Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This was so interesting:



So apparently women think all men are ugly. A thoroughly mid looking woman who rates only a 4-5 is probably looking for a man who is 6-7, which is basically an entire standard deviation or more away from the mean for how women are rating looks for men.

It seems like men evaluate the looks of women much more fairly given that the mean is about a 4/10, which should be expected (5/10). Women seem to have insane expectations for how their partners should look. I guess if you aren't Henry Cavill you're an instant 1 or 2. Modern dating cultures and apps have ruined all expectations, no doubt.

. Men are visual, it’s not surprise they find women more attractive. Women like different things.

At the end of the day just because a man thinks a woman is attractive and will sleep with him doesn’t mean he wants her as a partner.

Single moms for instance, most are for recreational use only, they may be hot and guys will sleep with them, but most guys won’t wife them up. No man wants to continue another man’s saved game because the women he’s sleeping with made bad decisions in the past.

Too much at stake and family courts are a mess. That’s why most women will be unmarried and childless now. Men don’t need marriage to sleep with women as they give it up easily anyways…why by the cow when you get the milk for free and all that.

The man who wrote this is 300% a fat, ugly neckbeard. You can't be visually ugly and ugly personality-wise as well and then wonder why no one wants you. Describing fellow human beings as being for recreational use only makes clear that you're not even good enough to be used for recreation only.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh, so there are repercussions for oppressing women for hundreds of years and now they get enhanced choice in who they procreate with? Boo hoo to you.

lol…oppression Olympics.

I live how women say they’re oppressed yet men routinely fight and die in wars to protect the very women who say they’re oppressed. Or they work dangerous jobs that equate to men have 95% of workplace deaths.

Don’t see women clamoring to be working the in coal mines, oil fields and risking their lives in cargo ships so you can buy the latest Lululemon to complete your clean-girl aesthetic.

But yeah…women are oppressed….

Men fighting and dying in wars that MEN start is not oppression. It's the consequences of MEN's own foolish, idiotic choices. You're welcome.

Anonymous wrote:This was so interesting:



So apparently women think all men are ugly. A thoroughly mid looking woman who rates only a 4-5 is probably looking for a man who is 6-7, which is basically an entire standard deviation or more away from the mean for how women are rating looks for men.

It seems like men evaluate the looks of women much more fairly given that the mean is about a 4/10, which should be expected (5/10). Women seem to have insane expectations for how their partners should look. I guess if you aren't Henry Cavill you're an instant 1 or 2. Modern dating cultures and apps have ruined all expectations, no doubt.

You have eyes. Look around you. Look at all the men who are fat, ugly, poorly dressed, wearing stained/ripped clothes, who can't be bothered to even comb their hair or get a decent haircut. The difference is in which half of the pool actually cares to present themselves well and which half thinks they deserve Marilyn Monroe at her best just for rolling out of bed. There's also the fact that men have worse skin at younger ages because they think they don't need to take care of their looks. Years of neglect add up to leathery, spotty, uneven complexioned skin and then men lie to themselves that women don't notice this because we're allegedly not visual creatures. Our eyeballs work, regardless of what cherry picked studies done by other men are telling you. Men are objectively uglier, slovenly, and arrogant to boot.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh, so there are repercussions for oppressing women for hundreds of years and now they get enhanced choice in who they procreate with? Boo hoo to you.

I don’t think you understand what this chart results in. You end up with a very small number of men that have enhanced choice. Many men that have no partners at all. And women who are pressured to have sex rather than relationships in the forlorn hope that the former will turn in to the latter.

I mean, all men have to do to be in the top 1/3 of men is to be about a 4. How is that not good news for men?

I feel like all gay men are able to achieve this. You can do this, OP.

I love you.

- Not OP

+1. I mean, a few years in the weight room turned me from a 3 into a hard 5 for sure. Well, a 5 for DC I guess. Small victories.

Anonymous wrote:This was so interesting:



So apparently women think all men are ugly. A thoroughly mid looking woman who rates only a 4-5 is probably looking for a man who is 6-7, which is basically an entire standard deviation or more away from the mean for how women are rating looks for men.

It seems like men evaluate the looks of women much more fairly given that the mean is about a 4/10, which should be expected (5/10). Women seem to have insane expectations for how their partners should look. I guess if you aren't Henry Cavill you're an instant 1 or 2. Modern dating cultures and apps have ruined all expectations, no doubt.

It’s an interesting and curious finding of course, and there is probably something to it, but my understanding is that this sort of data tends to be generated by reviewing pictures and rating them (I mean, no one is having women or men look at police lineups of people and rate their attractiveness I don’t think), and I suspect the best explanation for this is that pictures miss more of the aspects that women find attractive than for men. And truthfully a lot of attraction has always seemed more chemistry-based to me anyway — I’ve certainly had the experience of being intensely attracted to people who aren’t objectively nearly as hot as I felt they were. What this really gets to, I think, is that a lot of people are missing the chance to meet people they might find hot in person because so much of dating is not mediated through apps that, while useful in some ways, by there nature miss all sorts of things too.

Wow. The misogyny in this thread.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, take a look at the beauty forum on this website. Women spend A LOT of time on looking good. Of course they are more attractive.

I have three boys and one girl. My daughter is 12 now and starting to have to do all of this stuff that her brothers don’t just to fit in (hair, jewelry, eyebrows, shaving). She’s pretty resentful of it, so I notice it more.

I bet if you spent $50/wk and one hour a day trying to make yourself more attractive (in addition to working out), you would find that women notice you more.

