50% of men find 50% of women to be "attractive" so why would any man ask out THIS (unattractive) girl when there is a different (ATTRACTIVE) girl standing 3 feet over there? Meanwhile 80% of women find only 20% of men to be "attractive" so just do some basic math and you can see why the world tells women to adjust their standards. |
Cite. |
When I was in my teens and 20s I was attracted to damn near everyone of the opposite sex. Pardon my bluntness but I was all about getting p*ssy not finding “The One”.
In my 30’s I got tired of chasing tail and started seeking companionship and stumbled across this lady who complimented me to a tee. The way we clicked I’d have married her even if she was bald-headed and butt ugly but fortunately she’s fine as a muthaf***a. |
Not true at all. |
I'm assuming pp meant, pretending to be men. It's obvious and pathetic. |
So very true! |
https://quillette.com/2019/03/12/attraction-inequality-and-the-dating-economy/ |
"Yet another study, run by OkCupid on their huge datasets, found that women rate 80 percent of men as “worse-looking than medium,” and that this 80 percent “below-average” block received replies to messages only about 30 percent of the time or less. By contrast, men rate women as worse-looking than medium only about 50 percent of the time, and this 50 percent below-average block received message replies closer to 40 percent of the time or higher." This only makes sense if you ignore the way women and men use online dating. Men will swipe right on EVERYONE, then they're picky once they see who matched with them. A swipe doesn't mean he was attracted. Whereas many women will swipe left on conventionally attractive men when their profile is noting more than "ay im tony wanna fuk?" It also doesn't account for bots and fakes. Also, online dating doesn't give us evidence of anything outside of online dating. AND the study by OKC is old AF and forgets that OKC used a "star" system as a way of blocking. OCK also took down their own study because incels wouldn't stop misinterpreting it. Overall when it comes to looks women are more generous than men are. |
| I did when I was younger but the relationships never progressed. I’m married now so I’m always attracted to my date. |
|
There have been plenty of women who were not inherently very attractive to me - i.e., just looking at them I didn’t think “gee she’s hot” - but they sent out such strong signals of wanting my D that I said “well, why not?”
|
| When I was dating there was always something attractive about the person and not necessarily looks. Brains, good athlete, great sense of humor were attractive to me. Any of those plus good looks was a definite ask. But there had to be something or why bother? |
| Generally I'm attracted to something whether it be physical or some other shared interest. Undoubtedly for every positive trait there is another glaring negative one, sometimes several. So yes, but not for long. I'm not perfect and I'm sure it's the same for them on some level too. |
| Yes, men call these "practice" women. You see what works with them so you don't screw up your date with attractive women. |
This sound like something a woman would do...not a man. |
Oh please. I see lots of beautiful, fit women (even in their mid years) and who are married to average, at best, guys. I see that way more than the reverse. |