Researchers asked young women (ages 15 to 29) to choose potential dates from a series of photographs and descriptions, while the women’s mothers (ages 37 to 61) were asked to select possible boyfriends for their daughters using the same information. Results showed that a man’s looks influenced both groups of women more strongly than his personality profile. This held true even if a man’s profile was filled with highly desirable personal qualities, such as being respectful, honest and trustworthy.
Both daughters and mothers rated the attractive and moderately attractive men as more desirable dating partners than unattractive men, said the findings, published online in March in the journal Evolutionary Psychological Science.
The study suggests that women value physical attractiveness in a potential mate far more than they say they do, said study author Madeleine Fugère, a professor of social psychology at Eastern Connecticut State University in Willimantic.
Try looksmaxxing for yourself instead of for foids, pick up a manual hobby like carpentry or scale modelling to keep your hands occupied, hit the books to increase your knowledge while killing time, and eventually rope at around 30 once you run out of copes just like I'm gonna do.
"This is not true of men, she said. Men are more consciously aware — or more willing to admit — that good looks in a woman are more important to them than personality, Fugère said. Men’s emphasis on looks in a mate choice may have a biological basis, because men may associate a woman’s physical attractiveness with her fertility"
Did you even read the full article before posting this nonsense or?
"This is not true of men, she said. Men are more consciously aware — or more willing to admit — that good looks in a woman are more important to them than personality, Fugère said. Men’s emphasis on looks in a mate choice may have a biological basis, because men may associate a woman’s physical attractiveness with her fertility"
Did you even read the full article before posting this nonsense or?
Yes, because most of us here aren't pieces of shit. However, turn that question around - would an ugly woman ever consider talking to subhumans such as us to find out whether we have nice personalities?
Because I can assure you, they wouldn't. Else 80% of the folks here wouldn't be here.
Someone who thinks of himself as worthless shit the entire day probably doesn't come around that great.
Who wants to deal with a crybaby, all day?
Before you reply with the usual "I don't act like that when approaching women."
You either hide it bad or come around as artificial because you're trying to hide what you truly are, a loser who doesn't want to put the effort into improving himself but still wants to get all the benefits of doing so.
Maybe try improving yourself instead of being a whiny cunt for once.
People here will never get that you gotta bring something into the relationship too.
They all just demand shit but when you ask them "Well what do you offer?" all you get is "I am ugly and they are all bitches, now go date me you fucking chad-loving cunt!".
"In addition, the findings demonstrated that "a moderate level of attractiveness is a necessity to young women and to their moms, and they are not willing to give that up in favor of personality," Fugère said." Holy hell.
Most of you wont talk to ugly, fat/obese or a combo of all, women. If you did you wouldnt be incel. Espcially when they are in their 30s-40s. They will fuck anything. Even if you are a two with the right game and confidence they will give it up.
I think alot of you dont wanna admit you are just like the women you complain about
Most of you wont talk to ugly, fat/obese or a combo of all, women. If you did you wouldnt be incel.
Why the fuck do you dumb normal fags keep saying this? Do you think ugly girls have no standards? They usually are the most pretension ones, in fact all the girls that bullied me in highschool were fat and ugly.
"This is not true of men, she said. Men are more consciously aware — or more willing to admit — that good looks in a woman are more important to them than personality, Fugère said. Men’s emphasis on looks in a mate choice may have a biological basis, because men may associate a woman’s physical attractiveness with her fertility"
I was just about to post that, because you're so right. They just nit-pick the things that relate to them but leave out whatever else that doesn't benefit their argument.
Cool you found one study that barely corroborates your retarded view on life. Now go find any of the hundreds of studies and surveys on women saying the number 1 thing they like in a guy in confidence and that actually looks ranks somewhere around the middle of the list. Incels lack basic common sense it seems.
Cool so you got proven wrong and moved the goal post without even linking any evidence to prove me wrong.
Are you normies actually this dense? This study proved that what women say and what they do are completely different. Anyone can say anything you fucking moron, it doesn't make it true.
He wants to be right soooo badly. He wants the reason that his SO picked him was because of something he did, not something he was born with that's out of his control.
Anyone can say anything you fucking moron, it doesn't make it true.
Then why the fuck are you sucking the nuts off this "study" if what they say isn't necessarily true then you thick fuck? Its only true when it corroborates your stupid theory right? This one study is correct but the HUNDREDS of studies and surveys of people saying the exact opposite is lies right? WRONG.
You're arguing for the wrong team; this post is a 'black pill' meant for people from places like Incel Tears etc to read and somehow 'get it'. Incels already understand evolutionary biology; that's why this place exists and that's why it's so over.
Why are Normies so dense? Why can't they see LITERAL evidence proving that looks are a prerequisite for females. Once you get in the door, then "personality matters".
Ok I've discussed this study already so I'll just copy and paste my complaints with this study:
ok ive read the study you linked and i have a few problems with it
Firstly the study is just about how much women think looks mean to them and not about how looks matter more to women than men. Actually men aren't tested i this study at all and are only really mentioned in the last paragraph.
This study just says women say looks aren't very important to them and then tries an experiment to prove them wrong however i find their methodology to be very poor.
Firstly they have a very small sample size, only 141 people, which is not enough data to extrapolate to infer the habits of a large population but if their results were promising it would be interesting. However they tested this by giving the women pictures of 3 men, 2 of which are said to be attractive and the other not so much. Then they give all 3 men POSITIVE personality traits and ask the women to choose. Although they say the personality traits are said to be considered 'highly desirable', 'desirable' and 'moderately desirable' this is a very subjective description as all three traits can be seen as positive depending on your values. Also the personality traits are not comparable (one set including honestly and the other intelligence both of which are equally valued)
In conclusion this study needs to revise its methodology, perhaps giving the attractive men more negative traits and the unattractive men positive traits to correctly test their hypothesis. The way the study is right now it is basically asking the women to compare three guys, all with good personalities, and choose the best one. Clearly they would choose the better looking individuals.
