artanis_neravar said:
"a hypothetical psychological effect" are the first words used to describe the Westermarck effect. It also goes on to say that it effects people who "live in close domestic proximity during the first few years of their lives". So the effect doesn't apply to this case.
No shit, Sherlock. I outright said that, to quote myself, " If someone considers someone else to be 'like a sibling,' they have zero of the things that evolution uses to prevent them from inbreeding had they been actual siblings."
In other words, someone can regard someone else in the same way they hold a brother or sister, and they didn't need to be raised with one another for it to happen.
That was my point, which you somehow missed.
artanis_neravar said:
These seem to contradict each other.
Statement 1 - If she is looking for someone like you who isn't you she is lying
Statement 2 - It's possible for someone to like someone in a none romantic way
Doesn't 2 imply that she wasn't lying in 1?
Alright. I'll go through what you summarized as 'Statement 1.'
Let's say you have two guys, A and B. Guy A is average looking: far from ugly, but he doesn't turn many heads when he walks in a room. Normal, in other words.
Guy B is the positive extreme: he's very good looking, but also an exact replica in terms of personality, interests, etc to Guy A.
Now let's say the girl from the scenario (X) meets A, likes him "as a friend," and ultimately rejects his advances, and wishes that her future boyfriends will be "like him." She then meets B who, as I said, is exactly like A in every respect except is also extremely good-looking, and the two begin a relationship.
So yes. In the hypothetical scenario, the girl is lying. If A and B are identical in every way except looks, then she is only rejecting A because she thinks she can find someone better looking. She doesn't see him 'like a brother,' because B is identical in terms of personality to A.
If she's telling the truth, of course, then we get the delightful implication that she doesn't mind sex with her non-familial sibling, provided he's good looking enough. But let's not get into that, hm?
Clarification of 'Statement 2'
Two people are very good friends for a long time. They strike up a relationship, and get married. Some time after marriage, they discover that the relationship between spouses isn't nearly the same as a relationship between friends, and they get a divorce. Despite the end of their marriage, they remain friends,
because they had been good friends for a long time.
For a personal example (inadmissible in a court of law, but w/e), a friend of mine has this happen with his parents. They certainly found each other 'attractive' enough to have two kids together, and the divorce proceedings were pretty cordial. Their split was because they (to put it a bit simply) didn't love each other as spouses ought to. They might have been great friends, and found one another attractive enough to produce children together, but those two things didn't add up to 'love.'
Clarification of 1&2's "contradiction"
In Statement 1, it all comes down to personality: A and B are identical, but B is better looking, so he gets the girl when she rejects A. Thus, in the most ideal situation as set by her statement, if she wants "someone like (A)," then it means that she's rejecting him solely because she thinks she can find a version of him that is identical but better looking.
In Statement 2, it comes down to the difference between 'friends' and 'lovers.' Have you ever noticed how similar children look to their parents? Check a wedding album: you'll probably find that with the right haircut and clothing, you're a dead-ringer for whichever of your parents shared your gender. It's even common advice to get a decent idea of what your significant other will look like in 30 years by looking at their parent.
So let's give another hypothetical scenario: a husband and a wife have a daughter at age, let's say 25. And let's say that the parents age very well (they continue to look younger than they are) while the daughter grows up fairly quickly (she looks older than she is). So, at age 20, she looks very much like her mother does at age 45.
Now the husband/father comes into play. He's got two women in his house, both of whom he loves with all his heart. Yet one of them he regularly has sex with, and he'd likely attack you for suggesting that he would like having sex with the other.
Answer me this totally-not-leading question: do you think that past a certain age, all parents are holding back the urge to have sex with their children? Or do you think that it's possible to like or even love someone without regard for their physical appearance?
artanis_neravar said:
Did I ever say that? No, all I said is that a romantic relationship can not work without physical attraction, just like they can not work without emotional attraction. If you are going to deliberately misconstrued everything I say what's the point in even trying to argue with me?
...then what did you mean, pray tell, when you said that "if you aren't [physically] attracted to someone then the relationship will never work"? Because having 'physical attraction' to someone is a fancy way of saying (to put it in the plainest terms possible) that you want to have sex with them. I literally can't think of anything else it can describe. Nobody has ever gotten into an intense internal debate because they like someone a lot, but that person just doesn't turn them on.
There's a reason why succubi are never depicted as very plain women who seduce men with their great personalities.
artanis_neravar said:
For future reference, yes it does.
Shallow - Judging a person based strictly on looks, not factoring in their personality whatsoever.
I do not judge based solely on looks, I judge based on looks, personality, and mentality, among other things, therefore calling me shallow would be incorrect.
Really? Because in that situation we've been discussing, A and B are internally identical. The only factor you can judge them by is their looks.
Actually, scratch that: A has also been a dependable friend for an indeterminate amount of time, while B was still just a hypothetical ideal. So in other words, you're throwing out the entire history you had with A because B seems a lot like him personality-wise, and he's better looking. Nice.