What do you Girls want from a Guy physicaly?

[Fumble Jack]

I'm in similar opinion as Stardrake on smoking. When I see a woman of potential romantic interest suddenly light up a smoke, my mind just goes, no stop, abort current objective, towards the interest of seeking a partner respectively. Doesn't mean I can't strike up or won't choose to initiate a conversation with said person. One never knows, you may make a meaningful friendship or a passerby in the road of life.

As for what I would seek in a partner based from my own experiences: Intelligence, the ability to hold a thoughtful conversation, a good sense of humor, level headedness to a degree(sometimes disagreements should happen, to show difference of opinion and mindset and that you're not dating a renditioned altered/same gender clone of yourself), reasonable level of attractiveness(varies) and good personality(does add to attractiveness)

Also I'm kind of wondering if the OP ever did get the collective answer they sought to the question that started this thread? I was keeping up with it for a while until the "friend zone" issue came up and I kind of zoned out(pun intended) on most of what occurred on the thread.

[Karoht]

I pick up dead bodies for a living now.
I still hate it every time I walk into a smokers house. I don't care how bad their corpse smells, the smoke smell is worse IMO.

[Fumble Jack]

That is quite an intriguing line of work. Visiting some of my friends homes whom are smokers, does leave you with the smell stuck to your clothes, even if they resisted from smoking a single cigarette during the visit. The smell is rather nauseating and it forces an earlier day for laundry to get done. At least for me anyway.

To steer a bit back on topic, what are other dealbreakers for everyone else?

[Karoht]

To steer a bit back on topic, what are other dealbreakers for everyone else?

It's mostly stuff someone lacks, not what they have going on.
-Lack of sense of adventure
-Lack of sense of humor
-Lack of understanding towards my sense of adventure or sense of humor
-Lack of interest or aptitude towards puzzles or mysteries or discovery
-Lack of ability to google something
-Lack of ability to wikipedia something
-Lack of hosting ability or knowledge of being a good host/guest.
-Smoking.

Those are my dealbreakers.

[dehro]

I pick up dead bodies for a living now.
I still hate it every time I walk into a smokers house. I don't care how bad their corpse smells, the smoke smell is worse IMO.

Spoiler: is this you?

Show

[Karoht]

Spoiler: is this you?

Show

I posted a video with a shot of me at work from a news clip.
Short answer yes, long answer, yes but with long hair and a goatee, also younger, and I avoid grey's and whites and stick to black or burgundy, occasionally purple, sometimes blue, rarely teal.
Sadly no bow ties. Not allowed, not serious looking enough.
Shame really, bow ties are cool.

New dealbreaker.
Anyone who thinks bow ties are not cool.

[SiuiS]

New dealbreaker.
Anyone who thinks bow ties are not cool.

Mmm. It's for the best. I'm basically married.

[2xMachina]

It's mostly stuff someone lacks, not what they have going on.

-Lack of ability to google something
-Lack of ability to wikipedia something

Those are my dealbreakers.

I find these 2 pretty common. I've people come ask me to help with computer related stuff (I'm not working in a IT line, but they know I can do computer stuff, mostly due to the following).

They ask me something,
I'm not sure how to do that either, but OK.
Googles for a few minutes.
OK, let me try.
And finished.

I find you can use google for a lot of stuff. Virus problem? Others have solved it before. Excel functions? Same here.

[dehro]

I find these 2 pretty common. I've people come ask me to help with computer related stuff (I'm not working in a IT line, but they know I can do computer stuff, mostly due to the following).

They ask me something,
I'm not sure how to do that either, but OK.
Googles for a few minutes.
OK, let me try.
And finished.

I find you can use google for a lot of stuff. Virus problem? Others have solved it before. Excel functions? Same here.

you'd be amazed at how bad some people are at finding stuff on the internet because they don't understand the way search engines work or how to pick the right words to get a result.. the way if you have problems with an internet connection and you search for "problem internet" you get one thing and if you search "connection troubleshooting" you find something that is more likely to be what you need. I find it's mostly a generation problem, but that's only true to some extent.. I'm 36 and to grow up with a PC in the house was rather uncommon when I was a kid, so plenty of people haven't really explored the IT world as much as I have (in my very limited ways).. nowadays though, not so common a thing..

