More Thought on Incels.
How do you know they're ugly in the eyes of women collectively? How you perceive their looks is irrelevant. Men and women may have varying degrees of perception. As men, we can't judge each other's looks as well as we think we can. It's up to women to decide if a man is x/10...not us.
Guys you find ugly may very well be passable in the eyes of women, collectively. Guys you think are average-looking may actually fall behind the passable threshold in the eyes of women, collectively. Your perceptions of attractiveness of males may not even remotely transfer the way you think it does. ToM
auntblabby
Veteran

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 114,768
Location: the island of defective toy santas
in the distant future, if mankind doesn't blow itself up or get blasted to smithereens by a humongous meteorite, sex-and-companionship robots will be big business and the war between the sexes will effectively be over. both sexes will benefit. people will go carless if it means they can afford one of these things. they will be lifesavers.
I never claimed my impression was anything more than my own opinion.
Yeah. Think back to school. There was that one girl who was really, really pretty. All the guys agreed. Even if you weren't crazy about her personally, she was certainly considered very attractive by most of the guys. Then think of that really ugly, frumpy, fat girl. You felt bad for her, but most guys, including you, would take one look and think, "yikes!"
Most girls weren't at either extreme. They were in the average camp. Maybe you preferred one over the other...and your buddy like a different girl who you thought was 'just okay.' Either way, despite individual preferences, there were still averages. In the average camp, this is where 'people having individual tastes with looks' comes in.
Same holds true when women look at men, though their perception of male attractiveness may not translate the way you think it does. So when you see a man who you think looks decent in your eyes, he may actually statistically be in the "yikes" camp for most women.
Supposedly, as per genetic research, there was a time in humanity's past when more women than men procreated...meaning a smaller number of men were fathering children with multiple women. Was this due to the sex ratio being off, or the state of affairs where a large portion of men were kept from breeding?
I’ve had to develop compensatory strategies when I was roundly rejected.
Right. I've always said with two average-looking men, one will be more appealing if he works on himself, the other may slip away and become off-putting. Lookswise, they're still passable.
I think some men do fall below that threshold, where the compensatory strategies get harder and harder, if not impossible. What works for an average-looking man in compensating won't automatically work for an uglier man. You need a minimum of passable looks to even get in the door in the first place.
It's a no-brainer
You'd think so, but apparently not. The average-looking guy who let himself slip eventually improved himself by doing X,Y,Z. So, he tells the ugly guy, "This worked for me, surely it will work for you, too!" When it won't. Then he blames the ugly guy for not trying hard enough.
auntblabby
Veteran

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 114,768
Location: the island of defective toy santas
Supposedly, as per genetic research, there was a time in humanity's past when more women than men procreated...meaning a smaller number of men were fathering children with multiple women. Was this due to the sex ratio being off, or the state of affairs where a large portion of men were kept from breeding?
judging by how primates and wolves behave where only the alphas are allowed to mate, i suspect most men were prevented from mating unless they were very crafty and ballsy.
funeralxempire
Veteran

Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 40
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 33,122
Location: Right over your left shoulder
Supposedly, as per genetic research, there was a time in humanity's past when more women than men procreated...meaning a smaller number of men were fathering children with multiple women. Was this due to the sex ratio being off, or the state of affairs where a large portion of men were kept from breeding?
judging by how primates and wolves behave where only the alphas are allowed to mate, i suspect most men were prevented from mating unless they were very crafty and ballsy.
The concept of alphas is based on flawed research.
_________________
The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.
If you're not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing the oppressing. —Malcolm X
If you feel useless, just remember the USA took four presidents, thousands of lives, trillions of dollars and 20 years to replace the Taliban with the Taliban.
Same holds true when women look at men, though their perception of male attractiveness may not translate the way you think it does. So when you see a man who you think looks decent in your eyes, he may actually statistically be in the "yikes" camp for most women.
Not true. Men are attracted to 90% of women. That is, if a new woman showed interest, 9 out of 10 times, a man would give her a chance without hesitation. It's only if she's severely obese, blatantly unhealthy, or has an extremely offputting demeanor that a man wouldn't go for her. Heck, my own first girlfriend was far from attractive, and I still dated her.
Women, however, are attracted to only the top 20% of men: the alpha males. All other men are as good as nonexistent in women's eyes. Well, when as woman realizes she needs a stable life, they may date one of such unattractive men. But the raw sexual attraction for him will never be there. That's why many marriages are boring and sexless.
Same holds true when women look at men, though their perception of male attractiveness may not translate the way you think it does. So when you see a man who you think looks decent in your eyes, he may actually statistically be in the "yikes" camp for most women.
Not true. Men are attracted to 90% of women. That is, if a new woman showed interest, 9 out of 10 times, a man would give her a chance without hesitation. It's only if she's severely obese, blatantly unhealthy, or has an extremely offputting demeanor that a man wouldn't go for her. Heck, my own first girlfriend was far from attractive, and I still dated her.
Women, however, are attracted to only the top 20% of men: the alpha males. All other men are as good as nonexistent in women's eyes. Well, when they realize they need a stable life, they may start dating one of such unattractive men. But the raw sexual attraction for him will never be there. That's why many marriages are boring and sexless.
We're not in disagreement. I was trying to frame it in a way a man might understand it. What I'm saying is that in the "average-looking" group of girls , you may have a crush on one girl, your buddy may have a crush on the other ("beauty in the eye of the beholder," etc.). However, if the girl your buddy likes shows interest in you, you'd gladly take her. We're in agreement. Even if she's not in that elite super-hot group, you're still attracted to her. No question.
I was trying to explain that women have their own groupings of male attractiveness. And, yeah, it's even more selective than men's, you're right. I think, as men, we can't perceive our attractiveness or the attractiveness of other men the way we think we can. Men we see as normal/average through our eyes may be seen as collectively ugly in the eyes of the average woman.
So, when guys here say things like, "Well, I see ugly guys with women and good-looking guys who can't get a date," they're failing to factor in women's perception of attractiveness in men. These guys think how they see the looks of their fellow man must be how women also see them. This isn't so, as you yourself acknowledge.
Forget % for a moment. Any guy can tell a super hot girl, from an average girl, from a REALLY ugly one. Women have their own groupings, and we can't accurately gauge where men fall.
You're wrong though when you say "all other men are as good as nonexistent in women's eyes." The men they find average-looking are ignored/non-existent. The men they find hideous have it made known to them.
If you are talking about animal models then its not quite the same. However girls recognise alpha males at school from a young age. We use sophisticated language where "popular girls" date "popular boys". Popular means genetically blessed.
So while mechanisms might have changed, the order of things remains.
Sweetleaf
Veteran

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Female
Posts: 35,138
Location: Somewhere in Colorado
Same holds true when women look at men, though their perception of male attractiveness may not translate the way you think it does. So when you see a man who you think looks decent in your eyes, he may actually statistically be in the "yikes" camp for most women.
Not true. Men are attracted to 90% of women. That is, if a new woman showed interest, 9 out of 10 times, a man would give her a chance without hesitation. It's only if she's severely obese, blatantly unhealthy, or has an extremely offputting demeanor that a man wouldn't go for her. Heck, my own first girlfriend was far from attractive, and I still dated her.
Women, however, are attracted to only the top 20% of men: the alpha males. All other men are as good as nonexistent in women's eyes. Well, when as woman realizes she needs a stable life, they may date one of such unattractive men. But the raw sexual attraction for him will never be there. That's why many marriages are boring and sexless.
Those are all just statistics and averages, and probably should not be taken so literally.
Also even if someone settles for a partner that is less attractive than they envisioned, they could probably still find ways to enjoy sex. And well I think the reason a lot of marriages end up boring and sexless is because so many couples don't bother to communicate about sex...so they never really explore how to make it better and just give up on it instead.
_________________
Eat the rich, feed the poor. No not literally idiot, cannibalism is gross.
Sweetleaf
Veteran

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Female
Posts: 35,138
Location: Somewhere in Colorado
If you are talking about animal models then its not quite the same. However girls recognise alpha males at school from a young age. We use sophisticated language where "popular girls" date "popular boys". Popular means genetically blessed.
So while mechanisms might have changed, the order of things remains.
And what of unpopular girls? Seems when people get into these sort of discussions they forget that those existed and also became adult women who may not be so keen on guys who remind them of the popular guys at school who were probably not very nice to them.
_________________
Eat the rich, feed the poor. No not literally idiot, cannibalism is gross.