- Jun 7, 2019
many men think that attractivness in both genders follows a normal distribution. but from a biological and evolutionary standpoint this makes little sense. why? because men and women are different.retrudedmaxilla said:ive always thought men are plainer are objectively less attractive then women, but because I am straight that probably affects this.zombie said:Men in general overestime their own looks, and women think 80% of men are "below average"
JFL at thinking you are GL as a man in 2019
you have to keep in mind in mind that what we find attractiv is part of of biological programm, not a conscious decision (what we find attractive is decided within less than one second) mostly determined by dna and hastn changed since the stoneage. technological progress has zero effect on what we find attractive. thats why women still dig the strong guy who looks he would be succesful at hunting and not the small scrawny indian guy who looks like he can make a lot of money at google even though the later would be more rational decison today. but the subconsciousness, the lizard brain whatever you wanna call that still thinks we live in primitive times and thats why a woman wont be attracted in a sexual way by the average google employe
just like you are attracted by a female body that highers the possibilities that she wont have any birth complications (wide hips, thin waist)
and thats why modern invention like the pill or condoms have no effect on the mechanism i will now tell you.
until 100 years ago sex = pregnancy.
women and men have totally different reproduction strategies because they are biological totally different.
dschinghis khan had around 1000 children in his life. you will never hear of a woman with a even close number of children. a woman is biological limited. the highest number you will hear are 12-13 children.
in theory a men could make another woman pregnant every 30min. when a woman gets pregnant she not only loses 9 months she is also in high danger of actually dying at pregnancy or at birth. like i said our body and brain is still in the stoneage so modern medicine isnt helpful here. sex has zero risks for a man but comes with a lot of risks for the woman.
so obviously women and men will have different reproduction strategies.
the men goes for quantity. the more offsprings the more succesful a man is evolutionary speaking.
the women cant go for quantiy. she goes for quality. it makes sense for her not waste the few opportunities she for children for a normal dude or even an ugly incel. getting impregnated by an ugly incel is catastrophic for a woman form a evolutionary point of view. she risks death and she loses times where she could get impregnated by chad.
so when a man sees a woman his brain has way lower standards to find a woman fuckable then vice versa.
and thats why we have results like this
the same results can be replicated outside the online dating bubble (in case you argue ugly men are more likely to end up on dating platforms..i never understood this argument because the same should be the case for women then)
the percentage of ugly men is way more higher then the percentage of ugly women in the age group where women can still get kids
BTW THIS DOES NOT MEAN THAT ONLY 20% OF MEN GET SEX IT ONLY MEANS THAT ONLY 20% OF MEN ARE WHAT WOMEN WOULD CONSIDER AS PHYSICALLY HOT
obviously other factors play a role for men too in oder to get laid.