You in Print vs. You in Person: Who's Sexier?

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

A comment elsewhere in the IL* universe has implied that an individual's writing and writing style can make him or her "sexy," a comment with which I agree too strongly for my own good. (Which is to say: I am one of those ridiculous people who is physically turned off by bad writing.)

So ... how do you rank yourself in terms of the verbal vs. textual sexiness schism? (Note that this doesn't necessarily involve physical appearance, unless you're so good looking that you could be mute and illiterate and still do fine. Which, judging from the picture thread, is a possibility around here.)

― Nitsuh, Monday, 8 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

My answer: text all the way, unfortunately. If I could hold every conversation via pen and paper, I would. And women would find me exponentially more attractive, judging from past experience.

― Nitsuh, Monday, 8 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Actually, when I first came across your name on AMG, I thought you might *be* a woman. So let that be a lesson to you. ;-)

― Ned Raggett, Monday, 8 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I'm afraid that the majority of people that find me sexy do so for reasons neither verbal nor textual. I feel as though I'm fairly bright, clever and well-spoken, but these traits have probably played a fairly small role in how "lucky" I've been.

And I'll 'fess up; I'm the one who said Nitsuh's writing made him sexy.

― Sean, Monday, 8 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

id fuck nitsuh by the power of his text. raw intelligence, incisive commentary and a sardonic wit ! Anyway text is important !

― anthony, Monday, 8 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

"Nitsuh and I, we had such a brainiac amour, but no more, no more." Sean and Anthony are right. Hey, we're all gay, what does that mean? We're supposed to be shallow and vain, what's wrong with us?

Anyway, I think it'd be much easier for me to pull in person, with my sexy Phil Hartman meets Hal the Computer voice. I don't think my writing style is particularly striking. I do think I sound a bit gayer, uh I mean more disco, online than in real life. Which is fine.

― Arthur, Monday, 8 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Arthur, is that a Patti Smith lyric you're adapting? Sexy!!

― Sean, Monday, 8 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Yes, and sassy, too. Sassy!

― Arthur, Monday, 8 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Ummm ... whoah. I think that's the first time in my life that a man's said he'd fuck me. But, well ... feel free to talk about people other than me, please.

Anthony and Sean, you may both change your mind when you notice the subject-verb disagreement in my "one of those ridiculous people who is," above. I'm off to do penance for that one -- six bonks on the head with the Chicago Manual of Style.

― Nitsuh, Monday, 8 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I'm not sexy in life or in print.

― Melissa W, Monday, 8 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

For me, definitely in person. I so wish we could just organize a party or something. When is someone going to invent the goddamn teleporter?

Anyway, sexier in person, not because I think I'm a universal knockout or anything, but because I come off so dry and robotic in print.

― Brian MacDonald, Monday, 8 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Anyway, sexier in person, not because I think I'm a universal knockout or anything, but because I come off so dry and robotic in print.

No you don't, silly! Not robotic at all.

Brian is sexier in person though, just because he has a very lovely voice.

For me, pretty non-sexy in both realms. I'm more doofy with sexy, but that's cool with me.

― Nicole, Monday, 8 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Awww, thanks Nicole. :)
See this thread though for thoughts on yours truly's voice.

And you speak nonsense, too. Obviously the right guy finds you sexy in all ways, otherwise you wouldn't have recently gotten encaged.

I mean, engaged.

― Brian MacDonald, Monday, 8 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Yeah, Brian, you post very attractively. You are the DJ Martian of the forgotten band! And I actually remember you from the SFA list, so you can't be all that robotic.

― Arthur, Monday, 8 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Quite right, Arthur and Nicole, so Brian, shush and be a good boy like you always have been. :-) Now about myself -- fuck if *I* know. What do those who have had the misfortune to deal with me directly think?

― Ned Raggett, Monday, 8 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

And yes, Nicole = appeal. Dammit. I CHALLENGE ANYONE WHO DISAGREES WITH ME, because you are blind, lazy and stupid if you do disagree.

― Ned Raggett, Monday, 8 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I am above sexiness.

― Mike Hanle y, Monday, 8 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I am much much sexier in person. Which isn't hard, considering how blowsy and unsexy and shouty I am online.

― Ally, Monday, 8 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Yeah, Ally, you're HORRIBLE. ;-)

― Ned Raggett, Monday, 8 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I am occasionally boisterous in person and have a tendency to bite people if they say or do something that pleases me. I am *safer* in print. But I am more articulate and attentive in person.

― rainy, Monday, 8 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

a tendency to bite people if they say or do something that pleases me.

I don't know about the rest of you, but I think Rainy has just posited the #1 way to efficiently pull men. A girl could ignore and insult me for an entire evening, but if she bit me for doing something interesting, I'd be so completely sold.