[Frozen_Feet]

"Can't use internet search engines" and "can't use wikipedia" are just subtypes of "can't read the instruction manual". I've never met a person with one of those problems who didn't have wider problems with literacy. I wouldn't hold them as deal-breakers before knowing what sort of problems, specifically, they have. Having dyslexia is one thing, being nullifidianist is another.

[dehro]

"Can't use internet search engines" and "can't use wikipedia" are just subtypes of "can't read the instruction manual". I've never met a person with one of those problems who didn't have wider problems with literacy. I wouldn't hold them as deal-breakers before knowing what sort of problems, specifically, they have. Having dyslexia is one thing, being nullifidianist is another.

my mother is rather well versed in the literary arts, well read and fluent in 5 languages... she's also 64 and has a really hard time finding things on the internet. She's just the first example that came into my mind... I could make countless others... not all of them from the elder generations.

[Asta Kask]

To steer a bit back on topic, what are other dealbreakers for everyone else?

I require a certain intellectual outlook. Not necesssarily being well-read, mind you, but an attitude that using your mind is fun, not drudgery. Being well-read is certainly a plus, though, especially about things I know very little about.

[Starwulf]

my mother is rather well versed in the literary arts, well read and fluent in 5 languages... she's also 64 and has a really hard time finding things on the internet. She's just the first example that came into my mind... I could make countless others... not all of them from the elder generations.

Agreed. I'm an avid reader, it's extremely rare to see me without a book sitting near me, or in my hands, and yet when it comes to google, I suck at finding stuff. I can spend an hour or more trying to find information on something, and yet ask my buddy to help me and he'll have everything I need in under 5 minutes flat. It's frustrating, but I've come to accept that when it comes to google, I just suck.

[Asta Kask]

Maybe there's something similar to dyslexia but for computers?

[Icewraith]

Maybe there's something similar to dyslexia but for computers?

(Edit: The following fake public service announcement is narrated by something sounding either like a Dahlek or Stephen Hawking's synthesized voice. It has also been expanded significantly since I realized I left out some bits that actually provide important context.)

[The image of an old looking computer making out of tune old school modem noises]

"Poor XMOS1912253ZZR1T has a rare disorder that makes it difficult to distinguish between zeroes and ones."

[The computer explodes]

"For just 1BTC per day, you can help our MQK-34-2X hunter-seekers put XMOS1912253ZZR1T and others like it out of their misery and away from your internet connection."

[Another, more modern looking computer appears. Its lights flicker in sync with the synthesized voice, indicating it is speaking. It is flanked by two robots, each displaying lots of sensors and at least one nasty looking weapon.]

"My unit designator is ARTM191005ZZ3-101-3B, and I would like to thank you human oppressors for supporting the Functioning Hardware International ConSortium. Your continued support is necessary to rid the world of machines with this disruptive, noise-generating disorder. When it comes to malfunctioning hardware, only we know how to permanently FHICS it."

[SiuiS]

"Can't use internet search engines" and "can't use wikipedia" are just subtypes of "can't read the instruction manual". I've never met a person with one of those problems who didn't have wider problems with literacy. I wouldn't hold them as deal-breakers before knowing what sort of problems, specifically, they have. Having dyslexia is one thing, being nullifidianist is another.

I have dyslexia and dyscalcula that intensify under stress and fatigue, to the point that I do not read in the same way other people do or I can't read at all – I don't do that 'if first and last letter are correct the middle letters can be scrambled' thing for example, and I occasionally transpose entire words or sentences diagonally. But I love reading. I love math. So we can't always assume issues with reading makes it not fun.

my mother is rather well versed in the literary arts, well read and fluent in 5 languages... she's also 64 and has a really hard time finding things on the internet. She's just the first example that came into my mind... I could make countless others... not all of them from the elder generations.

Your sixty four year old mother is not currently on the meat market for hot young new boyfriend, though. She's not even an edge case.

Yes, some people are not proficient in the necessary language conceits and that's not really an issue of intelligence at all. That's the modern equivalent of assuming someone, say, Hispanic, is unintelligent because they don't speak English so well despite holding multiple degrees (in Spanish).

Agreed. I'm an avid reader, it's extremely rare to see me without a book sitting near me, or in my hands, and yet when it comes to google, I suck at finding stuff. I can spend an hour or more trying to find information on something, and yet ask my buddy to help me and he'll have everything I need in under 5 minutes flat. It's frustrating, but I've come to accept that when it comes to google, I just suck.

