Cài đặt Steam
Đăng nhập
|
Ngôn ngữ
简体中文 (Hán giản thể)
繁體中文 (Hán phồn thể)
日本語 (Nhật)
한국어 (Hàn Quốc)
ไทย (Thái)
Български (Bungari)
Čeština (CH Séc)
Dansk (Đan Mạch)
Deutsch (Đức)
English (Anh)
Español - España (Tây Ban Nha - TBN)
Español - Latinoamérica (Tây Ban Nha cho Mỹ Latin)
Ελληνικά (Hy Lạp)
Français (Pháp)
Italiano (Ý)
Bahasa Indonesia (tiếng Indonesia)
Magyar (Hungary)
Nederlands (Hà Lan)
Norsk (Na Uy)
Polski (Ba Lan)
Português (Tiếng Bồ Đào Nha - BĐN)
Português - Brasil (Bồ Đào Nha - Brazil)
Română (Rumani)
Русский (Nga)
Suomi (Phần Lan)
Svenska (Thụy Điển)
Türkçe (Thổ Nhĩ Kỳ)
Українська (Ukraine)
Báo cáo lỗi dịch thuật
(I.e.: Surely there'd be no point for potentially dualistic gravity and curvature to exist when you could just as well have nothing but matter or magnetism. Ideas such as time would be irrelevant, as magnetism type of bosonic forces would be perfectly sufficient in order to have male and female interact in whatever chaotic and non-causal fashion.)
Of course then there is also the uncertainty principle and phenomena such as the quantum eraser, which show that the female (the mind), or this potentially giving rise to the female (spacetime/gravity) and related ideas (time), does have theoretical agency beyond "pure(ly materialistic) biology."
Then dualists such as Descartes, for example, believed that animals are sentient, but do not have any kind of moral agency. And while YMMV on that, I don't think people should subscribe to these types of behaviour dogmatically or declare them necessarily "hard wired," but rather question on a metaphysical level why these idealizations exist. And to what degree metaphysical agency already influences the "physical" reality we can currently observe, if it does. (Read: There might be no pure biology as such, nor has there ever been. Doesn't make the current reality ideal, either, of course.)
Anyway... first came whoever set up the universal IDE and entered new to-be-particle matter during the big bang. Meaning neither male nor female. Or both. Or more.
...
Else, more directly on topic: I don't know. I'm average sized and haven't had any problems with women yet. They by and large leave me alone.
Probably not worth the trouble.
You're short but it's not your feet holding you up huh?
They're so strong biologically that they'll statistically die around 5 to 10 years sooner.
https://www.google.com/search?q=height's+effect+on+life+expectancy
https://www.google.com/search?q=Can+being+tall+decrease+your+lifespan%3F
Don't women usually prefer older men too?
And statistically, women live a few years longer than men on average too.
Wow, all that is going to add up to a lot of widow time... during which they'll have no strong protector by their side, unless they found another man in their old age or have a very devoted son (but maybe their son actually turns out to be short & disabled instead).
As a preference of sexual attraction, it's totally fine & understandable, but the concept / belief that they'll just be "stronger", "more protective", and "more stable" as a result, is hilariously askew.
edit: let's all meet up
It's kind of difficult to explain without taking up too much air from the room. :) The notion that cultural values can influence selection and that these can change into "new norms" is enough.
(The "Twiggy" syndrome is sort of one. Some girls recently tried out creating one that didn't take off too well - "The Thigh Gap." More ended up in the hospital than got their dance-cards filled. Peer competition was taken far too far.)
Now, they're trying out "If you're not over six-foot tall...." Well, it's accomplishing its goals, I guess.
But, that doesn't seem to be what a lot of people here are talking about. They're not discussing "life partner" qualities. Is a tall, abusive, alcoholic, moron, a good life-partner because they're tall? I think I missed that one... :)
The closest that one came was discussing a healthy physical relationship, but it's only in certain extreme cases where height would/could be that much of a motive force. (A fetish, perhaps, that's causing issues in normal interactions and that can't be solved for.)
I had a friend that did that. He just didn't "grow" and his self-esteem was effected by his height. He could have had some developmental issues, but he didn't suffer from outright dwarfism - He was just small and short. (There's a different developmental disorder that matches that, but that wasn't what he suffered from. I can't recall the name of it atm, but it has definite physiological characteristics, particular facial features, that he did not suffer from. He was just a small guy.)
And, I don't his height effected how most women thought about him. IIRC, he had a girlfriend at the time he received this surgery. (Necessarily after puberty, btw.) He likely compensated for his own perceived faults by using humor and was outwardly a pretty confident and fun guy. That counts in terms of what many find "attractive," too. (Note: He did, however, have some brief anger management issues and I think they may have mostly revolved around steroids that may have been assigned to try to work through the issue prior or after surgery.)
I'm all in favor of such things where someone's self-esteem is truly an issue. Therapy first, other solutions, then surgery if there is no other way to affect a satisfactory result.
Born in a poor familly?
You won't get to hang out with the "cool" (read: kids of wealthy parents) guys and have chance to be with the pretty popular girls.
Born in a (overtly) religious familly?
You will be treated as a kid when you're already a grown-up, various layers of "shame" will be hard coded into you and you could end up being a single person your whole life. (ironically enough, as marriage and bloodline continuation is seen as something sacred in the mainstream religions)
Born with a disability?
See first point, and it will extend further, especially if it's a crippling bodily or mental issue.
Financial issues?
You might be a hard worker, but in these unpredictable times, it's easy to fall prey to "economic sharks" and lack of money will result in much less interest in you.
At odds with society?
You could be an intelligent person but still lack the "game" to be part of the herd - unwritten societal rules are unlike those of a free-thinking person and unfortunately, most subscribe to that sort of mentality.
In the end, you also have to ask yourself what you even want.
Just sex?
Pay some cash to a prostitute or hook up with some single matures.
Casual relationship?
Try some dating sites, blind dates, talking to people at bars or clubs and such, experiment.
Serious relationship?
You will have to be commited and serious about it, especially if you plan to marry, have kids, etc.
Not everything works for everyone, make sure you know what you actually want first.