>>40935984
>>40936380
>>40936455
>>40936734
>>40937061
>>40938734
>>40938773
>>40939163
>>40940186
40941122
40942256
Thanks, anons—I shouldn’t be so easily put out by shitty comments. I’ll give my general advice, and then use myself as an example.
Basically, everyone has a combination of attributes that are going to be pluses to most all dating partners (e.g., nice huge tits), neutral to most all dating partners (e.g., knowing how to play the trumpet), and negative to most all dating partners (e.g., weird teeth). I think the most powerful strategy is to find someone who DOES like your neutral or “negative” features (e.g.. maybe bad teeth is their kink or they think it’s cute or whatever). You can also flip this: find someone with the positive features you want, who also has some “negatives” that happen to be a total non-issue for you. If you combine both of these strategies, you can wind up with some incredible 10/10 even if you’re imperfect.
In my case, I have a lot of stuff that most people respond positively to (muscles, blond hair, blue eyes, tall, deep voice), but I also come with the drawback (to most) of being very sexually submissive and kinky. [Side note: submissive does not mean bottom. I mean submissive in the BDSM sense.] And for my part, I’m actually not that particular about my partner’s fitness level (unlike most fit guys). So anyone who actually ENJOYS those kinks and dominating me wins every time, easily beating out the fit vanilla girl/guys who ask me out.
Anyway, I know this is an oversimplification and a really robotic way of thinking but it’s always made sense to me. You don’t need to be a 10/10 to everyone, you just need to be a 10/10 to that one person. But people tend to fixate on their broad appeal.
>>40941532
It’s me—I’m not nearly hot enough to be a fake choice, lmao. I post in /lgbt/ and /fit/ kind of a lot, and I always write like an autist. That’s the seal of authenticity.