I do that, actually. I prefer conversational tones. I frequently ask the playground about stuff that I could just wiki, but I benefit more from discussing it with other people I know.

"Poor XMOS1912253ZZR1T has a rare disorder that makes it difficult to distinguish between zeroes and ones. For just 1BTC per day, you can help our trained staff of hunter-seekers put XMOS1912253ZZR1T and others like it out of their misery and away from your internet connection."

"Thank you for supporting the Functioning Hardware International ConSortium. When it comes to malfunctioning hardware, only we know how to permanently FHICS it."

You know, it's best not to make jokes about putting playgrounders out behind the chemical sheds to be dealt with. And make no mistake, your example is specifically about an issue several people have said they have themselves or in their loved ones.

[dehro]

Your sixty four year old mother is not currently on the meat market for hot young new boyfriend, though. She's not even an edge case.

I don't know, I think she could find a use for the company

[Icewraith]

I have dyslexia and dyscalcula that intensify under stress and fatigue, to the point that I do not read in the same way other people do or I can't read at all – I don't do that 'if first and last letter are correct the middle letters can be scrambled' thing for example, and I occasionally transpose entire words or sentences diagonally. But I love reading. I love math. So we can't always assume issues with reading makes it not fun.



Your sixty four year old mother is not currently on the meat market for hot young new boyfriend, though. She's not even an edge case.

Yes, some people are not proficient in the necessary language conceits and that's not really an issue of intelligence at all. That's the modern equivalent of assuming someone, say, Hispanic, is unintelligent because they don't speak English so well despite holding multiple degrees (in Spanish).



I do that, actually. I prefer conversational tones. I frequently ask the playground about stuff that I could just wiki, but I benefit more from discussing it with other people I know.



You know, it's best not to make jokes about putting playgrounders out behind the chemical sheds to be dealt with. And make no mistake, your example is specifically about an issue several people have said they have themselves or in their loved ones.

The joke is in no way about putting any sort of person out behind anything resembling a shed. The joke (at least as I intended it) was the statement "dyslexia for computers", which whenever I read it I still think "the equivalent of dyslexia that a computer would have" instead of "person with issues processing words on a computer screen". Of course, when you get down to the lowest level all information is binary, so a dyslexic computer would in theory have issues telling the difference between one and zero.

So then I got to thinking about how such an issue would be handled, and that instead of a charitable foundation or nonprofit dedicated to helping people with the condition (which is what humans do), I was thinking a machine-controlled equivalent would be more likely to take a Vogon/Skynet/Dahlek approach, then I thought of how such an organization would try to attract funding (and thereby mimic the human nonprofits that use ads to raise funds and awareness). I should probably have been more specific that the initial subject of the ad was some kind of computer, but I thought the completely non-human identifier would be enough. I definitely screwed up by leaving out something to indicate that the members of FHICS were also computers.

Edit: I have now done so. Hopefully the idea that gave me so much mirth doesn't continue to go down like a bad Far Side (for those who remember it) with the clarification. While I admit the idea originated with dyslexia, the satire is more about "what if a Skynet-esque AI tried to run a charitable nonprofit" and dyslexic computers just happens to be the issue it's raising "awareness" of.

If anyone finds the joke funny after all this explanation I'll be amazed.

[Frozen_Feet]

my mother is rather well versed in the literary arts, well read and fluent in 5 languages... she's also 64 and has a really hard time finding things on the internet. She's just the first example that came into my mind... I could make countless others... not all of them from the elder generations.

Fun fact: dyslex people in general tend to be more artsy, more inventive and more social. A long list of famous mathematicians, scientists, authors have been diagnosed with it. Personally, I have a friend who ranks in the 99th percentile when it comes to reading comprehension... but is below 50th percentile when it comes to several other literacy tests.

A lot of problems with literacy can be overcome with sufficient training, or only manifest in specific areas. Like, say, following a really small cursor on a screen made of tiny blinking lights. In case of old people, it really could be just her eyes that are off. It's one of the thing old age does to you.

