Thursday, April 9, 2009

File #90029040

Types
Rant!

I was talking with some friends around Valentine's Day this year, when we came up on the topic of significant others and types. Two of my friends are in relationships, one guy and one lady. My other friend(also a guy) and myself are single. The first guy(I guess we'll go with lettering - "A") comments that his girlfriend wasn't exactly his "type" but is happy nonetheless. The only female in our party "B", says her boyfriend is probably as close to her preference as she can get and it quite content. The only other single guy (Mr. "C") in our group says he just wants someone he can have fun with and be happy(and keep his wallet lol). When it came my turn to 'fess up, I just said I didn't care. Ohhh, big mistake.
After Mr. C makes the one-shot "2D girls" joke, which he can only make because he is also an anime fan, we talk about what exactly creates our preference for a significant other. I read a long time ago that we tend to look for someone who is similar to whoever was the opposite sex parent in our lives(I'm a dude, so that means my mother). That sounds kind of awful doesn't it? I'm sure people who had "bad parents" don't do that, so there's more to it I guess.
Miss B brought up the popularity side of the study, how Hollywood crams the "ideal woman" down the throat of its viewers. Now that actually kind of makes sense. But on the other hand, that's just horrible. Apologies to all celebrities beforehand, but I'm sorry, celebrities are some of the most stupid and horrible people out there. They're right there next to filthy, rich, snobbish people.
After finding out that C watching a few episodes of 90210 and laughing about it, I brought up the idea hat it was mostly just personal experiences put together. For example, if you had a disastrous encounter with a redhead, you probably wouldn't like redheads anymore. That's stereotyping, right? And that's how emotions work, irrational, illogical, and doesn't make any sense. That's why psychology's so fun!
We reached a consensus that all these factors are responsible for molding our views for a partner.
Taking it an intriguing step further, Mr. A began to talk about how certain people become the type that people like. Obviously, celebrities have to do it all the time, they have to set the trend. They have to have the traits to make them popular, and they have to keep having it or else their career is over. That's rigorous, I suppose.
Anyway, we tossed around the "chance" theory, where people just happen to meet their type. To support the theory(very backwardly I might add) was the fact that most people do not meet their type as their preference is too high or unrealistic. We all have that unrealistic preference at one time or another, except for me of course lol. But reality sets it straight sooner or later.
We also tossed up the geographic possibility. Now that was hilarious. Northerners get along with Westerners, and Southerners stick to themselves. Obviously not true, but it was funny thought. But it makes a little sense in that Westerners are generally more accepting of Asian people, and Southerners more accepting of Hispanics, statistically.
Well, leave it to Miss B to come up with the most popular and sensible idea, the "trial and error process". The notion that we go from one relationship to the next in search of our ideal, while changing our views after each respective relationship. We not only change our ideal, but also ourselves to maybe match another. I've heard of people who quit smoking after they broke up because their ex didn't like it.
And then we came around full circle on me on how to NOT have a preference. By all that we've been talking about proves the fact that you cannot "not" have one. It was actually just a little fun to see them trying to make me a preference through questioning. "Glasses?" "I wear mine out of necessity." "British?" "I like their comedies." And so on. They never got anywhere with that attempt.
So it proves the point that there is a possibility of having no ideal. By ignoring one's surroundings, by remembering people by their names instead of faces, not watching TV, and being a completely insensitive, apathetic person who actually likes staring at stock tickers all day.
Wow... that's one good-looking stock...

1 comment:

  1. Yesss! Another rant! Yay for psychology. ^^

    Hmmm. Now this was an interesting little peek into your world. And
    that is one interesting conversation you guys had! Each of those 'theories' seem valid - I mean, in the end it's like you said, it's our experiences that shape our views.
    I wonder what you guys would have said about couples who got together due to an arranged marriage...Parents or guardians deciding the perfect "type" of person for their son or daughter.

    The best part: "Apologies to all celebrities beforehand, but I'm sorry, celebrities are some of the most stupid and horrible people out there. They're right there next to filthy, rich, snobbish people." :D

    And...I don't know how to read that stock stuff. -_-

    ReplyDelete