looks or attitude what is more imp.? - Page 18

Originally posted by: chatbuster

if u want to make comparisons with a pretty aabaa-dabaa or watever kinda female u have up there, then use exactly the opposite on the other side- a great attitude but ugly female. as pointed out eons ago, let's not cherry-pick. ab batao, ugly female ke peeche kaun padega? yaar, acha attitude hai. phir bhee naheen?😉😆

as for your example about kingfisher, u missed the point. most of the pretty ones have moved on. mallya might be trying to revive some of that but even so if the pretty ones get modelling or other offers, do u think they'll be glad to pick a tea-serving role in the skies? meanwhile, yes, yes, we can all find exceptions everywhere. ab ussee sahare points khuredna hai toh bolo😛 

Infact you are missing my point bud… pheley sey bol raha huu…purpose kya hai ? 1. only aabaa dabba baki kuch ho ya noo OR 2. jeevan saathi hai bhai aabaa daaabaa ho ya nahi but baki sab honna chaiye OR 3. baki sab kuch plus aabbaa dabbaa … even I can say same lets not cherry pick 😛 

Based on first post air hostess and looks were in question, so we mean to say if look walis are moving onto glam then position is open for attitude wali's right…BINGO..  now again purpose changed to modeling field then would lean on looks par waha par bhi without attitude survival mushkil hai…

OK bottom line is both matters…depends on what one is upto ( purpose kya hai😉...am sure u will kick me ek baar aur purpose ka naam liya toh😆😆) … but in most cases attitude wins over shear looks…looks might earn someone entry on the stage but to carry it on and be on stage for long…one has to have attitude…

 

Originally posted by: raj5000

Infact you are missing my point bud… pheley sey bol raha huu…purpose kya hai ? 1. only aabaa dabba baki kuch ho ya noo OR 2. jeevan saathi hai bhai aabaa daaabaa ho ya nahi but baki sab honna chaiye OR 3. baki sab kuch plus aabbaa dabbaa … even I can say same lets not cherry pick 😛 

Based on first post air hostess and looks were in question, so we mean to say if look walis are moving onto glam then position is open for attitude wali's right…BINGO..  now again purpose changed to modeling field then would lean on looks par waha par bhi without attitude survival mushkil hai…

OK bottom line is both matters…depends on what one is upto ( purpose kya hai😉...am sure u will kick me ek baar aur purpose ka naam liya toh😆😆) … but in most cases attitude wins over shear looks…looks might earn someone entry on the stage but to carry it on and be on stage for long…one has to have attitude…

 

Thats not true.. you generally see that since its a world of compromize and people typically settle down for other things since they either dont have the looks or dont get those where they expect...

Originally posted by: qwertyesque

Thats not true.. you generally see that since its a world of compromize and people typically settle down for other things since they either dont have the looks or dont get those where they expect...

😆😆 did you even read the whole convo 😕 Looks plus atti takes it through not just the looks.. please don't list exceptions here 😊

Originally posted by: raj5000

Infact you are missing my point bud… pheley sey bol raha huu…purpose kya hai ? 1. only aabaa dabba baki kuch ho ya noo OR 2. jeevan saathi hai bhai aabaa daaabaa ho ya nahi but baki sab honna chaiye OR 3. baki sab kuch plus aabbaa dabbaa … even I can say same lets not cherry pick 😛 

Based on first post air hostess and looks were in question, so we mean to say if look walis are moving onto glam then position is open for attitude wali's right…BINGO..  now again purpose changed to modeling field then would lean on looks par waha par bhi without attitude survival mushkil hai…

OK bottom line is both matters…depends on what one is upto ( purpose kya hai😉...am sure u will kick me ek baar aur purpose ka naam liya toh😆😆) … but in most cases attitude wins over shear looks…looks might earn someone entry on the stage but to carry it on and be on stage for long…one has to have attitude…

 

yaar, we all know that there are a lot of situations/ events in life where other factors far outweigh looks. for example, when someone is sick, they are basically looking for a competent doctor. those are fields in which probably just the talent counts, although all else equal even there the good-looking ones are reported to be generally more successful. all else equal, people reportedly prefer the good looking doc or nurse. and these are fields in which talent is key! then too, i am not sure we wld want a doctor with an attitude. of course talent, but attitude?😉😆

when we switch to the "soft" side of life where talent is not as paramount, looks are likely to be even more important... looks first. things come after that. dont have looks, dont even make the cut-off where u can be considered. dont look good, the picture is immediately discarded...

