NFs; what do you find attractive?

[Ender]

I've never been one to go nuts over celebrities and stuff, the guys I know will sit there and stare at pics of girls they'll never meet for hours. I just can't do it.

Theres a number of things I find attractive in women, but they're all mainly who they are, not what they look like. Always loved the little quirks in different women, the way they say something, or do things a certain way.

[cafe]

I like great brains (talk nerdy to me ), ethical behavior, a little bit of working class masculinity, and a nice butt.

[antireconciler]

Originally Posted by Kiddo

So what attracts you folks to a possible mate?

I don't know.

Ignoring the exceptions, why do a bunch of single girls and guys like us who all have a lot in common ask each other what each finds attractive in a mate?

We might be good matches, you know? ^_^

Who knows though? I feel kind of tired of looking for someone special. It's almost like the worst kind of wild goose chase. Because it's convincing! It keeps you hooked! Like an addict! Why not try just anyone? Probably more fun that way and less lonely. I don't care that much, I just want someone to love and sweet talk at any opportunity because that's just what I like. Hey Kiddo, you have a very cute personality ... we could hang out and have fun and not worry about what we thought of each other because that would all take care of itself and it would just be simple and fun and satisfying because I'm just tired of caring about being "understood". It just doesn't matter that much anymore. It's not like I'm some tragically misunderstood poet ... or like Kierkegaard. I mean, I can take care of me. But it's also kind of enjoyable to love someone else and to hell with our fears that there isn't enough of us to just love without some kind of sick security. Gah! I'm sick of being such a miser with my feelings! It doesn't have to be that way!

[armstrongvk12]

Originally Posted by allison

I'm like you. Looks really don't matter all that much to me; personality is far more important. I also find it hard to be physically attracted to someone if I'm not mentally/emotionally attracted as well. However, I find that I'm usually attracted to guys with dark hair. Eye color doesn't matter so much, but I love the dark hair. I also love for them to be taller than me (doesn't take much, by the way) and I like 'em skinny. I really don't have much of a preference, but these are the kind of guys I'm typically attracted to.

OMG....I am so glad I was able to read your response. I have so many friends that just look at a person and can tell you if they would be attracted to the person....and even sleep with them...without even knowing them. This seems strange to me...wanting to be with someone you don't even know, yet many of my female friends don't understand when I tell them, "I really couldn't say if I was attracted to him because I don't know him." And for me, chemistry is hard to determine...unless I kiss the person. There have been more than a few times when I had a verbal chemistry, but no physical chemistry.

[Kyrielle]

A brain, a dash of creativity (doesn't have to be a lot...just enough where I can bounce my ideas off of him and discuss them), and a hint of childlike, intense interest in something. Oh yes, and certain amount of confidence in themselves...or some aspect of themselves (along with the ability to be humble with the parts of themselves they aren't confident in).

As for looks, I have no clue. It changes with each guy and is relatively dependent on each guy's personality. The only details I seem to notice as a motif in my relationships: brown hair, brown/green eyes, taller than me. But I don't ever really limit myself consciously....just something I noticed as a trend....probably some unconscious reason for it (like the fact that my family is made up of recessively genetic blonde hair and blue eyes and my brain is telling me I need genetic diversity....or that a man being tall indicates greater physical strength than I possess; therefore, I will be safe).

[cascadeco]

Originally Posted by PinkPiranha

I sometimes feel pretty cursed by the NF thing because I don't just want, I require, an all-systems fusion. Add that to a weird peculiarity in my attractions plus my need to be sure of what I'm seeing (which entails some passage of time to get to know him better), and you have "alone forever" lurking at the end of the equation.
My older sister tried to push me into various practical arrangements. She's a very cut-and-dry ST and she honestly meant well, but she was coming at it from her perspective. She told me she'd LIKE to marry for love, but it wasn't necessary. I was astonished when she said that. I mean, I see her point, but I couldn't ever see myself marrying for anything other than love. If I did, it would be a desperate maneuver and the man involved would be relegated to caretaker status, which I KNOW isn't what a man wants out of me. She told me that I would just have to get over my "idealism" and stop behaving like I've got the time to burn and the choice to be attracted.

Maybe I don't. Maybe she was right.

But it doesn't change the nuts and bolts of the matter for an NF like me. I'd be miserable married to someone that I wasn't all-in for.

Honestly, I can relate to nearly all of this. I find I can go through endless loops in my head when I try to figure out what I want out of a relationship, but it really boils down to what you've written. I run into problems when I try to view my relationships as being, or needing, any less than the above, and the bottom line is that I don't WANT a relationship that is less than 'all-systems' fusion. I don't see the 'point' of it. So I won't enter one if I don't already see a lot of potential, on MANY levels -- one of which is physical attraction - the presence or absence of which is what distinguishes between partner and friend. And chemistry to me = emotional/intellectual/interaction being excellent, which exponentially adds to the attraction. Chemistry is like..interactive attraction. hahaha.

