study shows that women rate 80% of men online as 'below average'

chadD24

Slayer
Joined
Jul 7, 2015
Messages
2,238
Reputation
2
To illustrate the exact spectrum of looks we’re talking about here, and to put some human faces on our discussion, I want to introduce a few photos of real OkCupid users. Here are two men rated near the top of our range.

 



And here are two rated in the middle.

 









As you can see from the gray line, women rate an incredible 80% of guys as worse-looking than medium. Very harsh. On the other hand, when it comes to actual messaging, women shift their expectations only just slightly ahead of the curve, which is a healthier pattern than guys’ pursuing the all-but-unattainable. But with the basic ratings so out-of-whack, the two curves together suggest some strange possibilities for the female thought process, the most salient of which is that the average-looking woman has convinced herself that the vast majority of males aren’t good enough for her, but she then goes right out and messages them anyway.


Just to illustrate that women are operating on a very different scale, here are just a few of the many, many guys we here in the office think are totally decent-looking, but that women have rated, in their occult way, as significantly less attractive than so-called “medium”:

 






Females of OkCupid, we site founders say to you: ouch! Paradoxically, it seems it’s women, not men, who have unrealistic standards for the “average” member of the opposite sex.

Finally, I just want to combine the two charts to emphasize how much fuller the inboxes of good-looking people get. I have scaled this graph to show multiples of messages sent to the lowest-rated people. For instance, the most attractive guys get 11× the messages the lowest-rated do. The medium-rated get about 4×.




http://blog.okcupid.com/index.php/your-looks-and-online-dating/
 

chadD24

Slayer
Joined
Jul 7, 2015
Messages
2,238
Reputation
2
Datjaw said:
man lands on moon.jpg
i know its old news but i think this study should def be posted on this site
 

Weaselface

Coper
Joined
Jun 30, 2015
Messages
704
Reputation
0
To be fair, except for the guitar-man the middle and below-men look fairly subhuman, and the top-men look normal. All of a sudden these ominous statistics seem less cruel — I never saw them connected to actual images and just assumed the top to be the pinnacle of slayers.
 

chadD24

Slayer
Joined
Jul 7, 2015
Messages
2,238
Reputation
2
Weaselface said:
To be fair, except for the guitar-man the middle and below-men look fairly subhuman, and the top-men look normal. All of a sudden these ominous statistics seem less cruel.
there not even sub human. not a single one. they are all AVERAGE JOES. they are healthy, in shape, just with low dimorphism. 


this right here is a SUB HUMAN, although after painting her face, she wouldnt settle for anything less then the 10% of top tier guys

 

DyingHope

Alone Forever
Oldcels
Joined
Jul 2, 2015
Messages
1,769
Reputation
102
Women are biologically programmed to be much more picky than men, with who they choose to have sex with and feel attracted to. They always get in a new relationship easier after a break up and become stronger. While a dumped guy will be destroyed and just have to learn to move on.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...term-men-NEVER-recover-researchers-claim.html

"[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][size=x-small]Women have more to lose by dating the wrong person.[/font][/size]

[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][size=x-small]'Put simply, women are evolved to invest far more in a relationship than a man,' Morris said. [/font][/size]
[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][size=x-small]'A brief romantic encounter could lead to nine months of pregnancy followed by many years of lactation for an ancestral woman, while the man may have 'left the scene' literally minutes after the encounter, with no further biological investment. [/font][/size]
[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][size=x-small]'It is this 'risk' of higher biological investment that, over evolutionary time, has made women choosier about selecting a high-quality mate.[/font][/size]

[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][size=x-small]'Hence, the loss of a relationship with a high-quality mate 'hurts' more for a woman.'[/font][/size]