As a man, if I had $50 a week to spend on grooming, I'd be able to save about $48 a week. I really have no idea what products I'd buy for that price. I use the same razor for about two weeks. A bottle of shampoo lasts me months. No conditioner. Some body lotion in the winter months. My tweezers are a few decades old and my nose hair trimmer costs less than $10.

I do feel sorry for your 12 year-old daughter. That seems way too soon to be concerned with all that. My daughter was playing soccer at that age and didn't do any of that until later.

A lot of heterosexual men starting using good quality products. You could benefit from anti wrinkle face creams; daily sunscreen (that also prevents cancer ); skin lotion after bath; foot care; dye hair to look youthful.

I pay attention to man’s body as much as face. How proportional he is, belly fat, hate the fat folds under the arms and back of the neck (these are yaki).

Yes, very hard to be attracted to aging men with very few exceptions.

I’m 48 usually date within 5 years of my age

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This was so interesting:



So apparently women think all men are ugly. A thoroughly mid looking woman who rates only a 4-5 is probably looking for a man who is 6-7, which is basically an entire standard deviation or more away from the mean for how women are rating looks for men.

It seems like men evaluate the looks of women much more fairly given that the mean is about a 4/10, which should be expected (5/10). Women seem to have insane expectations for how their partners should look. I guess if you aren't Henry Cavill you're an instant 1 or 2. Modern dating cultures and apps have ruined all expectations, no doubt.

This makes sense. Women use a lot of makeup to improve their attractiveness. An ugly woman can wear makeup and appear decent on pictures and we she goes out. Men don’t wear makeup. An ugly man will appear ugly all day long.

My thoughts too. Not just that they can, they actually do. Women trying to date attempt to make themselves look the best they possibly can. Men trying to date just gone as they are.
I do think women are more complex, but if you want to, a women rating a man’s looks is rating his face. It is what it is. A man looks at a woman’s face, her body, etc. and depending on what he thinks is attractive a 4 face could get a 6 if he prefers her curves. But honestly


is rating attractiveness she may say

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This was so interesting:



So apparently women think all men are ugly. A thoroughly mid looking woman who rates only a 4-5 is probably looking for a man who is 6-7, which is basically an entire standard deviation or more away from the mean for how women are rating looks for men.

It seems like men evaluate the looks of women much more fairly given that the mean is about a 4/10, which should be expected (5/10). Women seem to have insane expectations for how their partners should look. I guess if you aren't Henry Cavill you're an instant 1 or 2. Modern dating cultures and apps have ruined all expectations, no doubt.

This makes sense. Women use a lot of makeup to improve their attractiveness. An ugly woman can wear makeup and appear decent on pictures and we she goes out. Men don’t wear makeup. An ugly man will appear ugly all day long.

Men use beards and mustaches in a similar way.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, take a look at the beauty forum on this website. Women spend A LOT of time on looking good. Of course they are more attractive.

I have three boys and one girl. My daughter is 12 now and starting to have to do all of this stuff that her brothers don’t just to fit in (hair, jewelry, eyebrows, shaving). She’s pretty resentful of it, so I notice it more.

I bet if you spent $50/wk and one hour a day trying to make yourself more attractive (in addition to working out), you would find that women notice you more.

As a man, if I had $50 a week to spend on grooming, I'd be able to save about $48 a week. I really have no idea what products I'd buy for that price. I use the same razor for about two weeks. A bottle of shampoo lasts me months. No conditioner. Some body lotion in the winter months. My tweezers are a few decades old and my nose hair trimmer costs less than $10.

I do feel sorry for your 12 year-old daughter. That seems way too soon to be concerned with all that. My daughter was playing soccer at that age and didn't do any of that until later.

It was "being more attractive" in general. Better haircuts. Skin products. If you're graying, getting your hair colored. And that's before we get to clothing.

Anonymous wrote:OP, take a look at the beauty forum on this website. Women spend A LOT of time on looking good. Of course they are more attractive.

I have three boys and one girl. My daughter is 12 now and starting to have to do all of this stuff that her brothers don’t just to fit in (hair, jewelry, eyebrows, shaving). She’s pretty resentful of it, so I notice it more.

I bet if you spent $50/wk and one hour a day trying to make yourself more attractive (in addition to working out), you would find that women notice you more.

As a man, if I had $50 a week to spend on grooming, I'd be able to save about $48 a week. I really have no idea what products I'd buy for that price. I use the same razor for about two weeks. A bottle of shampoo lasts me months. No conditioner. Some body lotion in the winter months. My tweezers are a few decades old and my nose hair trimmer costs less than $10.

I do feel sorry for your 12 year-old daughter. That seems way too soon to be concerned with all that. My daughter was playing soccer at that age and didn't do any of that until later.

Anonymous wrote:Has OP provided a citation of for the chart yet?

Not that I've seen. Not that that's stopping anyone from arguing about it like it's meaningful.

Women are more attractive than men, as a whole. And women put way more effort into their appearance (diet, fitness, grooming, clothes etc) than men do.

Anonymous wrote:This was so interesting:



So apparently women think all men are ugly. A thoroughly mid looking woman who rates only a 4-5 is probably looking for a man who is 6-7, which is basically an entire standard deviation or more away from the mean for how women are rating looks for men.

It seems like men evaluate the looks of women much more fairly given that the mean is about a 4/10, which should be expected (5/10). Women seem to have insane expectations for how their partners should look. I guess if you aren't Henry Cavill you're an instant 1 or 2. Modern dating cultures and apps have ruined all expectations, no doubt.

This makes sense. Women use a lot of makeup to improve their attractiveness. An ugly woman can wear makeup and appear decent on pictures and we she goes out. Men don’t wear makeup. An ugly man will appear ugly all day long.

Men should go back to wearing high heels and powdered wigs. We women didn't cause The Great Renunciation.