Originally posted by: chatbuster

yaar, we all know that there are a lot of situations/ events in life where other factors far outweigh looks. for example, when someone is sick, they are basically looking for a competent doctor. those are fields in which probably just the talent counts, although all else equal even there the good-looking ones are reported to be generally more successful. all else equal, people reportedly prefer the good looking doc or nurse. and these are fields in which talent is key! then too, i am not sure we wld want a doctor with an attitude. of course talent, but attitude?😉😆

Are we mixing attitude and talent here...Blame on original post for kichdi pakao's of words attitude and talent...I mean what they mean literally.. I am pursuing "attitude" over here with essence of talent...

when we switch to the "soft" side of life where talent is not as paramount, looks are likely to be even more important... looks first. things come after that. dont have looks, dont even make the cut-off where u can be considered. dont look good, the picture is immediately discarded...

In fields u mentioned that might be true for some...but whats the use...IMO the long lasting charateristics is more imp... lolss 😆 reminds me off this nationwide adv.. no offy meant http://youtube.com/watch?v=Lh9NPCRv65k&feature=related

Edited by raj5000 - 15 years ago

Don't know what went wrong with previous response I posted. My response is not showing there and I do not see other people's posts as well 😕

Lighty, I read your article and here's the essence of what I wrote before the page crashed on me:

Where does your article say that beauty/looks are more important than attitude? It says people are spending more on cosmetics than education. It does not say thgat people are spending on cosmetics instead of education. Most people will shop for cosmetics once their basic needs are met. Education, now a days, is one of the basic needs. They will spend on education first and then on cosmetic....eve if they end up spending more on cosmetics.

Article says attractive people get paid more...it doesn't say they get paid based on looks only. All else equal, attractive people will earn more...key is ALL ELSE EQUAL.

Please revisit my articles. They clearly show what people prefer. Pretty much all had personality or intellect up there along with some other features. Inner beauty lasts far longer than just the outer beauty.

No hedging allowed now yaar. Pick either "only" looks or "only" attitude. Prove how outer beauty is better than the inner beauty in the long run for sustaining a relationship 😊

^^^^yeah what did you do? this post is becoming more to do with hard work then looks/attitude... I found the responses of LH/CB in archive...let me post it here

Originally posted by: lighthouse

**This post was edited by Raj5000**

 

 Nicely put CB. 😊 

 Ok G I find it odd to prove my point by refering someone to the article which has opinions and not facts from people we have never heard of.  Since you insist here is one from economist.com , very reputable and widely read magazine reporting on cold hard facts of beauty business.  The point to note is people spend more on beauty than education or any other self improvement system.

The beauty business

May 22nd 2003
From The Economist print edition

MEDIEVAL noblewomen swallowed arsenic and dabbed on bats' blood to improve their complexions; 18th-century Americans prized the warm urine of young boys to erase their freckles; Victorian ladies removed their ribs to give themselves a wasp waist. The desire to be beautiful is as old as civilisation, as is the pain that it can cause. In his autobiography, Charles Darwin noted a "universal passion for adornment", often involving "wonderfully great" suffering.

The pain has not stopped the passion from creating a $160 billion-a-year global industry, encompassing make-up, skin and hair care, fragrances, cosmetic surgery, health clubs and diet pills. Americans spend more each year on beauty than they do on education. Such spending is not mere vanity. Being pretty—or just not ugly—confers enormous genetic and social advantages. Attractive people (both men and women) are judged to be more intelligent and better in bed; they earn more, and they are more likely to marry. http://www.economist.com/printedition/displayStory.cfm?Story _ID=1795852

AND Then CB's

Originally posted by: chatbuster

there's attitude and then there's aptitude. 😉

now, let's have a basic run-down.

