The Finch Formerly Known As Gold

21 February 2004

Barefoot and bathetic

A common complaint among guys of a certain age has to do with the general dearth of Major Babes: they may know lots of women, but no one that will really knock your socks off, you know?

Given the emphasis we tend to place on the visual, I've generally assumed that since I know a fairly substantial number of women who are eminently capable of destroying my entire sock wardrobe with a couple of glances, my tastes, if that's the word, are fairly small-c catholic.

And indeed, after following this link thoughtfully provided by Michele, which brings up a fairly lengthy test (presented by that purports to determine the ingredients that contribute to that sock destruction, I felt I had confirmed my thinking on the matter, inasmuch as in the test, just as in real life, the women I found most attractive from a purely-physical standpoint didn't look that much alike. Obviously, I felt, I had fairly elastic standards of beauty.

And then came the bombshell in the middle of the results, which I quote:

It's official: You're "picky." The fact is you are drawn to the most beautiful of the beautiful. You know what you like in women and are more selective than most men your age. Your tastes seem instinctual. You'd make a great casting agent, because you have a good eye for women who have "star quality." In real life, your high standards may be an obstacle for you. It's hard to find a woman with the strong features you like, who's also well-rounded in other ways. Still, you know the importance of a real physical "spark" in a relationship, and aren't willing (or able) to settle for less. The challenge is finding a woman who really wows you physically, even if she's not the most attractive woman in the room.


In addition to being unappealing, overbearing, mercurial and generally annoying, now I'm also excessively (like 98th percentile) selective?

And come to think of it, I haven't bought any socks in over a year.

Posted at 8:21 PM to Table for One

Hmm... took that test, and the personality test. Evidently, I'm only attracted to 4% of women, and only 1% of women are attracted to me.

Posted by: Aniwarp at 10:22 PM on 21 February 2004

Got to watch out about these online tests, Charles. Match.Com says I'm "very picky," attracted to only 1% of women, specifically the "beauty queens," and that no women at all would be likely to find me attractive (how do they know all this stuff?) But they did say I'm a "people person" and invited me to an AmWay recruitment meeting, which I suppose is a comfort of sorts.

Posted by: Francis W. Porretto at 5:05 AM on 22 February 2004

Well, my final results were the same as yours. But I'm willing to bet just about everybody's are, too.

Posted by: Vickie at 7:33 AM on 22 February 2004

Inasmuch as they're selling a dating service, it probably wouldn't be prudent to tell any prospective customer "Yeah, you'll take anything we dish up," but still, it's a shock to the system.

And there exists no set of criteria under which I could possibly qualify as a "people person."

Posted by: CGHill at 8:48 AM on 22 February 2004

Charles, at least you were allowed to finish taking the test.

Posted by: McGehee at 10:35 AM on 22 February 2004