, and figuring out that the whole "equality" schtick was a crock, is what began the process of improving my marriage. Prior to that realization, all I saw was hypocrisy left and right in what women apparently wanted.

What benefits accrue from looking south and west and small-town, is finding women who haven't been as spoilt by the poison of feminism as to not understand the above, at least on a gut level if not a mental level, which makes the chances of a successful relationship all that much better.

There. Now if I'm not burned at the stake, I'll be a little surprised. ;P

ON topic, Teri Polo is way too skinny for my tastes. Someone up there said their tastes in women revolve around their wife's appearance. I concur with that. I find that the women who are really attractive to me resemble her in one or more ways. Petite, brunette, and on the voluptous side (ex. Norah Jones). And curves! Straight-sided women just do not do it for me. Nor long and thin either. Sorry Ann Coulter...

It essentially rests on a notion of extreme male sluttiness that probably doesn't apply to a lot of Michele's readers, and almost certainly doesn't apply to the issue of long-term/lifetime matings, aka marriage.

Where's that smiley with the raised eyebrow when you need it?

This is pretty rich in a thread where 90% of the male respondents basically said, "Yeah, I'd bang the hell out of Teri Polo, in a New York minute."

And I don't think we even want to bring up the statistics related to marital infidelity.

Yeah, I figured someone would challenge the statement that Michele's guy readers are less likly to be slutty. But how slutty men say they are and how slutty they are in practice are two different things, no?

And marital infidelity has nothing to do with the issue of whether there's a distinction to be made between "I'd hit it" and "I'd marry it." When it comes to the latter, most people think more. In fact, the custom in our society is for the man to take the initiative, and ask the woman. So anthropologists' theories about "mating" don't apply to marriage, which is a decision two people make. And it's a serious decision; affairs (unfortunately) occur, but don't alter that fact.

Oh, right. Angry feminism. I can do that.

All sex is rape. And all men are exploitative bastards. And life is unfair! I am woman, hear me meow. There was a female Shakespeare, but she was a lesbian and you burned her books!

We don't want a piece of your patriarchal pie. We think the whole pie is filthy, shot through with patriarchy and semen.

Crawl before me, you Y-chromosome-infested vermin.

Skimming through all of this, I'm reminded what Allan Bloom said would make marriage and children more attractive to men: ownership, the renewal of the opinion that their wife and children are their property. "It had the advantage that it worked," he said, as best I can recall.

And he said (in words to this effect), "If a man and a woman base their relationship on sex, at least they've based it on something real."

Go ahead, close your mind. Obviously, any pedagogy as ineffective as mine, here, must be based on something other than the desire to persuade.

The irritating thing about being a guy is that I ignored all that after you mentioned getting reduction surgery.

Trying to read, yet mentally staring at your bust.

I don't even know what you LOOK like! Arg!

Well, pictures of me exist. Real ones, not just the pinup toon that serves as a logo on my web site.

But you do need to know where look. Be advised, also, that most buxom women are experts at camouflaging/hiding their boobs.

I'm just your basic short woman with a fleshy figure and a pair of DDs. Long, "hair-colored" hair. Nice legs for my age, etc.

Frankly I've never gone for the bones-a-showin look. I actually find it eerie in a cocaine infested/crypt keeper sort of way. I prefer something a bit more voluptuous, not huge, but nice curves. Think Alley Baggett with a little less rib cage showing.

When I look at Teri I instantly start thinking about scaffolding. Too wierd.

Not ALL women who are that skinny want to be that skinny, I just want to say since you seem to be lumping all skinny females into one "they all binge and purge" category.

I'm 5'6" and I weigh 117, which is up from the 100-105 that I used to weigh. I just can't hardly gain weight or keep it on, and I don't give a flyin feck what I eat or if I even get off of my butt the whole day.

I want to be back up to where I was 130lbs, but it's hard to keep the weight on, even though I eat what I want when I want.

This is in no way a flame, I just want you to know that some of us don't want to be this skinny, and that not all of us starve to be like this.

Sure, it's the custom that the man take the initiative. But initiative is not the same thing as selection.

Isn't what you're calling "initiative" really a response or an acquiescence by the man to subtle cues and hints given him by the woman? And yes, you're right that two people make the decision to marry in the sense that they both have to agree, but it is the woman who makes the ultimate selection of a mate. Unless I'm not mistaken I think there's pretty broad sociological acceptance of this.

Be honest with yourself. Who really does the choosing? Did you pick your mate? Or did he pick his?

You jest Attila, but I bought much of that hook, line and sinker as a young teen.

