TomasOhand
Posts: 2
Joined: 10/12/2006 Status: offline
|
Simply put, we like what we like, want what we want, need what we need. That being said, it is often a matter of cultural conditioning. There are still societies in Africa where very large women are considered the most desirable (probably because they have enough sheep or cattle to afford a nice lifestyle) but in ancient times, a woman whose body showed she'd had children was very desirable because it proved she was fertile (survival of the clan and all). Today, people do indulge in looking for the "fantasy mate" because popular culture deifies one type or another (yes, men are generally far more guilty of this than women). But to the original post, the line "she cooks, she sews, she has her own income" would not be attractive to me. I can cook, sew, use a vacuum, toilet brush and other small but potentially testosterone-depleting household implements. If that's all she had to offer, she would be redundant. OTOH, if you'd said, "She's bright, smart, funny, and has a nice lingerie collection" (well, that part's optional -- I'll buy her one) -- ah, now THAT would get my attention. Yes, if she nearly as much as I do and is 5" shorter, I'll admit I'd probably consider her friend material. Just as I would if she was too skinny. Just as a lot of women I've known have considered me as a friend, not as a potential lover. That's fine...I enjoy their company as friends. Looks do count. And if I "set the bar too high," that's okay. I'd rather be alone than in a relationship that I didn't truly enjoy (relish, need). Personally, I think size 10-12 is not "big" (Marilyn Monroe was a size 14). It's just about right. [As a complete aside, "Missturbation," you are definitely hot. (And I don't even like football.)]
_____________________________
Tomas Ohand "Life's too short to wear cheap underwear."
|