'>>31085330
Accept that you're not going to win and do something else.';

'>>31085330
What's wrong with the guy on the right? He's skinny? You know you can fix that. Work out 3 days a week and eat more. Guy on the left is actually kind of ugly, but he's fit.';

'>muh genetics
Yawn. Another incel cope thread. You are only looking for excuses to not try.';

'>>31085330
it's playing life on hard mode. Develop a personality. Definitely work out and lift as it improves mental health and other aspects of your life.

Unfortunately, if you're the man on the right; if you play all your cards right, you should be happy to land a woman that looks like pic related. In fact, if you look like the guy on the right, be grateful you have any pussy to smash.

I'm just being honest as I can, life is unfair and cruel. I've learned and accepted this and am actually happier because of it';

'>>31085330
>still white and tall';

'>>31085330
That saying means to work with what you were given that you can't change. I presume we're talking about the bodies since that appears to be the focus? Anyone can gain muscle. A more accurate picture would be to have someone with a conventionally attractive face next to someone with a conventionally unattractive face. Even still, while people are biased towards beauty that doesn't stop you from living a full life nor finding love, especially as you get older and you begin to pay less attention to the minutiae of beauty. I know this is a difficult thing to accept when you are likely at the biological point in your life where you body is constantly telling you to fit in and procreate (teenage years to 20's/early 30's) but one day, if you don't change your outlook, you will regret all of this time spent meandering over nothing.';

'>>31085330
chad is fucked if theyre playing yugioh';

'>>31085330
Just fuck off to the phillipines or Thailand if your white.';

'>>31085330
Uhh lift weights? No shit.';

'>>31085330
Become a business, financial, judicial or political elite, fund & siphon resources to an incel revolt, REVOLT!!!!';

'>>31085330
So you think he just woke up with those shoulders and did no work at all to aquire them?';

'>>31086132
Retard it's his frame.
He has very little actual muscle. Women don't like a hard worker they like a guy with good genetics.
Having a little muscle just gives off the illusion of good genetics, so it does help sometimes.
But attraction is fundamentally about selecting the best genes.';

'use Macdonalds card to buy breakfast an enjoy your meal in peace';

'>>31085330
The guy on the right plays the game.
He eats a kilo of red meat every single day.
He goes to the gym 2x a week and does upper body strength exercises.
He replaces his wardrobe with smart / casual.
He gets contacts.
He trims his beard.';

'>>31085330
>Acting as if being skinny is some life-ending, unfixable trait.
I've heard some girls like skinny guys, but if you're really concerned about it, start lifting';

'>>31085330
If u can't win with your hand just cheat
or go to the fucking gym u lazy fuck';

'>>31085342
Guy on the left has broad shoulders and a slim waist, so he has that tapered look like with minimal effort. Dude on the right has shit genetics, so he'll never compare to left no matter how hard he trains.';

'>>31086628
Dude on the left also has the ugly caveman look that women do not find attractive. Dude on the right looks like an actual homo sapien from a civilized society and just needs to work out his scrawny ass and he'd be fine.';

'>>31086166
Cope. He clearly is at least active where as the right photo looks like he doesn't even go outside and couldn't lift 40 pounds above his chest.';

'>>31085330
If the guy on the right had been more active as a kid or tried going to the gym sometime in the last 30 years he wouldn't be "playing that hand" today. Stop with the cope.';

'>>31086689
>Dude on the left also has the ugly caveman look that women do not find attractive
Lmao have you seen some of the dudes that women go with?';

'>>31085339
>>31085330
dude jus be urself girls love that!';

'>>31085380
>enabling fatties
no, fuck off, guy on the right should fuck sugar babies before he goes for fat
>>31085365
>hello roastie!';

'>>31086628
Shoulders aren't completely genetic. There are shoulder workouts which builds shoulder muscles and make your shoulders appear broader. Get some dumbbells.';

'>>31085380
I would unironically give up everything for a fat nerd gf like picrel. I went to magic the gathering tournaments for months and failed to find one';

'>>31087247
My body's fucked. I don't know why I still bother working out. It's a waste of time.';

'>>31086166
no denying frame is suboptimal. that said, still tall, still white, not obese, not bald, can grow facial hair, doesn't need any cosmetic surgery.

he's not Chad but you're delusional if you don't immediately see more fortunate than average genetics. a billion men would kill to switch places with him';

'>>31086628
>so he'll never compare to left no matter how hard he trains.
and half of males will never compare to him no matter what they do';

'>>31087387
That's why attraction is genetically deterministic. Women don't care how hard you've worked to improve yourself, they'll take the dude who was born lucky.
Oh but you will head the
>ackshually i liek dadbod
line from roasties, which basically means they like a chad who's let himself go a little.';

'>>31085330
Do what I did.
Stop playing pozzed unfair games.
Just withdraw from trying to appease roasties who will hate you regardless of whatever you do.
Just fuck a prostitute once a while when you feel frustrated.
Dating in clown world = scam.
>>31087247
You are a DYEL retard. Even with gear there is an upper limit on how wide your shoulders can get. The right guy has completely and utterly subhuman bone structure. The best he can hope to achieve is going from absolute dogshit to dogshit. It's simply over for him.
Either bluepilled basedboy or gaslighting bitch.';

'>>31087428
and the guy on the right is genetically determined to be tall white and not bald so those are the cards he plays';

'>>31087451
>so those are the cards he plays
Not with that frame.';

'>>31086066
Is it really that easy?';

'>>31087488
White fetishism is very strong in Asia, being white is akin to at least +2/10 points to your looks compared to west. Tons of girls around Universities and big cities looking out for foreign dick.
If you are truecel subhuman, you are an incel wherever you go, but a 5/10 sexless normie might get laid there. I don't think the right guy in OP's pic would get laid even there though.
Excluding worthless gold diggers and visa whores of course. Anyone with their monetary requirements can get these.';

'>>31087461
you are unironically delusional then. as-is right now he mogs plenty of men born to more fortunate frames that can put on more muscle';

'>>31087527
>post poo actor who juiced himself to fuck
I'm sure you're just baiting at this point.';

'>>31087527
>>31087541
Fr even with juice, he would be incel without fame.
Bluepillers never stop being retarded.';

'>>31087431
He could definitely get a skinny gf if he lifted, had a good personality, a job and went where single women are.';

'>>31087431
You don't get to renounce lifting and then call someone a dyel in the same post you faggot, it's one or the other.';

'>>31085330
don't be unsufferable, it's only going to play against you to try to be edgy, hateful o spiteful, try to be dependable';

'Who the fuck cares if you don't look like a male model. Most guys who look like male models only succeed at being, well, male models. I would suggest focus being successful at whatever it is you do and the rest will come naturally. While you're at it, dressing well and learning to communicate well with people will definitely come in handy.

Also, there are a lot of good-looking women out there who don't even seek the sterotypical "chad" you posted. Sure, it doesn't hurt in life to have broad shoulders or a sharp jawline or whatever. But there's more to life than that and the real world doesn't think like /r9k/.';

'>>31085330
Guy on the right definitely doesn't win by trying to have superficial beauty. Many of the people identifying with the -cel monicker are actually pretty decent looking and extremely vain. We don't know anything about either of these guys so all I can do is give general advice.';

'>>31088275
What's superficial about beauty?';

'>>31088332
It's not. That's the thing. You can beautiful on the outside, inside, or both.';

'jesus this thread was one tough pill to swallow, im actually supposed to renew my gym membership but this thread motivated me to just quit and give up kek';

'>>31085330
Hit the gymn, work on his grooming and appearence, be social, be the best, most masculine version of himself. That's really it.';

'>>31086689
Its proven that women are attracted to guys with brow ridges and cavemen/masculine features bruh.';

'>>31085330
Looksmaxx as best you can or just play a different game man. There's more to life than pussy, even so, dude on the right could probably pull a bad bitch in India or the Philippines or some shit considering how attractive white skin is perceived as in those countries.';

'>>31085330
You guys have such warped views. Guy on the left is actually ugly to me andnguy to right is normal.';

'>>31085330
Being 100% honest guy on the right has a better chance if he just acts normal. I looked like left as a teenager and nobody really talks about this but other people are afraid of you and it hurts.

Afraid of being ridiculed

Afraid of me bullying them. Apart from my looks I was right on the inside. I was also challenged more to fighting or other tests.

If your a nerdy looking dude I mean it from the bottom of my heart theres nothing wrong with you. The smart women I want go after brains, and I have none.

I have sense enough to know your going to be alright. And if I was there to witness somebody treating you bad for looking like right. I would stand up for you.

Peace and love 4chan.';

'>>31086166
>But attraction is fundamentally about selecting the best genes.

