Malvineous:

The point I was trying to make is that in general, it seems like men have a narrower list of qualities that they find sexy in a partner, while women generally have a wider range of things they find sexually attractive beyond purely physical. It's not about who you would date, but what turns you on. Your example of a woman who only likes 6' tall men is an exact comparison, but that's because the woman's list of turn-ons is also very narrow, which I think isn't very common for women. What I was trying to do was think of some common answers I've heard for what women find attractive beyond just looks (sense of humor, etc.), and come up with a scenario where ALL of those qualities disappear at once. Perhaps I made a bad analogy, but I'm struggling to think of a different one that still illustrates that point.

My personal definition of shallowness has nothing to do with what someone's attracted to, no matter how specific. I think shallowness comes in when someone values sexuality above anything else in a relationship. So to make another strained analogy, you could have a guy who's only sexually attracted to 4' tall rodeo clowns, which is super specific and rare, but if he cared the most about personality and family values in his rodeo clown (and is even willing to bend some on the sexual side so he can find someone), he wouldn't be shallow in my opinion. However, you could have a different guy who is attracted to women of all heights, sizes, races and ages, but he doesn't care about anything else, he just wants a hot girlfriend and nothing else matters to him, that guy would be shallow.

Malvineous:

I wouldn't either. I personally don't think someone is shallow if they lose attraction to their partner. Munchies said that.

Malvineous:

Women seem to have a more multi-factored list of things that they find attractive in a partner, so if he lacks in one area, there's still other areas to fall back on. Here's an equivalent for women: Let's say he gets married like you said. Then one day, he gets fired and refuses to look for any work, he just wants her to be the sole breadwinner, so that he can spend all his time playing video games and smoking weed. He doesn't want to take over the housework either. Anything that distracts from his gaming is met with frustration. That includes showering, so he starts neglecting his hygiene. On top of that, he gets fat when she likes fit guys, and he grows a weird beard. These are all symptoms of severe depression, but he stubbornly refuses to get help or talk to her about it. Do you think she would still find him sexy?

X_Larsson:
If set to Inside 800 km radius from stockholm (capturing most of Sweden population, some of Norway, Denmark, Finland and some Germany/Poland,
25yo and up women, straight or bi, feedee, gainer or mutual, and online in the last 12 months gives 36 hits in total!
And like I said, that is a pretty wide scope, in my opinion. Geographically, it covers over 15 million people, I guess. Most of Sweden, plus Oslo, Copenhagen, Warsaw, Berlin, Hamburg, Helsinki. Some big cities.

But again, my initial question was about going outside the preference. I could offer that, haha, "instant friend zone", but without benefits?

Letters And Numbers:
Based on the way you project yourself in this thread, I would say no, don’t go outside your preferences to try to try to date women you won’t be attracted to. Maybe just start with making friends. And don’t dismiss therapy. I think you may be developing an unhealthy relationship with this kink or fetish or whatever term works best for you.

X_Larsson:
That is a somewhat odd way of framing your reply. I am still very interested in hearing how you base your recommendation. It might be helpful for me to know. Thanks!

Letters And Numbers:
When you “meet a woman with whom [you] share at least some intellectual and psycological common ground, and where things are fun and drama free”, what is stopping you from becoming her friend?

X_Larsson:
Yup. That is my original assumption here, and also what I wonder about. Friends, no benefits (?), but some strings attached (as friendship means).

X_Larsson:
If set to Inside 800 km radius from stockholm (capturing most of Sweden population, some of Norway, Denmark, Finland and some Germany/Poland,
25yo and up women, straight or bi, feedee, gainer or mutual, and online in the last 12 months gives 36 hits in total!
And like I said, that is a pretty wide scope, in my opinion. Geographically, it covers over 15 million people, I guess. Most of Sweden, plus Oslo, Copenhagen, Warsaw, Berlin, Hamburg, Helsinki. Some big cities.

But again, my initial question was about going outside the preference. I could offer that, haha, "instant friend zone", but without benefits?

