A woman who I was intensely, passionately sexually attracted to, but we had little in common (A)
or
a woman with similar culture and other traits who even found me attractive, but I wasn't attracted to at all (B)
who should i marry?
2007-05-15 10:17:28 · 21 answers · asked by Anonymous in Family & Relationships ➔ Marriage & Divorce
Ya need to have a C answer. One you can't stop thinking about or can't stand to be alone without. This would be the start of L-O-V-E. Sexual attraction and similarities is only a fraction of what makes a long lasting marriage. Love is what will make it work.
Bear
2007-05-15 10:29:09 · answer #1 · answered by Major_Mtn 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
niether I think you have to have the whole package which is virtually impossible but you have to be attacted to someone in some way not always their looks but something, sense of humour, or their caring nature etc. Passion is a great thing and an important part of a relashionship you need to feel that there is nothing you couldnt talk about or do together that would make you feel uncomfortable. However once you get to know someone how they look becomes less important and things grow from there you dont have to be too similiar as long as you can relate to each other in the things that are important to you. You will just know who is right as time goes by. x
2007-05-15 17:28:52 · answer #2 · answered by Magster 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'd Say lady A, if you aren't attracted to a lady at all, it will strain your relationship, and other than plastic surgery, I don't know what you could do to make her more attractive to you, on the other hand a lady with little in common, enough searching and trying new things together, you will eventually find something the two of you have in common.
Sounds like Lady A is the winner!
2007-05-15 17:23:16 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Neither. I would pass them both over and find a woman who you were attracted to and who you had everything in common with. I would be looking for my intellectual/emotional and sexual equal and give those two a big miss.
2007-05-15 17:23:36 · answer #4 · answered by rightio 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
neither.
You don't have to have the world in common to love someone. And if you don't Love the other person you shouldn't marry them.
Sexual attraction is important, but don't worry so much about that. It goes away after years of use.
2007-05-15 17:25:38 · answer #5 · answered by tincre 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Neither one is the backdrop for a lasting relationship. I wouldn't marry either if I were you. Wait for a combination of A and B.
2007-05-15 18:26:52 · answer #6 · answered by K 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
How about (C): a woman you have things in common with AND you find her attractive...
2007-05-15 17:24:44 · answer #7 · answered by Dena 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
(c) None of the above.
This is a false choice. Why would you have to pick one anyways?
Date (a) and hope to get lucky from time to time.
Hang out with (b) since she probably is someone who you could have fun with.
but wait for (d) - all of the above
2007-05-15 17:26:13 · answer #8 · answered by Pythagoras 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
You shouldn't choose either of them. Why marry at all? You could go out with (A) and scorn (B) distainfully whenever you happened across her path.
2007-05-15 17:25:46 · answer #9 · answered by John Timothy 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
woman number 3...The lady who has all these traits that you have with lady "A" and "B". And dont say she doesnt exist, because she does
2007-05-15 17:23:47 · answer #10 · answered by plumprump26 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