I sure it varies depending on the individual and their culture, I'm not sure of any wide spread studies that contain the data necessary to make any general conclusions on the matter, if you know of any I would be happy to read them.
But they are women that all they care about is looks but they are women who care about personality more, same for men.
But hey i'm not the kind of person to make grand assumptions out of little to no data
Haha thats not what I said.
Basically this study is giving people free range to choose any partner just based on two factors, looks and the three personality traits (real relationships are FAR more complicated than this), so ignoring other factors like mutual interest or compatibility with another individual and due to the poor separation between the personalities given in the study the experiment as shown just comes down to looks
Im sure any person, male or female, when given the option between 3 pictures and are told to choose a partner most people will choose the more attractive individual
I was not finding fault with you. What you said is correct. But these things doesn't translate well to real life well where looks Trumps everything most of the time.
McGinty helped ABCNEWS put together an experiment to test just how willing women are to date shorter men. We brought together several short men and asked them to stand next to taller men. We invited groups of women to look at the men and choose a date.
To see if the women would go for short guys who were successful, ABCNEWS' Lynn Sherr created extraordinary résumés for the shorter men. She told the women that the shorter men included a doctor, a best-selling author, a champion skier, a venture capitalist who'd made millions by the age of 25.
Nothing worked. The women always chose the tall men. Sherr asked whether there'd be anything she could say that would make the shortest of the men, who was 5 feet, irresistible. One of the women replied, "Maybe the only thing you could say is that the other four are murderers." Another backed her up, saying that had the taller men had a criminal record she might have been swayed to choose a shorter man. Another said she'd have considered the shorter men, if the taller men had been described as "child molesters."
Not even a criminal record would be enough for then to choose the short guy, it was just a virtue signal. Jeremy Meeks criminal record does nothing to hinder his access to pussay
Yet another study to add to the quickly filling filing cabinet. Lets be completely honest though, normies are going to find some way to invalidate this. "Uh...Uh...em...Eastern Connecticut State isn't a well known school, get a study from Harvard!"
The problem is, women lie and deflect when asked about it.
OK... so what if women aren't as up front about it as men. That's a cultural expectation, which is no one person's fault. Men and women are expected to behave differently. Women are supposed to be "gold hearted" and so they act like it, even if it's not entirely true. This is actually a result of patriarchy. Women are supposed to be the good natured ones, the loving ones, etc.
But that doesn't mean that looks matter MORE to women than men. I've seen no evidence of that scientifically or even anecdotally in my life, among the people I know and see IRL.
The only evidence I ever see here are cherry-picked examples from pictures people saw on the internet of, like, disabled girls with normal looking boyfriends. This is someone "evidence."
you said that women are suppose to be good natured. No. That’s just how society chooses to portray.
Yes, that is my point. This is a social expectation. Not something that is inherent in women. It is a social role that they are expected to play, just as men are expected to portray other social roles, like being tough and independent, etc.
It is social roles that dictate how men and women are supposed to date or find mates as well. It is a social convention that men are supposed to "make the first move" and be more aggressive and women are supposed to "fend them off." These are cultural practices, and there may be some innate grounding in our biology, but it's hard to prove this claim, especially about things like social conventions, as we know social patterns do change and are changing.
Now the term patriarchy, like it or not, has come to describe a particular set of social patterns, in which men take on the role of power. This has been the norm in human society for as long as history has been written. It didn't just stop one day in 1977 or whatever as many MRAs like to believe. It maybe slowly changing, but social patterns change very slowly. They are "reified."
Incels, from what I can tell, are totally biological determinists. To an extreme degree. But this biological determinism is not grounded in empirical science, but rather ideology. It serves to support political beliefs about gender and power, and also grounded in a peculiar psychology of victimhood (mimicking in fact the rhetoric of victimhood from minority groups).
I am continually amazed at the beliefs I see espoused in here. I feel like I'm watching the crisis of masculinity unfold before my very eyes.
So, tell me, is there any scientific evidence that shows that looks are more important for women than men?
You can be intellectually dishonest and pretend like female biological imperative didn’t push that to get with attractive men FIRST but, that’s just you coping.
Even if these social structures are totally biologically determined, and even if your perception of them is correct, which it isn't, it's never just one "sex" that does it "first." That's impossible to determine, a chicken and egg question. It's dialectic, if anything.
because incels seem to want to pretend that this is true only of women and not of men. It's true of everyone.
No no, that is not the point. You are right, it applies to everyone. Both men and women care about looks. The difference is, society already acknowledges it is true of men. Men are stereotyped as shallow, crude, and obsessed with sex/physical attraction. But women are seen as the opposite - they are portrayed as mature and virtuous and caring about personality and character more than appearance. That is why it is worth showing that women are just like men.
I don't disagree. It's a stereotype that doesn't reflect reality. Women do care about looks. (And I'm not sure if too many people actually believe women do not care about looks at all).
But on this sub, the view commonly expressed isn't that both men and women care about looks, but that women care about looks much more than men. In fact, because of "hypergamy" women basically ONLY care about looks.
But on this sub, the view commonly expressed isn't that both men and women care about looks, but that women care about looks much more than men.
I don't think that is the consensus or majority view, from what I have observed (I have been lurking on this sub for a while). There are some people who say that, but I have also seen incels agree that men care about looks as much as women do. (The topic just doesn't come up that often because they rarely discuss male attraction.)
Anyway, regardless of what they say about men, or whether they exaggerate how much women care about looks to excessive degrees, I still believe it is important to dispel the notion that women care much less about looks than men, because it is tied to gender stereotypes that are disrupting modern gender dynamics and have negative effects for both men and women.
ok, so, for incels, because of hypergamy women only care about looks or money or status, but not other aspects like personality. Is this statement now true?
women underestimate the importance of attractiveness. that doesn't surprise me, for reasons i've already said. it also doesn't prove that women care about looks more than men do. men may have even stricter thresholds than women. Men also have different thresholds for women they'd like to sleep with versus women they'd consider as a potential lifelong mate.
