for a long-term committed relationship, both of us want much better than borderline, so we should be able to cooperate on finding that out anyway;
I think it’s worth being specific about “borderline,” curious what you think about this.
In my model, most people in the same culture broadly agree on people’s attractiveness levels—there’s a “g factor” for attractiveness. They also compete effectively for mates. Being heteronormative for a moment, this means that the husbands find their wives about as attractive as the wives find their husbands.
Luck and personal idiosyncrasies mean that people can sometimes find their own partner slightly more attractive than most people would. For example, if a man has a preference for unusually short women, and if those women are typically considered relatively unattractive, he might consider his short wife an 6 when most people would consider her a 4.[1] However, she might consider him a 4, but be happy to date him because she herself is a 4 and finds him typical of the most attractive class of men who show her interest.
This “luck and idiosyncrasy bonus” might be the difference between a “borderline” match (a 4 dating a 4) and a “good” match (two 4s who consider each other 5s due to their mutual attraction to each others’ idiosyncrasies).
A different definition of “borderline” might mean dating somebody you find very attractive (perhaps an 8-10). In my opinion, this is only a realistic expectation if you yourself are in the 8-10 range, or if you’re a 6-7 and willing to hold out a long time for the right mix of luck and idiosyncratic compatibility.
In this model, it’s good to encourage people to spend time looking around for a partner they’re somewhat unusually compatible with, but who would be seen by most people as basically equally as attractive as you are. You’ll know it’s a good match when you each find that the other person fits some odd set of personal preferences that you know most people don’t share, or at least that they don’t feel as strongly about as you do.
In my case, my partner has a similar sense of goofy physical humor, is unusually forthright and willing to deal with my LW-trained debate style despite not having any interest in it herself, doesn’t mind my odd sleep schedule, accommodates me nattering on about my projects, has been willing to patiently wait out a 2 year separation while we’ve had to live 2,000 miles apart for grad school, is exceptionally levelheaded about politics, and is very good at managing her own emotional state.
We each have similar aspects that most people probably find somewhat unattractive. Neither of us grows much hair on our heads. My body is very hairy, her shape is well shy of rubinesque but not thin. Neither of us earns much money right now, and we’re both grinding through grad school. We both dress OK but nothing special, and while neither of us have particular hygiene problems, neither of us is that focused on personal grooming. She is distractable, I’m caught up in my own thoughts. She’s rather cautious, and I take things too seriously. I think that if most people viewed us as a couple, we’d look pretty well matched as far as looks and social charm goes.
Sometimes, I find myself comparing what we might call my partner’s “sexual market value” to other women I’ve dated in the past. Then I remind myself that she is by far the most stable, caring, generous, solid, kind, honest person I’ve dated, the most willing to compromise, the person who’s on the most similar life trajectory to my own. I’ve dated some really conventionally beautiful women, but they were always emotionally unstable, manipulative, struggling in life, or just temporarily having a fling with me and not interested in anything long term. It’s not that conventionally beautiful women are this way intrinsically, it’s just that the conventionally women who have been willing to date me are usually struggling to hang on to a steady relationship with a more attractive man for a reason.
Ranking people’s attractiveness on a 10 point scale feels dumb/crass but it is helpful to express the thought in this case. I’m sorry if it offends anybody.
I think it’s worth being specific about “borderline,” curious what you think about this.
In my model, most people in the same culture broadly agree on people’s attractiveness levels—there’s a “g factor” for attractiveness. They also compete effectively for mates. Being heteronormative for a moment, this means that the husbands find their wives about as attractive as the wives find their husbands.
Luck and personal idiosyncrasies mean that people can sometimes find their own partner slightly more attractive than most people would. For example, if a man has a preference for unusually short women, and if those women are typically considered relatively unattractive, he might consider his short wife an 6 when most people would consider her a 4.[1] However, she might consider him a 4, but be happy to date him because she herself is a 4 and finds him typical of the most attractive class of men who show her interest.
This “luck and idiosyncrasy bonus” might be the difference between a “borderline” match (a 4 dating a 4) and a “good” match (two 4s who consider each other 5s due to their mutual attraction to each others’ idiosyncrasies).
A different definition of “borderline” might mean dating somebody you find very attractive (perhaps an 8-10). In my opinion, this is only a realistic expectation if you yourself are in the 8-10 range, or if you’re a 6-7 and willing to hold out a long time for the right mix of luck and idiosyncratic compatibility.
In this model, it’s good to encourage people to spend time looking around for a partner they’re somewhat unusually compatible with, but who would be seen by most people as basically equally as attractive as you are. You’ll know it’s a good match when you each find that the other person fits some odd set of personal preferences that you know most people don’t share, or at least that they don’t feel as strongly about as you do.
In my case, my partner has a similar sense of goofy physical humor, is unusually forthright and willing to deal with my LW-trained debate style despite not having any interest in it herself, doesn’t mind my odd sleep schedule, accommodates me nattering on about my projects, has been willing to patiently wait out a 2 year separation while we’ve had to live 2,000 miles apart for grad school, is exceptionally levelheaded about politics, and is very good at managing her own emotional state.
We each have similar aspects that most people probably find somewhat unattractive. Neither of us grows much hair on our heads. My body is very hairy, her shape is well shy of rubinesque but not thin. Neither of us earns much money right now, and we’re both grinding through grad school. We both dress OK but nothing special, and while neither of us have particular hygiene problems, neither of us is that focused on personal grooming. She is distractable, I’m caught up in my own thoughts. She’s rather cautious, and I take things too seriously. I think that if most people viewed us as a couple, we’d look pretty well matched as far as looks and social charm goes.
Sometimes, I find myself comparing what we might call my partner’s “sexual market value” to other women I’ve dated in the past. Then I remind myself that she is by far the most stable, caring, generous, solid, kind, honest person I’ve dated, the most willing to compromise, the person who’s on the most similar life trajectory to my own. I’ve dated some really conventionally beautiful women, but they were always emotionally unstable, manipulative, struggling in life, or just temporarily having a fling with me and not interested in anything long term. It’s not that conventionally beautiful women are this way intrinsically, it’s just that the conventionally women who have been willing to date me are usually struggling to hang on to a steady relationship with a more attractive man for a reason.
Ranking people’s attractiveness on a 10 point scale feels dumb/crass but it is helpful to express the thought in this case. I’m sorry if it offends anybody.