Sub-theme Two: Attraction

Physical Attractiveness

Physical attraction was important to some participants but it did not appear to be the most important aspect of the relationship. For some participants (Dean, John, Caroline, Carrie, Joe, Emma and Liam) it was their physical appearance which first attracted

125

them to their partner but as their feelings progressed a stronger emotional bond

developed. Mary valued Gary’s physical appearance but it was not possible to ascertain what initially attracted her to Gary due to her limited verbal skills. Alan appeared to have difficulty stating what he found attractive about his wife. Alan valued her companionship (which is discussed in 5.1.3) but it was unclear from his description if it had to be ‘Ann’ in that role or could it have been any other female. Alan’s love for Ann appeared to be more platonic than that of husband and wife: he was the only participant not to suggest a romantic/sexual element to the relationship. This implied that not all of the participants considered sex a basic ‘physiological need’. It was possible he felt embarrassed discussing this with a female. With prompting, he was able to say he liked Ann as she was always smiling.

Peter, like Alan, was less forthcoming when asked what he found physically attractive about his wife. He thought she looked most beautiful on their wedding day. He said (with prompting) that he was attracted to her body, although this did not seem important.

Peter: I say, she is actually pretty

All of the younger participants, with the exception of Kerry, appeared to value and were more open in discussing what they found physically attractive about their partner. Kerry appeared uninterested in Dean’s physical appearance and stated this played no role in selecting him as a partner. She repeated that there was no physical attribute of Dean’s she valued above others. Dean openly shared that he was sexually attracted to Kerry.

The younger participants have grown up under a different political and social care system to older participants, with minimal or no experience of institutions, a greater involvement in the wider community and, as discussed in Section 2.2, with a more sexualised media/ society. Therefore, it was expected that they would be more open when discussing attraction, although some older participants were enthusiastic about discussing physical attraction. Caroline and John were equally as open about the physical attraction they felt for each other at the start of their relationship. Both found the other person ‘good looking’.

John: Good looking (Caroline)

Caroline: The same really, he looked good looking and everything, so, yeah. His eyes and his smile

126

However, when asked what John found attractive he said ‘tall women’ and Caroline was not tall. The impact of this comment for Caroline was not discussed in the

interview, but it could be possible to infer that this may have impacted on her negatively due to her experiences of rejection from her family (discussed in Chapter 4).

Mary, who was another older participant, was open about her attraction to Gary and favoured some non-traditionally attractive aspects of Gary’s appearance, such as his shortness: perhaps this was due to her short stature. She also found his strength appealing.

Mary: He’s a strong man

Carrie and Joe shared physical attraction and were the only couple to use sexualised language to describe their attraction to each other (despite not engaging in a full sexual relationship).

Joe: Her face and her lips. You looked so hot (to Carrie).

Emma, despite being in a sexual relationship, used less adult language in describing her attraction to Liam. It was his physical appearance that attracted her to him.

Emma: I just liked the look of him. He was cute and sweet and lovely (laughs)

Their relationship was initially based purely on a physical attraction which developed further. In interviews, Liam expressed his mutual physical attraction for Emma.

Liam: Beautiful, actually (points at Emma).

There was some degree of prejudice among participants: outward indicators of

disability were seen as unattractive or described negatively by some participants. This included the use of wheelchairs, breathing equipment or having Down’s Syndrome. This implied that possessing such attributes could be detrimental in attaining ‘love and belonging needs’ as this was considered unattractive in a potential partner. Such attributes may increase feelings of stigma reported by people with learning disabilities which could be detrimental to attaining social status and therefore their ‘self-esteem needs’.

127

Liam: She (an ex-girlfriend) can walk but not well. Too much, dancing for her, too much. She got a breathing mask. Went to her bedroom and she has a breathing mask and I thought ‘no thanks’.

Mary: I don’t like wheelchairs. I am ok, I am.

Considering the abuse, abandonment and rejection participants had experienced (see Chapter 4) having a special person who appreciated their physical appearance could have been reparative to participants. It could have enabled them to achieve the ‘higher psychological needs’ of Maslow’s hierarchy such as ‘love and belonging needs’ and ‘self-esteem needs’ by increasing their confidence and feeling respected and desired by others.

A ‘Nice’ Personality

An appealing personality was a facilitator for relationships. Both Carrie and Joe agreed with this and identified similar aspects that they admired about their partner’s

personality

Joe: She’s a great person in my life, friendly, kind, funny and fun to be with. I love you so much. So happy about the person I am married to, and also, she is my soul mate.

Carrie: I am happy to feel like a girl, I am happy he is a lovely person. And I am always bubbly. He brings it out in me.

Peter’s description of his relationship with his wife suggested a connection that went beyond a mere physical attraction. Peter wore a locket which contained his wife’s photo: his face broke into a smile when showing this to me. Peter’s comments implied that his wife was an important person in his life for whom he cared deeply. Peter was more forthcoming about the aspects of her personality he admired rather than her physical attributes.

Researcher: Peter what do you think life would be like without your wife? Peter: I would actually miss her. I would actually cry……She is actually nice.

It was also important to Mary that Gary was ‘nice’ and this was reinforced by her throughout her statements in the interview. Regardless of age and gender, ‘niceness’ was the most highly valued trait. Both Caroline and John shared this opinion on what is important in a potential partner.

128

John- Nice, kind and gentle (traits valued in a partner).

Caroline- I would want them to be friendly and I would want them to be friendly and things like that if it was possible, so yeah, friendly

Emma compared how Liam had a different personality to her other abusive partners: he was more caring, sensitive and supportive towards her.

Emma: He [Liam] is not the same as the other boyfriends. He is kind and gentle, lovely and caring.

In summary, a partner’s physical attractiveness appeared to be a facilitator in the formation of the relationship as it was what attracted most participants to their partner and this attraction developed into a deeper emotional connection. Despite it being an important factor in the formation of the relationship few participants had a predefined set of physical attributes that they desired in a potential partner and therefore appeared more open to what an ‘attractive partner’ was. Despite this ‘openness’ any outwards sign of disability (such as the use of a wheelchair) could be a potential barrier to the formation of relationships for some. The ‘physical appearance of being a person with a learning disability’ was not discussed by any participant and it was possible to

determine that some participants had a learning disability from their appearance. However, this appeared to have no impact in the development of their relationships or partner choice. Almost all of the participants expressed a desire for a ‘nice’ partner (also encompassing traits such as friendly, kind, gentle), suggesting they wanted to be loved and special to someone. The traits described appeared similar to the secure attachment figure as described in Section 2.3.5. This was unsurprising when

considering the physical, psychological and sexual abuse some of the participants had experienced, making niceness potentially more appealing (as discussed in Chapter 4). Participants were rejecting of partners who possessed traits which were detrimental to their ‘safety and security needs’ such as aggression. All of the participants stated that an appealing personality was more important to them than physical appearance in a relationship and in the selection of a partner.

In document Experience of Partner Selection and Relationships for People with Learning Disabilities (Page 132-136)