In any case, none of this makes women the monsters that they're portrayed on this sub as. Nor does it show that women's thresholds are particularly high.
Men actually have looser standards than women do simply because, they do not have the luxury to be picky like women (the gatekeepers to sex) can be. Men will take whatever they can get most of the time.
I don’t think any of these guys really think of women as monsters. I never have. Especially not since learning about female nature and how women select mates. It’s just nature.
Doesn't explain why the number of women who "just can't get laid" is much lower than that of men in their situation.
This could be because by and large women and men have somewhat different sexual desires and needs. Men are more interested in casual sex than women are, and thus will complain about it more.
Men are more interested in casual sex than women are, and thus will complain about it more.
I only have the data for dating sites, but women (as a group) actually get casual more easily than men. A few men have sex really often and the rest with very low frequency, while there is little difference between groups of women.
One dude has sex with three women, the other two guys don't have sex. Simple.
well they might get it more easier if they want it, but that doesn't mean that as large a percent of women are seeking it as men.
but let's say that they are. let's say that all women are interested in casual sex, and the top 1/4 of all men, the most attractive, are able to sleep with enough women to satisfy all of them. Wouldn't you do the same if you were a woman?
Let's say that the top 1/4 of all women were as interested in casual sex as men, then they might, one imagines, want to not just sleep with the top quarter of men, but of all men, just like men do, to increase their chances.
If you were being bombarded by women sending you nudes, wouldn't you only pick the hottest ones to actually sleep with?
Why does that word come out every time someone has a different opinion?
you're upset that women aren't grateful that they can more easily have casual sex?
If men could have unattached sex with a top 20% woman every once in a while, they'd be so satisfied. Specially the guys in this sub. Most women really don't appreciate that part.
It annoys me that quite a few women will
1- not be happy about a youth of unattached sex with a few attractive men
2- and still claim they "deserve" a man later on in life
No one deserves anything just because they want it. The guys here don't deserve to get laid just because they want to very bad. And women who don't secure a single guy in their youth don't deserve one when they get older.
ok but you do know that this stereotype that incels have, of ALL women having a buffet of causal sex with hot men in their 20s, only to complain that there are no good men in their 30s to settle down is likely only true in a handful of cases. The idea that all women are like this only exists in the aggrieved imaginations of incels. This is a classic example of taking one example an universalizing it, assuming it is true in all or most cases when in fact it's a minority or one small trend, like Regan's 'welfare queen.'
Look at this statistic:
Once we hit adulthood, most people are having some kind of sex. For 20 to 24-year-olds, the number not having sex is just 16 percent of women and 18 percent of men.
So yes it's true that more men are not having sex overall than women, but the difference is just 2%. If the incel world view actually represented reality, you would expect that gap to be much much higher.
Here's some more interesting stats. The vast majority of those between the ages of 25 and 44 have had one sexual partner in the last year, and men have a much greater rate of this than women
Multiple opposite-sex partners (and no same-sex partners): 14 percent of men, 6 percent of women
If the incel world view were true, wouldn't women's number of partners be much higher on average than the men's? Assuming that a majority of women are hooking up a lot, and only a small minority of men are doing all the hooking up? also look at this
The median number of opposite-sex [lifetime] partners under 44 is 3.4 for women, and 6.4 for men.
So, yes, it's generally true that men have more partners than women, and perhaps this is skewed by all these chads, but if a majority of women are getting all this chad dick, how do they only have a paltry 3.4 partners in their lifetime?
So basically, there's some truth to the trend that incel's describe, which is why you can find anecdotal evidence of it, but it's not representative of the population at large.
The reason I don't trust those numbers is because the female participants always claim less sexual experience and fewer sexual partners and the male participants do the contrary.
Take this as an indicator. For every 4 women without children there are 5 men without children. "That's impossible", you might say. Simple: one guy has children with two women, another guy has none. Hence the
The same principle applies to sex life: the number of sexless men has always been higher that that of women, and the difference is much bigger than those polls make one think.
NOTE: the reason I used number of children as an example is because that's something you can't lie about: you either have children or not. Sexual encounters, however, can be made up or denied: a man can triple his numbers and a woman can divide hers by three and we would not have any evidence to know they're lying.
these guys are retarded, lol. this is literally what goes through my head whenever i meet a girl. if she passes the physical attraction test, then i'm willing to consider her. if i can't find her attractive, i simply will not be able to be with her.
Lol u idiots should get in a "handsome" costume and then try to get girls with your fucked up personalities.
Maybe then you'll have personal experience knowing that you were right all along, or you are wrong and the most common definition of "incel" on Urban dictionary is correct.
Lol.. see my first comment.. dress up handsome. Get that full make up and costume. Y'all can gofundyourselves with the pool of resources all 38 of you have. I'm sure you can make a decent one for of your fearless leaders to don.
Then when he gets laid because he's so hawt you can oust him for being a faker. Or whatever your term is.
Lol or
He doesn't get laid be cause he's got personality issues.
. Being physically attracted to someone is very important, no one is saying it isn't. They're just saying that having a shitty toxic personality is making your prospects much worse. Like a 1 guy with the nicest personality isn't going to get a 10 woman just like a 1 woman who is nice isn't going to get a 10 guy, it's just not how it works. Physical attractiveness is extremely important in a relationship
You can be intellectually dishonest and pretend like female biological imperative didn’t push that to get with attractive men FIRST but, that’s just you coping.
157 comments
1 boredyeah 2018-03-22
...yeah...we know. Blackpill assumed knowledge 101
1 Madeon929 2018-03-22
This is for incel tears.
1 boredyeah 2018-03-22
Oh ok looks like you got the wrong sub then maybe tbh
1 Madeon929 2018-03-22
Nope... they lurk here....👀
1 boredyeah 2018-03-22
Good luck getting it screenshotted now thst youve asked for it jfl
1 Madeon929 2018-03-22
👀
1 anincelforlifelol 2018-03-22
Waiting for the normies and CuckTears. Come on females...what about pErSoNaLiTy?
