What do girls look for in a life partner/relationship that is different from gays?

[kidster]

My two straight bros in my clique. One got married and the other got a girlfriend recently. Compared to my other friends, they took quite awhile to find and in fact, they are the last few. Without disrespect, I won't choose them if I'm a girl. No looks, no body, no money, uninteresting characters and the list goes on....

 

On the other hand, most of all of my gay bros are single. Those with above average looks, got body and some got money somemore but can't even find a bf for years. Why?

 

Did you notice the same in your circle of friends/colleagues?   

[feilyxnixx]

34 minutes ago, kidster said:

My two straight bros in my clique. One got married and the other got a girlfriend recently. Compared to my other friends, they took quite awhile to find and in fact, they are the last few. Without disrespect, I won't choose them if I'm a girl. No looks, no body, no money, uninteresting characters and the list goes on....

 

On the other hand, most of all of my gay bros are single. Those with above average looks, got body and some got money somemore but can't even find a bf for years. Why?

 

Did you notice the same in your circle of friends/colleagues?   

 

My circle of friends...90% mostly attached. all of them confirm have at least 1 of these 3 : handsome/hotbod/money

 

Me on the other hand , all 3 also dont have. Only have ppl flooding me saying i have a nice human heart.

But then gays are too (insert word here) that the nice heart is being blinded by so many other surface factors (like the 3 above).

 

Go figure. 😅

[Startup]

You are at the age where you see things in a certain perspective. 

 

I have a friend whom I just met on CNY eve. He is 51, his wife just passed away this month. He has a son who is 21 and ignores his messages. He now lives in a 5 room flat alone. He said he is scared of the quiet at night so he plays the Buddhist chant and sleeps on the sofa at night. 

 

When you reach a certain age, you start to see things differently. Everyone has their own path in life, and it has nothing to do with looks and wealth.

[naked_boi]

frankly when it comes to the human heart ie. relationships it's a minefield; pure and simple.

for gays, most would think it's either looks, body or wealth.

the truth lies somewhere further from these perceptions and closer to what many would not have thought of or believed.

 

personally, i tried using simplicity as a factor ie. not revealing that i have quite some zeroes and playing down my physical assets.

it worked for a bit, a little while then the interest fades from the other party. this would go on for a few others which lead me to conclude

like a hetero; they were looking for possibly security or maybe even just a 'sugar-daddy' type of relationship.

 

however there was one that came close; he was the ideal gay date/companion/bf.

he had the looks, was financially independent and his body was honed from his hours away from work in the gym.

the best of all was his intellect; we could converse on and on for many hours on just about everything and anything that came along.

so where did it went south or went the way of spiltsville?

 

the love wasn't there. it's a great friendship but as a relationship it's unsustainable.

for gays, a monogamous type similar to a hetero is quite a rarity. Most were in an 'open' relationship and there's instances where this could work out.

a relationship is ultimately a commitment of love towards two like-minded individuals; and part of this equation includes sex or love-making and intimacy. 

 

To summarise; a relationship is started by attraction to each other and powered along the way by L.O.V.E; be it a gay or heterosexual.

Other factors are just simply icing on the cake that takes two to bake.

 

of course, those are just my opinion(s) and my own personal experiences meant as food for thought; not to act.

 

Happy CNY! ☺️

 

  

Edited yesterday at 04:09 AM by naked_boi

[Why?]

6 hours ago, kidster said:

Did you notice the same in your circle of friends/colleagues?   

I did notice that, but they will have children who often look very handsome and gorgeous. That is the wonder of nature.   Did you also notice that?

[Steve5380]

12 hours ago, feilyxnixx said:

 

My circle of friends...90% mostly attached. all of them confirm have at least 1 of these 3 : handsome/hotbod/money

 

Me on the other hand , all 3 also dont have. Only have ppl flooding me saying i have a nice human heart.

But then gays are too (insert word here) that the nice heart is being blinded by so many other surface factors (like the 3 above).

 

Go figure. 😅

 

So then... who is the guy in your picture?  He looks handsome, with a hot bod.  Not able to see about money and nice heart.

 

Maybe you are overcritical of yourself, unwilling to recognize your assets?   Reflect on this!  Not all gays are too (insert word here) to ignore nice hearts, and it turns out that this might be on the long run the most valuable asset.  The "long run" is important today.  For once, we live longer. And second, in today's society, life-partnerships are found later all the time.  The days when boy and girl had to marry soon so to have many children, seem to be gone.  

.

Edited yesterday at 02:30 PM by Steve5380

[GachiMuchi]

  

17 hours ago, kidster said:

My two straight bros in my clique. One got married and the other got a girlfriend recently. Compared to my other friends, they took quite awhile to find and in fact, they are the last few. Without disrespect, I won't choose them if I'm a girl. No looks, no body, no money, uninteresting characters and the list goes on....

