A couple of weeks ago Kiki of Saucebox mentioned a friend, a man, who feels sexual attraction for every woman he meets. Between her post and resulting comments, and a parallel discussion at Pandagon I’ve been mulling over the possibilities.
I guess the first thing I should say is I can identify with Kiki’s friend. I wasn’t sure right away, but I’ve been thinking about it ever since, asking myself when I meet someone “can I be attracted to her.” The answer — almost always yes — in turn creates a couple of other interesting questions.
One being about our assumptions about the priorities of sexual attraction. Sexual attraction doesn’t translate automatically into sexual desire. At least for me, I find its not that hard to consider people who I think might be interested and say yeah, we could work it out together. Still, that’s not the same thing as wanting to, or needing to, or regretting that one can’t.
Another assumption that crops up in the discussions on Kiki’s site is that looks really do matter, enough so that men simply won’t consider partners who don’t meet certain (generally conventional) standards of attractiveness. I actually think that might be true at certain ages, particularly adolescence when we at least perceive incredible pressure to conform to all manner of standards. But (by definition) adolescence isn’t adulthood, and I think for most adults looks do matter, but they’re not the deal-breaker other people assume.
One good question that came up was why, if looks don’t matter, we’re presented over and over with the same limited standards for women’s looks in pop culture — blonde hair, big chests, etc. I think it may have a lot more to do with iconography than ideals. Ask 100 people to think of a flower and they’ll probably imagine a red rose, a red tulip, or perhaps a white daisy with a yellow center — the iconic flowers. But if you took all 100 of them to an arboretium and invited them to select their favorite flower very few would select the iconic flowers. Anyway I think the same thing is true for iconic images of masculinity and femininity — ask me to pick the iconic “sexy” man and woman and I’ll pretty much say Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie. But mostly because they’re the designated sexy icons. Ask me to select who of the people I know I’m most attracted to and you’d get very different answers. Anyway, I’m guessing that’s why we’re presented with instance after instance of the same types of people in media — advertising, moving pictures, and porn.
Anyway, if our culture was less monogamy-centric then chances are good I’d be sexual with more than one person. But very few of my partners would be attractive in the classic/iconic sense.
—-
One thing that wasn’t clear from the discussions on Saucebox or Pandagon was whether women had corresponding attractions to men. I’ve noticed that if you give people time for reflection their answers overlap a great deal more than our stereotypes would suggest, with most of the variation coming more from age or background than gender. I’m guessing the same thing is true for looks. What do you think?
Submitted by 812 (not verified) on Tue, 2006-06-27 19:34.
Even though one might not choose the ionic flower, the one that is chosen still would considered to be beautiful by most standards.
I think I am mostly visual, if its not the beautiful face, its the beautiful body, and in some cases its the beautiful mind. Not the geek, but the thinker.
Not every man has these attributes, so I can say I could not be attracted to every man I met.
[Yeah, not everyone has one of those attributes at the moment of our encounters with them, and scarcely anyone has all. But for me part of it comes from recognizing how, say, a very old person remembers herself and I can see that in her, or how someone else's weariness, or wariness, may have shaped them outwardly but maybe doesn't define them internally. It's not always easy, but if easy was always best then yeah, we'd plant only tulips, drink only Heinekin, vacation only at Club Med, listen only to top-40, and so on. Thanks, 5o9. --fl]
Submitted by 812 (not verified) on Tue, 2006-06-27 20:32.
reading this post has made me consider some of my rather awful assumptions, particularly about overweight people. i'm going to have to chew on this awhile - perhaps a blog post, eventually.
[Wow, thanks, A. I hope you do post about it. I'd like to hear your perspective on it. --fl]
Submitted by 812 (not verified) on Wed, 2006-06-28 04:03.
Generally for me, I see a male as whatever a stereotypical 'male' is to me (hairy, musky, strong, etc.). The sexual attraction part comes from the little things he says or does, the way he carries himself, the twinkle in his eye. If he surprises me with a quick dimpled smile or witty banter, a whispered aside or an unconscious display of muscle, then yeah, my desire for that man increases accordingly.
There is something to be said for how 'handsome' he is at first glance, but usually I dismiss the model-types and it's the everyday joes who later turn out to be the most physically desirable to me. The smarter and funnier he becomes, the more I want to bonk him.
I'll think more on this, a very interesting topic! And that photo...well...I'm wondering if you could hike those jeans down a bit more. Please.
[Yup, it's the "smarter and funnier [he|she] becomes, the more I want to bonk [him|her]" part that's important. Looks do matter, but like you say it's a lot more about eye twinkle than eye color. Thanks, Mona. --fl]
Submitted by 812 (not verified) on Wed, 2006-06-28 05:48.
weighing in as a female. that whole attraction thing strikes me in the oddest places with guys that certainly are not iconic. case in point: there's a clerk at my post office. he's probably at least 10 or 15 years older than me, has a receding hairline and fair amount of middle aged spread. but there is something so damn sexy about him; his carriage, his fabulous skin, the spark of mischief in his eye, and his warm smile. excuse me, i think i have some packages to mail, or some stamps to buy...
[I totally get that, Lime. That's exactly what I mean about attraction not being directly tied to attractiveness. Thanks. --fl]
Submitted by 812 (not verified) on Wed, 2006-06-28 12:23.
While I can honestly say that I'm not attracted 'to' every man I meet or see, I can also honestly say that I see something attractive 'about' every man I see. While I might not be attracted to a 'big' man, that same man can have the most amazing eyes I've ever seen. Some of the things that I have envied the most (hair, smile, personality etc.) have been qualities of people, who would be considered 'ugly' by societies standards. A person can always find something attactive about someone if they look hard enough.
