Planet-Love.com Searchable Archives
November 07, 2024, 01:06:30 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: This board is a BROWSE and SEARCH only board. Please IGNORE the Registration - no registration necessary. No new posts allowed. It contains the archived posts from the Planet-Love.com website from approximately 2001 through 2005.
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: [1] 2   Go Down
« previous next »
  Print  
Author Topic: Top Ten Turn-ons -- anyone else see this?  (Read 6367 times)
MarkInTx
Guest
« on: May 25, 2002, 04:00:00 AM »

This was a list compiled through a survey done by Match.com. Men and women. These are the top ten turn-ons of American Men and Women:

1. A good body.
2. Confidence.
3. A good job.
4. A cool car.
5. Fashion sense.
6. Nice hair.
7. Good manners.
8. Scent.
9. Lack of neediness.
10. Creativity.

I wonder what this list would be if it were compiled by Russian Women?

I'm guessing that it would definitely be re-ordered... and I have a hunch that #4 wouldn't make the list...

So, all of those guys going through a middle-age crisis and joining hairclub for men, and buying the Porsche aren't having a crisis, after all... they just know something about American women that the rest of us don't...
Logged
thesearch
Guest
« Reply #1 on: May 28, 2002, 04:00:00 AM »
... in response to Top Ten Turn-ons -- anyone else see this..., posted by MarkInTx on May 25, 2002

This list mostly comprises superficial aspects of what and who people are

Many of these for women fulfill the need to have a successful hunter - a throw off of the Neanderthal days.

Two of them confidence and lack of neediness still are good hunter qualities.

Note that there are not things like he is a good man, good family values. honest - the closest thing on the list  is good manners.

Hey I am no different - I mean I expect the woman that I marry to have a nice physical package - it is the animal thing to do and we still have our roots to the animal kingdom.
Logged
MarkInTx
Guest
« Reply #2 on: May 25, 2002, 04:00:00 AM »
... in response to Top Ten Turn-ons -- anyone else see this..., posted by MarkInTx on May 25, 2002

Three that aren't on the list that surprise me:

1. Morals
2. Sense of Humor
3. Intelligence

You can phrase it a lot of different ways... but how can you want a wife (or husband) without these three important traits?

Is a cool car better than a strong sense of Morals?

Will great hair get you through a life with someone who has no sense of humor?

The list amazed me...

I mean, we can quibble about where on the list these should be placed... But how can they not even make the cut???
Logged
robobond
Guest
« Reply #3 on: May 27, 2002, 04:00:00 AM »
... in response to Three not on the list, posted by MarkInTx on May 25, 2002

MarkInTx, the list DIDN'T amaze me!!!...  Just look at the divorce rate in America!
Logged
BubbaGump
Guest
« Reply #4 on: May 26, 2002, 04:00:00 AM »
... in response to Three not on the list, posted by MarkInTx on May 25, 2002

I have dated some extremely intelligent women but I don't know why I bothered.  They are more career oriented and thus not very family oriented.  I would settle for average there even though most married couples have an IQ within 7 points of each other.
Logged
juio99
Guest
« Reply #5 on: May 26, 2002, 04:00:00 AM »
... in response to Intelligence is way overrated, posted by BubbaGump on May 26, 2002

Intelligence is at the top of my list.  No matter how hot the body and face, when the first few words out of their mouth indicate an air head, I just can't keep up the interest in them.

And Mark is correct, at least in my experience;  the more intelligent the woman, the better she is in bed.  Some of the Mensa gals are unbelievable, even though they tend to not look so great.

JR
Logged
Oscar
Guest
« Reply #6 on: May 27, 2002, 04:00:00 AM »
... in response to Disagree, posted by juio99 on May 26, 2002

Well, being a psychotherapist and I can tell you that there is absolutely no correlation between intelligence and skill in bed.  You can get your clock cleaned just as well by an interested hat check girl as by a mensa member..

Geez, where do you guys get some of this stuff??
Logged
juio99
Guest
« Reply #7 on: May 27, 2002, 04:00:00 AM »
... in response to Re: Disagree, posted by Oscar on May 27, 2002

Oscar asks: Geez, where do you guys get some of this stuff??