The best genes according to whom? If you think the smelly clam between a woman's legs knows what the best genes are then you're a fool. In this day and age women get fucked by the most successful douchebag social grifters. Image trumps reality when it comes to making the slit wet and women are almost always too brainless to see through a sham. Women's instincts ceased to be a good determinant for optimal breeding when mankind left the stone age behind.';

'>>31085365
Game is fucking bullshit dude. Get real. If you're 5'5 and ugly, you could be William Shakespeare himself and you're still not going to be charming your way into pussy with 99% of women.';

'>>31088449
If you want to work out for the health benefits, that's fine. Just don't expect it to make any difference to a woman unless you have lucky genetics. The irony is ofc that men who won the genetic lottery don't even need to train to attract women. They can be scrawny-ass twigs or overweight "dadbods" and still get the girl. It's Joever for the rest of us.';

'>>31085330
>bulk
>get a haircut
>Lose the glasses and get contacts
>buy some fitting clothes
>be social

You won't pull as many girls as left but that can make al the difference between dying alone and at least haveing a chance if you play the numbers game.';

'>>31085330
>How do you play the game as the guy on the right
You don't.
There's no point in playing a rigged game.
If you are an actual incel (not just a melodramatic failed normalfag), the only choices you have are
>neetbux if your country has those and just withdraw from everything
>work towards a decently paying job so you can travel to poor third world countries and fuck cheap hookers twice a year
Everything else is pure cope.';

'>>31090194
>There's no point in playing a rigged game.
Actually, let me correct this:
There is an ethical OBLIGATION to not play rigged games.';

'>>31090070
>at least haveing a chance if you play the numbers game.
It's not a numbers game. Women either like you or they don't. They're a hivemind.';

'>>31086949
Fat is simply a symptom of bad upbringing, can get fixed';

'>>31086689
you're either trolling or coping out of your mind my nigga.';

'>>31085339
FPBP';

'>>31085330
Why is he built like the playing cards? How does that even happen?';

'>>31087270
I got a casual fling out of one recently. But she wasn't quite as fat as that one.';

'ITT: incels who have never been on a date thinking they are experts on women.';

'>>31086689
okay John Copington this is getting a little out of hand, i think you might just be lying to yourself at this point';

'>>31089534
>If you're 5'5 and ugly, you could be William Shakespeare himself and you're still not going to be charming your way into pussy with 99% of women.
actually yes you can, it's just that you're just not sociable at all so nobody likes you or cares about you';

'>>31089534
t. guy with no game';

'>>31091234
no but you dont get it bro look at all these carefully cropped charts, tweets nobody gave a fuck about, and other chronically online shit. It so over!';

'>>31089534
You're right actually. In the past this was different, because people still met in the real world and relationships developed organically. Even now, when young people meet irl, the OLD dynamics seep in. Before there was room for your other qualities to come into play ( charm, wit, humour, intelligence) now you get filtered out on looks immediatly if you don't make the cut on first glance. It's still possible, but it will take a lot of rejection and failure';

'>>31091652
Always have to laugh when people use these same old pictures as some kind of ultimate reference point to discredit clear social trends ( increasing inceldom in young men). Because they seem to be taken in 1) eastern/central europe 2) no one is saying things are impossible, they're just much harder compared to even a generation ago';

'>>31087488
Hell yeah it is! Actually, women would even come to you with no effort on your behalf.';

'>>31091666
its only hard because you're just as useless or even more useless than the others in your age group
The bar is so fucking low right now. Job. Transportation. Apartment. Wash your ass and clothes. Don't be a psycho (optional). If you can't meet these basic ass requirements why would any woman want you inside of her?
>B-b-but chad...
You're not chad, most of us aren't. Yes some people got dealt a good hand, you didn't. Boo hoo. Life isn't fair and its not meant to be.';

'>>31091683
Brother I'm in my third year of my EE degree and all my friends ( normal looking guys, if a little socially awkward) are incel virgins. Does that seem like a stable and sustainable state of society to you?';

'>>31085330
You act like the guy on the right couldn’t look 1000 times better by actually exercising and getting a decent hair cut like chad on the left';

'>>31091694
>i can't get laid despite it being easier than ever
>therefore society has collapsed and billions must die
Oh shut up please.';

'>>31091717
I'm not saying billions should die negro. I only said there is an obvious societal trend that doesn't get disproven by posting the same old creepshots

Why are millenials so obtuse when it comes to understanding that dating dynamics are different in different generations. Easier than ever? Yet more virgin men than ever before in history and fewer relationships. Must be because all zoomers are shut in weirdos right? That's what you were going to say next. Nothing to do with female hypergamy intensifying x100 in the last decade or so';

'>>31091732
>Yet more virgin men than ever before in history
Correct. Because more men than ever before in history are useless losers.
>fewer relationships
Completely wrong and I bet you can not provide any source to substantiate this claim.
>Must be because all zoomers are shut in weirdos right?
Not all zoomers. Just the zoomer "men". Most of them are simply not fit for a relationship because instead of going to the gym or doing any productive hobbies they would rather jack off to porn and waste their lives on video games.
>Nothing to do with female hypergamy intensifying x100 in the last decade or so
No, because you are confusing cause and effect. Increased female hypergamy isn't a cause for the increase of incels. It's an effect of the increase of incels.';

'>>31091732
>Must be because all zoomers are shut in weirdos right?
Yes, unironically.
> Nothing to do with female hypergamy intensifying x100 in the last decade or so
And how do we know this is the case though? Why, because you said it is?
"Hypergamy" will always be a massive cope, because the only guys that get screened out by it are the ones who are supposed to be. Sucks to suck I guess, but this circles back to that whole "shut in weirdo" thing.';

'>>31091694
>I am 21-22 years old, an age where 40%-45% of all men and women are still virgins
>By some strange twist of fate me and my friends are in this 45%
>This mean society has fallen';

'>>31091732
>I only said there is an obvious societal trend
Yeah.
The Sexual Revolution is ended.
Virginity rates in young people, men & women
>increasing for 25 years, making feminists cry
Lifetime sexual partner counts
>falling for 25 years, making feminists cry
Divorce rates among married people
>dropping for over 50 years
Percentage of people aged 19-29 that think sex outside of marriage is morally wrong
>increasing for 20 years
Among unmarried men and women aged 19-29 a MAJORITY think sex outside of marriage is morally wrong.
You and other socially isolated make virgins that think porn, OF, podcasts that invite literal prostitutes on to talk about dating, and so on are all there is because you are, again, socially isolated, think you can't get laid for weird, magical fucked up reasons to with with bigfoot, I mean Chad.
Meanwhile? Among Gen Z men aged 26-28 over 1 in 5 is already married';

'>>31092046
Bingo
What does the word "hypergamy" actually mean?
>Male appearance is much less important to women than status, personality, and othr factors
But when a guy that hasn't talked to a woman his life can't get laid he blames hypergamy for it.';

'>>31085330
>Did you now some people are more attractive than other people? IT'S TRUE, I SEAR! Anyway, this means if you aren't perfect you will die alone
Meanwhile, Outside';

'>>31085330
Gosh, isn't it TERRIBLE that some men are not born 10/10?
Can you imagine how hard it must be for men to be only AVERAGE?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!';

'>>31092136
>a rare few people win the lottery therefore you have no right to complain';

'>>31092142
high fwhr short midface slayer';

'>>31092205
>80% of men have wives
>99.8% of men have sex
>THIS IS JUST LIKE WINNING THE LOTTERY!';

'>>31092584
I'll take random stats pulled out of anon's ass for 500, Alex';

'>>31085330
oh no..i'm not a male model..i'm not a 1 in 1000 adonis..how will i ever find a gf';

'>>31092662
Funny you should say that after blindly believing the blatant incel lie that the majority of men are sexless.';

'>>31092231
...that's a woman';

'>>31092827
Nah, they're just betas who get a pity fuck from their wives once a month.';

'>>31092142
Horseshoe effect, sometimes you can be so ugly that you become hot. If he was built and shredded with tattoos he would get pussy.';

'>>31092078
21 years old virgin woman? nice joke

the 95% of females has been pound by chad since 14 at least';

'>>31085330
By not being a vain retarded chud who longs for an imaginary life of constant validation and affirmation.
All he has to do is work hard to make money and not act/dress like white trash, not get obese, and he's instantly more attractive than 80% of men on the face of the earth.
Or become gay or a tranny, he's kinda cute in an unmanly way, they'd eat him up.';

'>>31085330
The guy on the left looks like a douchebag and douchebags only attract low IQ skanks. The guy on the right needs to exercise a little and improve his wardrobe and he'll become vastly more attractive than the other guy to higher quality women.';

'>>31085330
Left looks disproportionate.';

'>>31091652
>haha let's make fun of this guy who thinks he's too ugly to date by genuinely cartooning him as a guy physically too ugly to date';

'>>31092662
>Census stats are pulled out of your ass
kek';

'>>31092855
>t. KHHV incel afraid to look at women';

'>>31093732
That's a biofem, idiot';

'>>31091652
Wait, so jewchudjak actually is comically hideous to the point that nobody could ever love him? Maybe the incels are right...';

'>>31092078
If 45% of men are virgins, that is a terrible sign for society';

'>>31091646
who the fuck cares about game? that guy said he was 5'5 and ugly, no game will get him laid';

'>>31091683
>The bar is so fucking low right now.
Saying this over and over again will not bring it into reality.';

'Everyone ITT is coping HUGE. Look at this faggot. He is in great physical shape and pretty jacked but women still would NOT care one bit. He has der coomer face/phenotype, no hair, etc. He is going to have to settle for single moms or fat bitches.

Women care about Prestige, Face, and Money. In that order. Women will cheat on a rich guy with a hotter guy. Women will cheat on a hot guy with a famous guy. None of these things will RETAIN the woman.

You need to be realistic with your goals. You need to realize that a "loving wife" is a Hollywood psyop fantasy at this point for modern North Americans. Women are vicious opportunists that are not afraid to leverage their vagina to get what they want. If your hopes and dreams for life are being a loving husband, you are unironically a sucker at this point and need deprogramming.

Focus on your own wellbeing right now. Make money, save money. Have a skill or a hobby you like doing. Build yourself up. But don't throw it all away for a chance at lukewarm leftover pussy.';

'>>31085330
Change your clothes, even if it's just some jeans and a t-shirt. Baggy, not tight. Try to look like a man at ease with himself. Don't look nervous or uncomfortable. That is sensed like a bad smell. You don't care what people think and why should you?';

'I'm a 32 year old virgin who looks like the guy on the right. I just gave up on everything since I have redeeming qualities. Looks are shit, brain is shit, social skills are shit, personality is shit, and my parents are poor so I'm expecting nothing from them. I just work and stay home.';

'The same way you "play the game as a guy on the left". Instead of looking got freaks on the left, you look for freaks on the right. People on political poles are the minority. Most people are centrist, using their brain to decide on an issue by issue basis with respect to actual evidence. If you want to live on a political pole you're going to have a hard time unless you go to social gatherings for other people on that same social pole.