I do think that women can be as stereotypical as men. But however, by nature, I think most women have a tendency to look a little deeper and for different types of qualities that make a man sexually attractive to them. (Like you mentioned in your post) For me, I find myself sexually attacted to men who have dark shaggy hair, blue eyes, dimples, etc. But, I am more sexually attracted to my husband, than I have ever been to any other man. And he happens to have short blond hair, receding hairline, blue eyes, no dimples, and a tall lanky body. Why can he flip my switch the way no one else can? Because like many women, I find things other than looks sexuallly attractive in men.
Oh by the way... when I first came across some of your photos I had to bring my husband in to ask him if they were of him. :)(I was teasing him of course) It's a little freaky, but my husband could be your body double. Actually your bodies are so close, its beyond freaky. It's no wonder I think your pictures are so yummy!!!! Just for info sake... I know you are 50ish? Right? Well my hubby is 34, so I hope you are proud of your "young" physique. :)
[I'm flattered as can be, Sage. And I know what you mean about attraction mattering on the one hand, but not so much that we can't or don't wind up deeply desiring someone totally other than that. Thanks. --fl]
Submitted by 812 (not verified) on Thu, 2006-06-29 16:53.
Two things:
1) Are you really that old? I'd swear you're 35 or so... How tall are you?
2) I think I'm attracted to subtle things like body carriage, confidence, respectful attitude. The appearance (clothes, hair, etc) is one indicator of those subtle things, and also is an indicator of a person's basic values and outlook on life, but you really have to talk to someone for a while to know if they're worth your investment of time and energy in them.
I have an automatic distrust and turned-off reaction to anyone who looks like the icon. Maybe it's unfair, but I automatically assume those people are going to be slimy in one way or another.
When I see a random man, like in a club, or at the mall, I might fantasize about how intelligent or whatever they might be, but there's rarely any sense of "attraction" per se. Not until I actually talk to them (which I usually don't, because I'm married and I *don't* want to go there!)
[Actually you raise a good point about people fortunate, or unfortunate, enough to be iconic. In a lot of ways its even harder to see the real beauty (as opposed to the "checklist beauty") in them. As for question #1, I'm 51 years old and 6'3" tall. Thanks, Swan. --fl]
Submitted by 812 (not verified) on Fri, 2006-06-30 00:28.
I was kind of wondering whether the guy mentioned at Saucebox (and the other people, mostly men, that I've heard say similar things) could possibly mean the same thing I did by "sexual attraction," since being sexually attracted to most women you meet seems so alien to me. And it seems, from what you say, that the answer is no. If I say I find someone sexually attractive, I do mean that I actively desire that person (for which reason, I wouldn't say that I find Brad Pitt sexually attractive, even though I refer to him as a kind of icon of attractiveness the way everyone else does - I'm not actually fantasizing about him or actively wishing I could sleep with him).
And I don't tend to think of people sexually at all unless we've spoken.
Actually, to the extent that I do any kind of automatic assessing of people's attractiveness when I meet them, it's mostly confined to other women, and the scale has two settings: prettier than me and less pretty than me.
[I think one difference (that we'd sort of discussed in each other's comments in the past) is that till very recently tradition has dictated that men ask and women wait to be asked. In which case we very likely do mean something very different when we say "sexual attraction." And it occurs to me that this might explain a big point of confusion -- if I say "I think person X is sexually attractive" I'd be saying something closer to "If it circumstances were otherwise I'd consider asking her for a date" while you, based on your experience of the phrase, would assume I was *way* further along in the process. Thanks, Lynn. --fl]
Submitted by 812 (not verified) on Fri, 2006-06-30 14:02.
One thing that wasn't clear from the discussions on Saucebox or Pandagon was whether women had corresponding attractions to men.
To answer your question, fl, this woman does indeed have corresponding attractions to men. Be it the Fed Ex delivery man, the investment analyst who is sitting across the conference table, the neighbor walking his dog: I consider the possibility of each as a sexual partner, but being married for over 20 years, I have learned that happiness in life is very much a matter of not acting or speaking on impulse. I would also echo Tooelesage's words: I can also honestly say that I see something attractive 'about' every man I see. I think that is one thing that separates the emotionally mature from the immature: as you go through life you realize that judging people by their appearances, especially in comparison to a narrow definition of beauty, is an adolescent and shallow preoccupation.
I also tend to focus on the same characteristics that swan cited: I think I'm attracted to subtle things like body carriage, confidence, respectful attitude. The appearance (clothes, hair, etc) is one indicator of those subtle things, and also is an indicator of a person's basic values and outlook on life, but you really have to talk to someone for a while to know if they're worth your investment of time and energy in them.
Like swan, I also have ...an automatic distrust and turned-off reaction to anyone who looks like the icon. But I realize that it is just as unfair to look askance at someone whose appearance conforms to a standard as to dismiss someone whose looks do not conform.
I applaud A for admitting that she may have formed ...awful assumptions, particularly about overweight people. I would encourage her to post on this topic to explore the origins of those assumptions. A text that she may find especially helpful when examining these assumptions is Women Who Run With the Wolves: Myths and Stories of the Wild Women Archetype by Clarissa Pinkola Estes, PhD. which is the source of the following paragraph. While Pinkola-Estes writes about the effects upon women, the same principle applies to men.
Submitted by 812 (not verified) on Sat, 2006-07-01 22:47.
Yes, I suppose the asking/being asked roles might have something to do with it.
It's also traditionally taken as a way bigger deal if a woman says openly that she considers a man attractive than if a man openly says the same about a woman. At least if both statements are made in mixed company.
[Oh yeah, another good point, Lynn. Thanks. --fl]