[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][size=x-small]Conversely, as men have evolved to compete for the romantic attention of women, the loss of a high-quality mate for a man may not 'hurt' as much at first, Morris said.[/font][/size]
[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][size=x-small]'The man will likely feel the loss deeply and for a very long period of time as it 'sinks in' that he must 'start competing' all over again to replace what he has lost - or worse still, come to the realization that the loss is irreplaceable[/font][/size]
 

chadD24

Slayer
Joined
Jul 7, 2015
Messages
2,238
Reputation
2
Machiavellian said:
chadD24 said:
I would think the 2nd pic that was in the least attractive category would score better than the top one in most attractive who looks like a stereotypical dwebe to me. But they are small pictures.
i was thinking the exact same thing. the guy at the top is an average joe but figured out to take advantage of myspace angles. the guy with the guitar is no doubt more aesthetic but women in the study rated him lower probably becuase he looks like hes trying too hard with the guitar looking at the camera like that.. thats the kind of shit women pick up on.
[hr]
DyingHope said:
Women are biologically programmed to be much more picky than men, with who they choose to have sex with and feel attracted to. They always get in a new relationship easier after a break up and become stronger. While a dumped guy will be destroyed and just have to learn to move on.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...term-men-NEVER-recover-researchers-claim.html

"[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][size=x-small]Women have more to lose by dating the wrong person.[/font][/size]

[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][size=x-small]'Put simply, women are evolved to invest far more in a relationship than a man,' Morris said. [/font][/size]
[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][size=x-small]'A brief romantic encounter could lead to nine months of pregnancy followed by many years of lactation for an ancestral woman, while the man may have 'left the scene' literally minutes after the encounter, with no further biological investment. [/font][/size]
[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][size=x-small]'It is this 'risk' of higher biological investment that, over evolutionary time, has made women choosier about selecting a high-quality mate.[/font][/size]

[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][size=x-small]'Hence, the loss of a relationship with a high-quality mate 'hurts' more for a woman.'[/font][/size]

[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][size=x-small]Conversely, as men have evolved to compete for the romantic attention of women, the loss of a high-quality mate for a man may not 'hurt' as much at first, Morris said.[/font][/size]
[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][size=x-small]'The man will likely feel the loss deeply and for a very long period of time as it 'sinks in' that he must 'start competing' all over again to replace what he has lost - or worse still, come to the realization that the loss is irreplaceable[/font][/size]
with contraception and condoms, sex isnt any more of risk for women then it is for men. biologically speaking, the average woman has evolved into a hypergamous whore(thanks to the invention of makeup) who knows that she can manipulate beta males and fuck the guys she finds most attractive at the same time.
 

lono

Banned
Joined
Jul 4, 2015
Messages
2,606
Reputation
10
chadD24 said:
Weaselface said:
To be fair, except for the guitar-man the middle and below-men look fairly subhuman, and the top-men look normal. All of a sudden these ominous statistics seem less cruel.
there not even sub human. not a single one. they are all AVERAGE JOES. they are healthy, in shape, just with low dimorphism. 


this right here is a SUB HUMAN, although after painting her face, she wouldnt settle for anything less then the 10% of top tier guys

Looks like an advert for the walking dead zombify me app

 

Dontel

Incel
Joined
Jul 9, 2015
Messages
263
Reputation
1
chadD24 said:
Weaselface said:
To be fair, except for the guitar-man the middle and below-men look fairly subhuman, and the top-men look normal. All of a sudden these ominous statistics seem less cruel.
there not even sub human. not a single one. they are all AVERAGE JOES. they are healthy, in shape, just with low dimorphism. 


this right here is a SUB HUMAN, although after painting her face, she wouldnt settle for anything less then the 10% of top tier guys

LEGIT

There aren't that many men who begrudge women for rejecting a looksmatched man or a man below her.

Nowadays women are faking age, skin, hair, height, body, tits, sexual fidelity, knowledge not to mention all these bogus "achievements". The most egregious stuff is the "caring" bullshit flowery personality they all fraud, they act like they are superior beings who give a shit about social causes etc;most of these chicks wouldn't give a pound to a starving homeless guy but whine about all these goofy social ill's -  it's all bollocks and a mating strategy. Unless you've seen one of these witches actually do something or help someone in real life without throwing a hissy fit assume it's all bullshit/fakery. 

The average woman you meet is ugly without her makeup/filters/angles and is a bum. 

Only a clown would walk around covering their face with that much makeup and fakery.

The problem today is men are being rejected by fraudsters and losers; instead of calling them out they are worshiping these clowns.
 

Nizoral Babe

Coper
Joined
Jun 30, 2015
Messages
869
Reputation
0
chadD24 said:
Weaselface said:
To be fair, except for the guitar-man the middle and below-men look fairly subhuman, and the top-men look normal. All of a sudden these ominous statistics seem less cruel.
there not even sub human. not a single one. they are all AVERAGE JOES. they are healthy, in shape, just with low dimorphism. 


this right here is a SUB HUMAN, although after painting her face, she wouldnt settle for anything less then the 10% of top tier guys

Take a girl swimming on your first date. You get to see if she has a tight body and how bad she looks without make up.
 