Late to the game...I think I'm attracted to all sorts of women. I've been in serious relationships with tall, short, slender, and, well, shapely. I doubt I've ever dated anyone with more than 20 or 30 extra pounds over "fighting weight", though; that's a definite turn-off for me. Skinny, though, is also a turnoff; that's distinctly different from "slender". I do have an appreciation for women that are attractive in unconventional ways; conventional beauty is actually not all that interesting to me. Women I wind up with for the long haul, though, tend to be strong personalities, more Type A than not, and not shy about saying what they think. I have no idea why; this is just looking at the facts.

Oh, and Allah's comments...oh, jeez. First, I don't think he's wrong so much as taking it all far too seriously. Life's a game; what may be deeply meaningful to a fellow like Allah doesn't mean all that much to me.

My wife and I both did roughly equal amounts of wild-oats sowing; she did so after the first marriage ended, while mine were more equally scattered before and after mine. But the thing is, people aren't always completely, fully aware of their motivations in doing something at the time they are doing it. So, she got married because what she really wanted was to start a family, and she loved her intended, so it seemed perfectly logical to her at the time that of course he'd make an excellent husband and father, and that he wouldn't (for instance) decide a couple of years into the marriage that he didn't (despite pre-nuptial statements to the contrary) want a family after all, and that staying out until the wee hours every week-night was much better than hanging out with the spouse. Bad choice on both sides; both of them learned from it (after they'd split up, of course). I, on the other hand, really wasn't thinking all that much about family (although I knew I wanted kids) until I was about 30, and when I did realize that I'd better do something about it, I did. And my first marriage was formed without any agreement about family, and she was nowhere near a strong enough personality to keep me from making all the decisions, regardless of how unfortunate they turned out to be. So that ended fairly quickly.

Neither my wife nor I settled for anything. Actually, both of us had pretty much decided that the probability of finding anyone else to make a life together with was too small to consider, and then we met. We wanted the same thing at the same time, and we were in many different ways attracted to each other. It's not perfect, but nothing interesting ever is. And if you're waiting for perfect, wonderful will pass you by.

Don't worry. The odds of this happening to you are probably three or four decimal places to the right of zero.

I think we are all forgetting the need for context here. Would most every available guy be happy to nail Teri Polo? Sure, she's attractive, which is the only requirement for that simple decision. I found that in the young (20's) dating scene, women go for looks just as much as men. They weren't seeking husbands yet after all. College age girls nearly always went for the good looking guy who was complete asshole, and most of them knew it. [I honestly had a few girls tell me: "I would marry you in 10 years, but won't date you now"]

As they get older, other attributes become more critical, brains, job, sense of humor...the stuff that matters in a permanent mate. Girls hit this stage before men on average, but most guys reach this point as well. The divorce rate comes when anyone is stupid enough to pick a mate before they make the transition. Look at the states with the highest divorce rate (Oklahoma #1) and you'll also see the youngest average age for marriage.

Here's the story that really caused the scales to drop from my eyes.



I had been seeing a female therapist for several years, and at the end of one of my sessions with her the conversation turned to work, vocation, etc. and the relative ease with which people seem to be able to get along (or not) in that part of their lives. She mentioned a mutual friend of ours -- who I had something of a crush on at the time, but I don't suspect the therapist knew this -- and said that she (the woman I was crushing on) had a terrible time providing for herself and her daughter. The therapist then related her (the therapist's) advice to the woman having trouble: "X, why don't you just go down to Blackfin's [ritzy bar here in town where the rich & fabulous hang] and find yourself one of those guys, and pick one who can at least be kind to you?"



Well, you could've knocked me over with a feather. Here I had been in therapy, working on the weaknesses in my own personality diligently and with no small amount of struggle and pain, in the hope that the "wholeness" I would gain would eventually make me a better person and a better partner. After all of that, it was just inconceivable to me that a therapist would suggest that someone solve a fundamental problem of their existence so cheaply. To me it felt like an enormous betrayal.



It was like I was in some weird alternate universe where the rules for the sexes were totally out of balance. Any men out there having difficulties in relationships? Well, get into therapy and start your REAL suffering. Any women out there having trouble with making a living? Well, get yourself down to Blackfin's and snag a rich guy!



I just stood there speechless.



Call me an old-fashioned romantic, but I always felt that women (and men) ought to be motivated by a mutual attraction, the magic of chemistry, shared goals, common values, etc. If one or the other has money, great, but I was brought up believing that part of the joy in a relationship is being able to get thru times when you don't have much money. But here was my therapist (my THERAPIST!) telling me, in effect, "Oh honey, don't be so naive. What we really want are guys with money." Having that mercenary aspect of the whole thing put out there like that so bluntly was an incredible shock. I'm thankful for the cold dose of reality, but I guess I'm still recovering from that realization.