― Nitsuh, Monday, 8 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I don't think I'm sexy in print and I don't think I'm sexy otherwise. Which, I should say, doesn't bother me. It's definitely possible to be textually sexy, though - or at least textually fanciable.

― Tom, Monday, 8 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Anyway, sexier in person, not because I think I'm a universal knockout or anything, but because I come off so dry and robotic in print.

I am exactly like this. And I think it's nice to think I'm sexy; if no one else does at least I've got me own support.

― Maria, Monday, 8 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

bite me Nitsuh

― Mike Hanle y, Monday, 8 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I'm a dumb blonde. I'm virtually handicapped here. In fact I'm beginning to think that all my posts should have a little blue and white sign there in the right hand corner.

― Kim, Monday, 8 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I prefer being doofy to being sexy, I wasn't saying it like it was a bad thing, y'all. I just can't see someone who natters on about smurfs as being sexy. ;-)

96.5% percent of the ilx massive come off as quite sexy in print, but then I always think that about anyone who writes with a lot of enthusiasm, wit and intelligence. So most of the folks here who are claiming not to be sexy are...

― Nicole, Monday, 8 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I have resigned myself to not being sexy in print or real life. Ho hum.

― DG, Monday, 8 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

i am sexy cos i said so.

if i find someone sexy, its cos i've talked to them in person usually. what a person writes doesn't really tell me that much about them, (probably cos i don't know what to look for), except what they think, a lot of mannerisms are lost in text, or can be text specific. i have never been turned on by a disembodied text.

― di, Monday, 8 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

96.5% percent of the ilx massive come off as quite sexy in print, but then I always think that about anyone who writes with a lot of enthusiasm, wit and intelligence.

This is kind of the root of my distinction between "sexy" and "fanciable" - I'm not quite sure what the extra thing needed to make someone's writing "sexy" is, and I'm certainly not sure whether it's a better thing to be "sexy". Hmm. More thought on this in less insomniac times, maybe.

― Tom, Monday, 8 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I'm very much in favor of Tom's new wording here, partly because it keeps this thread from seeming creepy.

My New Personal Rule: text = fanciable, biting = sexy.

― Nitsuh, Tuesday, 9 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I find that incisive, intelligent, or plain beautiful writing is that much more impressive when coming straight from the horse's mouth, so to speak (hehe!). That's why I heart hearing text read.

S'funny though--the way some people can make shite text sound beautiful, & vice versa. But enough about my creative writing class...< /P>

― turner, Tuesday, 9 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Oop--stray html

― turner, Tuesday, 9 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

it always frustrates me that I can't communicate the ideas fizzing around my head into text. I'm only marginally better verbally, but there must be something non-physical to attract people to me, (see pink tights picture for evidence of this), perhapsme intimate knowledge of nomad tents and folk songs.

― Ed, Tuesday, 9 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Other people finding me attractive puzzles me. I could sort of understand it in my skinny fresh faced youth, but now I'm flabby and a bit worn looking it's beyond me. It's not as if I have a sexy writing style or am stunning conversationalist either. But something about me must be attractive as I'm not totally lacking in attention from either sex. It doesn't really bother me, it's just something I find a bit weird.

― Richard Tunnicliffe, Tuesday, 9 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

It's because you're a big soft badger, I reckon.

NB crucial factor on this sexy-text thing - choice of e-mail account names/IM aliases etc etc. A quirky or resonant one is more fanciable than a flat name/number combo, surely?

― Tom, Tuesday, 9 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

HA HA I draw you all in with my AMAZINGNESS!!

― Sarah, Tuesday, 9 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I fink Tom *is* sexy in print.

― mark s, Tuesday, 9 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

The mere fact that I have a sexy ass is good enough. I don't think I write in a particularly sexy way, however I have had some marriage proposal from things I have written...

― Pete, Tuesday, 9 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Either people envision me as a gothic witch or as a shy person. Combine the two... and you still don't have the real Nathalie. I think it all has to do with the fact that sooner or later you will always fancy the other. Or vice versa.

― nathalie (nathalie), Tuesday, 9 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I doubt if I appear sexy in text. I doubt if I appear sexy in real. I doubt if I would ever wish to be considered sexy. I can't take that kind of pressure.

― jel, Tuesday, 9 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I'm less annoying, probably, in person. In print, you can write whatever you feel like. It's artistic license. But, in reality, any thought you express becomes "who you are", rather than "who you just were" and I don't say much of anything in person, other than to analyze things with people and then say what I think I believe about said things. Delivery is the difference, I guess.

― Nude Spock, Tuesday, 9 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

How to be fanciable textually (I reckon): Have a nice name. Be funny and intelligent. Don't take yourself too seriously but don't be too self-deprecating (this is surely the biggest turn-off). Don't be an asshole but don't be a pushover. Make people feel included but don't be too confessional.