doctors- want someone with an attitude? what attitude? killer attitude? 😆
wife- want someone with an attitude? nakhre wali, matakne wali yaa kosne wali? some like it hot, some like it cold. 😉
model- want someone with an attitude? again, what attitude? temper-tantrums phekne wali?
hostess- want someone with an attitude?

reverse the above for looks and see what u get.

lol, now u will tell me, u want the person with the right attitude. but that my friend is a commodity that is very hard to define and correctly perceive, which changes more with the season and with one's moods than looks. one instant we might like a laid-back person, next an aggressive person. part-time angel, part-time devil. very little constancy and unambiguity there.

personally, i just might be able to withstand being married to the same gorgeous female all my life 😆 , but i sure cant see how i cld stick to her if she had attitude. 😊

Originally posted by: raj5000

Thats negative attitude or emotional imbalance, as per original poster we were seeing he positive side of it like attitude to be go getter or attitude to make it big .. not that of type to pour coffee over someone's head kind of atti. 😆 Like it was sed looks are important... it implies..it's good looks (positive side)

edit - i lost my response, so had to retype

 

Edited by raj5000 - 15 years ago

Originally posted by: raj5000

^^^^yeah what did you do? I found the responses of LH/CB in archive...let me post it here

😆😆😆 don't know but it crashed after I posted my response to LH's article😆

 

Moderator's Note: REMINDER!! There have been too many reported posts and complaints in the recent weeks about sarcastic posts. Such posts have triggered quite a bit of indirect or direct mudslinging attacks disrupting the flow of the debates and have created bad vibes in the section. Sarcasm per se, is not bad but overuse or misuse of it surely has the capacity to ruin a good debate and affect the environment. Topics are for healthy debating, state your points clearly with proper reasoning and restrain from resorting to any sarcasm to drive home a point. We will not tolerate it any more. If anyone is found making sarcastic posts, instigatory posts, retaliatory posts, getting personal, attacking another member directly or indirectly, strict action will be taken against such members. Please take this as the final warning! If you find any such posts, DO NOT try to give a fitting reply, or try being the moral police, but simply "REPORT" it. Let us take the necessary action. Please help us in keeping the section positive, friendly and welcoming. Regards DM Dev Team

Originally posted by: Gauri_3

Don't know what went wrong with previous response I posted. My response is not showing there and I do not see other people's posts as well 😕

Lighty, I read your article and here's the essence of what I wrote before the page crashed on me:

Where does your article say that beauty/looks are more important than attitude? It says people are spending more on cosmetics than education. It does not say thgat people are spending on cosmetics instead of education. Most people will shop for cosmetics once their basic needs are met. Education, now a days, is one of the basic needs. They will spend on education first and then on cosmetic....eve if they end up spending more on cosmetics.

 G. The report contains statistical information and needs to be read accordingly not the way you are interpreting. I assumed you knew that much. Its per capita expenditure , not on individual basis ok which means education expenditure is less than $160b figure of beauty business.  according to US census 2/3 of population is under 44 and 1/3 under 17 so you can do the math on how much should be education expenditure. People can say whatever they want about beauty not being paramount, but the proof is in the solid numbers of beauty industry. 😊

Article says attractive people get paid more...it doesn't say they get paid based on looks only. All else equal, attractive people will earn more...key is ALL ELSE EQUAL. 
 Finally you see it!!!!!!! we have been saying the same thing using same words from page 1...😆 repeated many times also ...😛 But you never mentioned it before..

Please revisit my articles. They clearly show what people prefer. Pretty much all had personality or intellect up there along with some other features. Inner beauty lasts far longer than just the outer beauty.
People can say whatever, the fact is vanity/beauty is a huge mega business, numbers prove that and that is where it is. It is all about packaging, can't have inner beauty and not worry about exterior beauty. If that were the case, we would have personal development mega malls not retail malls selling latest fashion clothes jewelry and beauty products.😛  

No hedging allowed now yaar. Pick either "only" looks or "only" attitude. Prove how outer beauty is better than the inner beauty in the long run for sustaining a relationship 😊  Huh? so now you are changing the premise of the debate and drive the debate . ok if it makes you happy,  no attitude is better than bad attitude but you can't say the same about beauty because ther is no such thign as bad beauty.😊

Edited by lighthouse - 15 years ago