 

On the other hand, most of all of my gay bros are single. Those with above average looks, got body and some got money somemore but can't even find a bf for years. Why?

 

Did you notice the same in your circle of friends/colleagues?   

 

Here is what Deepseek has to say about your post.
Analyse the following article and what you think will make it work. "My two straight bros in my clique. One got married and the other got a girlfriend recently. Compared to my other friends, they took quite a while to find and in fact, they are the last few. Without disrespect, I won't choose them if I'm a girl. No looks, no body, no money, uninteresting characters and the list goes on....

Analysis of the Article

The author observes a perceived paradox: two straight male friends (described as lacking conventional attractiveness, wealth, or charisma) recently entered relationships, while their gay male friends (with "above average looks, body, and money") remain single. The author questions why this disparity exists and implies confusion about societal or personal factors influencing dating success.

Key Themes:

1. Societal Expectations: The author assumes that "looks, body, money, and interesting personalities" are the primary drivers of romantic success. This reflects a common belief in superficial or transactional dating dynamics.

2. Comparison Bias: The author judges their straight friends through a hypothetical female gaze ("I won’t choose them if I’m a girl") and contrasts this with their gay friends’ struggles, implying a disconnect between perceived "value" and actual outcomes.

3. Dating Pool Dynamics: The article hints at differences between straight and LGBTQ+ dating cultures. For example, heterosexual relationships often face societal pressure to conform to timelines (e.g., marriage), while gay dating pools may be smaller or prioritize different traits.

4. Assumptions About Relationships: The author equates relationship status with "success," overlooking factors like emotional compatibility, effort, or luck.

Weaknesses of the Article:

• Overgeneralization: The sample size is tiny (two straight friends vs. "most" gay friends), making it anecdotal.

• Judgmental Tone: Describing friends as "no looks, no body, no money, uninteresting" undermines empathy and overlooks intangible qualities (e.g., kindness, humor, loyalty).

• Oversimplification: Reduces complex human connections to superficial traits.

---

How to Make the Article Work

To refine the piece and provoke meaningful discussion, consider these adjustments:

1. Add Nuance to the Argument

• Explore Sociocultural Factors:

  • Straight Relationships: Societal pressure (e.g., marriage timelines) might incentivize settling or prioritizing stability over superficial traits.

  • Gay Dating Challenges: Smaller dating pools, higher expectations, or internalized standards (e.g., hyperfocus on physical appearance in some LGBTQ+ spaces).

• Acknowledge Intangibles: Highlight qualities like emotional availability, shared values, or effort—traits that aren’t always visible externally.

2. Avoid Stereotyping

• Humanize the Friends: Instead of reducing them to "no looks, no money," share anecdotes that reveal their personalities or why their partners might value them.

• Question Assumptions: Ask, "Do we overvalue superficial traits in dating? Are we underestimating compatibility factors?"

3. Broaden the Scope

• Include Data/Research: Cite studies on dating trends (e.g., how different communities prioritize traits) to move beyond personal observations.

• Interview Perspectives: Talk to the friends or their partners to understand their relationship dynamics.

4. Reframe the Conclusion

• Instead of framing the disparity as a puzzle, ask:

  • "What does this say about societal expectations vs. what actually sustains relationships?"

  • "Are we judging others’ romantic choices through a biased lens?"

5. Tone Adjustments

• Replace judgmental language with curiosity. For example:

  • Original: "I won’t choose them if I’m a girl."

  • Revised: "I wonder what qualities their partners see in them that I might be overlooking."

---

Final Thought

The article’s core question—"Why do some people find love despite lacking ‘obvious’ advantages?"—is relatable and worth exploring. By shifting from judgment to curiosity and grounding the discussion in broader societal context, the author could turn a personal observation into a thoughtful exploration of modern dating dynamics.

[egal]

from chatgpt

 

 

The article seems to touch on themes of relationships, expectations, and perhaps a bit of social commentary. Here’s a breakdown of what might make this piece work, or what could be improved:

1. Relatability and Social Commentary

• Strength: The article touches on relatable ideas about dating, preferences, and societal expectations. A lot of people have friends who, despite not fitting the idealized "partner" mold, still find meaningful relationships.
• Improvement: The tone could be perceived as judgmental or harsh. To make it work, the writer could soften the language or provide context for why these friends are still loved or valued, despite their flaws.

2. Characterization and Depth

• Strength: The author gives a lot of personal insight into their friends’ lives, which can evoke curiosity. Why did these "straight bros" take longer to find relationships? What are their other qualities, if not the ones traditionally sought after in romantic relationships?
• Improvement: To make the story more engaging, the writer could offer more backstory or emotional depth for the two characters. Instead of listing flaws, highlighting their personalities or unique qualities could create more empathy for them.

