and would you stay with someone who is POOR,but HOT?

Both me and Jill (hokie) are poor and hot. And we're together

MRGee said:

Looks though semi important shift and change with age


$ was/is not a factor of importance to me - I have my own

Neither are MOST important but financial independence/literacy is very important to me these days. If Im just hooking up with someone then looks would definitely be more important.

Well I'd never GET w/ anyone who I didn't find attractive, so there is no "staying" w/o that "looks" wins, $ isn't a factor unless a mf is homeless/car-less...

Looks. Without a doubt. Then money.

money

MRGee said:

Of course I would. If I am not attracted to somebody he could be the richest guy in the universe (and good looking by society's standard too), I would never give him a second look. I don't care at all if he has money or not.

looks
and she has to be willing

It's so much deeper. It's a spiritual thang, baby! As far as sex is concerned, I probably have low standards. But in terms of correlation of the heart and mind, she's got to blow me away enough to provoke the urge to engage in mental incantations that are so mind-blowing and hyperbolic that I have to be on a higher plain of enlightenment just to invoke mantras of the ethereal kind. Eternal Sunshine on my Spotless Mind! I'm so damn picky! Goal-driven and beautiful in so many more ways than just the arc of a prominent proboscis or the protrusion of her posterior. I'm still on the verge of a transient headlock.
[Edited 12/24/08 13:16pm]

Mysterioso said:

mirrorsbestfriend ?

BlueZebra said:

I wasn't describing myself on those last sentences, if that's what you think. You don't think I'm a narcissist....do you? Albeit, I actually like that guy. He was the first person to orgnote me. I'll never forget that moment.

Mysterioso said:

What did he write?

neither health and happiness mean the most to me

Rosalita said:

Aren't we talking about the looks of a man/woman we would date and not about ourselves?

not sure Serious?

Serious said:

Nothing explicit or ribald. Just that he really likes my style and personality.

Looks.

Looks.

both, for things to work out better. unless it's a fling or a scam

Looks might snag me... OK, looks will snag me.

But, if character's not part of her scene, I'm out. And, I count good money management as part of her character (but not the chief part).

ThreadBare said:

yeah, I'm with you

if it was looks with character vs money with character

that's a tougher one

Neither, really. Here's my diatribe:

A man can be beautiful, like a painting and have no smolder factor, kinda like Eva Longoria's husband. Attractive, but no smolder, and not that bright. Won't work.

A man can be marginally attractive, but smolder all over the place, which increases his effability quotient. Take Johnny Depp - he smolders more than he is beautiful in my book. Which makes him more fetching.

NOW...

A man can be a smoldering, wealthy jerk - kinda like how I imagine Prince could be on his worst days. I may be roped in temporarily but I'd hit the bricks as soon as those titanium horns start showin'.

A man can be poor, talented, honest, intelligent, and hardworking, and if he smolders, he's got me. He ain't gotta be fine, he's just gotta smolder. BIG difference, y'all.

notaprintztype said:

Very refreshing. BRAVO!!! I mean that. No smartassedness applied, here. You've got me on the edge of my seat, here. Where do I fit in this rubric?

ThreadBare said:

Rashida

ZombieKitten said:

notaprintztype said:

WORD.

Flowers2 said:

eh.

Money and OK looks. (Miss Jones isn't exactly my type. )