Well Oscar, as I said in my post, it was from 'my experience.'

OK, so does my 'experience' count as a scientific experiment; probably not.  I did not do my work in a laboratory setting with necessary controls, etc.

But I think my sample size of the upper 30s is enough for statistical reliability using the Student t distribution.

OK, so I didn't have IQ tests for all of the ladies, but I still could make my judgement of their 'intelligence' relative to an average.

And how would you know there is no correlation?  I thought it was against ethics for you to have sex with your patients.

I still stand by my original statement.  Overall, I have had much better sex with intelligent women than with non-intelligent women.

JR
Logged
thesearch
Guest
« Reply #8 on: May 28, 2002, 04:00:00 AM »
... in response to Well Geez Oscar, posted by juio99 on May 27, 2002

JR

I thought that was funny - I needed a good laugh just at about the moment that I read your post.

"And how would you know there is no correlation? I thought it was against ethics for you to have sex with your patients."

But seriously - there is also another possibility here that comes to mind. If you are naturally turned on by women who are intelligent - you might very well generally find sex better with women who real grey matter.
Logged
Oscar
Guest
« Reply #9 on: May 27, 2002, 04:00:00 AM »
... in response to Well Geez Oscar, posted by juio99 on May 27, 2002

Well, from the ridiculous garbage you are spouting, I guess I would have to be a bit skeptical about what YOU happened to think intelligence was..

And I don't think your having sex twice could amount to much of a sampling..

Logged
thesearch
Guest
« Reply #10 on: May 28, 2002, 04:00:00 AM »
... in response to Re: Well Geez Oscar, posted by Oscar on May 27, 2002

That is funny also :

"And I don't think your having sex twice could amount to much of a sampling.."
Logged
NW Jim
Guest
« Reply #11 on: May 27, 2002, 04:00:00 AM »
... in response to Re: Well Geez Oscar, posted by Oscar on May 27, 2002

JR,
Don't know if there is scientific basis for your opinion, but it would seem to make sense; intelligence is the ability to be adaptable in new situations. Certainly adds to creativity.

However, there is research from Dr. Gillian Turner that clearly shows that a sons intelligence is inherited from his mother via the X chromosone.

So keep picking intelligent women over hat check girls. As for Dr. Oscars last cheap shot, just ignore the quack.
Logged
Oscar
Guest
« Reply #12 on: May 27, 2002, 04:00:00 AM »
... in response to Stick with intelligence, posted by NW Jim on May 27, 2002

For being so "intelligent", it's funny how you missed the fact that the first "cheap shot" did not come from me...

And in response to your own "cheap shot", you should be aware that the word you were attempting to dazzle us with is spelled "chromosome".. LOL!  So much for your quest for intelligent women!
Logged
NW Jim
Guest
« Reply #13 on: May 28, 2002, 04:00:00 AM »
... in response to Well, big Jim-, posted by Oscar on May 27, 2002

So we've reduced the discussion to spelling? I doubt my spelling skills have much to do with the outcome of my quest, my intelligence or lack thereof.  

JR's original point was his OPINION that intelligent women are more exciting in bed. Therefore it is his PREFERENCE. Don't think there's a right or wrong answer; nor do I think you can disprove his premise. Viva choice!

Oscar, hope the fiancee visa comes through soon for your fiancee, you sound a bit frustrated. Best of luck.

Logged
thesearch
Guest
« Reply #14 on: May 28, 2002, 04:00:00 AM »
... in response to Re: Well, Dr. Oscar, posted by NW Jim on May 28, 2002

For a person trained in science where fact is sought out over opinion a certain mind set is in place. IMHO, Oscar was not out of line, however, if his response had been a bit more diplomatic he might not have gotten the reaction that he did. I am not saying he needed to be more diplomatic - the reasons for relative levels of diplomacy is dependent on too many  things to comment and thus I do not have any judgement concerning it.

JR was coming from his experience plain and simple which is valid for him. . JR's experience although valid for him may  not be duplicated by others experiences.  As for me, I have not made the same observations as JR what ever that does or does not mean.

However, I got a few good laughs out of the joust.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up
  Print  
« previous next »
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1 RC2 | SMF © 2001-2005, Lewis Media Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!