And I certainly wouldn't marry for less than a deep love and respect for the person, and my thinking we're both on similar pages as far as journeying through life -- which is something you cannot force. It's either there, or it's not. Anything less would be meaningless for me....

If I wasn't attracted to the person, I would be their friend. That's just how it would be. Since I can be emotionally incredibly close to my friends, I don't see how elevating that to a romantic level, just for the sake of it, would make it any better...if the attraction isn't there. It would make it worse for me, and I'd feel unauthentic, and I think it would be a disservice to the other person too, because my feelings/desires would never be truly there. I could envision resentment or mismatched expectations/conflicting needs looming down the road in this scenario....

I am also curious how many people who are already married, or already in a happy relationship, are not physically attracted to their significant other. Of course no one would really admit it, but... It seems that the people who try to say 'you don't have to be attracted, it's not important' are the ones who ARE in relationships. :-) Are THEY (or were they) all unattracted to their spouses/significant others, and when they married them, did they find them unattractive or were they totally lacking in chemistry? ;-) I somehow doubt it.

Attraction IS in the eye of the beholder...and I've mentioned elsewhere that attraction can work in funny ways -- that someone who might have initially been attractive becomes *really* unattractive to me if I cannot make any sort of emotional/intellectual/spiritual connection with him. And those other levels, if present, indeed make someone all the more attractive in my eyes.

[PinkPiranha]

Originally Posted by cascademn

Honestly, I can relate to nearly all of this. I find I can go through endless loops in my head when I try to figure out what I want out of a relationship, but it really boils down to what you've written. I run into problems when I try to view my relationships as being, or needing, any less than the above, and the bottom line is that I don't WANT a relationship that is less than 'all-systems' fusion. I don't see the 'point' of it. So I won't enter one if I don't already see a lot of potential, on MANY levels -- one of which is physical attraction - the presence or absence of which is what distinguishes between partner and friend. And chemistry to me = emotional/intellectual/interaction being excellent, which exponentially adds to the attraction. Chemistry is like..interactive attraction. hahaha.

Love how you put this.

And I certainly wouldn't marry for less than a deep love and respect for the person, and my thinking we're both on similar pages as far as journeying through life -- which is something you cannot force. It's either there, or it's not. Anything less would be meaningless for me....

Forcing meaning on an object/person frequently renders the object/person meaningless as it/they must transform into something entirely different from what they were.

If I wasn't attracted to the person, I would be their friend. That's just how it would be. Since I can be emotionally incredibly close to my friends, I don't see how elevating that to a romantic level, just for the sake of it, would make it any better...if the attraction isn't there.

Exactly. Couldn't have said it better.

It would make it worse for me, and I'd feel unauthentic, and I think it would be a disservice to the other person too, because my feelings/desires would never be truly there. I could envision resentment or mismatched expectations/conflicting needs looming down the road in this scenario....

The inauthenticity thing demarcates you as truly NF.

It's vital to me too, to feel genuine, esp in relation to others. I never want to be accused of being a fraud.

I am also curious how many people who are already married, or already in a happy relationship, are not physically attracted to their significant other. Of course no one would really admit it, but... It seems that the people who try to say 'you don't have to be attracted, it's not important' are the ones who ARE in relationships. :-) Are THEY (or were they) all unattracted to their spouses/significant others, and when they married them, did they find them unattractive or were they totally lacking in chemistry? ;-) I somehow doubt it.

Yes. Good point.

Attraction IS in the eye of the beholder...and I've mentioned elsewhere that attraction can work in funny ways -- that someone who might have initially been attractive becomes *really* unattractive to me if I cannot make any sort of emotional/intellectual/spiritual connection with him. And those other levels, if present, indeed make someone all the more attractive in my eyes.

They become dead to me. Lights out.

[theshadow]

- that someone who might have initially been attractive becomes *really* unattractive to me if I cannot make any sort of emotional/intellectual/spiritual connection with him.

I really wish I could somehow ignore wanting an emotional connection with people.

at one point I ended a relationship with a girl I actually liked because of this. well that and eventually she started using my desire for an emotional connection as collaterally if you will. and that wasn't going to fly.

[scantilyclad]

I really like confidence, even arrogance.
creativity is nice and sense of humor is a must.
intelligence is probably the most important thing. i'm instantly attracted to someone who is smarter than myself.
i also like quirks. i like people to be a little weird.
When people are so perfectly normal it freaks me out.

[faith]

Originally Posted by Kiddo

Better to be alone than to be stuck with someone I'm miserable with.

I had a wonderful great-aunt who was single all her life. Loving, friendly, generous, but always with a mind of her own. She used to say, "It takes an awfully good man to beat no man at all." I don't want to be single all my life, but she had a good point.