Friday, January 14, 2011

Mythical Creatures

Dear Diary:

There has been much discussion as of late, or rather I have just really noticed a string of connecting stories in the blogosphere (that's how it's spelled, right?) surrounding what is apparently a mythical creature. A unicorn in fact. What is a unicorn? Well, apparently according to those who have written and/or discussed the topic, is nothing more than a man, who is single, employed, and slightly taller than a woman, in the dating pool. Oh, and heterosexual. Can't forget that part. These are apparently the basic criteria.

So let's examine this for a bit, shall we?

For one, there has to be, and obviously is, more criteria that creates such a mythical creature. Hell, I am slightly taller than a lot of women (even when they are in heels), employed, heterosexual, and single. Now granted, I removed myself from the dating pool because I needed a break, but it wasn't like I had a harem of women banging down my door when I was an actively swimming in that pool. So, I fit the basic criteria. Am I a unicorn? But if I throw in the fact that I am divorced, overweight and have introverted tendencies, does that make me less of a unicorn? But what if I can cook and own my own home? Does that make me more of a unicorn?

Which begs another question. Are all unicorns created equal or not? Is a single, 6'3, dark haired, light eyed, single, never married, doctor, who volunteers with sick children and sings in the church choir more of a unicorn than a 5'11, blond but with a slightly receding hair line, light eyed, divorced, highly successful CEO of an Internet start-up, who could stand to lose a few pounds, with vacation homes in Paris and the Bahamas? And if all unicorns are not created equal, is there a point system? Is there a way to move up and down the point scale? Does it come with a handbook? Are there charts? There had better be some fucking charts!

But let's be honest for a minute. The concept of unicorn itself is a myth. Why? Because initial attraction boils down to looks. Human beings are superficial in that respect. I mean, a guy could make a woman laugh like he is a comedian, have romance down like he is Casanova, be tall, employed, single, and straight, but if he looks like he was set on fire and put out with a bag of quarters, he's fucked, and I don't mean literally.

And it works both ways. A girl could laugh at dick and fart jokes, drink beer, be fun to be around, and could suck the chrome off a bumper, but if she looks like a gargoyle, yeah, well, guys will pass.

Unless you are taking one for the team, and in that case, you will just drink more.

But if women get to make up some type of list of basic qualifications, should guys be able to make up a list of basic qualifications? What shall we name this mythical creature of basic qualifications? What will comprise the list of basic qualifications? I think Dave Chappelle probably has the most honest list there is, so I will basically stick to his. A guy just wants a girl that will suck his dick, play with his balls, make him a sandwich, and not talk so much. We shall call her a mermaid.

Why a mermaid? Because the odds of mermaids actually existing are about slim to shit, just like a fucking unicorn.

14 comments:

  1. LOL! That was actually a riot. And I can't believe I am saying this...but I agree with you, for the most part. I mentioned the unicorn thing in my post more to the point of the qualities you look for in a significant other (and sometimes yeah, it does seem mythical that he actually exists) but you're right, to both men and women, the first stop is chemistry, looks, attraction. Of course. That's natural. But it's all the other "stuff" that matters most, at least to me, all wrapped into one said unicorn that may or may not be a doctor.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I'm going to disagree. Yes, there is a superficial layer of attraction that people have to have to eachother -- men and women alike. But attraction is so highly subjective. What one person deems hot is different than another. And inner personality plays a huge role. The guy who can make me laugh looks far better to me than the guy who is just cute.

    I am not easily impressed with only physical characteristics -- we're born with those, that's so easy. Being physically fit IS hot because it's a sign someone is taking care of themselves, but looks alone? Their value shouldn't be overestimated.

    ReplyDelete
  3. chemistry opens the door. but at least for me, i see it differently in two major ways:

    1) chemistry is more than looks. a pretty face is a nice entry point, but if there's a less attractive man who's intangibly hotter, he's in my bed 10 times out of 10.

    2) i can't tell you how many gorgeous men i've met and stared at in my life... and then turned away from in a heartbeat because he opened his mouth and he's too stupid to live.

    so maybe my minimum criteria are different. but that being said, i don't disagree with the concept. baselines are fine. i just think the "baseline" varies based on whose eyes you're using.

    ReplyDelete
  4. There's a fourth unicorn criteria in addition to single, taller and employed that nobody talks about: It's "wants to date you back."

    Also, props to Spleeness for pointing out attraction is subjective.

    ReplyDelete
  5. The problem with having standards is that you soon find that if you had no standards, you would have a date.

    I happen to think I'm an attractive woman with a good job who is smart and responsible. I don't think there's anything wrong with wanting a partner who is at least able to take care of himself (as in employed) and on the smarter side of average.

    Unfortunately, those are exceedingly rare. And they don't seem to be interested in dating me.