1 Yewker 2018-03-22
this is common knowledge
1 CamoWoobie3 2018-03-22
You must be brain dead.
1 boredyeah 2018-03-22
im one step ahead of you buddy boyo and you dont even know it
1 onestepcloser2daedge 2018-03-22
link to article?
1 Madeon929 2018-03-22
Shit... I would need to find it
1 onestepcloser2daedge 2018-03-22
found it https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/mens-looks-matter-more-than-women-admit-study-shows_us_58ecf563e4b0ca64d91978be
1 Madeon929 2018-03-22
Nice
1 geneticwaste43 2018-03-22
In before sample size excuses
1 DrFeel_MD_PHD_NOGF 2018-03-22
It turns out that behind every half-retarded normie there's a PhD-level statistician
1 onestepcloser2daedge 2018-03-22
It's over
1 Madeon929 2018-03-22
Of course it’s over.
I tried to tell you lads
1 The_Real_Cannaman 2018-03-22
So what now? How to cope to the end of the life? I dont want to rope tbh
1 AutismoCircus 2018-03-22
There are other things beside women to turn your attention to.
1 CursedCel 2018-03-22
Try looksmaxxing for yourself instead of for foids, pick up a manual hobby like carpentry or scale modelling to keep your hands occupied, hit the books to increase your knowledge while killing time, and eventually rope at around 30 once you run out of copes just like I'm gonna do.
1 Madeon929 2018-03-22
Lol! True!
30 sounds perfect
1 chadbhava 2018-03-22
Lol
1 Claymore-2000 2018-03-22
NORMIES ARE NO WHERE TO BE FOUND
1 Madeon929 2018-03-22
Of course not
1 OldDryCum 2018-03-22
"This is not true of men, she said. Men are more consciously aware — or more willing to admit — that good looks in a woman are more important to them than personality, Fugère said. Men’s emphasis on looks in a mate choice may have a biological basis, because men may associate a woman’s physical attractiveness with her fertility"
Did you even read the full article before posting this nonsense or?
1 OldDryCum 2018-03-22
"This is not true of men, she said. Men are more consciously aware — or more willing to admit — that good looks in a woman are more important to them than personality, Fugère said. Men’s emphasis on looks in a mate choice may have a biological basis, because men may associate a woman’s physical attractiveness with her fertility"
Did you even read the full article before posting this nonsense or?
1 NerdWerl 2018-03-22
They're just gonna "cherry picking" or "conformation bias"
1 Sniveling_Cur 2018-03-22
I'm just waiting for "To be fair..." which is normtalk for "To cope..."
1 toastyroastie123 2018-03-22
Just geneticmax bro
1 The_Real_Cannaman 2018-03-22
I yearn 4 the ultimate guide
1 Khungghar 2018-03-22
Of course normies are nowhere to be seen. They hate us subhumans.
1 bdoderdb 2018-03-22
Would you even talk to an ugly woman to find out whether she has a nice personality?
1 CursedCel 2018-03-22
Yes, because most of us here aren't pieces of shit. However, turn that question around - would an ugly woman ever consider talking to subhumans such as us to find out whether we have nice personalities?
Because I can assure you, they wouldn't. Else 80% of the folks here wouldn't be here.
1 bdoderdb 2018-03-22
Well, maybe your personality isn´t as nice as you think it is.
1 sharkb8master 2018-03-22
Well, I'm sure you, a random person on the internet, would definitely know.
1 wx_wxt 2018-03-22
Someone who thinks of himself as worthless shit the entire day probably doesn't come around that great. Who wants to deal with a crybaby, all day?
Before you reply with the usual "I don't act like that when approaching women."
You either hide it bad or come around as artificial because you're trying to hide what you truly are, a loser who doesn't want to put the effort into improving himself but still wants to get all the benefits of doing so.
Maybe try improving yourself instead of being a whiny cunt for once.
People here will never get that you gotta bring something into the relationship too. They all just demand shit but when you ask them "Well what do you offer?" all you get is "I am ugly and they are all bitches, now go date me you fucking chad-loving cunt!".
1 sharkb8master 2018-03-22
Lot of assumptions you make there, so i'm not even gonna bother to make a decent reply since you didn't either.
1 wx_wxt 2018-03-22
You mean like assuming that every women is materialistic and a "chad-dick sucking cunt"? :D
keep making yourself victims over and over again.
1 sharkb8master 2018-03-22
I never said that.
1 destiny-draw 2018-03-22
Their comment is like a winning sheet of normie bingo.
1 sharkb8master 2018-03-22
Didn't even fully read that shit.
1 destiny-draw 2018-03-22
Good save yourself the headache.
1 bdoderdb 2018-03-22
Well, I´m sure I, a random person on the internet, have a pretty good idea.
1 sharkb8master 2018-03-22
I'm sure you don't.
1 bdoderdb 2018-03-22
I´m sure I do.
1 Yewker 2018-03-22
You aren't a piece of shit for wanting to be attracted to a partner. It's not charity.
1 Madeon929 2018-03-22
My looks match? She wants Chad as well.
1 bcat124 2018-03-22
"In addition, the findings demonstrated that "a moderate level of attractiveness is a necessity to young women and to their moms, and they are not willing to give that up in favor of personality," Fugère said." Holy hell.
1 IlliterateAndProud 2018-03-22
The blackpill is that this 'moderate level of attractiveness' is better-looking than average.
1 Supreme_Salt_Lord 2018-03-22
Most of you wont talk to ugly, fat/obese or a combo of all, women. If you did you wouldnt be incel. Espcially when they are in their 30s-40s. They will fuck anything. Even if you are a two with the right game and confidence they will give it up.