Nizoral Babe

Coper
Joined
Jun 30, 2015
Messages
869
Reputation
0
Studies show 80% of men will fuck 100% of women - no matter how ugly, fat, annoying, etc.
 

Copenhagen

Slayer
Joined
Jun 29, 2015
Messages
2,784
Reputation
17
The "unattractive" men on the OKStupid staff are Nerdic, short, ethnic, and wearing glasses. Nothing else new to be seen here.

Of course those same guys believe it's all about personality. What a load of shit.
 
Joined
Jun 29, 2015
Messages
5,434
Reputation
3
merlin said:
What if this is actually true? Normal and good looking guys would not need to turn to online dating, as they would mostly get gfs and get laid from social circle game. The majority of guys who turn to online dating will be ones who are below average and who can't get laid irl.

Yeah, I've seen this argument a lot but it is wrong.

The OKCupid founder thought the same, so he repeated the experiment with random facebook photos. Same result.
 

AdolfHitler

Noel Ignatiev
Joined
Jul 26, 2015
Messages
3,255
Reputation
760
Dontel said:
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
[hr]
ThereIsNoGame said:
merlin said:
What if this is actually true? Normal and good looking guys would not need to turn to online dating, as they would mostly get gfs and get laid from social circle game. The majority of guys who turn to online dating will be ones who are below average and who can't get laid irl.

Yeah, I've seen this argument a lot but it is wrong.

The OKCupid founder thought the same, so he repeated the experiment with random facebook photos. Same result.
Source? Post a Link
 
Joined
Jul 5, 2015
Messages
198
Reputation
0
OK, so we all know that online dating is bullshit, and have known this for at least 3 years.

Why is anyone using online dating sites?  As I've said many many many times, going out and meeting girls IRL yield a much high success rate, you get better looking girls; all of which is because you making women make a decision about you in real life time instead of letting her talk herself out of meeting you.  Dating is just like sales, the more time lapses the worse position you are in with said women.
 

chadD24

Slayer
Joined
Jul 7, 2015
Messages
2,238
Reputation
2
merlin said:
What if this is actually true? Normal and good looking guys would not need to turn to online dating, as they would mostly get gfs and get laid from social circle game. The majority of guys who turn to online dating will be ones who are below average and who can't get laid irl.
its very true that the MAJORITY of guys are below average/incel but there is relatively small niche group of aesthetic/sexually dimorphic guys on dating sites have no problem meeting women IRL too. THESE ARE THE ONES GETTING 80% OF THE SLUTS ONLINE. their IRL 'social circle' is just part of the part of the equation. for most highly aesthetic guys, its just another vehicle for them to get potential lays. plus.. good looking =/= high status. there are alot of highly aesthetic guys who have close knight group of friends with low female traffic and relay on tinder, okcupid, etc for the majority of their lays.
[hr]
Potatofaceofdeath said:
OK, so we all know that online dating is bullshit, and have known this for at least 3 years.

Why is anyone using online dating sites?  As I've said many many many times, going out and meeting girls IRL yield a much high success rate, you get better looking girls; all of which is because you making women make a decision about you in real life time instead of letting her talk herself out of meeting you.  Dating is just like sales, the more time lapses the worse position you are in with said women.
becuase when you meet a girl IRL you dont know if shes attracted to you unless youre objectively dimorphic/aesthetic/attrative. nick bateman is objectively attractive.. most guys are not. When you approach a girl and spend time talking to only to find out "youre not her type" is just a buzz kill. online dating eliminates that since both parties already are aware there is a mutual attraction. its easier physiologically.

some dudes have been able to delude themselves long enough where there are perfectly ok approaching 150 girls and getting rejected 149 times. most guys have to much dignity and dont want to boost a sluts ego by being rejected like that over and over.  that is NO DIFFERENT THEN BEING A WHITE KNIGHT BECUASE YOUR JUST INFLATING HER EGO/SELF ESTEEM. id much rather work on my aesthetic looksmax hard and in an anouther year ill be the one doing the rejecting.
 
Top