What a horrible story. Even if you accept the premise that single parenthood is hard--and it is--and that in some cases the best solution is for the single parent to find a partner, the idea that one might find such a person in a bar is simply appalling.

I'm not sure your therapist would suggest such a solution for herself, however, and she might have taken exception to your inference that "we really want guys with money."

What she was really saying is that this woman should prostitute herself. I hope you left therapy with her abruptly.

"What she was really saying is that this woman should prostitute herself."

Bingo! You've said it.

The problem is that she and her therapist would likely be unwilling to make that admission themselves.

Bingo! You've said it. The problem is that she and her therapist would likely be unwilling to make that admission themselves.

Precisely. In their minds, they're only doing it . . . for the children.

Also, further to Attila's comment, I hope you didn't leave that therapist, PF. It's not often you'll get straight talk like that from a woman, especially an educated woman. Stick with her and learn what you can.

Time for my two cents, most guys out there like the look of Teri Polo, I'll admit, I find her attractive, but I would have no chance with her if she walked into a bar that I frequent. Playboy is all about fantasy, it isn't reality, I'm sure that their airbrush artists are busier than their photographers. What I'm saying is that when it comes down to it, I'd like to go out with a girl with a few extra pounds that can carry on a descent conversation than a girl who is emaciated and couldn't carry a conversation in a Hefty Cinch Sack.

It's not often you'll get straight talk like that from a woman, especially an educated woman.

Amen, Allah. Those lying, misleading, delusional, exploitative, unethical, money-grubbing, self-interested and educated bitches not only manipulate us, they often aren't hot enough to bother with. Screw 'em.

This is fun- not only do we get to bash the skinny ones, we get to lay it on about the rest of them, too, except for the "intellectuals" who aren't so "gold-diggery". (Still, if those smart ones are "educated", they're probably not being straight with us.)

I'd hit it, but the question of "what body type" is far too complicated. It all depends.

Two words: Ladder Theory.

I'm not sure your therapist would suggest such a solution for herself, however, and she might have taken exception to your inference that "we really want guys with money."

Well, funny you should mention that, because I think that's exactly the path the therapist had chosen for herself, and it was probably no small reason she'd recommended it for someone else. However, I'm not sure she realized it until exactly that moment. There was kind of an awkward silence and a very strange look passed over her face. Maybe I'm projecting, but it sure seemed that as the sentence left her mouth her reaction was "I can't believe I just said that."

For a long time, for me, she was pretty much the embodiment of wisdom and self-awareness. To her credit, she's made some changes in her relationship with her 2nd hubby who is -- surprise, surprise -- a very wealthy man. I probably shouldn't go into it any more than that, but in my more self-indulgent moments, I like to think a lot of it was due to that very conversation.

As far as further therapy, that was pretty much the nail in the transference's coffin. No more therapy with her, Attila's advice notwithstanding.

Would she extend her experience into a generalization about all women? Probably not, but I think she would acknowledge that it plays a bigger role in most women's unconscious agendas than they feel comfortable (or are capable of) admitting.

I have no idea how X is making out these days. I don't hang out at Blackfin's, as my paid-for 97 Tercel would probably embarrass the valets.

Oops.. Shoulda been "Allah's advice notwithstanding." Freudian slip, I guess.

If it's her idea, she's a gold-digger, but if it's his idea, she's a trophy wife? And if she happens to earn more in a year than he does he's a gigolo?

Perhaps the problem is that we're treating people as objects to possess (or be possessed by) rather than as play partners?

I smell a Rogerian or Rational-Emotive therapy session in that exchange, not advice to become a prostitute, with the "I can't believe I said that" being shock that she discussed another patient, not the particular question.

Allah,

You already know this, but just in case you forgot (for whatever reason)...

Some of us hotties in our thirties who are still single are that way because things just didn't work out, not because we were too busy sampling the aggressive and roguish cock. There are those of us who were actually looking for love, pure and simple, and thought we'd found it. Again and again, in my case. Sometimes we get our hearts broken, and before we know it, we're thirty-something, and whaddya know? Guys like you remind us of our plummeting stock value (I'm a size two, but I AM getting lines around my eyes), and it serves as a reminder that we'll probably be alone forever.

Oh well. I make up for the emptiness of my life by reminding myself: at least I can buy very good, very expensive wine.

And shoes. And French handbags.

I for one never thought of a man as an accessory of any kind, because I have all of those I ever wanted, and I got them all by myself.

htom: X wasn't another client (at least not that I know of). She was a mutual friend.

An employee once referred to me as my husband's "trophy wife." I took it as a compliment, since I'm not intellectually insecure, but I suspect a lot of women would have fired him.