>>31098099

Your post is as much cope as the rest of the shit in this thread. Fucking hollywood psyop kek.

This is really simple. Go to social places, talk to normal women. Ignore whores and fast women.';

'>>31098099
>Don't look nervous or uncomfortable. That is sensed like a bad smell. You don't care what people think and why should you?
Try being physically deformed and pulling that off.';

'>>31089534
Putin is 5'5. You telling me he isn't getting platinum pussy?';

'>>31101003
>Just become a dictator bro';

'>>31098099
This post is in itself part of a psyop.
Thanks for telling on yourself anon.';

'>>31085330
that dude on the left looks fucking weird in that photo, I prefer my own frame.';

'>>31085330
Shoulder exercises (probably lat raises and their varieties) and shrugs, tailored shirts (button ups in particular, maybe a nice blazer), a new set of glasses maybe but he suits the round lenses, and a sense of humor.

All those combined would tell a woman "I understand my shortcomings and refuse to let them hold me back, I'm determined to be happy regardless. I take care of myself and am conscious of presenting well. "

From then on its just a confidance and charisma game.';

'>>31085330
Trespasser!';

'>>31085330
>>31087527
>>31087950
>>31098099
/thread';

'>>31103817
This guys looks fine...';

'>>31103817
the lack of pectoral muscles does look a bit odd, he should work those out.';

'>>31091652
>Just betabuxx or get constantly cheated on.';

'>your body/brain needs some minor accomplishment before it will allow you to feel good about yourself for other things too

h'what the fuck I didn't even know that';

'>>31101887
>All those combined would tell a woman "I understand my shortcomings and refuse to let them hold me back, I'm determined to be happy regardless. I take care of myself and am conscious of presenting well. "
And a woman would interpret that as "I am an overcompensating genelet."';

'>>31098099
Only based post ITT.';

'>>31107120
And they would be right as well.';

'>>31098099';

'>>31089534
I'm 5'6 and had most sexual experiences out of my friend group, our group looked very geeky but I at least lifted out and pulled the most girls.
You're just making excuses to not try. Think of when you're on your deathbed and wonder if it was worth it being a bitch who hesitated and didn't take the shot.
Keep listening to what internet tells you about not getting pussy as a short dude lmao, that's all you're good for';

'>>31098099
beard out you retard';

'>>31098099
only way guys like this can win is if they nichemaxx. unironically become a gnome/wizard and watch pussy fall into your lap';

'I'm honestly thinking of quitting weightlifting. There is seriously no point when you're a genetic deadend.';

'>>31110197
It's about the feeling. faggot.';

'>>31110197
nichemaxx retard';

'>>31110205
Feeling of what? If you're not reaping the rewards, it's worthless.';

'>>31085330
>terrible hands for canasta
In life, you get to determine your own win conditions.

The problem with OP and incels is that they've decided that the win condition is "Be Chad" or "Live like Chad" and then get salty that Chad has an advantage.

My advice would be to set a win condition for yourself without ever once thinking about Chad or what other people have.';

'>>31085339
Imprecise but not wrong.';

'>>31085330
Not to downplay the role of genes, but being hot, ESPECIALLY in photos, is a combination of three things
>being born sexy
>avoiding blunders in your personal appearance
>avoiding photography blunders
You have to be doing all three or you'll look like shit.

The person in the right photo has committed a ton of fixable personal appearance and photography sins.
>Stop wearing outfits with zero visual cohesion
I basically don't care who you are, baggy banana-cargo pants with a red lumberjack flannel and a skin-tight sweater isn't a good look. You put that outfit on the guy on the left, he'd look like shit too.
>Start spending a year or two hitting the gym
the guy on the left's clearly put SIGNIFICANT work into his physique and has significantly developed arms, chest, and shoulder muscles. The guy on the right's got beanpole arms and does not appear to spend any time at the gym. Choose to be fit.
>Get some contact lenses and an alternate haircut
High and tight military haircuts are a loser's choice, it's a super-dated "live with parents" hair-style. He could and should try wearing his hair differently
>Do not take photos indoors and in dungeons
The guy on the left is at the beach in very pleasing natural lighting with carefully chosen angles to position shadows that accent his muscles and jaw. The guy on the right is in a dingy poorly lit yellow-tinged dungeon. Ew.
>Do not take photos from below
Photo on the left is from above, showing off his face and body well. Photo on the right is centered at his belly button and gives us an unpleasant under-nostril shot.
>Do not take inactive non-narrative shots
Shot on the left is at the beach, actively wading with a girl: socially proven, aspirational for both men and women, fun! Shot on the right is a static "nothing is happening" shot of a face-on Kubrick stare. No one looks good in this angle or setting.

Don't complain you were dealt a bad hand, if based on your choices you would've equally fucked up a better one.';

'>>31098099
>Women care about
And how exactly did you obtain this masterful knowledge of what all women want? Was it from websites full of statistics gathered by other men who cannot get girlfriends?

As for his face, the deadeye slack jaw look is not very charming. And people can become more charming. It's possible to change and be more charming.

But hey man, whatever makes you happy.';

'>>31110433
>My advice would be to set a win condition for yourself without ever once thinking about Chad or what other people have.
Unfortunately everything is relative.';

'>>31110537
Not everything is relative to others though.
...which is why you set win conditions irrespective of others and only for yourself.

My lifting goals are to get stronger than my previous self for my future self, not women.

>Don't waste your time on jealousy; sometimes you're ahead, sometimes you're behind. The race is long, and in the end, it's only with yourself';

'>>31101577
NTA but The point is they've proved
>Some threshold exists for sufficient success or game such that someone like that can cross to get laid with good quality partners
Now you're just haggling over where that threshold is and how reasonable it is for someone 5'5 to cross it.

I'd bet on the line being substantially lower than
>you must literally become the dictator of a top 5 largest country to get laid if you're 5'5
And much closer to
>You gotta be willing to ask out in person and date women who are 5'3 and under, which means you're getting out of the house enough to meet them where they're at.
plus
>you've got some attractive shit going on in your life that they'll find sexy- maybe muscles, maybe hobbies, maybe money, whatever.
Which isn't so high a bar a short person couldn't clear it.';

'>>31110645
No, all they've proved is that high socioeconomic status will guarantee you women. None of us are ever going to attain that level of status and power, so mentioning Putin's height was retarded as fuck.';

'>>31110714
>No, all they've proved is that high socioeconomic status will guarantee you women
This falls for the same point, that just changes the question to
>Okay, we know such a high point exists. How high?
And IRL, it's not "dictator" high.

>None of us are ever going to attain that level of status and power
That's broadly a choice. You're in a mating competition, you can intentionally optimize for winning if you care about doing so.';

'>>31110977
the issue with all this is that there's an obvious genetic component. you can't mold yourself into being a genetically superior male. you can camouflage your genes by attaining status and wealth. but young women in 2024 aren't looking for providers like they used to, so that's not really a worthwile startegy anymore, unless you attain mega status ( athlete, artist) or wealth

another guy, who's tall, handsome and masculine, can live with his mom at pull women you can't even dream of, while you and I can wageslave for years in order to play the role of provider for an older woman. does that sound appealing';

'>>31110998
>you can't mold yourself into being a genetically superior male.
The secret about incel gene arguments and dating in general, is that genetics are ultimately judged, both by incels and women, as a reflection of achieved outcomes. You and women as a group ultimately perceive anyone actually doing all of this and living like this as having good genes, regardless of what "genes" they had 5 years ago: no one cares about the genes, it's the outcomes. If someone were to undergo such a life change, incels and women would say those good genes were "just in there all along" and "just hadn't had a chance to express themself yet". It's just the nature of life, people have a bad imagination for what could be, you're judged on what you are now. You could be different.

I don't doubt there are cases at the boundary where sufficiently bad genes specifically related to appearance or height would sabotage such an effort, but if you're not
>I'm literally a midget smaller than all other women - short or
>"A horse carrying burning oil stepped on my head and spilled it on my face when I was seven months old and now I look like a smashed tomato" - ugly
Then broadly speaking this is just a cope incels like repeating because it's comforting to have zero responsibility for resolving an issue one's dealing with.';

'>>31110645
>You gotta be willing to ask out in person and date women who are 5'3 and under
Short women like tall men even more than average height women.';

'>>31085342
the guy on the left looks like he has a tiny head';

'>>31111064
that's not really true. a woman's sexuality is fundamentally different to a man's. for evolutionary reasons it's much more selective, focussed on quality over quantity. the inverse of men. through religion and cultural conditioning we enforced monogamy to safeguard male participation in society, but when those mechanisms of control fail, and women revert back to their primal hypergamous nature, their sexuality becomes extremly narrow

only a tiny percentage of men actually induce passionate feelings of lust, love and dedication in women. often at first glance. it's not something you can work towards. it's something you have or not, innately

for example. I have a PhD in bioinformatics ( genome sequencing), I make 6 figures, I'm well-groomed, socialised and have many female friends. yet I'm 5'8 with an average looking face at best. I know women will never look at me at my face or body and think of mating. they might look at my resources yes, but that's deception. that's hiring a lifelong actress to play the role of 'loving' wife

contrast that with my brother. he's a failed painter, still lives at home, but he's 6'3 with a clasically handsome face. he pulls women you and I can't even fantasize about

are you really going to claim that genetics aren't the deciding factor in our respective success ( or lack thereof) with women?';

'>>31111064
>if you're not
>Then broadly speaking this is just a cope incels like repeating because it's comforting to have zero responsibility for resolving an issue one's dealing with.
This';

'>>31111129
>only a tiny percentage of men actually induce passionate feelings of lust, love and dedication in women
Where are you pretending to get this information from?';

'>>31111166
I observe. I see the doe eyes full of admiration and lust when I'm out with women and a tall, handsome men walks in. I see the same women cast eyes of disintrest and irritation when an average guy tries to chat them up. I'm not sure why people are so vested in trying to dismiss elementary biology that's empirically proven if you would just open your eyes for a second and observe the underlying dynamics of the world';

'>>31111178
>I observe. I see the doe eyes full of admiration and lust when I'm out with women and a tall, handsome men walks in. I see the same women cast eyes of disintrest and irritation when an average guy tries to chat them up.
I refuse to believe that you have any sort of fundamental scientific training. I have met spiritualist mediums with great respect for the scientific method.';

'>>31111190
>great
With greater respect
Not even kidding';

'>>31111190
I'm not a positivist but empircal evidence is meaningful, especially if it conforms to the well-known fact that women are hypergamous by nature ( lots of studies that rigorously confirm this if you want to try and debooonk it)

So I'm not sure what you're trying to debate against here? That women don't have a markedly different reaction to men who display outward markers of higher genetic quality ( beauty/height/intelligence)?';

'>>31085330
Just... activate the fucking trap card
/game';

'>>31111190
>>31111195

Is that rigorous enough for you?

