site banner
PaperclipPerfector  1d ago (text post)   1108 thread views

Friday Fun Thread for May 23, 2025

Be advised: this thread is not for serious in-depth discussion of weighty topics (we have a link for that), this thread is not for anything Culture War related. This thread is for Fun. You got jokes? Share 'em. You got silly questions? Ask 'em.

1
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I'm thinking of biting the bullet on plastic surgery. I've always had chubby cheeks, without that much definition even when I was 10 kilos lighter, and buccal fat removal was something I'd been eyeing for years. I just didn't really have the money or the impetus to go for it back then.

I had an appointment with a reputable plastic surgeon today, and started off with a debate on whether he could exclude body dysmorphia in my case lol. I explained that in a psychiatric context, didn't any degree of dissatisfaction with one's physical appearance that involved attempts to modify it count? Why doesn't going to the gym or dieting to lose weight count? Besides, you'd need to have significant impairment in psychosocial functioning to warrant it. The DSM-5 includes, under BDD:*

Preoccupation with one or more perceived defects or flaws in physical appearance that are not observable or appear slight to others

While the roundness of one's face is a subjective thing, it's certainly not non-observable.

At any rate, he pretty successfully upsold me, explaining that I had hypertrophic masseters, which would make mere buccal fat removal not have very significant effects on the overall contour of the face. He also explained that instead of discarding buccal fat, as is the norm, he finds benefit from it being re-injected below the eyes and on the chin. To help tone down the masseters further, he suggested botox. I'm not particularly keen on semi-annual injections into my face, but I think it's worth a shot.

Anyone undergo anything similar?

*If it's unclear, he was taking the piss. I don't have body dysmorphia, it's a high bar to cross.

Personal belief: The things you select for in a partner are going to end up being the things you get selected on.

How much do you select for attractiveness? If the answer is a lot then any improvements you can make are probably going to be worth it. If the answer is something like "it matters but I care more about personality, compatibility, and intelligence" then I don't think it will be worth it to you and may be actively harmful.

Think of where you'd compromise on a perfect partner, would you want them a little dumber, a little uglier, a little less sexual, a little meaner? You will also get some of that compromise, because you won't be perfect for them. What does a woman's willingness to compromise on a trait say about them? A woman willing to compromise on attractiveness a bit might care more about who you are. The part of you she cares about might vary, money, intelligence, humor, etc. But it's not necessarily a bad sign.

Some things to think about, because finding a partner isn't always a straightforward "be better in every category".

I have a pretty high floor on the amount of intelligence, beauty and ideally wit I want in a long-term partner. I'd say that my ex before my last one was the closest to marriage material, barring what I strongly suspect is undiagnosed BPD. There's such a thing as too crazy to handle, no matter how hot.

Of course, these are, to an extent, fungible. But I still have strict floors. Too dumb but hot? Okay for a fling, but I'm not risking my kids coming out with my beauty and her brains. As I humbly explained in another comment, I had a hot model with a loaded family begging me to stay back in India and marry her. She was, unfortunately, very dumb. I could have taken advantage of her by promising marriage and then screwing around like her exes did, but I have some personal ethics.

Similarly, I'd love my partner to be intelligent, more than me? Even better. Helps the kids and makes them more engaging. I'd probably not go for someone brilliant but horrendous, being ugly is a severe disadvantage for future kids.

Think of where you'd compromise on a perfect partner, would you want them a little dumber, a little uglier, a little less sexual, a little meaner? You will also get some of that compromise, because you won't be perfect for them. What does a woman's willingness to compromise on a trait say about them? A woman willing to compromise on attractiveness a bit might care more about who you are. The part of you she cares about might vary, money, intelligence, humor, etc. But it's not necessarily a bad sign.

I can accept tradeoffs on any of those axes. I don't feel like any of my partners to date had to settle. While I'm not outright handsome, I at least look decent enough that it's not an outright detriment, just neutral. Unfortunately, the universe is unfair, and there are other men who are both smart and handsome to compete with.

A woman willing to compromise on attractiveness a bit might care more about who you are. The part of you she cares about might vary, money, intelligence, humor, etc. But it's not necessarily a bad sign.

I'd expect the sum of everything other than my looks to still be decent, but they certainly haven't dated me for my ravishing appearance. I do agree that it's better to have them attracted to me for my personality or wit, but eh, the real world is messy.

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats