faithful, probably doesn’t include those who say, “She/He is nice, but not good looking enough to tempt me.” or otherwise refusing to accept someone because of their various imperfections. To me, that’s basically showing an unwillingness to forgive someone, but it’s even worse as they aren’t requiring any forgiveness for simply not being “sexy” enough (a false contruct of society that we buy into and incorporate into our consciousness).

Ridiculous. You aren’t required to accept someone just because they are willing to marry you. How about if you just don’t love that person? Is that a failure to forgive as well?

I would much rather have someone tell me that they don’t love me (whatever the reason) and send me on my way than try to be with me out of a sense of duty, or because they don’t want to be thought superficial. There are such things as “attraction” and “love.”

You may say someone isn’t sexy or isn’t attractive enough, but what you really mean is that you just don’t love that person. If that’s the case, then you shouldn’t marry them, whatever their other qualities might be.

Just wanted to add my 2-cents in that faithful, probably doesn’t include those who say, “She/He is nice, but not good looking enough to tempt me.” or otherwise refusing to accept someone because of their various imperfections. To me, that’s basically showing an unwillingness to forgive someone, but it’s even worse as they aren’t requiring any forgiveness for simply not being “sexy” enough (a false contruct of society that we buy into and incorporate into our consciousness).

Of course, in any case, I am perfectly ok with eternal progression through the kingdoms so even those LDS who have convinced themselves they have no opportunity to marry for superficial reasons would still be able to work past that, but it wouldn’t be easy, and because the possibility exists doesn’t mean it would happen as often as we suppose (or maybe it does). I’m just saying, it’s not like the lights just turn on beyond the veil and we become a changed person with a full understanding. We still have to earn that line upon line.

Of course, everything I said could and probably would equally apply to a married couple — we have so many hang-ups and issues that disqualify us from being fully considered “faithful” that we’ll have to progress and work beyond those as well. But whatever light and knowledge and faith we gain in this life, so much the better then.

What, a woman can’t be single by choice?

http://www.ldschurchnews.com/articles/60749/Elder-Richard-G-Scott-The-eternal-blessings-of-marriage.html

I rather like the old-fashioned social structure. I used to think it was only fair for the girl to work as hard at “pursuing” the guy as he did at pursuing her, but after seeing the lack of energy in most guys around my age, I’ve changed my mind.

I think the current problem is that guys DON’T chase enough, and expect the women to flock to their doorsteps. And, sadly, we do.

If I ever marry again, it will be because the guy is man enough to take more initiative than simply expressing interest.

As for the question in the OP, I think that (like with women) it will depend on why they didn’t have an opportunity.

I’m not sure if you’re joking or not. If you’re not, what exactly does it take to get a man? What is due diligence?

I’m sure there’s lots of women who want to know.

So now that women aren’t a man’s property, to be bought and sold and “kept”, can we dispense with the idea that proper women don’t pursue (I hate that term) men?

finding a mate, a good match that is, takes time. I’ll never understand why people are in such a hurry to pair up for life.

If you do not do what is necessary to get a man (within reason and the boundaries of the Church), and deal with that in a realistic way, can you really say you have done your due diligence?