This is a criteria I've more commonly encountered with women, but quite a few men insist they also share the same desires, so I will be addressing this question to any gender that matches my query.

I've seen quite a lot of women, and some men, who seem to find certain attributes in a person attractive, or the lack thereof unattractive, which to them can make or break a relationship potential. To me, many of those things seem to be absolutely irrelevant, inconsequential and devoid of any logic, and I am perpetually baffled by them. I do not see how they affect an interaction with someone ( When you're not forcing it in your mind to pretend it affects anything ) or what kind of realistic benefit does it have. I will now list some of those "collateral" traits whose impact on a relationship I fail to realize:

  • Ambition - This is a pretty major one, for women particularly. And apparently a matter of life and death when it comes to someone's prospective appeal based on how ambitious they are. And we aren't even talking about careers ( Note that ambition and wealth are two different things, you can be a banker who grudgingly does his boring job or a trustfund babby with zero ambition and be more than capable of sustaining yourself, or you can be a super ambitious artist and broke as fuck, for as long as possible. What we are discussing here is the trait of ambition. ), but rather about some sort of personality aspect deemed attractive that can manifest in a variety of ways. Which I really don't get. Let's say my girlfriend is the world champion in synchronized swimming. That's great for her, very impressive, and I'll support her in competitions and such. However does it make an ounce of difference in my calculation on how attractive she is or whether or not to date her? No, because beyond the occasional times, it won't matter to how we interact with each other on a daily basis. I couldn't give less of a fuck if she's the ultra ambitious world champion or if she gave up on swimming the first time she tried. If anything ambition is more like to get in the way of things or reduce our available time. But either way it's completely irrelevant to me how many gold medals she has. Yet for some reason I see people, again, mostly women, who are soaking wet over how ambitious someone is and if he's the lead singer or how passionate he is about surfing or if he's at the top of his class and so on. Now, If you yourself are an ambitious swimmer, or actor, or math prodigy, and that's why you're looking for someone like that, then it makes sense and falls under the compatible interests category.. However if you don't have much of a connection to someone's ambition, and you just think ambition is attractive in general ( "Wowww look how ambitious he/she is woww so hot, I want him/her as my partner" ) then I consider it irrational and impractical.

  • Talent - This follows the same principle as ambition. Unless you share that person's talent, which would then make your lifestyle more compatible, why would you demand that your partner be talented about something? Let's say my girlfriend can make amazing creations in Origami and sculpting. I myself am not really drawn to it. How does it help me that she's Oh such a talented person?? Again, it would be nice to watch and I could praise her, but that will be like 1% of our interactions. It's not something that would make her more or less attractive as a partner. If she stopped doing it nothing would change.

  • Social status - I'm dating you, not your friends. I will be spending 95% of my time talking and co-existing with you, not your friends. Why should I care if someone is popular or a loner? The excuses I've been hearing are nothing but stereotypes about what those things mean about someone and stupid predictions of how someone is "Likely to behave or function" based on those factors. Most of which are bullshit. Plenty of people from every social status are in similar relationships. Besides, if you think their personality won't work out for you, why not check it yourself instead of relying on their social status? At any rate, social status is not relevant to anything except being a faulty indicator for preconceptions.

  • Fashion - Once more, something women seem to care more about ( Unless we're counting men paying attention to the absence of clothing in a given outfit ), but I couldn't really care less about what anyone is wearing. Whether your stripes integrate well with the color or your bag matches your blouse is something I'll need to be paid in order to notice. It's fucking fabric. ( Or leather, etc.. ). It comes off. It can be changed any time. A complete non-issue when selecting a partner.

  • Body language - Flap your hands for all the good it will do. As long as it doesn't impede the conversation it is not important to me. Nervous body language, smooth body language, why bother looking? I either look someone straight in the eyes or stare somewhere else.

To contrast, here are some things which I believe to be rational and practical elements:

  • Physical appearance - You have to look and touch each other as a primary relationship component, so it has a direct effect on a relationship.

  • Compatible worldview, interests, and hobbies - Verbal communication will make up the bulk percentage of a relationship, so sitting around in awkward silence or informing your partner how much you dislike their interests or worldview is technically implausible.

  • Loyalty - No-brainer. A relationship is meant to hold.

  • Honesty, empathy, kindness - Your partner should be someone you are relaxed and happy to be around and fulfill your emotional needs. This is something which is ever present and necessary.

As you can see there are things which makes sense because they are vital to functionality, and others which seem to serve very little purpose but people still value them even more than anything else.