I've come to the conclusion that women are as looks driven as men maybe more

List the factors. I'll address them.

A factor? It's by far the most important factor. You're deluded if you can't see this. To the person who said women are after money, go down the forbes list and see if you can find how many of the world's billionaires are married to women much more attractive than themselves.

Go down the top male models/100 most attractive men list and have a look at their girlfriends. Women couldn't give 2 shits about your wallet unless they're starving/poor and legitimately need money.

another case of do as I tell you not as I do.

Yeah, that's normally what happens.

Again I read the thread over and I couldn't find your "4 factor model".

Fine, I don't live in the U.S. It's an option I'm considering for myself and I'm not doing it out of insecurity. After, I get down to 15% bf, I'll look into it and see how "fixed" my features are.

Confidence is a result of success, confidence doesn't result in success. I'm not going to come up with a perfect mathematical model with 100 variables. You're expecting too much. The only thing I can say is the fundemental variable in finding out how attracted women will be towards you is your own looks.

 

Oh gimme a break!!!

Really you think all women care about are looks???


How about you get off the dating sites with your fake profiles and go out into the real world and really talk to women. Not the ones with duck lips and painted orange ( but those women are trying to look pretty for you b/c they think it is what men want....)

I'm not saying that looks don't matter b/c they do there has to be some type of attraction to start the process but jesus fucking christ we would all be alone if everyone only partnered up with "perfect" people.

And another thing Confidence comes from within. If you feel good about yourself and present yourself that way other people will see it too it's all in how you carry yourself!

 

Read my response I typed into your quote. Also on this last part of your most recent post I'm not expecting you to quantify a perfect mathmatical model for behavior, but there are people who have studied this already in a double-study and you cite nothing but your own opinion which isn't a psychology journal.


Do people tend to marry people around their same level of attractiveness? Yes (sidenote: keyword tend)

Are looks the ONLY thing that matters?
No

Also what is attractiveness? (body type, and face?)

Also what about tons of situations where a total babe drives her bf up a wall because her attitude sours everything that used to be attractive? And attractive guys who drive their gf's up a wall and they leave?

Also forbes list is about the richest, and I never said the RICHEST overtakes other factors like looks either so you can't use that list in a counter argument against me, it's not a statistical accurate representation of the affluent but not super affluent people. All I'm saying on the $ aspect is that it plays a part, the same as personality and looks do because they're all variables into the success or failure of a relationship.

^I don't think that claim is an unreasonable one to make and to counter your claim with.

 

Also I want to add that tons of American celebrities are obviously a sample of some of the most attractive physically speaking that this country has to offer, and yet they still have relationship problems and affairs and divorce, in fact some would say they're more complicated since they're in the public eye, despite their good looks.

---
You've never acknowledge HOW average looking guys, whom you might label as downright ugly, might be getting turned down not because of confidence but because of HOW they are approaching. Handsome guys can come off as creepy too if the approach is all wrong.

 

Here's a generic list of factors as you've requested:

1. Looks
2. Gift of gab (ability to smooth talk)
3. Is related to #2, and that's how you can use the ability to talk create charm
4. Reading body language
5. Bedroom skills (related to #4)
6. Giving off body language
7. Body scent
8. Hygiene (something you can't get an accurate read on by an online profile)
9. Personal Ambition and Drive (not related to the relationship)
10. Wealth and social class
11. Culture
12. Intelligence


Those are the top 12 variables I can think of in a list, but there you go. I'm sure others who agree with my counter argument against your argument thesis can add a few more.

 

;

 

If he's good looking the girl will assume he has all those things and blame herself for making him "feel awkward" and him having awkward body language. You cannot talk your way into a girls pants if she doesn't like your face. If she likes your face and you make normal conversation about life you won't screw up.

 

I don't follow celebrities. Give me some specific examples. American celebrities are in the above average good looks category. They are in the 80-95% category. There are much better looking people at my university.

 

Women in the Western world are way more superficial than men in general.
However, they are also more likely to give someone they consider out of their usual type a legitimate chance just because they make them feel good.
And there are a lot of women out there that don't fit in with the general group (but not as many as women would like to think =P)

A big problem with your anecdotal research is that it comes from dating sites. I'm not saying there is anything wrong with dating sites: but there is definitely a different set of people at each dating venue (bars, social events, etc.)

Another problem is that most of the important factors like chemistry, aren't exhibited through a website. You are restricted on what you are looking for, and your initial selection is fantasy based, not based in realism.

On an aside:

does anyone else think this Bill and Melinda Gates picture OP posted is absolutely adorable?