I think alot of you dont wanna admit you are just like the women you complain about
1 sharkb8master 2018-03-22
I literally got rejected by a combo of that, shut the hell up. Do you really think we reject hordes of ugly and fat females? jfl
1 throwaway192200 2018-03-22
Why the fuck do you dumb normal fags keep saying this? Do you think ugly girls have no standards? They usually are the most pretension ones, in fact all the girls that bullied me in highschool were fat and ugly.
1 Supreme_Salt_Lord 2018-03-22
She wont reject u anymore soon enough. Trying in college without any social skills is a bad choice. To many options available.
1 Madeon929 2018-03-22
Lies. If most of us are ugly so, is our looksmatch.
Problem is 80/20.
Cope.
1 OldDryCum 2018-03-22
"This is not true of men, she said. Men are more consciously aware — or more willing to admit — that good looks in a woman are more important to them than personality, Fugère said. Men’s emphasis on looks in a mate choice may have a biological basis, because men may associate a woman’s physical attractiveness with her fertility"
I was just about to post that, because you're so right. They just nit-pick the things that relate to them but leave out whatever else that doesn't benefit their argument.
1 Treesarescary 2018-03-22
Mate, it’s reached the point of desperation where i will literally fuck anyone
1 Madeon929 2018-03-22
I know.... I know...
1 Supreme_Salt_Lord 2018-03-22
You will get ur chance. Thats why i be tryna tell you guys to get some game and personal improvement. You can get a 2 i know it.
1 kysacademy 2018-03-22
Can u link the article?
1 Madeon929 2018-03-22
Someone already did in the comments section
1 Madeon929 2018-03-22
https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_58ecf563e4b0ca64d91978be
1 Incel_Executioner 2018-03-22
It's over, man.
1 TacticalNannerz 2018-03-22
orginal link pls
1 Madeon929 2018-03-22
It’s linked in the comments section
1 Madeon929 2018-03-22
https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_58ecf563e4b0ca64d91978be
1 iketoure 2018-03-22
They brigade about 75% of posts but now they're nowhere to be seen 🤔
1 IlliterateAndProud 2018-03-22
Typically posts like this they just downvote without commenting.
1 Madeon929 2018-03-22
Too much truth
1 throwaway192200 2018-03-22
Normies are suspiciously absent again in a thread that drops scientific black pill bombs lmao.
1 KingoftheCastle94 2018-03-22
Because this is only one woman's perspective you dumb fuck
1 throwaway192200 2018-03-22
Just "one" perspective huh?
Brain dead Normans don't even have enough reading comprehension to analyse simple articles lmfao.
1 KingoftheCastle94 2018-03-22
Cool you found one study that barely corroborates your retarded view on life. Now go find any of the hundreds of studies and surveys on women saying the number 1 thing they like in a guy in confidence and that actually looks ranks somewhere around the middle of the list. Incels lack basic common sense it seems.
1 throwaway192200 2018-03-22
Cool so you got proven wrong and moved the goal post without even linking any evidence to prove me wrong.
Are you normies actually this dense? This study proved that what women say and what they do are completely different. Anyone can say anything you fucking moron, it doesn't make it true.
1 r4risbullshit 2018-03-22
Yeah dude. They move the goalpost instead of providing back proof and then give us flack for not having enough proof.
1 BF8211 2018-03-22
He wants to be right soooo badly. He wants the reason that his SO picked him was because of something he did, not something he was born with that's out of his control.
1 KingoftheCastle94 2018-03-22
Then why the fuck are you sucking the nuts off this "study" if what they say isn't necessarily true then you thick fuck? Its only true when it corroborates your stupid theory right? This one study is correct but the HUNDREDS of studies and surveys of people saying the exact opposite is lies right? WRONG.
1 KingoftheCastle94 2018-03-22
ScIenTifIC BLaCk PilL bOmBs
1 SaltzPyre1 2018-03-22
B T F O
1 jdc5294 2018-03-22
Did you read the next sentence?
1 xenodit 2018-03-22
the blackpill confirmed true?no shit
1 sciew 2018-03-22
No fucking shit dumbasses. Do incels not understand evolutionary biology?
1 deathnik_ethnic 2018-03-22
reee reee reee
1 terminaltevarin 2018-03-22
You're arguing for the wrong team; this post is a 'black pill' meant for people from places like Incel Tears etc to read and somehow 'get it'. Incels already understand evolutionary biology; that's why this place exists and that's why it's so over.
1 IncelSlayerZero 2018-03-22
I've been saying this for months now.
1 GotTigerBloodWinning 2018-03-22
Chad looks + tall height + good personality = sex with as many women as you please.
Average looks/ugly + personality = friend zone/non sexual entity (seen as like a brother... or a lamp).
1 IncelSlayerZero 2018-03-22
Why do I constantly keep exposing myself to these suicide inducing inconvenient truths!?
1 GotTigerBloodWinning 2018-03-22
Better to slap you with the truth brudda, rather than to kiss you with a lie.
1 RIPMYPOOPCHUTE 2018-03-22
That sounds like too much effort.
1 AntiAbleism 2018-03-22
The blackpill is undefeated.
1 kysacademy 2018-03-22
Why are Normies so dense? Why can't they see LITERAL evidence proving that looks are a prerequisite for females. Once you get in the door, then "personality matters".
1 trevmon 2018-03-22
women tend to hamster away reality
1 TacticalNannerz 2018-03-22
Ok I've discussed this study already so I'll just copy and paste my complaints with this study:
ok ive read the study you linked and i have a few problems with it
Firstly the study is just about how much women think looks mean to them and not about how looks matter more to women than men. Actually men aren't tested i this study at all and are only really mentioned in the last paragraph.
This study just says women say looks aren't very important to them and then tries an experiment to prove them wrong however i find their methodology to be very poor.