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/per.2087

"Finally, we found that of all of the traits and score types assessed, romantic interest was only predicted by the responders’ perception of the targets’ physical attractiveness, with no moderating effect of the responders’ sex. Specifically, responders’ were interested in targets’ who they perceived to be higher than themselves on physical attractiveness"';

'>>31085330
bruh all this incel shit that blames your loneliness on women for being shallow is so fucking shallow.
Of course there are shallow women, there are shallow people. Of course if your going after 'stacy' you will be rejected and you will also be rejected by earnest women (who usally care about looks much less then men) bc u have this deeply flawed mentality. Or better yet you wont even persue those women earsently (as in with actual respect and affection).

Idk if yall r just surounded by terrible women and that whats trapping you in this mindset but your just fucking over your own life and are going to end up ignored bc no woman wants to get w someone who doesnt respect them and fix them.

also enough with the look maxing please

just treat women (and yourselves) like people pleaase

:p';

'>>31111294
and of course people are born w unfair advantages. its like that for women too- especially in terms of genetics.';

'https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10508-022-02416-2

> Women view taller men as more physically attractive, more masculine, and having a greater fighting ability. Higher shoulder-to-hip ratios were rated as more attractive in taller men but did not influence attractiveness ratings for shorter men';

'>>31111294
can tell u didn't get much laid in college.';

'https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40806-017-0092-x


>Prior research investigating the mate preferences of women and their parents reveals two important findings with regard to physical attractiveness. First, daughters more strongly value mate characteristics connoting genetic quality (such as physical attractiveness) than their parents.
>Unattractive men were never rated as more desirable partners for daughters, even when they possessed the most desirable trait profiles

anyway, I've made my point';

'>>31111221
>empircal evidence is meaningful
The biased "observations" of a biased man in the small pool in a physical location near him do not constitute valid "empirical evidence" any more than a lack of sharks is empirical evidence of the effectiveness of shark repellent.

>That women don't have a markedly different reaction to men who display outward markers of higher genetic quality ( beauty/height/intelligence)?
No.
Try actually paying attention to the ideas you assert as truth:
>>31111129
>only a tiny percentage of men actually induce passionate feelings of lust, love and dedication in women
This is your personal unverified belief. Accept that as a first step.

Lookism is real and people of both sexes getting favored by their looks definitely happens.
But the moment you start constructing a defeatist and traditionally incel argument that only a tiny percentage of me actually arouse women, you are both revealing that you don't understand what arouses women and invalidating the feelings and minds of many women on the planet who are aroused by men you think they wouldn't be.

You know who my mom found sexy? Robin Williams. Because he was funny and furry as hell. You don't know what you are talking about. The empirical evidence of the fact that you don't understand what attracts women is the fact that you can't attract women.';

'>>31111355

>>31111341
>>31111322
>>31111253

I anxiously await your retort dear sir. the actual science seems proof my "observations"

using an extreme outlier example like robin williams to try and discredit general trends is not it';

'>>31111253
"specifically, responders' who rated the targets' physical attractiveness as higher than themselves reported more romantic interest"
This conclusion based aon a survey of 335 people states that both genders reported that they had more romantic interest in people they felt were more attractive than themselves.

This doesn't in any way prove that only a tiny percentage of men actually induce passionate feelings of lust, love and dedication in women.';

'>>31111322
>Women view taller men as more physically attractive, more masculine, and having a greater fighting ability. Higher shoulder-to-hip ratios were rated as more attractive in taller men but did not influence attractiveness ratings for shorter men
Not even reading it if this is what you're pulling from it.

This doesn't in any way prove that only a tiny percentage of men actually induce passionate feelings of lust, love and dedication in women.';

'>>31111386
>>31111392
no, what it proves is hypergamy and the value of looks above other intangible qualities. and hypergamy, when taken to its extreme form ( like now, without any cultural restraints on women's sexuality) leads to them results I've mentioned

do I really need to pull up the OLD statistics that only a tiny minortiy of men get 90%+ of matches. or do you think that kind of dynamic is only confined to online dating and is not representative of real life. open your eyes';

'>>31111341
>I've made my point
You really fucking haven't.
All that study says is that the women surveyed have a minimum level of attractiveness they require in a partner and that for them extremely good or bad looks trump personality.

None of the studies suggest that only a tiny percentage of men actually induce passionate feelings of lust, love and dedication in women.
See
>Men with the most desirable personality profiles were rated more favorably than their counterparts only when they were at least moderately attractive.
Attractiveness is not all or nothing.

And none of them come close to the absurd idea that there is an objective ideal attractiveness. All attractiveness was based on the individual's subjective assessment.';

'>>31111411
Nah

It proves that looks matter.
That's it.';

'>>31111498
But there is an objective ideal of beauty and trying to dismiss that is dimissing reality. Optimal craniofacial development IS beauty. Of course there is room for subjective taste whe it comes to soft features ( and a certain amount of leeway when it comes to morphological development , for example a mandible that's a little recessed can still be seen as cute in women) but the foundation is largely a biological reality

Btw, it doesn't prove looks matter, it proves the primacy of looks. Or did all those profiles get so many matches because their sense of humour and charm radiated through the screen?';

'>>31111544
>it proves the primacy of looks
Were these matches on an app that primarily focuses on snap decisions based on images?';

'>>31111228
Chad has Jinzo on the field bro';

'>>31111338
that's a woman and she probably got passed around kek';

'>>31111623
Evidently. But that isn't the gotcha you think it is. For the younger generations there isn't a clear seperation between the internet and real life, the same dynamics are at play. Those worlds merge into each other. Not only is dating increasingly moving into the online space ( not only OLD, that's more a millenial thing actually, zoomer mostly use social as a dating app), the mentality of OLD/social is also seeping into real life dating dynamics';

'>>31111544
>But there is an objective ideal of beauty and trying to dismiss that is dimissing reality.
There's an objective ideal of symmetry.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Certain craniofacial traits are regional and what is common in one region is considered bizarre or exotic in another, depending on subjective perspective.

You're currently arguing against millennia old wisdom in favor of incel internet rants designed to escape any sense of personal responsibility. Now might be a good time to rethink some of your life choices.';

'>>31111653
>For the younger generations there isn't a clear seperation between the internet and real life
It seems that way.

>the same dynamics are at play.
Nope.
The differences are numerous and relevant.
You can't see the difference between a bored girl swiping a finger on a picture and two human beings interacting in real life, I really don't think I am going to be able reach you.';

'>>31111687
>You can't see
If you can't see';

'>>31111655
>>31111655

Symmetry and harmony IS beauty. A face that has undergone correct craniofacial development will have facial ratios that make it pleasing to eye, regardless of cultural perception. Your refusal to acknoweldge objective beauty is not age-old wisdom, it's just modern denial

Of course there are ethnic variations in craniofacial development, but an optimally developed face will mostly share the same traits across races

I'm not trying to escape personal responsibility, save me your faux petersoneque bootstrap ad hominem bs. My life is decent, I make good money, I enjoy my work';

'>>31111696
>I'm not trying to escape personal responsibility
So who is responsible for a man not being in a relationship again?
Is it the inherent nature of half the planet all insisting on a tiny percentage of beautiful men such that most men can do nothing to improve their lot and therefore are not remotely responsible for being alone?';

'>>31110279
serotonin bitch.
sounds like you weren't lifting hard enough';

'>>31085330
you have a yugioh card and chad has nothing
you've already won, anon, just let chad play his last pathetic card and END THIS DUEL!!!!';

'>>31097130
WTF?
The decline of degenerates is a good thing.';

'>>31098099
...he's married with kids, moron';

'Incels
>ONLY THE VERY MOST ATTRACTIVE MEN CAN SUCCEED WITH WOMEN! REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!
Reality
>picrel';

'>>31094203
>just chase money bro!!!

https://youtu.be/k224gY7Tn-Y
Going from a low status job to a prestigious one made the average go from a 5.6/10 to a 6.8/10 that is to say 1.2 points higher. So for example if you are a 4/10 bartender and switched to surgeon you'd become a 5.2/10.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2017.12.008 (Wang 2018)
This is also in line with this study which stated that making TEN TIMES your current salary would mean at most 2 points more in an attractiveness scale. So if you are a 4/10 making 60k, you'd be a 6/10 making 600k. Good luck getting that salary bump.

http://doi.org/10.1556/JEP.12.2014.1.1 (Dunn 2014)
Photoshopping a man into a luxury apartment made women rate him as around 1.2 points more attractive. The same manipulation had no significant effect on men rating women. Being rich as hell with a lavish lifestyle made the subject go from a 4.4/10 to a 5.6/10

https://archive.is/Y9xuc
"Job status/prestige are not significant determinants of initial interest on Tinder, for both men and women". So women don't care if you are a teacher or a neurosurgeon. Note that women STILL want you to be college educated, so don't even try it tradies.