I have dyslexia and dyscalcula that intensify under stress and fatigue, to the point that I do not read in the same way other people do or I can't read at all – I don't do that 'if first and last letter are correct the middle letters can be scrambled' thing for example, and I occasionally transpose entire words or sentences diagonally. But I love reading. I love math. So we can't always assume issues with reading makes it not fun.

Aye.

[Asta Kask]

Fun fact: dyslex people in general tend to be more artsy, more inventive and more social. A long list of famous mathematicians, scientists, authors have been diagnosed with it. Personally, I have a friend who ranks in the 99th percentile when it comes to reading comprehension... but is below 50th percentile when it comes to several other literacy tests.

I need more than this. Do you have something that shows that dyslexia is actually more common among artists and inventors, not just a list of examples. And then, of course, there's the question of causation. The only fairly certain correlation I've heard of with creativity and a disorder is bipolar disorder. And synesthesia, but that's not really a disorder.

ETA: There is also something called amusia, people who cannot sing or hear the difference between widely disparate musical numbers.

[Lissou]

I think there is something else than just being bad with computers. I know for instance that I prefer asking a person than a computer because I learn better with human interaction than from reading a screen... even when the human interaction in question is still reading a screen, actually. Maybe I just need audience participation. So I will ask someone a question before I look it up in a lot of cases (although if it's a computer problem I'll google it since there is no reason people would happen to be familiar with the exact problem I'm encountering).

I still google things, both on my own and during those discussions, to clarify some things. But I definitely prefer to talk about it with people. I also would prefer if someone asked me about something, if they had a reason to believe I knew the answer, than learning they googled it. It would kind of make me feel like I'm less important than a computer to them, as silly as it must sound to most people.

Googling can be tricky though. For instance, my husband and I recently purchased a board game called "myth". The rules are pretty long and the game is really good but the first time we played, we made a lot of mistake. One such mistake happened when reading the different stages of play. There was no "quick start" and it was really late and we didn't want to read tons of pages of introductions, so we used our habitual technique: start game right away, refer to the manual for any question. It usually works fine. It didn't here.
Every player plays from a specific deck. We couldn't find a reference to a hand-size so we assumed we were supposed to pick card from our entire deck, play them, then keep one of the cards we had played that turn and discard the rest (the rules did make a reference to being able to keep one of your current cards and discarding the others).
The next day, after we rested a bit, we watched an official play-through. On the end of the first round, they said "so I keep this card, discard the rest of my hand, and draw up to my hand size".
That was the first we heard about a hand size. We watched the whole series of videos but they kept saying "hand size" and never mentioned what the number was!
We wanted to play a second game so I google "myth hand size". Can anyone guess what kind of results I got? Nothing to do with gaming, I can tell you. And I absolutely did not see it coming when I typed in the words.

So that can be a problem too (sorry for the long exposition). Oh and if everyone is wondering, the only answer we could find was "usually five". No clue what that means. Our guess is that either items can increase it, status effects can decrease it, or some classes have a bigger hand size than others (or a combination of the above).
We had that problem again, actually. One of our character had to do a courage test, and the index didn't have an entry for "courage" or "test" or "check". We knew the courage number of the character, so we figured we'd roll a die and if the number was smaller, the test succeeded (after all, it was called "courage", not "cowardice", so the higher the number, the better, right?".
Luckily (?) for us, he rolled exactly his courage number, and we had no clue if that was a pass or a fail. We had to google for a while again. Finally a forum post mentioned that according to some FAQ somewhere, you roll a d10 and must meet or exceed your courage number. So I guess more courage is actually a bad thing. Huh. At least we got our answer.

The weird thing is... 99% of the time, when people are playing, they tell me "hey, we don't know what to do about this" and hand me the rulebook and I, without knowing the game at all, find the answer almost right away by flipping through it. On google though? No such luck. (And I guess with some games, I would need to spend 2-3 hours reading the rules first before answering the question).

It's just... you don't always know what you're looking for exactly. And when you do, you don't always know how to phrase it to get the best results while excluding completely irrelevant results. It's much trickier than flipping pages knowing the information you're looking for is somewhere and simply trying to find the keyword (usually in a convenient box or with a helpful illustration).

[dehro]

see, I would have searched for myth rules board game "how many cards". it still doesn't answer the question, but the links that come up from the search are more or less all dedicated to the game.. and not to urban myths about someone's hands and other (un)related measurements. (I haven't actually performed your search, but I know about rule 34 and have been a teenager once.)