    I have my own dating handicaps (kids), but I think a lot of guys would have a much easier time if they didn't all aim for the same group of early to mid 20s, slim, smart, vivacious, women.

    Just a thought.

    ReplyDelete
  6. The Unicorn thing is news to me....

    and as far as looks....leave you with this nugget if wisdom do with it as you will...:-)

    "Beauty is only a light switch away" Everyone looks good in the dark."

    ReplyDelete
  7. First, I agree with Magnolia.

    Second, I just broke up with a Mythical Man myself. He was also overweight, with intimacy issues, but I loved him dearly.

    Unless there's a large amount of power or money involved on either side, I'd say people pretty much date within their caste system. And there is one, unfortunately. It's why most of the guys on Match.com view my profile and never returns my emails, goddammit.

    ReplyDelete
  8. You know it's funny. I am by no means a knock out - never have been, never will be. I am also not a gargoyle. I'm probably what some people call "cute" - However, I was passed over by guys time and time again for my more conventionally attractive friends. I've had a few men come back to me in life commenting on how they wished they had given me (or someone like me) more a chance in the beginning.

    I happen to happily married to a great guy who is FAR better looking than I am. I thank my lucky stars to this day that he decided to give ME a chance, and not just the body I was born into.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I think there is a different set of criteria for each person. There has to be a basic attraction, but for some of us an intellectual attraction can lead to physical attraction. What someone says can be far sexier than how they look. It can draw you in. You can fall in love with who someone is as a person, too...their morals and what they believe in and how they treat others.

    And I laughed at your comment about the mermaid not talking too much, as several men have recently told me they are looking for someone quieter than their ex. I think that quality is on the list for some men for sure.

    ReplyDelete
  10. As one who was a part of this conversation, I appreciate what you're saying here and think some of what we were saying was lost in translation, i.e., in 140 characters or less. The point of attraction keeps being brought up, and a couple of weeks ago, while mulling over this topic, I and a few girlfriends decided that was the hidden criteria -- you have to be attracted to the person. And while looks are great, that's not what attracts most girls right off the bat. If you are nasty looking then of course no one is going to think you're hot, but the point of the criteria was to set reasonable standards (even though we called that man mythical) and compromise on other things that may be superficial. Bottom line? We're trying, but no one seems to be biting (for me at least), and venting our frustrations is the easiest way to deal with it.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Fuck the whole list of pro's and cons' Screw your looks and how you dress. Screw your pay check and your profession.
    The secret to finding the right one.
    The secret to finding That pretty girl/woman or mermaid that will suck your cock, press your clothes make you a sandwich and not embarrass you when you leave the kitchen door unlocked is numbers.....yes numbers.
    You are a doctor right?
    Think about it like this. In any given population there's a certain number of deformity. The larger the number the larger the pool grows. Like in India, there are lots more deformed people than on the island of the bahamas.
    So if you want to find someon ugly in the Bahamas you have to look a little harder. But in India the ugly will stand out because the numbers are there.
    Now if the pool in which your looking for your next wife is small find a larger pool. IN other words. Go to more bars, parties, network , online dating site. For every woman you have sex with you will surely not have sex with the 30 that turned you down. But if you lines up 100 woman your gonna have sex with at least three of them. You have to be willing to put up with the mutts before you find the pure breed bitches.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Part 2
    Long story short, go out and date as many as you can. Find the one that closest meets your needs and wants but do not marry her.
    There is no such thing as chemistry because chemicals can mislead you. Ever see a handsome guy with a dog of s girlfriend or wife. Yes, that was me. I settled for ho-hum ordinary woman #15 and in the ends I learned something. If your gonna get married, marry the best looking woman that you can find because there's nothing worse than getting yelled at by an ugly woman your gonna have to sleep with later in the evening.
    Also, if your in shape or getting into shape find a woman who is also in shape or getting into shape because nothing is worse than marrying someone who later in the evening is gonna expect you to climb on top of her and sweat it out because she hasn't the stamina or the imagination to do it (you) right!
    Another thing is find a woman who understand that when you marry her you are creating YOUR family and that YOUR family supersedes her mothers and her sisters in importance. Because nothing is worse than not being able to buy yourself something nice because she has lent your work bonus to her stupid sisters bad boyfriend fund.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Oh yes, chemistry. That always gets me because chemistry is a lot like Zodiac signs and dating. Ever read a sun sign that said "Your lucky numbers are 12-23-12-12-12 and today your also getting the clap" or "You will met a tall dark and handsome man today" Well I am sure no one in Africa ever got their sun sign quite right.
    I have known woman who actually turned down high calibre men in search of a tarot card reading or a sun sign prediction. I had a friend who paid 200 dollars so some old lady would tell her her last boyfriend would be from Elpaso. Sure she kept turning down guys UNTIL she found a guy from El Paso....he was gay.
    Chemistry attractions only work when your horny.

    ReplyDelete