As it was, I respected him for saying something so edgy and risky to me. But if I weren't perfectly sure that I was no such thing, who knows how I would have reacted?

  • * *

I've decided that Allah's whole deal here has been a schtick, like his old blog. He's posing as a dark, troubled soul whose relations with women have been complicated by others' attempts to take unfair advantage. He's appealing to that nursemaid, the hidden social worker inside every good woman. The part of us that wants to heal the wounded. He knows that this sort of thing is a magnet for chicks, especially intellectual ones. That motherhood instinct gone awry.

In short, he's just trying to get girls.

I feel so used.

Purple, what the hell were you doing in therapy with someone you knew?

Fair points all, liv. Frankly, I'm shocked that more people haven't challenged what I said about mercenary behavior with the fact that women today are quite capable of paying their own way. To which I would have responded, indeed -- but then why do so many of them still seem to have an inordinate fondness for rich guys? Perhaps social progress has outpaced evolutionary tastes.

Two things. I can't quite tell if you're being sarcastic in referring to your life as empty. I assume that you are, in which case I'll point out that I never said single women's lives were empty. In case you're not being sarcastic, I'll suggest to you that anyone who can afford "very expensive wine" probably has a fuller life than they're letting on.

The other thing I'm troubled by is that little reference to "guys like me" reminding you that your stock's fallen. Do I detect a whiff of blame there? Would you rather I lie to you and tell you, "As a 'mature' thirtysomething man, I like women's bodies to sag a bit"? Don't you get tired of men insulting you by telling you what you want to hear because they don't think you can handle unpleasant truths?

What I've been trying to suggest in my comments here is that the reason women's -- and men's -- tastes in the opposite sex change as they get older has little to do with any bullshit sense of "maturity" and everything to do with their evolving life goals and their declining looks. To all the guys in their 40s who stopped by to say, "Sure, I might have been attracted to Teri Polo in my 20s, but now that I'm older and wiser I know nothing can replace the velveteen touch of a wrinkled, gray-haired woman" -- bullshit. You're a fucking liar. You're lying to yourself to justify the fact that you can't score babes like Polo anymore. It's like the old game of dumping someone before they can dump you. Well, guess what? Teri and her pals dumped you a long time ago. You just haven't been able to face that fact. Until now.

In short, he's just trying to get girls.

C'mon, ladies. Hump the cynicism right out of me!

After I started therapy, I attended a seminar taught by the therapist. I met X at the class. X had known the therapist (and vice versa) for some time when I met her.

I know what you're getting it, though, and yes, there were problems there, too, but that is way OT.

Allah's just exaggerating a real phenotype. One especially found in college (and above) educated women. Roughly:

1) College women sample a lot. Especially those bass players and "artists."

2) College women then break up with aforementioned hippy/bohemian/athletic types (whatever is their fancy that semester).

3) Post-college women now embark on career. Now they sample co-workers, hotties at the bars, etc.

4) Post-college woman is now 30. Tick tock. Now there is mad scramble for available "nice men" to settle down and have kiddies. Of course "nice" means well-off and secure.

This phenotype doesn't exist if you're not college-educated. Everything there is sped up 4-8 years--no college, no moving around for that internship/first analyst job, no professional school. Here you have a 23 year old women who's been dating the same guy for 3-4 years get married and start hatching kiddies. Not nearly as much time pressure for the couples here.

By the way ladies, the Allah phenotype is reinforced by every guy I know who's used a dating service (about 90% of my friends--they're all the rage with us wired gen-Xers).

As to whoever asked about the wife making more money. HAHHAHAHHAHAHAHHAH.

I don't care how "feminist" that women thinks she is, she will lose respect for her man if he makes less. The only exception to this rule is if the man has some prestigious title (i.e. he's a professor, and she's a corporate type).

Solution for guys:
1) be a hottie. work out. Make money.
2) wait until your 30's. Pretend to be stable and want a family. Screw as many late 20-something women as you want. Dump them.
3) Find a less educated or less demanding chick in her 20's. Settle down.

And whoever up there was 5'6" and 117. Hot.

David

Oh and PS.

Someone mentioned "adult" pubic hair.

Ladies, here's the deal.
Trim/shave/wax it if you want me to spend time down there. If you're not into that, fine, let it grow till you can braid it. Just know I ain't goin downtown. And plenty of fellas feel that way. Nothing spoils the mood like picking pubes out of your teeth when you're ready to slide into home plate.

David

Allah suggests that no sensible, mature, well-intentioned female could possibly want him for anything other than a meal ticket.

we should take him at his word.

You just want to be first in line for the Hump-a-thon, don't you? Well, let's get on with it, then. SADDLE UP, BABE.

wait. who's wearing the saddle?