Letters And Numbers:
Based on the way you project yourself in this thread, I would say no, don’t go outside your preferences to try to try to date women you won’t be attracted to. Maybe just start with making friends. And don’t dismiss therapy. I think you may be developing an unhealthy relationship with this kink or fetish or whatever term works best for you.

X_Larsson:
That is a somewhat odd way of framing your reply. I am still very interested in hearing how you base your recommendation. It might be helpful for me to know. Thanks!

X_Larsson:
If set to Inside 800 km radius from stockholm (capturing most of Sweden population, some of Norway, Denmark, Finland and some Germany/Poland,
25yo and up women, straight or bi, feedee, gainer or mutual, and online in the last 12 months gives 36 hits in total!
And like I said, that is a pretty wide scope, in my opinion. Geographically, it covers over 15 million people, I guess. Most of Sweden, plus Oslo, Copenhagen, Warsaw, Berlin, Hamburg, Helsinki. Some big cities.

But again, my initial question was about going outside the preference. I could offer that, haha, "instant friend zone", but without benefits?

X_Larsson:
Yes, I have talked to members overseas, but not any feedee/gainer. (So still sort of missing the point.)

I will just say, "LDR", time zones and relocation are real challenges, and I cannot just leave to go abroad for a month to "get to know someone". Travelling costs are steep these days for someone from Sweden, as well. Not impossible, but bad...

X_Larsson:
Let me assure you that I have researched profiles like you described, and... This country, as well as Finland, Denmark, Norway, and also venturing into Germany and Poland gives zero dates so far. And there are not many candidates to start with.
Some are abandoned accounts, some ghost, even block, some are in a relationship, many are way too young, or have additional (undisclosed) deviations, like BDSM etc. There IS a reason those women are here, and not finding partners off line. (That is my conclusion.)

As for striking up polite, friendly conversations with strangers, it is not well liked in Sweden. Even attempting to kill some time ie waiting in line results in raised eyebrows and single syllable replies.
This is the norm, and nowadays it is worse than before.

Of course, I am still doing both of the above!

Morbidly A Beast:
Must be a European thing

SSBBW Summer:
There's bbw bashes in vegas?

Morbidly A Beast:
Sure but like that’s Vegas lol it’s not super common to hear of bbw clubs

Chimneychonga:
Male attraction works a bit differently. Although I can appreciate someone with intellect and personality, sometimes that doesn't translate to the guy downstairs. Believe me, ED wouldn't be a problem if that's what all guys needed, much to women's chagrin.

Letters And Numbers:
I guess my thought is, if a fetish is interfering with your life to the point where you can’t have a normal relationship with a partner, and if that’s a problem (it might not be), sex therapy might be a solution. Maybe I’m wrong, but finding a partner who checks all the boxes (except physical looks) and who ALSO doesn’t want a sexual relationship might be a tall order. I mean, if someone told me they loved me and wanted an intimate relationship but they were unable to have sex with me because of how I look … idk. Not saying they don’t exist, but it’s an extra hurdle.

X_Larsson:
Yup! Thanks! But I have a couple of comments.
First. Feedism is not a fetish (which is more an object related deviation). I have read basically everything I have seen online (and in print) about the feedism thing, and it seems the authorities struggle to fit it into either the BDSM box (a big, fat no), or into more body transformation or parafilia related deviations (also a no go).
Feedism refuses to be put together with other deviations, is my view on this, just like homosexuality etc.
And feedism is not a "size" distinction. It is about the whole relation to appetite, food, consumption, gaining, AND size (and more?).

Secondly. (And I will be a bit tough here.)
What kind of attitude is it to say, that I cannot "have a normal relationship with a partner"?
Do you also tell straight people to enter relationships with homosexuals? Or tell 18 year old boys to marry 80 year old women?
If they objected, would you then send them to sex therapy?
Ok, on a lighter side. I have thought long and hard about sex therapy. It seems that the therapists generally want the client to explore and embrace their "natural" sexual preferences, unless they are illegal or revolting, like necrophilia or koprophilia.

That said, I also think it is a big spiritual defeat to resign any sexual aspirations in order to have at least a partial relation. Hmmm...