While I was visting my "best friend", the infamous Brandy, in Baltimore over Thanksgiving, we had some interesting conversations. We always do. One of these kind of centered around looks and sexual attraction. Brandy observed that we were kind of fortunate that we fell into the same category: attractive enough to be described as such, but not so much so that we had ever had to worry that that was the sole reason someone was dating, screwing, hooking up with, or otherwise "involved" with us. I saw where she was going, and I agreed. But I've kind of turned the conversation around in my mind; mulled it over, so to speak; since then.
I have to say, I no longer believe it's entirely true. First of all, perhaps unbeknownst to her, Brandy is a knockout. A friggin' knockout. She's tall and naturally tan with blonde hair and green eyes...and hell, her ass ain't half-bad either. My whole life, she's been my "hot friend" (As in "Who's your 'hot friend'?"). So, who's to say that in all her years of dating, since I first aided my fellow classmates in holding down Andy Guy at recess and forcing her to kiss him, she's never dated anyone who was doing so in part just because of what a hottie she is? Call me a doubting Thomas, but hmmm.....
And in my case? Hell, I'd just put myself in the "reasonably attractive" category. I'm tall, I've got good teeth, I bathe regularly. That's about it. But even I have been "involved" with someone, knowing all the while that I was arm candy. But I guess in a way that particular situation serves to reiterate Brandy's point--remembering the situation, it wasn't that he thought I was cute, but that he thought I was cute and intelligent. (I guess he wasn't aware that they could come together in one package?) And it kind of drives the point home even more that he knew that I knew that I was just arm candy; and that I was "dating" him (we'll call it that for simplicity's sake) just for something to do. He was an attractive man with money, but neither the time nor the inclination to pursue a "real" relationship with me or anyone else. So, he had his arm candy girl for occasions that warranted one. Did he deserve more? Yes. Did he desire more? Probably. Did he actually attempt to "get" more? Nope.
I'm confusing myself even more as I go around in these circles. Every man I've been involved with has, at one point or another, practically tripped over himself to tell me how attractive he thinks I am. Very few have ever bothered to compliment me on my intelligence, sparkling wit, or grilled cheese-makin' skills. So, I hypothesize that although I may be just in the "reasonably attractive" category in general; the people who date me find me, in particular, beautiful. And likewise, I've never been "involved" with a man who I did not think was attractive (at least while I was involved with him...).
So. Is it that the attraction comes from the attractiveness, and the relationships with the people who have the sparkling wit and grilled cheese-makin' skills are the ones that perservere? Or is it that those with the sparkling wit and grilled cheese-makin' skills become more attractive to you when you allow yourself to love them?
I don't know, I don't know, I don't know....
But Brandy, the one thing I can state, with a good degree of certainty; is that people with your level of the intelligence, sparkling wit, and all-around greatness just don't tend to attract the kind of scum-buckets who only want pretty pictures for their wallets. They'd be far too intimidated.
So, I guess she was right, in that sense. Let me turn it over for another few weeks and I'll have an entirely different take on it.