Attila: Most American women are experts at disguising their vast heaving bosoms. I find in most other cultures women dress to look sexy.

I think someone else brought up an interesting point. What does it matter what guys like? Just from looking at things like "Ladies night" shows that women are in demand, not men. I think it's all boils down to statistics. How many available desireable women are there vs available desireable men.

Also, two notes about Playboy, first is that it's not doing that well. You can subscribe to the magazine for a dollar an issue these days.

Second, the issue that Terri Polo shows up in, the centerfold girl is 5'6" 36DD-28-36. Not the average girl for Playboy, maybe they were trying to compensate?

Skinny women are considered sexy because somehow women and homosexual men have been put in charge of deciding which women are sexy, and they can't seem to distinguish between the diametrically oppossed concepts of fashion and beauty. Also, for men, esspecially those of us with long-term monogomous inclinations, too skinny is easyer to overlook than too fat. Skinny women at least still look nice and dainty around the face, as opposed to having a dewlap. They also look like they're just going through a phase they'll get over once they get a good strong man like me to nurture them so they plump right up, wheras fat women have this glacial inevatability to them, as if they can only get fatter and fatter until even light can't escape.

I checked out Ms. Polo and at first didn't like what I saw. Very little substance and hardly impressive. But then late that night when I became the master of my domain images of the nearly divine Ms. Polo kept popping in my fantasy. I tend to like curves but maybe it's something in the male psyche that goes for the skinny.

Dave, I'm thinking you don't get laid much. And if you do, you shouldn't.

Dave's comment about gays ventures even further into crackpot territory than I'm willing to go, but I must say, his observation about the glacial inevitability of fat chicks rings tragically true.

Look upon your fate, married men: She lies there, off the coast of Antarctica!

Erik: Believe me, I dress just fine. But if I accentuated my breasts I'd just look like a whore. Trust me on this. I'm perfectly willing to show off my legs, but I have to be careful with blouses.

I think the fundamental thing that people are annoyed by WRT Allah's stance (and that of his homies on this thread) is that he is simply picking and choosing from the old way of things and the new way. Heads, he wins. Tails, we lose.

Old, pre-feminist system: I'm the guy, and I'll pick whom I want. I reserve the right to be as shallow as a piece of paper in determining what I want. I'm going to be purely selfish and superficial about this. And, by the way, if you've got lines around your eyes, you're starting to turn into a dog. Your market value is plummeting. I'm going to evaluate you strictly on the basis of your looks. I'm the guy. It's what I think that matters. You're basically a piece of property that I can evaluate like I would a farm animal.

Okay. Certain neanderthal charm. But then we have:

New, "enlightened," post-feminist system: I expect any woman I date to be completely and totally self-sufficient, even if there are kids in the equation and she is caring for them 12 hours a day. She should still be able to work full-time, even then: why would she need to sleep?

Under no circumstances am I willing to pay the bills. Because I'm old-fashioned on the looks question, but veeerrrryy modern when it comes to money.

These are both interesting attitudes. But I'm not sure they really go together.

Allah, who previous to this discussion had female fans who wanted to do him "into next week," has watched his own market value plummet as he's exposed his own hypocrisy on this thread.

And, by the way, I'm hot now: crow's feet and all. I'll be hot until I die. Just so you know, Babe. Because, guess what? Men age, too. I'll always be desirable to the population of men I'd be willing to date if I weren't married. Right into my 90s. I don't think I'll ever date again, but I'll always know that I could if I wanted to.

Is Allah being too clever for our own good, or has he been burned so many times he feels the need to eviscerate women in general? There's no male bashing going on this thread, nor black, Latino, Asian, Jew, gentile, gay or crippled crude sniping. How did women get so lucky? Is it because we're actually taking "votes" on a skinny one?

Well, come on down, guys. Tell us more how we're the cat's shit. Endear yourselves to us and call your attitude "honesty", and then complain how we don't want to look preternaturally sexy for you until we're 90 and lie down with you for nothing.

Dawgs.

"As for the thick or thin question, let me just put it this way: I don't want to be picking any bones out of my teeth when I go for my dinner, all right?"

My ex-common law father-in-law was a short and slender man married to a large woman. They both seemed quite content with this state of affairs. He used to say, If you make love to a skinny woman, better do it on a Saturday night. You'll need all day Sunday to pick the bones out of your teeth.

k

Yesterday I questioned your reading comprehension skills, Attila. Now I see that I was wrong. There's no way even a poor reader who followed my comments on this thread would represent my views the way you just have. Conclusion: You're reading me fine, you're just full of shit.

Let's call this "Things I Never Said."

I'm going to evaluate you strictly on the basis of your looks. I'm the guy. It's what I think that matters. You're basically a piece of property that I can evaluate like I would a farm animal.