Firstly they have a very small sample size, only 141 people, which is not enough data to extrapolate to infer the habits of a large population but if their results were promising it would be interesting. However they tested this by giving the women pictures of 3 men, 2 of which are said to be attractive and the other not so much. Then they give all 3 men POSITIVE personality traits and ask the women to choose. Although they say the personality traits are said to be considered 'highly desirable', 'desirable' and 'moderately desirable' this is a very subjective description as all three traits can be seen as positive depending on your values. Also the personality traits are not comparable (one set including honestly and the other intelligence both of which are equally valued)
In conclusion this study needs to revise its methodology, perhaps giving the attractive men more negative traits and the unattractive men positive traits to correctly test their hypothesis. The way the study is right now it is basically asking the women to compare three guys, all with good personalities, and choose the best one. Clearly they would choose the better looking individuals.
1 Madeon929 2018-03-22
Are you a fan of mine?😁
1 TacticalNannerz 2018-03-22
haha nah I just don't like pseudoscience or bad studies.
1 Madeon929 2018-03-22
Lol. How much do you think looks matter to a woman?
1 TacticalNannerz 2018-03-22
I sure it varies depending on the individual and their culture, I'm not sure of any wide spread studies that contain the data necessary to make any general conclusions on the matter, if you know of any I would be happy to read them. But they are women that all they care about is looks but they are women who care about personality more, same for men. But hey i'm not the kind of person to make grand assumptions out of little to no data
1 Madeon929 2018-03-22
Interesting.
1 regular_failure 2018-03-22
So you are basically saying that our chance of getting a partner depends on others being bad. How more cruel life can be to incels.
1 TacticalNannerz 2018-03-22
Haha thats not what I said. Basically this study is giving people free range to choose any partner just based on two factors, looks and the three personality traits (real relationships are FAR more complicated than this), so ignoring other factors like mutual interest or compatibility with another individual and due to the poor separation between the personalities given in the study the experiment as shown just comes down to looks
Im sure any person, male or female, when given the option between 3 pictures and are told to choose a partner most people will choose the more attractive individual
1 regular_failure 2018-03-22
I was not finding fault with you. What you said is correct. But these things doesn't translate well to real life well where looks Trumps everything most of the time.
1 kta2 2018-03-22
http://abcnews.go.com/2020/story?id=123853&page=1
1 GeneticCleansing 2018-03-22
And normans want us to respect femoids
femoids literally have no sense of morality. They think that being 5 feet tall is worse than being a murderer.
1 Madeon929 2018-03-22
God damn!!! Damning evidence.
1 StupidassMotherfoker 2018-03-22
Not even a criminal record would be enough for then to choose the short guy, it was just a virtue signal. Jeremy Meeks criminal record does nothing to hinder his access to pussay
1 comeondantheman 2018-03-22
Lmao
1 BF8211 2018-03-22
Yet another study to add to the quickly filling filing cabinet. Lets be completely honest though, normies are going to find some way to invalidate this. "Uh...Uh...em...Eastern Connecticut State isn't a well known school, get a study from Harvard!"
1 Madeon929 2018-03-22
Salute
1 Npeesee 2018-03-22
SHUT IT DOWN DELETE THIS
1 Madeon929 2018-03-22
Delete Delete Delete
1 Im_So_Hard_Right_Now 2018-03-22
Do you really think this is also not true for men?
1 Madeon929 2018-03-22
Why are you asking that about an article that is talking about women?
1 Im_So_Hard_Right_Now 2018-03-22
because incels seem to want to pretend that this is true only of women and not of men. It's true of everyone. Looks matter, no one denies that.
1 Madeon929 2018-03-22
The problem is, women lie and deflect when asked about it. Looks actually matter more to women than men.
That’s why pua books sell so, much. They are based on a false pretense.
1 Im_So_Hard_Right_Now 2018-03-22
OK... so what if women aren't as up front about it as men. That's a cultural expectation, which is no one person's fault. Men and women are expected to behave differently. Women are supposed to be "gold hearted" and so they act like it, even if it's not entirely true. This is actually a result of patriarchy. Women are supposed to be the good natured ones, the loving ones, etc.
But that doesn't mean that looks matter MORE to women than men. I've seen no evidence of that scientifically or even anecdotally in my life, among the people I know and see IRL.
The only evidence I ever see here are cherry-picked examples from pictures people saw on the internet of, like, disabled girls with normal looking boyfriends. This is someone "evidence."
1 Madeon929 2018-03-22
Time Out.
I know you just didn’t mention patriarchy🤦🏿♂️
I should walk away now and save myself a headache.
Now, you said that women are suppose to be good natured. No. That’s just how society chooses to portray.
Women are just as filthy as men but, they lie and use non sequiturs as part of their biological imperative. Like AF/BB.
Women want the at possible genes from a mate. They are won’t ever say that because, that drys up all the free dinners, drinks, rides, etc. from betas.
1 Im_So_Hard_Right_Now 2018-03-22
Yes, that is my point. This is a social expectation. Not something that is inherent in women. It is a social role that they are expected to play, just as men are expected to portray other social roles, like being tough and independent, etc.
It is social roles that dictate how men and women are supposed to date or find mates as well. It is a social convention that men are supposed to "make the first move" and be more aggressive and women are supposed to "fend them off." These are cultural practices, and there may be some innate grounding in our biology, but it's hard to prove this claim, especially about things like social conventions, as we know social patterns do change and are changing.
Now the term patriarchy, like it or not, has come to describe a particular set of social patterns, in which men take on the role of power. This has been the norm in human society for as long as history has been written. It didn't just stop one day in 1977 or whatever as many MRAs like to believe. It maybe slowly changing, but social patterns change very slowly. They are "reified."
Incels, from what I can tell, are totally biological determinists. To an extreme degree. But this biological determinism is not grounded in empirical science, but rather ideology. It serves to support political beliefs about gender and power, and also grounded in a peculiar psychology of victimhood (mimicking in fact the rhetoric of victimhood from minority groups).
I am continually amazed at the beliefs I see espoused in here. I feel like I'm watching the crisis of masculinity unfold before my very eyes.
So, tell me, is there any scientific evidence that shows that looks are more important for women than men?