NB other people may well be turned on by assholism or gut-spilling confessionals or blatant dumbness. They probably have "issues" though.

― Tom, Tuesday, 9 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I'd also like to include "don't be too abstract". Being able to ground what you write is just as important to fly up there with the grand ideas. If I have no IDEA where person x is coming from I'll be turned off quite instantly and it'll take a while for me to come round to them.

― Sarah, Tuesday, 9 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Well, jeepers, I hope those two posts weren't directed at me. Otherwise, I'd get the idea I'm an unfunny, unintelligent, self-important, yet self-deprecating, asshole/alternately pushover (?) gut-spiller who is, perhaps, far too abstract to be understood. Eesh.

NB other people may well be turned on by assholism or gut-spilling confessionals or blatant dumbness. They probably have "issues" though.

Tom, what's "NB"? I never saw that before.

― Nude Spock, Tuesday, 9 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

NB = nota bene = note well

― Richard Tunnicliffe, Tuesday, 9 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Nude Spock - no they weren't. Except the "Have a nice name." bit, ha.

― Tom, Tuesday, 9 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I've found people sexy on the Int'net before, only to discover that they are invariably fat, american, ugly & christian - oh, and they usually suffer from clinical depression too.

It is amazing how revealing a thread about bra size, or any clothing size for that matter, can be.

I realise that when I start to find Int'net people sexy it is just that I am feeling a bit randy and I'm projecting sexiness upon them.

― toraneko, Tuesday, 9 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

What's wrong with 'American'??

We need Prime Minister Blair to reprimand you for your rabid Anti-Americanism.

― the pinefox, Tuesday, 9 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I know you're all drooling right now. One flick of my space bar and you're all on the verge of being fired for screaming at work. Off I go to learn how to write again......talk later.

― Ronan, Tuesday, 9 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

What would a thread about bra size and clothing size reveal? I'm all for it, let's start, I want to see what it reveals about me. It's like fortune telling, with articles of clothing.

― Ally, Tuesday, 9 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I used to think that I came off as a bizarre individual in text, but this was before encountering the grand master (Hanle y). I think I've since devolved into Inappropriately Juvenile Boy, which fucking rocks. If I'm not sexy, that's okay, 'cuz I'm off the market anyway.

― Dan Perry, Tuesday, 9 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

hey nude spock, i think i'm probably more careful with what i say in text than what i say in person, cos once somethings written down its sort of immortalised.

― di, Tuesday, 9 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I have all the charm, wit, and charisma in real life that I do online. More or less.

― Tadeusz Suchodolski, Tuesday, 9 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I don't know the answer to this question. How do I find out? I'm not as a bad a nit-picker in real life.

― Nick, Wednesday, 10 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Oh come now Nick you met your lady friend online after all.

― Tom, Wednesday, 10 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Stop fishing for compliments.

I am pretty sure I'm better in the flesh.

― Emma (Emma), Wednesday, 10 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Well not really, Tom. I mean there was nothing going on till we met at that party. So it doesn't answer the question.

― Nick, Wednesday, 10 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Well yes it does, surely - if there was nothing going on until you met in real life then it implies you're sexier in real life. Ha!

― Tom, Wednesday, 10 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Or that we don't 'do' online romance.

― Nick, Wednesday, 10 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Maybe I should ask the ILE massive whether I am sexier in print or in person.

― Nick, Wednesday, 10 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

You don't 'do' online romance because you are not sexy online, surely.

― Tom, Wednesday, 10 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

In print you can hide your MARK OF THE BEAST more easily.

― Sarah, Wednesday, 10 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

No, it's because I am shallow and worry that the other person will be ugly and lack an alibi.

― Nick, Wednesday, 10 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

There's only one reason for that floppy fringe these days, Dweemy.

― Sarah, Wednesday, 10 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

What? Hiding my own face or obscuring others'? Explain.

― Nick, Wednesday, 10 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Ha ha, I only realised that I'd slipped American in there after I'd sent it. Oops. Um, I don't find American accents sexy.

― toraneko, Wednesday, 10 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Bloody hell, nip out to lunch for a bit and it all kicks off in your absence. While I am sure that having an online affair is bucketloads of fun it is infinitely more fun to do it for real. However sexy the other person is (or isn't) when writing.

Nick do you want someone (not me) to start a thread devoted to whether you are sexy or not?

― Emma, Wednesday, 10 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Nick, I'd make another joke about yr evilness but I'm having so much fun reading Dods Parliamentary Companion that I'll leave it to yr sinister and secretive ways to READ MY EARLIER COMMENT.

Lots of Lords are members of clubs. I am not finding it THAT amusing that lots of them belong to "Pratts". No, really! And another popular one is called "Beefsteak".

Cue Lords inna Cartman stylee... BEEFCAKE! BEEFCAKE!

― Sarah, Wednesday, 10 October 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.