Never said I'm going to evaluate anyone strictly on the basis of their looks. Go back and read my response to Steve H about 200 comments ago. Good looks are the most important thing, but they're not sufficient.

Never said "it's what I think that matters." I'm not even sure what this means, actually. Are you referring to my thought processes when I'm deciding whether to ask someone out? In that case, yes, it's what I think that matters. Do you consult God or your imaginary friend or something?

Never said that women should be viewed as property or farm animals. On the contrary, I used the plow horse metaphor to describe how many women instinctively view men.

I expect any woman I date to be completely and totally self-sufficient, even if there are kids in the equation and she is caring for them 12 hours a day. She should still be able to work full-time, even then: why would she need to sleep? Under no circumstances am I willing to pay the bills. Because I'm old-fashioned on the looks question, but veeerrrryy modern when it comes to money.

Never said women should be completely self-sufficient. On the contrary, I've taken the position of a biological fatalist throughout this exchange: men mostly value looks and women mostly value money/resources. Given that paradigm, if anyone has a responsibility to be completely self-sufficient, it's men, not women.

Never said married women with kids should have to work full-time. Never said anything remotely like this, in fact, so I'm not even sure what statement of mine you're distorting. Riddle me this, though: If I took the exact opposite position, i.e., that married women should quit their jobs and stay home with the kids, you'd be bitching at me about that too, wouldn't you?

Never said I'm unwilling to pay the bills. I EXPECT to pay the bills. Once again, see my point about biological fatalism. And once again, I'm not sure where exactly you got this idea from me. I can only assume you're distorting the point I made yesterday about women trying to lure financially stable men into marriage, but as I've tried to explain umpteen times now, the complaint there isn't about having to pay bills. It's that I think they're being somewhat disingenuous about their true motives. To repeat: I EXPECT to pay the bills. I'm a guy. It's what I do.

As for the rest of your comment, the only female fan who said she'd do me into next week is Ilyka, and while I don't want to put her on the spot, I'd be verrrry curious to know if she concurs with you about my stock having declined here. No doubt she disagrees with most everything I've said, but she strikes me as the type who can handle disagreement on these matters without wetting her pants. Who knows? Perhaps I've made enough decent points that my stock has actually jumped a bit. Wouldn't surprise me....

Finally, yes, women with crow's feet can still be hot. And yes, men age too. Unless they're rich men like Donald Trump, in which case they're forever young enough to date models. And if you really believe that you'll always be hot, well, that's too precious an illusion for me to puncture. Enjoy life in Fantasyland.

Who knows? Perhaps I've made enough decent points that my stock has actually jumped a bit.

I'd hit it.

My mistake. Nothing sexier than a guy who's actively hostile to women. You should be getting lots of offers from those who've read this thread. (What was that you said about Fantasyland . . .?)

Yes, I was exaggerating to make a point. No, I'm not sorry.

as I've tried to explain umpteen times now, the complaint there isn't about having to pay bills. It's that I think they're being somewhat disingenuous about their true motives. To repeat: I EXPECT to pay the bills. I'm a guy. It's what I do.

Then do it. And stop complaining that anyone would be so bold as to expect such a thing from you under any circumstances.

Good looks are the most important thing, but they're not sufficient.

That's a very reassuring thing to hear from someone who's made such colorful remarks about wrinkles and gray hair. You're clearly the kind of guy who wouldn't dream of dumping his middle-aged wife for a younger model. Yup: you're marriage material, all right. I'm swooning as I type this, and I'll bet the other girls are onto their third panty liner each.

Riddle me this, though: If I took the exact opposite position, i.e., that married women should quit their jobs and stay home with the kids, you'd be bitching at me about that too, wouldn't you?

Nope. 'Cause there's something to be said for it. Someone does, after all, need to watch those kids that you haven't quite ruled out, but deeply resent women for wanting.

Have a lovely evening.

the only female fan who said she'd do me into next week is Ilyka

Were we supposed to announce whether we'd do Allah? Because he was tops the past year up to two days ago, and now he's definitely bottom.

Anyway, I think his new schtick is to try to get certain women to rise to the "challenge" of an antagonist. Allah: I'm saying nasty things about most women. Useful woman: Oh, we're not all that way, Allah. I'm an intellectual and tolerant of your "civil debate". Allah: Oh, you're an "intellectual", then maybe you aren't a typical female gold-digger. You're just a sell-out and are allowed to do me and show me that you're not like those others.

Maybe Allah also gets off on women getting off on a man who expresses contempt for most of her gender (and just maybe her too, truth be known, cause she'd be pretty desperate to waste time on such a drama queen).