http://faculty.wcas.northwestern.edu/eli-finkel/documents/EastwickFinkel2008_JPSP.pdf
It is Looks > Personality > Money for both genders

https://www.jstor.org/stable/3441116
"Greater income does not buy more sex, nor more sexual partners" Note that it applies to both genders

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40806-017-0092-x
"We conclude that a minimum level of physical attractiveness is a necessity for both women and their mothers and that when women and their parents state that other traits are more important than physical attractiveness, they assume potential mates meet a minimally acceptable standard of physical attractiveness."';

'>>31112164
I am curious what your advice would be.
Is it perhaps to give up entirely because trying to succeed probably would not yield the highest possible success?';

'>>31092095
28 is not gen Z. Gen Z is like 19-21,college kids. Not old 30 year olds lmao. And in my uni 90% of guys are kissless virgins who have never touched a girl. I can count on my hands the number of guys who have had girlfriends before.';

'>>31112081
It isn't a decline of "degenerates", it is a complete decline of interpersonal relationships. It's not a return to more wholesome, stable relationships where a guy goes steady with his high school sweetheart and they are waiting for marriage, it's the complete cessation of any dating for young people. In my old high school out of 6 to 7 hundred kids, only a handful (maybe 10 at most) were dating or had ever dated. For most young late highschool/early college guys nowadays dating is something completely foreign. You will see birth rates plummet and go into free fall at such speed that south korea will look like a breeding powerhouse in the coming decades.';

'>>31112240
>zoomers are choosing the panda route to extinction
Wouldn't have been my first choice but it beats nuclear annihilation';

'>>31112212
Is it small or something?';

'>>31112106
yeah you have to have your own life and interests that aren't pedestrian. confidence, outcome indifference, etc.';

'>>31112164
>"OK, OK, sure, all of these small sample size/low confidence *surveys* do actually prove women do NOT care about physical appearance much (after all, if appearance mattered most then attractiveness ratings would not change based on the apartment, right?) but I am too stupid to realize this."
FTFY
My personal favorite stupidity?
This
>Note that women STILL want you to be college educated, so don't even try it tradies.
First, tradesmen can be good looking and you INSIST that matters most, remember?
Second, a large majority of men never get a 4 year degree yet a larger percentage of men get married and have children.

But please - do keep posting more homework assignments that looked at 40 people in a fake speed-dating survey and live your life by how you interpret it.';

'>>31112212
>28 is not gen Z
I knew incels were dumb, but this dumb?
>https://www.britannica.com/topic/Generation-Z
Yes, the oldest Zoomers are 28 years old.
>only 10% of my 21 year old friends have had sex
pack it up, boys, the personal anecdotes are here';

'>>31112240
Gee, its almost like you are too ignorant to know that prior to the Boomers dating in HS was rare AF and viewed with suspicion. Instead people waited until they were ready to actually marry to look for a spouse.';

'I can understand if women only want to mate with the most genetically desirable specimens, but it's a shame that doesn't work both ways. Men will stick their dicks in just about anything, which is why all these bitches feel entitled to Chad cock.';

'>>31087488
No, but it's the cope of subhuman tier white guys who are too poor to travel anyways. It's just as hard everywhere else, but at least the quality of women can be marginally better because feminism isn't as popular there yet (but it's steadily rising).';

'>>31112164
These things prove women don't place highest importance on physical appearance, though';

'>>31114113
I honestly can't tell if the anons dedicated to researching and arguing for incel points are delusional morons or anons just arguing indefensible positions because they like to argue on the internet.';

'>>31085365
Gr8 b8';

'>>31111750
No one is responsible. I'm not trying to assign blame to anything, I'm not reasoning from an emotional standpoint. I just don't like people peddling hope based on boomer tier delusions that have no bearing on modern day dating dynamics among young people';

'Imagine being the kind of idiot who denies genetic determinism.';

'>>31115277
>No one is responsible.
I literally just read this quality advice from an impaired autistic man with a long dating and relationships history:

>YOUR SINGLEDOM AND YOUR RELATIONSHIP TROUBLES ARE NOT THE FAULT OF WOMEN, LIBERALISM, FEMINISM, JUDAISM, SJWs, DEMOCRATS, SOCIALISTS, CAPITALISM, RELIGION, ATHEISM, OR ANYTHING ELSE OUTSIDE OF YOUR LOCUS OF CONTROL. WHILE MOST THINGS ARE OUT OF YOUR CONTROL, YOU CONTROL YOUR PERSPECTIVE AND YOU CONTROL YOUR ACTIONS.

>Guard your perspective and actions, because if you don’t, someone or something else will control them for you.
He's got a lot of quality advice.

>I just don't like people peddling hope based on boomer tier delusions that have no bearing on modern day dating dynamics among young people
"Modern day dating dynamics" are not what is stopping you. You are stopping yourself and putting up unnecessary obstacles between you and what you want.
Incels do this to avoid the responsibility of trying, failing, learning, and adapting. They want an excuse to pity themselves and justify never trying.
I don't know you or why you're doing it.

Hope isn't something to be peddled or rejected.';

'>>31115348
I am determined to deny any determinism conceived of by humans.
Even if genetic determinism existed, believing that you understand it is absurd hubris. You're a dumbass 4chan faggot human. You don't know shit about what is possible.
Hence, hope.';

'>>31115848
>>YOUR SINGLEDOM AND YOUR RELATIONSHIP TROUBLES ARE NOT THE FAULT OF WOMEN, LIBERALISM, FEMINISM, JUDAISM, SJWs, DEMOCRATS, SOCIALISTS, CAPITALISM, RELIGION, ATHEISM, OR ANYTHING ELSE OUTSIDE OF YOUR LOCUS OF CONTROL. WHILE MOST THINGS ARE OUT OF YOUR CONTROL, YOU CONTROL YOUR PERSPECTIVE AND YOU CONTROL YOUR ACTIONS.
Funny how plebbit is all about personal accountability when it comes to straight, single men, but for the plight of the queer, tranny, or poc, it's a societal issue.';

'>>31085380
Just realized that the image that I've had for years of this girl is actually photoshopped...';

'>>31115907
The point is to make you feel atomised and alone, and then ridicule you for being atomised and alone. Ask your parents and grandparents about dating during their time, not even 50 years ago. America in particular has spent incredible effort to sweep this under the rug and pretend it was never like this: Communities were tight knit, and young people pushed together by their surroundings. Do you think men were frantically scouring for young women in yoga classes and dive bars? No. Young people met each other at town festivals and dances, which young women actually went to because they didn't have a magic device in their hands that could sift through hundreds of men in their area to find the optimal one in a matter of minutes. Somehow they still try to sell you the lie that "things haven't changed, it's the same as it ever was". Bull. Shit.';

'>>31085330
By turning yourself into a person you can say your proud of regardless of how hard life is and not compare yourself to other people because there will always be other people better off than you.';

'As a woman, i personally think the guy on the right looks cute:] , but ther e are some resons that u are unlikabul maybey ur a perv? or a porn addict, or maybe ur not nice. if ur trying to pull of a girl there are many factors that play in hand besides looks being handsome is like a Buonis u know? but if i were looking 4 a long term relationship id go 4 a respectful, nice, thoughtful guy instead of a hot one, besides taste varey and for me i finde that bulky guys aren't really attractive, so instead of complaining and looking 4 advisee on 4chani i say go test ur luck insted of sulking in ur own filth cuz hey were all gona die at the end so whats there to really lose?';

'>>31085330
Uggos just get uggos, doesn't mean you'll stay single, just that you can realistically only shoot for your own "weight class" so to speak';

'>>31116488
>what is hypergamy';

'>>31111650
Why is the only response in your mind to someone telling you to go and be a normal person is that they must be a woman and whore? It’s not gonna affect me if there r a bunch of sad celibates wasting their lives- help your self out and stop being idiots. You will probably make life better for urself and the ppl around u.

I feel like this flavour of misogyny is just a conspiracy theory trying to explain why u don’t pull. You’re not a martyr for being socially awkward or having acne- that’s most ppl and it doesnt ruin ur life. most people arent the chad but still arent the guy on the right- they r just average people';

'>>31085330
By eating and exercising
Play the cards you were dealt, and you will at least look like a more attractive version of yourself
His biggest problem is being skinny and wearing clothes of a retard';

'>>31116547
Just fuck off with this shit. No amount of "le diet and let exercise" will fix shitty genetics.
Enough of the gaslighting.';

'>>31116441
yessss! its so easy to blame looks for the way your treated rather than critically assing ur self and the way u treat ppl (especially women) that it just becomes a delusional excuse.';

'>>31116547
>Just go to the gym for 23 years bro then maybe you'll get a gf at 50 :)
Shut up retard.';

'>>31116550
>muh defeatism
90% of things attributed to "genetics" are amendable, 5% are fixable by surgery, the other, 2.5% are overlooked if you're healthy otherwise and in only 2.5% of cases is it actually, truly over. If you are in that unfortunate bracket, tough luck, but you're in the same company as midgets and amputees. You're a small minority and unless diagnosed by me, you are much more likely in the other 97.5%.';

'>>31116568
Well I'm in the 2.5%, so fuck you nigger.';

'>>31116568
2.5% is very optimistic. only 40% of men in history procreated, and that was WITH cultural and religious restraints enforcing monogamy';

'>>31116617
>I base these statistics on (((assessments using confirmation bias to justify lower contemporaneous birth rates)))';

'>>31116633
yeah trying to act as if it's only 2.5% ( an arbitrary percentage) that's inevitably doomed is misguided optimism';

'>>31085339
>Accept that you're not going to win
Sounds like nihilism bro. No thanks';

'>>31116667
It's defeatism, not nihilism, you idiot.
But anon is right. If you've lost the genetic lottery, you're better off accepting your fate.';

'>>31116585
You're likely not. What are you. Fat? Are your shoulders smaller than your hips? Have you tried checking muscle imbalances? Maybe you've used your bum more than your shoulders growing up?