1 Madeon929 2018-03-22
You can be intellectually dishonest and pretend like female biological imperative didn’t push that to get with attractive men FIRST but, that’s just you coping.
1 Im_So_Hard_Right_Now 2018-03-22
Even if these social structures are totally biologically determined, and even if your perception of them is correct, which it isn't, it's never just one "sex" that does it "first." That's impossible to determine, a chicken and egg question. It's dialectic, if anything.
1 FEDORA_GOD 2018-03-22
There is a constant flow of people who come here thinking looks don't matter, stop gaslighting.
1 Im_So_Hard_Right_Now 2018-03-22
They usually just say that looks don't matter as much as you think, which is definitely true. But no one says that looks don't matter.
1 kta2 2018-03-22
No no, that is not the point. You are right, it applies to everyone. Both men and women care about looks. The difference is, society already acknowledges it is true of men. Men are stereotyped as shallow, crude, and obsessed with sex/physical attraction. But women are seen as the opposite - they are portrayed as mature and virtuous and caring about personality and character more than appearance. That is why it is worth showing that women are just like men.
1 Im_So_Hard_Right_Now 2018-03-22
I don't disagree. It's a stereotype that doesn't reflect reality. Women do care about looks. (And I'm not sure if too many people actually believe women do not care about looks at all).
But on this sub, the view commonly expressed isn't that both men and women care about looks, but that women care about looks much more than men. In fact, because of "hypergamy" women basically ONLY care about looks.
This is neither true of women nor men.
1 kta2 2018-03-22
I don't think that is the consensus or majority view, from what I have observed (I have been lurking on this sub for a while). There are some people who say that, but I have also seen incels agree that men care about looks as much as women do. (The topic just doesn't come up that often because they rarely discuss male attraction.)
Anyway, regardless of what they say about men, or whether they exaggerate how much women care about looks to excessive degrees, I still believe it is important to dispel the notion that women care much less about looks than men, because it is tied to gender stereotypes that are disrupting modern gender dynamics and have negative effects for both men and women.
1 Madeon929 2018-03-22
One second, I just wanted to make sure you don’t keep reciting something that isn’t true.
No incel has ever said that “Because of hypergamy women basically ONLY care about looks”
Hypergamy deals with moving up vertically (or horizontally) when it comes to dating men.
No one ever said only, just that looks are what a woman looks at first. You can be ugly with money and get women. That triggers hypergamy as well.
Just wanted to correct you on a statement that no incel has said ever.
1 Im_So_Hard_Right_Now 2018-03-22
ok, so, for incels, because of hypergamy women only care about looks or money or status, but not other aspects like personality. Is this statement now true?
1 Madeon929 2018-03-22
Look at the study.
1 Im_So_Hard_Right_Now 2018-03-22
women underestimate the importance of attractiveness. that doesn't surprise me, for reasons i've already said. it also doesn't prove that women care about looks more than men do. men may have even stricter thresholds than women. Men also have different thresholds for women they'd like to sleep with versus women they'd consider as a potential lifelong mate.
In any case, none of this makes women the monsters that they're portrayed on this sub as. Nor does it show that women's thresholds are particularly high.
1 Madeon929 2018-03-22
Men actually have looser standards than women do simply because, they do not have the luxury to be picky like women (the gatekeepers to sex) can be. Men will take whatever they can get most of the time.
I don’t think any of these guys really think of women as monsters. I never have. Especially not since learning about female nature and how women select mates. It’s just nature.
1 EvilBananaManRD 2018-03-22
I'm going to say... no.
1 Im_So_Hard_Right_Now 2018-03-22
looks like some real
scientificanecdotal evidence you've got here.1 EvilBananaManRD 2018-03-22
You may have a point. However, some of those are literal looksmatches and some others seem, I'm sorry, gold diggers.
Doesn't explain why the number of women who "just can't get laid" is much lower than men in their situation.
1 Im_So_Hard_Right_Now 2018-03-22
This could be because by and large women and men have somewhat different sexual desires and needs. Men are more interested in casual sex than women are, and thus will complain about it more.
1 EvilBananaManRD 2018-03-22
I only have the data for dating sites, but women (as a group) actually get casual more easily than men. A few men have sex really often and the rest with very low frequency, while there is little difference between groups of women.
One dude has sex with three women, the other two guys don't have sex. Simple.
1 Im_So_Hard_Right_Now 2018-03-22
well they might get it more easier if they want it, but that doesn't mean that as large a percent of women are seeking it as men.
but let's say that they are. let's say that all women are interested in casual sex, and the top 1/4 of all men, the most attractive, are able to sleep with enough women to satisfy all of them. Wouldn't you do the same if you were a woman?
Let's say that the top 1/4 of all women were as interested in casual sex as men, then they might, one imagines, want to not just sleep with the top quarter of men, but of all men, just like men do, to increase their chances.
If you were being bombarded by women sending you nudes, wouldn't you only pick the hottest ones to actually sleep with?
1 EvilBananaManRD 2018-03-22
Yes, true. But I'd openly admit how easy my situation is, and not complain when I failed to secure a hot woman for the long term.
1 Im_So_Hard_Right_Now 2018-03-22
so that's what this comes down to? all this misogyny. you're upset that women aren't grateful that they can more easily have casual sex?
1 EvilBananaManRD 2018-03-22
Why does that word come out every time someone has a different opinion?
If men could have unattached sex with a top 20% woman every once in a while, they'd be so satisfied. Specially the guys in this sub. Most women really don't appreciate that part.
It annoys me that quite a few women will
1- not be happy about a youth of unattached sex with a few attractive men
2- and still claim they "deserve" a man later on in life
No one deserves anything just because they want it. The guys here don't deserve to get laid just because they want to very bad. And women who don't secure a single guy in their youth don't deserve one when they get older.
