Well, that was a waste of time.

[kellinator]

For my own curiosity, I just took the Match.com "What do you find attractive?" test and boy, was that a waste of time.

The test informed me that I'm very picky and only like matinee-idol looks. Well, did it occur to you that maybe you should have included more diverse pictures? I didn't see many pictures of the geeky boys I always crush on, and in fact, when in the results it showed two pictures and labeled them "most conventionally attractive guy you picked" and "least conventionally attractive guy you picked," I found the "least" far more attractive in all cases.

I'm just pissed because I feel like the test gave me shallow options and then bitched at me for giving shallow answers. I know it was pretty accurate for some of you, but just about the only thing it got right for me was that I like angular features.

Of course, now I'm stuck with the uncomfortable feeling that maybe I really am shallow...

Comments

[neoijlc.livejournal.com]

I agree. The results were not very diverse, and then some of it didn't make sense. Like how it told me that I'm the pickiest of the picky, and then I prefer women who have a little extra weight. If I was so picky? Wouldn't I like only super models?
I felt that it nailed me on a lot of things, like how I prefer dark hair/the weight/dark eyes/asian. But others made me feel as if I'm too damn shallow. Which I really don't believe I am. Most of the girls I've really liked before have met some rough comments from my friends. I think I'm pretty diverse.
I completely agree with your feelings on the test.