It is 97.5% likely you are not in the 2.5%';

'>>31116685
Nope. Physically deformed. I've had numerous women point out my abnormalities. It's Joever.';

'>>31116645
>inevitably doomed
tell me you're young without telling me you're young
Pic rel had "bad genetics" and was fat and had an awkward pear shaped body
Look at transformations if you want inspiration, and then realize it's not hard, it just takes work, which you could put in if you just wanted';

'>>31116695
>Physically deformed
How? As I said, 5% is fixable by surgery. Be specific.';

'>>31116703
I've tried. Every surgeon I've ever met turned me away. Said surgery was too risky.';

'>>31116724
>Refuses to be specific
Alright faggot, cry in a corner. Some don't deserve to make it anyway.';

'>>31116737
What's the point being specific? The fuck you gonna do for me?';

'>>31116742
Obviously we are just curious because you're a deformed freak. So give with the details and don't get butthurt, you're one of us whether you're an ugly asshole or not.';

'>>31116747
So, just the usual morbid curiosity? Right.';

'>>31116742
You not being specific says everything we need to know. You have no idea what deformity you could point out that'd be so irredeemable. You haven't been to one surgeon, let alone "multiple". You should get a life and know that no one actually cares about you, so be specific or cry in a corner';

'>>31116761
Bro if you aren't even secure enough to tell us, how are you ever gonna be ok with letting a woman in?';

'>>31116770
Nope, I'm just not disclosing my deformities for you reprobates to slaughter me.';

'>>31116777
>how are you ever gonna be ok with letting a woman in?
That's not something I really need to worry about, is it? Women don't date freaks.';

'>>31116781
You need to not have a complex about it, man. Accept yourself. You're never going to get anywhere as long as you're hung up on whatever your issue is.';

'>>31116781
>to slaughter me.
Holy cringe if I ever read cringe
You care about what anonymous "reprobates" think about the deformities you have? That is beyond sad.';

'>>31116791
Yes, it is something you need to worry about. Are you giving up, asshole? Are you that weak?

Sack the fuck up, my man. Stop giving a fuck about it. I'm trying to help you here. Don't even give us the specifics but at least consider what I'm saying seriously.';

'>>31116793
Don't indulge his self-pity. It's what he's seeking. He obviously doesn't have problems. He's just his own main character, looking for struggles where he can find them';

'>>31116793
Yeah, it's always easy for normal folk to tell you that "your deformity doesn't define you" and "be confident in who you are" blablabla, when they've never had to live like this. I'm trapped in a body that I despise, which is entirely outside of my power to change. It's a living hell.';

'>>31116819
You are more than your body. You need to accept your vessel, focus on the task at hand and be the best you can be. There are people uglier than you who've found love. Self-pity is incredibly unattractive';

'>>31116819
We're all trapped, dummy. You think I don't want to be more than some shitty human doing a shitty job, eating, fucking, drinking, dying? Your deformity is nothing before the cosmic horror of human existence.';

'>>31116827
>You are more than your body.
We are just our bodies and nothing more.
>You need to accept your vessel
Been there, tried that. The one thing I'm sure about is that I will never come to terms with what I am.
>There are people uglier than you who've found love
And there's people who have won the lottery. What of it?
>Self-pity is incredibly unattractive
I don't care. Fuck anyone for judging me.';

'>>31116843
So if you're giving up, say so. Kill yourself and don't waste any more of our time.';

'>>31116864
>Kill yourself
I will once my parents have passed.';

'>>31116843
>>31116870
What can we do about this archetype guys? It is not their predicament that bothers me, personally, it is their determination to be pitiful. "Normal" kids are determined to do good, achieve, succeed and advance, then there are the passive ones who're simply undetermined. Then there are the ones who're determined to be pitiful. Those people are determined to make you give a fuck about them, and while we simply couldn't give less of a fuck, their determination creates annoyance

If I have kids, this is the type of kid I explicitly don't want them to become. Giving them meaning in life and not coddling them is the answer, I think, but I'm not a parent so it is beyond my scope';

'>>31116696
he really doesn't have bad genetics. his facial ratios are good, his bones are well developed. he just had an awkward ugly ducking teenage phase ( glasses, braces, ugly hair). the foundation was excellent actually. you have no idea what bad facial genes actually means';

'>>31116922
When any of you fucks are deformed to the extent that I am, you can preach about pity. If I was normal, I would've probably had something resembling a lovelife, and not been shunned by women all my life.';

'>yeah just lift bro
>take a shower bro
>buy my 500 dollar hustler course bro';

'>>31116931
Your lack of specificity can suck my dick, do you know that? I pray that you cry yourself to sleep every night.';

'>>31116941
Pretty sure you'd be a KHHV even if you were a 7,5/10.';

'>>31116957
Nah, there would be nothing holding me back if I was "normal". Facially I am okay, and I'm six foot tall. It's just the deformities that have irrevocably fucked me up.';

'>>31116945
>"I can't lift, I'm balding, can't you see?"
Some people don't deserve to make it, though.';

'>>31116950
I'm not crying, you just used a dogshit example. his facial ratios are good, that's the only thing that matters

the image you posted is a genuine ascension. but don't pretend that's a normal result. I've seen many incels try and get ps on the old forums and most looked only marginally better or even worse';

'>>31116961
>there would be nothing holding me back if I was "normal"
You would've found something.';

'>>31116971
Pure conjecture.';

'>>31116970
Honestly anon I don't want you to be better. A pessimist shouldn't be helped. They'll just crap on the hard effort put into bettering them, and making people around them feel bad.

Just enjoy your situation anon. We need ugly people in the world, to have examples for the young generation.';

'>>31116986
She was lucky enough to get surgery. I've been turned away every time, "muh risk outweighs the benefits". Selfish surgeons would rather I suffer in silence.';

'>>31116986
nah I'm a realist. I'm also pretty average in the face. you're just high on hopium and you want to keep your deluded sense of optimism going by dragging people in your little fantasy world where everything works out magically in the end. spoiler: for most people it doesn't';

'>>31116996
Working on the spine is dangerous. Can paralyze you. There are plenty of people who've successful lives with it. There is no shortage in examples. Are you like pic related?
If you've got a deformity like this, yeah, you're in 2.5%. Don't shit up the board because most don't have these deformities.';

'Why are you guys still wasting your time talking to this guy? He's just a future corpse, not a person. Wash your hands of it.';

'>>31117035
>Working on the spine is dangerous. Can paralyze you.
Better to just let them live as a miserable, insecure freak then. That would be the humane thing to do.';

'>>31116617
40% is a brutal stat. Nothing more should be said really';

'>>31117049
Problems like that are tragic and am all for research into possible fixes. If surgery goes wrong, being incapable of moving is worse, tragic as it is. I seriously hope your case isn't this bad anon. If you're dealing with shortcomings, know that everyone has them, and those who don't have issues elsewhere. There are people in this world who've spent 25 years raising an off spring, only to lose them by a split second mistake. There are people regretting things their entire lives, living with misery in darkness. It's easier said than done, but you always need to look on the bright side of life. No one will pity you.

Personally, if I saw someone with defects, simply trying to make their lives better, I would be infinitely more inclined to help them than if I saw someone with defects, being bitter and miserable, even if their reasons were "legitimate". Some didn't ask to be born short. Some didn't ask to have a 1cm penis. I didn't ask for my own defects. It is what it is. No one is Taylor Swift. Even the King of Pop had problems.';

'>>31117094
The difference is that most problems can be overcome. I've literally realized that there is no point to anything if you're abnormal. What's the point working out when it won't mask your physical defects? What's the point wearing nice clothes when none of it fits you properly because your body shape's messed up? It's not so much to ask for a normal body like everyone else. There's a billion people on this planet with perfectly normal bodies. I had to be one of the 'lucky' few who got the short end of the stick. There is no putting a positive spin on that.';

'>>31117131
You are trying to be like normal people, rather than do what we've said since the start, accept who you are.
Don't wear "nice clothes", you don't look like pic related and you will never look like pic related.
Have you tried not caring so much about clothes? You obviously have different struggles than wearing "nice clothes".
Why are you trying to work out when you can't even fit in regular clothes?
Don't be sad because you are "not normal", find something you are able to do, and be happy you can do it.

Am I unhappy I can't play basketball because I'm not tall enough? No, I don't even want to play basketball.
Why do you want to work out, when it will do nothing for you anyway?
>There's a billion people on this planet with perfectly normal bodies. I had to be one of the 'lucky' few who got the short end of the stick.
Until you tell us what your issue is specifically, all we can do is guess, and not give you satisfying perspective.
"Normal bodies" is relative. Do you have this? >>31117035
People with "normal bodies" have shortcomings elsewhere. Unless you give specifics after this, you just indulge in your bitterness and I won't waste time entertaining it. You're obviously in a self-feeding negative thought spiral and only the thinker can bring themselves out of it.';

'>>31085330
Have a shitty hand? Get better cards.';

'>>31116922
>What can we do about this archetype guys
You don't do anything. There's a class of people suicide hotlines call "energy vampires".

Suicide hotlines have the same problem you see on /adv/ of people who aren't gonna get better and are pretty much a waste of your time to talk to, they're mostly farming pity, derision, attention, and conversation, because they're very, very bored, insecure, and dysregulated. At hotlines, the actual people in crisis only account for about 40 percent of the calls, and the actual majority of calls come from these kinds of needy frequent callers. These are highly dysfunctional people, they get called "energy vampires", and essentially they're the people whom no one else would listen to anymore and no quantity of time talking with them is ever going to help them. You only listen at a hotline to these frequent callers because as satisfying as it would be, telling them to kill themselves or fuck off would be inhumane and counter to the hotline's mission.

