| How much has your "criteria" changed?
Posted: 8/30/2009 3:45:14 PM | Some time soon after turning 45 (I was divorced at 45) I began to notice that what I found attractive in the opposite sex had changed quite a bit (evolved?). Though the physical attraction is still a must for me, I find myself drawn much more by the personality/temperment of a lady.
I think when I was a young lad, the beauty/personality ratio was probably 65 percent looks and 35 percent personality. Now, I think that ratio has probably reversed. Why is this? Certainly life experience has taught me the value of a gentle spirit, but is it also because I've been taken in by the pretty face and my heart over-rode the brain and I ignored the obvious red flags? For whatever reason, what I desire in a mate has changed a lot since my youth. How about you? | |
|
| How much has your criteria changed?
Posted: 8/30/2009 5:26:37 PM | | My criteria is probably about the same, except I don't make "excuses or exceptions" anymore for men that are arrogant, rude, or self-centered. I don't care what your childhood was like...if you're 50+ years old you've had PLENTY of time to "work on yourself", and if you didn't.....well, that's not my issue..... | |
|
| |
| How much has your criteria changed?
Posted: 8/30/2009 5:48:19 PM | | I put more priority on personality, commonalities, and intellegence. I have never been attracted to another type, but I would date them just to see. Now I don't have time for that. | |
|
| How much has your criteria changed?
Posted: 8/30/2009 5:59:55 PM | I have found that I look for a kinder, gentler man than before.
However, I have always desired a man who knows what he wants and is decisive. As far as looks, well personality will definitely add or subtract to my physical attraction to a man. | |
|
| How much has your criteria changed?
Posted: 8/30/2009 6:02:12 PM | | Intelligence and personality has always been the big attraction for me. Not that I've always chosen wisely, but looks were always less important. It's still the same. If a man stimulates my mind, my spirit and my sense of humor, then he will win me over. | |
|
| How much has your criteria changed?
Posted: 8/30/2009 7:22:01 PM | | Seeing as how I never had criteria, and I still don't, nothing has changed. It's never occurred to me what purpose there would be to listing qualities as requirements because whatever happens spontaneously during the process of actual discovery works fine for knowing whether I am interested or not. There are several zillions of possible things that could get my attention, and from any one the next step would be seeing what else was there, which, in turn, would either lead my interest further or turn it off. I'm optimistic in that whatever happens I am looking for the way it can go well. Maybe that is too opportunistic for online selection, given the role of prejudice in evaluating profiles. Still, when it comes down to it I must rely on the impression as it evolves. I place more faith in the ability of the world to produce better than what I can imagine than I do in my power to determine the future based on assumptions left over from past experiences. | |
|
| How much has your criteria changed?
Posted: 8/30/2009 8:00:12 PM | | Not a big change to my criteria. I'm just a lot less inclined to put up with bullsht. I've always valued humor, honesty, respect, and empathy in a man and will continue to place high emphasis on those traits. | |
|
| How much has your criteria changed?
Posted: 8/30/2009 8:02:47 PM | Make me laugh...I love a wicked sense of humor when I was younger and now...the difference is now if someone has addiction issues Im not allowing myself to become involved with them.
Looks, money and all that never played that big a part in any decisions, it was more based on who someone is, can they be real vs hiding behind their money or looks. | |
|
| How much has your criteria changed?
Posted: 8/30/2009 8:07:26 PM | | What now attracts me has always attracted me. What now repulses me has always repulsed me. I sense no change. I am still hard wired the same way. | |
|
| How much has your criteria changed?
Posted: 8/30/2009 8:13:20 PM | | I've found the physical attraction has become more important to me as I've aged. I didn't put a lot of stock in that when I was younger, maybe even 5 years ago. Now, I finally realize that if I'm not attracted to a man, if the thought of seeing him doesn't make me excited, it's not likely to work out. | |
|
| How much has your criteria changed?
Posted: 8/30/2009 8:53:39 PM | I liked farceur's response, a few posts back. You never know what a new person will bring, that can certainly be a "plus" and it was something that you never thought about as a criterion, but there it is, staring you in the face.
For example, broadmindedness -- we all tend to get more "firm" about certain things in life as we get older, but here comes someone that will say, "Wait a minute, try looking at X, Y, Z, from a different angle, and you just may like, for example, working early in the morning as opposed to being a night owl." or "Why don't you give mushrooms another chance, these are sauteed, not fried." Or why don't we go out and buy you dress shoes to go with your Hickey Freeman, instead of wearing Bass shoes with the suit? hehe
Having said that, I've added to, not changed criteria throughout the years. For example, "looks" is still important -- it goes a long way to enhancing "chemistry," but looks alone, without intellect, sensitivity, good values, is not enough. I think that, as DaytonDennis says, it is "because I've been taken in by the pretty face and my heart [over-riding] the brain and I ignored the obvious red flags." So, with age, the "red flags" to avoid have become added criteria.
"Looks" are relative. I get blown away by some ladies here on POF that are older than me and still pack a punch in the looks department. And, vice versa. But a "classy" lady always shines through -- that hasn't changed for a very long time. | |
|
| How much has your criteria changed?
Posted: 8/30/2009 9:02:59 PM | Since I have more personality now in my 40s than I did in my 20s, yeah, personality is a trigger for an erection, a bit of animalistic quality and a forthright attitude, not being afraid to talk sex or any other feelings. Fearlessness is extremely attractive.
But looks are still important, so I'd say it's a 50/50 ratio, whereas it was an 80/20 ratio in favor of looks in my 20s. | |
|
| How much has your criteria changed?
Posted: 8/30/2009 9:31:24 PM |
Though the physical attraction is still a must for me, I find myself drawn much more by the personality/temperment of a lady.
For me it's always been a combination of both. Sometimes a good personality, intelligence and humor made them more attractive to me. Initial physical attraction could be destroyed by personality/temperament.
I place more faith in the ability of the world to produce better than what I can imagine than I do in my power to determine the future based on assumptions left over from past experiences
I liked that. Very thought-provoking. Kind of like "let it go" (especially the past) and just take things as they come, as they reveal themselves. Could be surprised. | |
|
| How much has your criteria changed?
Posted: 8/30/2009 9:39:57 PM | gaddflye wrote:
What now attracts me has always attracted me. What now repulses me has always repulsed me. I sense no change. I am still hard wired the same way.
YES; BUT, I find some wiggle room creeping into my slumbering senescent picker. I still place a high value on a fit and toned body (sorry, it seems to be embedded in my microcode) but I don't want a woman with the body of a 30 year old. (No, scratch that, yes, I would like a woman with the body of a 30year old (shoot, I want my 30 year old body), but I don't expect the body of a 30 year old).
and unlike 30 years ago, I tend to be more attracted at this age to mothers - something I didn't even dream of 30 years ago.
Some things just go without saying: a Christian woman who lives her faith daily.
A lover; a woman who knows what she wants, knows what she wants to give, and the desire to fulfill both. You know, this wasn't even a thought 30 years ago. I thought sex / physical intimacy was a no brainer, esp within the bounds of marriage. But, with age doth come experience, with experience doth come wisdom. Definately something that will be a serious discussion point.
Aggressiveness. This is a strange one. the women I hung around with 30 years ago were, for the most part, all go getters, excelling in their fields. I've come to appreciate this quality and think it belongs in my slunbering senescent picker file.
I guess the short answer is that 30 years ago I didn't really have criteria, not something I could point to; but now, my youth has given way, reluctantly, to a wiser, more experienced man with an age hardened idea of who he is and what he desires.
TK
{was going to say 'wizened,' but I'm not all wrinkly yet} | |
|
| How much has your criteria changed?
Posted: 8/30/2009 9:49:53 PM | “Though the physical attraction is still a must for me, I find myself drawn much more by the personality/temperment of a lady.”
Too bad you and I seem to be the only ones to think that way. I wouldn’t have given up otherwise. | |
|
| How much has your criteria changed?
Posted: 8/30/2009 10:06:29 PM | When I was young, things like peglegs, hook hands, Frankenstein scars, false teeth and glass eyes were a turn off,,,
I still can't relax around hook hands,,,
 | |
|
| How much has your criteria changed?
Posted: 8/30/2009 10:13:07 PM | Call me shallow but physical attraction matters MORE to me now than when I was younger.
I'm attracted to fit, athletic, good-looking 45+ men. Beer guts, man boobs, and skinny arms and legs just don't do it for me. Sorry but I still enjoy SEX.... and I'd prefer to be visually turned on by the man I'm with rather than having to close my eyes and fantasizing about George Clooney etc.  | |
|
| How much has your criteria changed?
Posted: 8/30/2009 10:13:25 PM | It's nice to be physically attracted to someone, but I have noticed that after I have gotten to know someone, I find I like them more than I initially thought. One thing that has changed for sure is that I don't want to be involved with someone who refuses to communicate.
My last relationship ended because he thought if you didn't talk about a problem, it would just go away. That just won't work. | |
|
| How much has your criteria changed?
Posted: 8/30/2009 10:23:05 PM | Have always been an old soul with a youthful spirit... What I look for has always been intelligence, integrity, humor, strength... yes want that attraction but it emanates more from the inside than is seen from the outside...
OP.. enjoyed your profile... loved the song.. :-)
cc.. | |
|
| How much has your criteria changed?
Posted: 8/30/2009 10:42:05 PM | My criteria haven't changed much. I'm still exclusively attracted to strong, intelligent and independent women. I'm much the same (some would argue the "intelligent" thing) and I don't like very needy types.
That being said, I've found that I've changed more than my expectations. I've progressed through several epiphanies thanks to many of the women I have dated. | |
|
| How much has your criteria changed?
Posted: 8/30/2009 11:23:48 PM | I'm attracted to fit, athletic, good-looking 45+ men.
As I thought people matured as they got older, they actually regress. Best of luck to you, you’ll need it! | |
|
| How much has your criteria changed?
Posted: 8/31/2009 1:29:15 AM | My criteria has changed very little over the years...although I merely 'admuire' the
D~D~G-types, now...knowing that...
1.) They can have any guy that they want, and I have 2-strikes against me to Start with, now...
2.) I've found those types to be vain and conceited...which I find quite distasteful...
Not that I'll 'settle' for less than I want,
[I still know I'm a great catch for someone, if given a chance...]
but I'm more conscious of my limitations, now..!!
  | |
|
| How much has your criteria changed?
Posted: 8/31/2009 2:15:55 AM | I've always been a sucker for a guy who can make me laugh.
But now I look for kindness, not arrogance. I look for intelligence, not arrogance. I look for a full set of teeth, not arrogance - I mean, dentures. Hair is optional nowadays, which would have been unthinkable 30 years ago. | |
|
| How much has your criteria changed?
Posted: 8/31/2009 3:09:08 AM | A few years back I was on the beach in Texas, watching this gal (a friend of a friend) playing with my friends young daughter. She was helping her build sand castles, looking at shells and learning about the world. That blew me right away. I'd swear she was the most beautiful woman on the beach that day.
20 years ago I wouldn't have noticed, with all the bikini babes running around. | |
|
Home
login 