1 Im_So_Hard_Right_Now 2018-03-22
ok but you do know that this stereotype that incels have, of ALL women having a buffet of causal sex with hot men in their 20s, only to complain that there are no good men in their 30s to settle down is likely only true in a handful of cases. The idea that all women are like this only exists in the aggrieved imaginations of incels. This is a classic example of taking one example an universalizing it, assuming it is true in all or most cases when in fact it's a minority or one small trend, like Regan's 'welfare queen.'
Look at this statistic:
So yes it's true that more men are not having sex overall than women, but the difference is just 2%. If the incel world view actually represented reality, you would expect that gap to be much much higher.
Here's some more interesting stats. The vast majority of those between the ages of 25 and 44 have had one sexual partner in the last year, and men have a much greater rate of this than women
If the incel world view were true, wouldn't women's number of partners be much higher on average than the men's? Assuming that a majority of women are hooking up a lot, and only a small minority of men are doing all the hooking up? also look at this
So, yes, it's generally true that men have more partners than women, and perhaps this is skewed by all these chads, but if a majority of women are getting all this chad dick, how do they only have a paltry 3.4 partners in their lifetime?
So basically, there's some truth to the trend that incel's describe, which is why you can find anecdotal evidence of it, but it's not representative of the population at large.
1 EvilBananaManRD 2018-03-22
You do realize those numbers don't even add up, right?
Men below 44 must be dating so many 44+ women for that to add up.
4 in 5 women lie about their number of sexual partners and there's a reason why there are so damn many articles about the subject in so many magazines, with so many studies (I haven't read them all yet).
The reason I don't trust those numbers is because the female participants always claim less sexual experience and fewer sexual partners and the male participants do the contrary.
Take this as an indicator. For every 4 women without children there are 5 men without children. "That's impossible", you might say. Simple: one guy has children with two women, another guy has none. Hence the
The same principle applies to sex life: the number of sexless men has always been higher that that of women, and the difference is much bigger than those polls make one think.
NOTE: the reason I used number of children as an example is because that's something you can't lie about: you either have children or not. Sexual encounters, however, can be made up or denied: a man can triple his numbers and a woman can divide hers by three and we would not have any evidence to know they're lying.
1 Rocky_Bukkake 2018-03-22
these guys are retarded, lol. this is literally what goes through my head whenever i meet a girl. if she passes the physical attraction test, then i'm willing to consider her. if i can't find her attractive, i simply will not be able to be with her.
1 oilbro770 2018-03-22
Lol u idiots should get in a "handsome" costume and then try to get girls with your fucked up personalities.
Maybe then you'll have personal experience knowing that you were right all along, or you are wrong and the most common definition of "incel" on Urban dictionary is correct.
Lol.. Just.. Do it for everyone.. Please lol
1 Madeon929 2018-03-22
Meanwhile, Jeremy Meeks and others like him are still slaying.
1 oilbro770 2018-03-22
Lol what's your argument? That the bad boy is getting girls?
Don't have the game to play?? The game is what it is.. play it or don't. But no one wants to here you whine about the other players.
Lol
1 VonMagnar 2018-03-22
Then fuck off from the sub, maybe?
1 oilbro770 2018-03-22
I'm just trying to help you gals out
1 VonMagnar 2018-03-22
Your shitty tough love crap is neither solicited nor appreciated.
Don't want to hear the whining, leave.
1 oilbro770 2018-03-22
Thanks for proving my point, doll
1 VonMagnar 2018-03-22
And what point would that be?
1 iQ9k 2018-03-22
Because violent criminals don't get laid. Yeah, sure buddy.
1 Madeon929 2018-03-22
I’m just laughing. Anyone who starts off with ad hominems is not to be taken serious.
1 oilbro770 2018-03-22
Then what's your excuse for not getting laid m'bitch?
1 iQ9k 2018-03-22
OUR LOOKS YOU BRAIN DEAD FAGGOT
1 oilbro770 2018-03-22
Lol.. see my first comment.. dress up handsome. Get that full make up and costume. Y'all can gofundyourselves with the pool of resources all 38 of you have. I'm sure you can make a decent one for of your fearless leaders to don.
Then when he gets laid because he's so hawt you can oust him for being a faker. Or whatever your term is.
Lol or
He doesn't get laid be cause he's got personality issues.
Then you'll finally know if you're incels lol
1 kysacademy 2018-03-22
Dumbest suggestion ever my guy.
1 oilbro770 2018-03-22
How else are you going to get laid if the only thing stopping you is your lucky looks
1 kysacademy 2018-03-22
The point is we CANT dumbass
1 kysacademy 2018-03-22
You cant fake beimg handsome
1 oilbro770 2018-03-22
I mean..I get laid..a lot. You should listen to what I have to say
1 Madeon929 2018-03-22
Waste of time.
1 Mostly_Void_ 2018-03-22
. Being physically attracted to someone is very important, no one is saying it isn't. They're just saying that having a shitty toxic personality is making your prospects much worse. Like a 1 guy with the nicest personality isn't going to get a 10 woman just like a 1 woman who is nice isn't going to get a 10 guy, it's just not how it works. Physical attractiveness is extremely important in a relationship
1 Madeon929 2018-03-22
Why are you asking that about an article that is talking about women?
1 EvilBananaManRD 2018-03-22
I'm going to say... no.
1 Madeon929 2018-03-22
Time Out.
I know you just didn’t mention patriarchy🤦🏿♂️
I should walk away now and save myself a headache.
Now, you said that women are suppose to be good natured. No. That’s just how society chooses to portray.
Women are just as filthy as men but, they lie and use non sequiturs as part of their biological imperative. Like AF/BB.
Women want the at possible genes from a mate. They are won’t ever say that because, that drys up all the free dinners, drinks, rides, etc. from betas.
1 Madeon929 2018-03-22
You can be intellectually dishonest and pretend like female biological imperative didn’t push that to get with attractive men FIRST but, that’s just you coping.
1 sharkb8master 2018-03-22
Didn't even fully read that shit.
1 VonMagnar 2018-03-22
Your shitty tough love crap is neither solicited nor appreciated.
Don't want to hear the whining, leave.