 

Duck phrased that very nicely, and is the main reason him posting chat logs wouldn't help push his argument forward.

I'll ignore his statement implying that i look stupid for asking him clarifying his definitions. He's obviously taking me thinking he's a internet troll as a personal attack it simply could be he thinks I'm a jerk.

Look I'm a fairly attractive guy, but even I've gotten more rejection than success. That's just a nature of dating and if you let rejection bring your confidence down then it'll show.

And you only put up a weak counter argument towards my 12 factor list, by saying in a nutshell "looks usurp that entire list.

Oh yeah? Prove it since the onus is on you to prove the status quo is wrong.


I will say I do find your rephrasing of the definition of your argument, which is in bold more fair though.

But no the words ONLY and the phrase MOST IMPORTANT is a huge difference in meaning.
And your necessity to breathe metaphor is not equal to the necessity of looks to get a girl.

If your aiming to get a 10 in looks when your only a 1-3, sure it matters because your aiming to high. But I applaud you for being gutsy.

What country are you from to the point where tabloids don't reach you about USA celebrities and models?

 

As for my list #'s 3-9, and 11 are not rebutted or even addressed.

And #3 creating charm utilizes the skill of #2, but creating charm is more than talking intelligently or saying sexually charged statement.
It's when to say it and how to or how not to say it.
---
As for celebrity drama, well tiger woods is an example of someone accomplished had kids and a wife but cheated on her on a massive scale, there's Rihanna and Chris Brown who got in a domestic violence situation, Ashton Kutcher and the Demi Moore split, then there's Charlie Sheen.

Most recently the stars of twilight films had drama because the lead actress cheated with the 41 year old director of another one of her films who is almost double her age.

Britney spears is another example of looks not being enough to keep a relationship going.

---
But point being problems arise where looks don't cut it for any gender to have long term happines and the impact for other factors is more than 5%.

Hygiene overlaps with looks I will admit but not for the sake of looks but what a bad smile or a huge acne problem tells girls about a guy. (He doesn't take care of his health and is undisciplined about it, and with modern medicine and proper cleaning you'll send a different message. Same goes for teeth and smile and being fat).

 

Never underestimate the power of denial

 

If you're good looking, girls will assume 100 different positive things about your character, your intelligence, your personality.

As I said earlier, your reading comprehension is suspect. Breathing/not being naked are basic bodily functions and manners that one would expect any person with common sense would already have and so they are superfluous to mention if you're making a manual for driving vehicles. Many of Your "factors" on attracting women are fairly superfluous like "hygiene", "not being socially retarded". I still maintain that a man who's good looking with poor hygiene and social retardedness will still be much more attractive to women than a regular guy with both good hygiene + not socially retarded.

I am saying you need to be a 8-10 at the least in order to be sexually attractive to 9-10 women.

Do You really think I spend time reading/discussing U.S tabloids?

 

And you totally miss the point why chatlogs aren't credible evidence by itself to make your argument.

Also I never encouraged you to post them because I thought posting those chatlogs would violate privacy laws.

So mod action might be needed now in this thread...nice going bud.

 

You called me a troll on the first page. Ah but of course your post count is higher. As I said, if you're good looking women will assume all sorts of things about your intelligence, your character, will forgive any body language that makes you seem socially retarded.

 

Oh why didn't you say it that way in the first place? That's a much better and fairer statement that I would not have had issue with. It's a much fairer statement because it explains the caliber of physical looks in a women your aiming for.

You don't have to read the tabloids, you just have to glance at the huge headlines while you're shopping for groceries.

 

You brought up 10 women in the first place you idiot. you said if I'm 1-3(which I'm not) I shouldn't be going for perfect 10s which I'm not.

I'm only telling you that 90% of the reasons women and men choose partners are looks. If you have trouble attracting women it's probably because you're not very good looking.

what was that about straw-men arguments again? Geez you're dumb.

Here is the quotation I was responding to:

 

Obviously you don't.
Them:
1. news organization, possibly a sting organized WITH law enforcement


You:
1. just an opinionated individual, no credentials or affiliation with legit media.

The fact you take a prideful approach for the last few pages, until you redefined your definitions, made you appear to be an internet troll; that's not an insult because at least 1 other person also doubts your sincerity.

 

^That line I said was said in the 3rd person, not specifically talking about YOU, but hitting a general concept which is the topic you brought up in the first place on the first page.

The fact you misinterpreted the context of my quote also proves talking online via text why your chatlogs fail as credible evidence. (you can't detect tone of voice or rhetorical questions very well, you can't read body language or facial expressions)