3. Humor and Tone

• Strength: The casual, almost irreverent tone can appeal to readers who appreciate humor in discussing serious topics. It gives the piece a more relaxed, conversational vibe.
• Improvement: The humor might be more effective if balanced with sensitivity. If the writer’s goal is to be critical, it can be done in a more nuanced way to avoid offending or alienating readers who might identify with the “straight bros” in question.

4. Conflict and Resolution

• Strength: There’s an implied tension between the expectations of romantic partners and the reality of the friends’ situations. This contrast can serve as an interesting point for exploration.
• Improvement: The article could benefit from a deeper exploration of this tension. How do these friends view themselves? What does finding love mean to them, and how do they feel about not fitting the usual molds?

5. Cultural Insight

• Strength: The piece offers a glimpse into the expectations placed on people (particularly men) in relationships. These expectations are often informed by external factors like looks, financial success, and "interesting" character traits.
• Improvement: The writer could delve more into how cultural norms influence the way we view love and relationships, making it more thought-provoking.

6. Empathy vs. Judgment

• Strength: The initial impression is a mixture of humor and judgment, which could work if the writer later shifts to a more reflective or empathetic tone.
• Improvement: If the writer were to lean into empathy and acknowledge the complexity of relationships (not just surface-level attributes), it would make the piece feel more thoughtful and less critical.

---

Conclusion:

This article has potential if it’s refined to balance humor, criticism, and empathy. Rather than focusing solely on negative traits, exploring the deeper value of these relationships or offering insight into why these two individuals are deserving of love—despite not fitting the conventional "mold"—would make the piece both humorous and heartwarming. Adding depth to the characterization and refining the tone would elevate it from a surface-level critique to a more engaging and thoughtful commentary.

[egal]

from copilot:

 

Sure, let's analyze this article.

### Analysis
- **Content**: The article shares the personal experiences and observations of the author about their two friends who recently entered romantic relationships. The author's perspective is somewhat critical, noting that these friends took longer to find partners compared to others in their clique.
- **Tone and Style**: The tone seems casual and candid, reflecting personal opinions and experiences. The author uses informal language, making it relatable and easy to understand. The style is conversational, as if the author is sharing thoughts with a friend.
- **Narrative**: The narrative focuses on the contrast between the two friends and the rest of the clique, highlighting their perceived shortcomings (e.g., no looks, no body, no money, uninteresting characters).
- **Underlying Message**: Despite the critical view, the underlying message might be that love and relationships are not solely based on external factors like looks or money. It suggests that other qualities, which may not be immediately apparent, play a significant role in forming lasting relationships.

### What Can Make It Work
1. **Relatability**: Many readers might relate to having friends who don’t fit conventional standards of attractiveness or success, yet find happiness in relationships. This relatability can make the article engaging.
2. **Humor and Honesty**: The informal, candid tone, and the touch of humor can make the content more enjoyable. Honesty about the author’s perspective, even if it’s critical, can also be refreshing.
3. **Positive Spin**: While the author lists negative traits, highlighting the positive aspects of why these friends found partners despite these traits can add a heartwarming twist. It can show that love is complex and not just about superficial qualities.
4. **Engaging Storytelling**: Personal anecdotes and storytelling can draw readers in and keep them engaged. Sharing specific instances or funny moments can add depth to the article.

Ultimately, embracing the positive aspects and offering a broader perspective on what makes relationships work can resonate well with readers.

What do you think about these points?

[Steve5380]

GOD HEAVENS!!!   Is this the future of society?

 

Will we be forced to chat and converse with ChatGPT, Deepseek and tens of future AI programs,  or will we be able to keep interacting with fellow Members and Guests? 

 

( I don't give a damn what AI programs think about this-and-that,  I welcome the opinions of fellow human beings!!   It is FUN to argue with people, not with cyber programs... )

.

Edited 5 hours ago by Steve5380

[doncoin]

In the context of Singapore, I think there is a pattern when it comes to gay relationships. Mostly, due to the fact of social pressures and lack of recognition for same sex relationships, most gay men don't even think of a relationship in a permanent sense. That is just my personal observation. The support system is simply not there or very limited. Many guus are still closeted, ashamed of who they are. Even if they meet someone special, the other bf is this dirty little secret, except to their inner circle of friends. Family events are out of the question, or at best, the bf is the best friend. So when you cannot even intro to your parents that this is my boyfriend, much less some day introduce this man as husband, you don't think about the relationship in a long-term sense. The system is not there to support gay relationships in Singapore. 

 

We all ultimately want to find someone to grow old with. It's different when the support system is not in place to help your relationship to thrive.