Hotlines in response to these types protectively have a rule that you're not supposed to be on the phone with someone for more than twenty minutes, on the basis that If you did your job with someone actually in crisis, it wasn’t going to take you longer than that to get them to a better place, and if you've got an energy vampire on the line, they'll always take the maximal time you give them.. The empathetic thing to do is therefore to tell them you need to help other callers and firmly but politely hang up, because they'll happily hog the line for hours if you don't cut them off.

Hotlines also track these frequent callers and protectively keep a "one call a day" rule with known energy vampires, because otherwise they'd just call back again and again. You pretty much need to have similar boundaries with these types, they'll take whatever you can give them, it only ends when you say
>nope, not talking to this person anymore, they're wasting my time to help others
and hang up.';

'>>31117157
>>31117195
Notice how he went quiet after I indulged him seriously with productive perspective
He doesn't want help. Energy vampire is the right word indeed. I can't stand people like this.';

'>>31115907
Why would anyone pay attention to Reddit politics?
If a Redditfag says 2 plus 2 equals 4, I'm not going to pretend it isn't true.

>>31116381
Things haven't changed. Socially inept men irrationally angry at the world can only get women if they manage to gain some form of power over them. Otherwise they die alone.
Whereas even men with less than average traits can eventually find a willing partner by pleasantly interacting with people in real life.
This is how it has always been.

>inb4 nobody interacts irl
They do. You choose not to.

Also:
>The point is to make you feel atomised and alone
>proceeds to make anons feel atomized, alone, and despair
Cool story bro';

'>>31085330
>BLUE EYES WHITE DRAGON!
>HOROBI NO BAAAAASUTO SUTOREEEEEEEEEEEMU!';

'Same way you play the game as anyone
>find things you like
>find people you like
>fill your life with said things and people
its that simple';

'>>31116703
For contrast, I was born with a facial deformity that they had to invent a new surgery for. It took 8-12 hours. I forget exactly. I was one of the first 20 people to have it done. I didn't look close to normal until a couple much more minor surgeries years later.
"Craniofacial Anomaly" is what they called it. It was essentially a cleft face down to the skull.
I went to public school and was completely ostracized because of it.

And even back then, I knew that plenty of unattractive men get gfs. I loved comedy and got gud at being funny. It took until I was 15 to realize that ignoring all social rules and my own clothes and appearance wasn't going to work and I began to learn and adapt.
It took me until the middle of university for me to realize that I wasn't as unacceptable as I always thought I "knew" I was.

I've had plenty of success with women.
But it really does involve trying, failing, and adapting.';

'>>31113228
>>31114113
>2 studies literally prove that looks come first
>other studies prove that you need an insane salary bump so that you can twist female perception of your attractiveness such that you gain at most 1.2 points in a 10 point scale
>"b-but this proves looks don't matter!!!"
>"bro just if you're a 5/10 you just need to make 100 times your salary and you'll stop being invisible to women!!!"
Fucking retard imbeciles LMAO';

'>>31085330
>How do you play the game as the guy on the right
Stronglift 5x5 while on an ungodly bulk. Voila, fixed.
>muh frame
Just lift
>muh bad genetics
Just lift, faggot';

'>How do you play the game as the guy on the right
if the guy on the right gained 15 lbs and wore clothes that actually fit, he'd be super attractive. he's not unattractive to begin with, just a bit skinny with poor fashion sense. also, while not unattractive either, the guy on the left is not some male adonis; his shoulders are cartoonish and I'm not a fan of the hair (although I'm sure it looks better dry/styled).

to answer the question for men who are ACTUALLY unattractive, the key is to be funny and confident; both things that are hard to do if you are born with shit genetics. it's not impossible though; the guy I know who has pulled the hottest girls and married an absolute stunner is obese with psoriasis. that said, he has confidence in spades and can make anyone laugh.';

'>>31117266
......or it was late and I can't afford to stay up all night talking about this?';

'>>31117157
Again, it's easy for a normal person to sit there and tell an abnormal person to accept their lot in life. We have people on here who complain that they aren't 6'6 or that they don't have the right canthal tilt. I would kill for retarded problems like that. I have tried to seek help for my deformities, and each and every time I've been turned away "for my own good". I've spent an entire life trapped in a body that I despise, unable to change a goddamn thing. It's not self-pity, it's pain. But I don't expect any one of you to understand, especially when you throw around terms like "energy vampire" because someone doesn't bend over and take your advice.';

'>>31118452
>just lift bro frame and height doesn't matter';

'>>31116441
>>31116562
You have to be 18 to post here.';

'>>31110977
>implying that wasting all your time and effort on self-improvement will actually help
The only thing that matters is being tall and handsome. There is no point to improvement when just being born perfect is all you need.';

'>>31118739
Anon I’m not gonna give you bd advice but I have klinefelters syndrome, so I do feel you. I’m basically pear shaped, people give me the same bullshit just lifts bro all the time. They don’t get it
Don’t bother trying to convince them bro';

'>>31118739
The relevant point is that the only option is to play the best game you can with the hand you're dealt.

You were dealt a really shitty hand. You could spend the rest of your life like OP, bemoaning the fact that others were born better off. Or you can make the most of what you have.

There was a quadriplegic that became a celebrated cartoonist. His pain and troubles didn't go away and he eventually died from it. But he made the most of what he could.

It could be worse. There are children dying of leukemia who won't live to be ten years old. You could have to talk to their parents.';

'>>31085330

The guy on the right is cuter and more interesting.';

'>>31120254
>klinefelters syndrome
I don't know a lot about that. I've seen photos of bodybuilders with that condition, but I don't know how severe yours is?';

'>>31085380
Okay to be fair she is a gamer, that's super hot. She has a really cute face and massive tits. I would absolutely love to bang this woman. However the frontbutt is incredibly unattractive. So I'll probably stick with doggystyle and tittyfucks.
>>31085330
Dude on left is fucking freakish. That's a really weird body. That isn't hot at all.
Guy on the right definitely doesn't have the wide shoulders, but other than that he is totally normal looking. So what? You're like a girl with a flat chest while all her friends have B cups and her friend she is jealous of who has the same weight has DDD's. That's your hand bro, but it really isn't that big of a deal. In fact, you're so normal looking that it's literally one thing that you think is the physical problem. Actually you're BETTER OFF than a flat chested girl bc she is judged for her body and looks way more than you and her chest size is basically equivalent to your penis size. So I guess you're like a girl with a flat butt instead. There's tons of those and they get guys just like everyone else. Just bc you dont have wide shoulders doesn't mean shit. If flat butt women can get dates, a unwide shoulder man can.';

'>>31085330
Dude both guys here are still better than at least 30% of males who are like this:';

'>>31120063
>only thing
Not really, the correlation's between physical attractiveness and lifetime sex partners is about 0.2, height's around the same. Neither's strong enough to write home about.

The biggest predictor of lifetime partner count with a correlation of about 0.4 is "sensation-seeking", which is mostly uncorrelated with physical attractiveness (0.14 correlation of the two parameters) and is defined in the scientific literature as being comprised of four aspects
>thrill and adventure seeking,
>experience seeking
>disinhibition
>boredom susceptibility

In effect, it's how much you're willing to throw caution to the wind and say
>fuck it, I bet it'll be fun, we should try it
when it comes to doing stuff, regardless of how ill-advised or risky it might be, combined with how much action you practically are willing take to actually have some sex.

Most incels fuck up on this metric because they're homebodies, avoid thrills and adventures, are surprisingly sexually demure, and in general are risk-adverse. Additionally, once we cut past the bullshit and say
>everyone wants sex, you just saying you want sex is meaningless
>what SPECIFIC new things are you trying and doing to seek it out?
They usually don't have an answer because they're not doing or trying anything, meaning they're not even making a dedicated effort to seek out environments where they could take a shot if they wanted to. Improvement is a good route to try to increase sensation-seeking in someone by boosting their confidence and forcing them into new environments where they'll have chances to try.';

'>>31121453
You're retarded';

'>>31121519
Most personality traits are heritable to a significant degree. I'm highly sceptical to which extent you can increase such behaviour - or whether it's even sensible.
And while physical attractiveness may be relevant, educational attainment, income and other forms of social status matter probably as much - if not more. Also, the whole lifetime sex partner thing is a somewhat sketchy metric, since it typically does not exclude prostitution and may be affected by a social desirability bias.
I think what matters more than having had sex is whether men got married and had children, which serves as a far better and much more robust metric, with much more reliable data. And we see those numbers are in serious decline - largely driven by female choosiness.';

'>>31121948
>>Most personality traits are heritable to a significant degree
The choices themselves aren't, is the thing. You can have inherited genes for
>I am naturally inclined to sit at home and do nothing, as I am naturally lazy

and nevertheless still choose
>I'm choosing with intentionality to go out drinking and dancing every saturday so I can hit on club chicks, and will do some volunteering stuff locally twice a week, because intellectually I know doing so will massively increase the likelihood I get laid

>lifetime sex partner thing is a somewhat sketchy metric, it typically does not exclude prostitution and may be affected by a social desirability bias
That's the secret about about sensation-seeking, it doesn't give nearly as many fucks about how desirable the other person is, so much as that the person wants to have sex.