Michele, I admire your courage. Though I do think you're a minority voice, here. (At least, going by my e-mail.)

Wear kevlar.

Though I do think you're a minority voice, here. (At least, going by my e-mail.)

Going by my latest e-mail -- from a female friend who's monitoring this thread and who just read your and ff's comments -- "the feministas have arrived!"

Very quickly, Attila, one more round of "Things I Never Said." Never complained about women "being so bold" as to ask me to pay bills. Never said I'd dump my middle-age wife for a younger women; that's a simple case of make a promise, keep a promise. Never said I resent women for wanting kids. Also, just for the record, I don't care whether you're swooning, anti-swooning, whatever. The whole thing about female fans wanting me was a joke Ilyka made early on. You brought it up again tonight in semi-serious fashion for some unknown reason. If you really think I care whether women I don't know and will never meet find me less appealing because of my comments here, well, I simply don't know what to say. Actually, yes I do: if Michele's still in my corner, it's all good.

"Former fan": Sorry to hear my stock has dropped. Win some, lose some. I'll certainly confess (as I already have privately to Ilyka) to exaggerating some of my opinions in order to get a rise out of my opponents.

Anyway, sounds like your real problem is with Ilyka and Michele so I'll let them deal with the rest of your comment.

I think Allah's trying to be a bad boy because he knows some women will fall for it. They either like the abuse or being flattered into thinking they're the exception to his crass outlook on many/most women. And he thinks women are manipulative!

Meanwhile, Allah hopes his "stock has actually jumped a bit"... Are we really so stooopid as to be played like this???? Allah is such an f-n talent, and he's either pulling a far too derivative Andy Kaufman or Ali G, or he's sincerely fine about bashing most women when he wouldn't dream of doing so WRT any other group, save jihadist Islamists and reactionary leftists. Gosh, thanks, Allah.

Methinks that some of the people doing loud protesting here are one and the same person. In fact, I pretty much know this for certain.

Take your ball and go home, hon. And take the stick out of your ass when you get there.

As it happens, my brother used to date a lot of golddiggers. Possibly because he refused to date anyone he actually knew and liked, or anyone I knew, or anyone who shared his interests or intelligence.

No, he wanted to date really blonde women with really hard faces and shellacked makeup. There were signs all over them that said, "I will treat you badly, I'm only dating you because I'm between rich guys, and when I spot a new one I'll dump you fast", but that was what he liked, apparently. He also tended to act around them not like my confident older brother, or even my geekishly charming and gentlemanly older brother, but like a puppy begging not to be kicked (which was like raw meat to them). And then, after they dumped him, he would come to cry on my shoulder about how all women wanted was money and an expensive car, and call every cute or gorgeous nice woman he met a cow.

At a certain point, my brother got a better job and more money, and apparently decided this meant he didn't have to play puppydog anymore. Amazingly enough, acting more confident around women brought him more choice in women. Still, his cynicism grew...despite the fact that his "better job" wasn't exactly the kind to draw golddiggers.

He is currently married to a nice, pretty, smart girl who couldn't get him to ask her out, and so took matters into her own hands with a romantic clue-by-four. He lets her walk all over him -- pleads for it practically -- but fortunately for him, she uses her power for good and not for evil. To be honest, though, I think she likes him best when he forgets about puppydog love and is more his normal self.

I still don't know where he managed to find all those golddiggers. Maybe he subscribed to some kind of Self-Esteem Destroyers R Us catalog.

No, he wanted to date really blonde women with really hard faces and shellacked makeup.

You know what the upshot of this thread just might be? "Avoid blondes."

Sounds like a plan!

I'm bored with the back and forth of who said what and when. And I'm not going to look back over this thread so I can write a doctoral thesis. I should probably point out that the reason I'll always be attractive is that I'll always consider myself to be that. My grandmother remarried at 80. I don't think I'll do that, but I'll still probably be pretty damned well-preserved at that age (as now).

Guys I'd never date no matter what (even if I were single, they were the last men on earth, etc.):

1) Donald Trump. There's no amount of money that would convice me to let him undress in front of me.

2) Howard Stern. He hates women, and he isn't funny. Other than that, there's no problem.

3) Allah. He dislikes women, and he is funny. So there's an improvement there, but he's still not up to scratch.

4) Any man who lets me figure out that he'd really prefer to be with the slim, leggy type, and is only settling for curvy little me. Because there are just as many men whose preferences run the other way, and I'd rather be with them; life is short.

5) Any guy who doesn't meet my intelligence requirements, and/or can't carry on an interesting conversation.

Because why should I waste my time? If I were single, and no one were around who met my standards, I'd stay at home and watch TV, surf the web, or read about Jack the Ripper.