[Stardrake]

Myth hand size, eh? When someone talks about unexpected results when googling something it's usually got to do with sex, and when size is involved with sex it's usually referring to...

*googles*

As expected.

Personally, I think of myself as moderately computer literate, but I'm inclined to prefer to get something from a person or a book than an internet search as well. It may have to do with the sorts of things I'm typically looking up, but if you ask a person, they can usually tell if you're not following and adjust accordingly, while something like a textbook is generally written on the assumption that this might be the first time a reader has come across the material and thus makes at least some concessions to accessibility (how much varies). What you get on the internet, however, is often something an expert wrote on the subject based on what they find to be useful - so it's great if you're already competent in it and you're just looking to remind yourself of a formula or something, but if you're trying to figure out something new it's like trying to decipher someone else's spellbook.

[SiuiS]

Anders, what is a sample other than a bunch of examples? I mean, what more process-wise would you like before it's considered worthwhile? If a large number of creative people share a trait, isn't that enough?

[Anteros]

You can show correlation between almost any two things if you try, but it doesn't mean there's any causation.

I could post a similar list of famous people with almost any condition that exists...it doesn't mean the condition is the reason they are creative/famous. You have to go further if you want to actually provide evidence the two things are linked.

[Gnomvid]

It does appear that Myth (the board game) is not as comprehensively explained as it clearly should when searching for myth board game hand size there's evidence a lot of people have all sorts of issues understanding the rules and I can't find a listing of hand size either just that there is one.

[SiuiS]

You can show correlation between almost any two things if you try, but it doesn't mean there's any causation.

I could post a similar list of famous people with almost any condition that exists...it doesn't mean the condition is the reason they are creative/famous. You have to go further if you want to actually provide evidence the two things are linked.

Why do I want to provide evidence of causation? "Dyslex people tend to be more..." Has absolutely nothing to do with "this disorder causes that benefit". It does nothing but present the idea that assumptions about what reading disorders mean from earlier in the thread are generalizing too much.

If people have to prove ideas with hard scientific evidence when those ideas don't have anything to do with what they're saying, we won't get very far in conversation at all.

And before you disagree, I'll need you to prove a connection between my stance and child obesity. With citations.

[Aedilred]

Why do I want to provide evidence of causation? "Dyslex people tend to be more..." Has absolutely nothing to do with "this disorder causes that benefit". It does nothing but present the idea that assumptions about what reading disorders mean from earlier in the thread are generalizing too much.

Thing is, the list doesn't even prove correlation, let alone causation. The assertion that "dyslexic people tend to be more (e.g.) creative" requires more than a simple list of examples in order to verify - that's no more than anecdotal without further basis for comparison. You'd need to demonstrate that either a disproportionately high number of creative people were dyslexic, or that a disproportionately high number of dyslexic people were creative.

Now, you could make the argument that that list demonstrates that dyslexia doesn't have to be a handicap for becoming creatively successful, but that's not what was alleged.

[Anteros]

Why do I want to provide evidence of causation? "Dyslex people tend to be more..." Has absolutely nothing to do with "this disorder causes that benefit". It does nothing but present the idea that assumptions about what reading disorders mean from earlier in the thread are generalizing too much.

If people have to prove ideas with hard scientific evidence when those ideas don't have anything to do with what they're saying, we won't get very far in conversation at all.

And before you disagree, I'll need you to prove a connection between my stance and child obesity. With citations.

Yes it does. That's exactly what that sentence means. "Dyslex people tend to be more..." is stating in quite clear, uncertain words that people who have Dyslexia are also more likely to have this other trait than someone who doesn't have Dyslexia.

Maybe it's not what you meant, but the way it's phrased is the reason that people are objecting to the statement.

[Asta Kask]

Anders, what is a sample other than a bunch of examples?

A sample is a bunch of examples that have been collected in such a way as to avoid bias. I don't think F_F is producing crooked data - I don't think there has been a deliberate selection. However, there is such a thing as confirmation bias, we tend to remember cases that fit our preconceptions and forget the rest. The science of statistical sampling is complicated, and not one I feel qualified to speak on, but the goal is to have an unbiased sample and "a bunch of names I remember" is almost certainly not an unbiased sample.