It's all good.

All I can say is good luck trying to find a straight man who finds women who look like that attractive. There's certainly plenty of people who do. It's just that very few of them actually sleep with women, if you get my drift ;)

I'm getting some negative feedback from the gay male side of things, and it doesn't look too good there, either.

Weren't opinions asked for? Isn't that pretty much what's happened?

Yeah, thought so.

Necks and clavicles are where it's at. There is nothing as sensual as a graceful neck and defined clavicles. Ann Heche, Catherine Zeta-Jones, Audrey Hepburn, these women define sexy for me.

As far as weight goes, I prefer zaftig and cuddly but my fascination with the neck means the greatly overweight won't cut it. Then again neither will the grossly underweight - there's nothing sexy about a neck like a stick.

Add to the Big Rule Book of Commenting: Read the comments before you post so you'll know ahead of time if the thread has completely removed itself from the post topic and can therefore avoid looking like a tard.

So anyway, Allah has some points but I don't agree with the generalization. Is security a factor in what a gal looks for in a guy? Sure, why not? Is it generally the most important thing on the list? I doubt it. I think companionship trumps the hell out of that for most women. Most men too for that matter.

Michelle: Dave, I'm thinking you don't get laid much. And if you do, you shouldn't.

May I ask why?

Honestly? What really turns me on is a woman in uniform.

I fully agree with the 'dozen wire hangers in a cheap sock' comment. Meat on bones for sure, and the upper limit is much more lax than the lower one. I'd rather have a little gut than prominent veins and ribs. Ugh.

I just looked at the picture. Yech. Skeletons ain't my thing.

Let's just be honest folks --- you have no clue what will end up rocking your world. I am a breast man, but a woman with smaller breasts that fit her frame perfectly would be infinitely preferrable than Tara Reid. Physical attractiveness is something that nobody can honestly describe.

Just for an example, when I was younger, I loved very skinny redheads. Thought red hair was insanely sexy. Whom did I actually get engaged to?

An Italian girl who was not skinny. Not even close to what was my ideal.

While it didn't work out, I admit, freely, that she was not what I considered my ideal BEFORE I met her.

And, currently, I'm seeing another brunette. She is definitely not rail thin and, probably, not somebody when I was a teenager I'd consider to be a dream girl, but she definitely does it for me now.

Anybody who claims that they have a physical ideal is clearly single and not even sniffing at something serious. Your "ideals" will quickly and easily morph into areas you didn't expect when you meet that person you fall in love with.
-=Mike

I saw the pix of Teri Polo a few days before coming across this thread, and thought she was pretty unattactive for a Playboy model/Hollywood cheesecake.

Her skinniness is only part of the problem. I don't find her cute, which is an important factor to me (although even harder to define than "beautiful"). Her face looks a bit goofy to me, and not in a cute way.

By the more down-to-earth standards of the "real world", she's certainly not bad looking though.

I guess on the whole I like women who are on the tall-side, and have enough meat on their bones to be soft and snuggleable. Stephanie Seymour, one-time Victoria's Secret/SI Swimsuit model probably comes as close to an ideal physical specimen as anyone else I can think of at the moment. Or Jeri Ryan. Or Anna Kournikova.

I haven't read enough interviews with Jeri Ryan to form an opinion, but Stephanie and Anna seem to be pretty much idiots, so I'm only talking about physical appearance.

And no, I don't expect to ever get the time-of-day from any woman who looks like them...

Wow. This is still going on?

Well, for those who can't get enough, the series I wasn't going to pimp is now being kicked around at a very good discussion site (The Perfect World) and Football Fans for Truth:

here

Good lord. I figured this conversation would have ended long ago.

www.laddertheory.com has the entire rationale speeled out for anyone still wondering "What would a guy do?"

(Sorry, couldn't figure out putting in links using HTML.)

ya'll r some realy horndogs...get a dildo....later days!!!

Well I'm slim (not skinny) and my breasts aren't exactly big but I can't help it...I've been on binge diets before but all fat goes to my ass (I am out of proportion as hell, all hips and ass!) so don't be too mean about slim girls! Not all of us are anorexic.
I say people need to back off on commenting about what shape a woman should be. Teri Polo wouldn't be so skinny then, and other women wouldn't feel the need for breast implants. All women can be sexy if they feel it, because glowing confidence makes anyone attractive. I know you want to know what physically makes a woman attractive, but this question can never be answered! It differs for all men. My current boyfriend used to say he'd dump me if I gained any weight...I said I would be whatever weight I was and I certainly wasn't dieting. I've actually gained a little and he's noticed but doesn't care! Men say they have ideal body shapes, but unless a girl is obese or boney, in my experience guys don't mind.