Incels are too invested in their pride to realize that doing so means yeah, you're gonna fuck more uggos, but ALSO way more desirable people than you currently do, because women's algorithm for who they'd fuck differs hardcore from how a lot of incels think it works. Ultimately, women use other women's rating of a man to determine fuckability - women at hotness level N start considering a man fuckable by whether he can land a woman at hotness level N-1, and a man who'd fuck ANYONE very quickly will start being able to climb that ladder because each slightly hotter woman builds slightly more interest. It doesn't take long before women start saying
>Damn he was able to pull THAT? He MUST have something good going on, I gotta see what's up.
It's a virtuous cycle and exploitable process for a guy who just wants to maximally man-whore it up.';

'>>31122180
>and nevertheless still choose
The question is: how likely are you to ultimately do that, or will your character traits interfere with what you consciously decided to do?

>That's the secret about about sensation-seeking, it doesn't give nearly as many fucks about how desirable the other person is, so much as that the person wants to have sex.
Yes, but a sensation seeker might as well be a guy who spends his money on hookers and cocaine every weekend.

>women's algorithm for who they'd fuck differs hardcore from how a lot of incels think it works
Yes; it tends to depend on a greater variety of traits than people tend to commonly believe - but if you don't manifest these traits to a significant extent you're still going to be unattractive. It might not be 'just' because you're below average in height, but it's more because you're below average in height and you've never graduated college, don't have a job and you live with your parents, and so on.

Ultimately, my point is: we see that women are getting significantly choosier in terms of who they are marrying and having kids with. Independent of the question of whether the average incel could get laid if went out more, drank more alcohol and consumed more drugs, there is pretty good evidence that in most of the developed world a growing number of men is being ruled out as viable long-term partners.';

'>>31122238
I should probably add: I don't rule out at all that the belief that one particular trait already rules you out leaves you to neglect yourself and give up rather than trying to improve in other domains. In that regard, it is well likely that you can find people among incels who could become viable as long-term partners, if they only put effort into finishing their degree, got a proper hair cut and left the house a little more. But the underlying problem is larger than a bunch of incels.';

'>>31089534
if you were a famous and talented writer like shakespeare you definitely could attract a woman
salman rushdie is short and ugly but he's also a rich author (and has the excitement factor from the fatwa), hence why he fucks models and women 30 years younger than him';

'>>31122238
>how likely are you to ultimately do that
Aggregates aren't individuals.

On average, yeah, most incels aren't gonna listen to advice, most people are set in their ways and you're correct that developed life eliminates a lot of mating; certain kinds of individuals will have their desire for intimacy, sociality, and novelty completely satisfied by some combination of social media, internet, and video games.

It's the same way basically every fat person on earth knows how to lose weight (eat less, exercise more), 90% will never do it. It's still the correct advice to give someone saying
>how do I lose weight?
though, even when the alternative compelling choice of
>give no fucks, enjoy eating whatever you want at whatever quantity you want!
is going to overwhelmingly outcompete it for most of them.

> sensation seeker might as well be a guy who spends his money on hookers and cocaine every weekend.
Among other things, yeah. They eventually tire of that and do all kinds of other activities, drugs, and fuck other people in other contexts. Possessing this kind of
> "throw caution to the wind, we're out to experience new things"
attitude is pretty much the most predictive determinant of how much fucking you're doing, and is an intentionally learnable and actionable pattern of behavior for someone willing to do it, and self-improving makes it easier.';

'>>31122590
>Aggregates aren't individuals.
But there is a relation between the aggregate and the individual in the sense that the individual being grouped in that aggregate manifests heritable traits which raise the likelihood of a certain kind of behaviour to occur.

>certain kinds of individuals will have their desire for intimacy, sociality, and novelty completely satisfied by some combination of social media, internet, and video games.
I wouldn't go as far as to call it satisfied - they obviously are not satisfied, hence their complaints.

>It's the same way basically every fat person on earth knows how to lose weight (eat less, exercise more), 90% will never do it.
Weight too is actually substantially heritable. That does not mean it can't be offset by other traits, e.g. a conscientious personality.

>give no fucks, enjoy eating whatever you want at whatever quantity you want!
If you leave it to the individual, its true nature will reveal itself. That is the price of Liberalism.

>is an intentionally learnable and actionable pattern of behavior for someone willing to do it, and self-improving makes it easier.
Do you have some reliable data on that? I'm fairly certain you can unlearn a fear of spiders, but to 'learn' an entirely new personality facet seems a bit too in-depth to me.


In any case, my main point is still that casual sex is meaningless and pretty hard to measure reliably as well. What actually matters is dropping marriage- and birthrates for which we do have reliable data.';

'>>31122628
>What actually matters is dropping marriage- and birthrates for which we do have reliable data.
When incels post stuff like the OP meme and ask "how to play the game", they're usually not talking about marriage and birthrates, they're generally talking about how some people are born with a leg up on being sexually desired by attractive women (usually very explicitly for the purpose of fucking) and seen as enviably sexy by men (because they want the ego boost). You can talk about marriage and birthrates, but that's not what most people in the threat seem to be talking about or care about.

>sensation seeking Is an intentionally learnable and actionable pattern of behavior
>Do you have some reliable data on that?
I speak in the sense that you can choose to enact it as a bias towards action in one's individual decisionmaking process, and this has predictable impacts on one's life. You are presented in life with thousands of micro-choices that allow you to steer towards sensation-seeking if you want to. For example,
> I have no weekend plans. Will I find something to do and make plans for this weekend, right now, that put me in a new situation I've never been in before with strangers I've never met doing something I've never done - or will I shitpost on 4chan again and rewatch Shawshank redemption while eating Cheetos on my couch?
is a choice that faces every incel on this board. Intentionally choosing the sensation seeking route is an overwhelmingly better strategy for sexual success, and repeatedly noticing when such a choice exists to seek sensation and that you will make those choices in the sensation-seeking direction creates something akin to a strong gravitational pull in the universe tugging you towards
>you're an interesting individual who is desired and liked by others, who meets a lot of people, who is getting consistently laid and living a very enjoyable life
because it naturally pushes you in that direction.';

'Is an ok physique even enough to get a gf?
I only ever had one 4 years ago, and desu I wasn't even attracted to her, but that was all I could get.

I managed to get very few dates, and these girls were always dating other guys at the same time, and I guess I can't compete.';

'>>31122754
>some people are born with a leg up on being sexually desired by attractive women
If we're talking about stated mate appeal as well as revealed mate appeal in lab experiments they are somewhat right - it just doesn't seem to translate to the real world to a significant effect. Or maybe the data on sex partners is wonky.

>you can choose to enact it as a bias towards action in one's individual decisionmaking process
I think we know too little about how decision making actually happens. I am somewhat sceptical whether change (that were not meant to happen to begin with) can be induced from within rather than requiring the interaction with other agents or other types of constraints and boundary conditions.

>Intentionally choosing the sensation seeking route is an overwhelmingly better strategy
Yes, but what ultimately motivates the sensation seeker is the desire for sensation. If you lack that to a sufficient degree and your fears stifle the little there is (incels might be lower in libido as well), then you won't act, because your internal reward mechanisms don't give you cookies, like they do for the sensation seeker. Not to mention being anxious and easily hurt by negative responses (or perceived negative responses) might also make you like it even less.

I don't think it's as straightforward as you make it out to be - which is why it's an issue at all - it's not like people are unable to recognise it at a rational level.

But as I said, this entire debate is only tangentially relevant to my interests, which is mostly demographic issues. I have seen good evidence that women have become choosier when it comes to marriage - in particular in terms of educational attainment and income (men too - for long-term relationships). Intuitively, it would surprise me if this choosiness would not somehow translate to casual sexual encounters as well. It's also getting late here, so we'll have to continue this some other time. Have a nice day, Anon.';

'>>31085330
Stop giving a shit';

'>>31111773
Serotonin is gay, makes you placid. That's what ssris do, they make you 'accept' the situation like a fag.';

'>>31122860
>it's not like people are unable to recognise it at a rational level.
Being open to sensation-seeking when you're not is one of those "hard things that's easy to explain", see also weight loss. "Eat less and exercise more" is 100% viable, perfectly actionable dieting advice, most people just don't have the force of will to do it.';

'>>31114113
I'm stupid anon can you explain why?
eg. In the bartender/surgeon example (although it could apply to each example), you could flip what is being measured.
An average looking bartender morphs into a bartender who is far above average looking. ie. 4/10 to 8/10
Wouldn't the rating of the bartender go up more significantly than in the test given, thereby indicating that women place highest importance on physical appearance?';

'>>31113281
Cart before horse. Women don't need prior experience with Chad in order to chase him. Otherwise how would preselection work?
What appears to be entitlement is just bitterness directed at anything less than Chad.';

'>>31086689
Pretty women out walking with gorillas down my street';

'>>31101003
So is fallout boy, and he completely defined a generation and ended up on hotties bedroom walls
height barely matters';

'>>31085413
>Anyone can gain muscle.

I can't, and I've been trying for years. Its a constant cycle of working out, breaking down, getting stronger but not looking fitter, not eating enough cuz money, hurt self, have to start all over again.';

'>>31112106
>tall
>tattoo
>frame that could be fat but some muscle
>house
>maybe hes got a huge dick
>probably funny

>"Mr Donaghey, a sales adviser, thought he’d be a strong contender for the top prize, saying he’s used to copping flak about how he managed to pull his gorgeous partner."

>sales so hes a dark triad smooth talker

she's not even that hot';

'>>31123927
>getting stronger but not looking fitter,
>hurt self
You're training wrong then. Many such cases.';

'>>31123981
Of course, it's not just 'lift' its also eat right, sleep right, have your life in order and the time to do it, have money, exercise the exact right way when there are many conflicting sources on how to do it, and have good genetics in the first place.';

'I think I’m going to give up on dating bros';

'>>31124017
Nope. Just don't hurt yourself in pursuit of Gaynz
Exercise with short term attainable goals with safety in mind.

>>31123927
>not eating enough cuz money
You might want to get basic survival sorted before worrying about bodybuilding.
But eating protein is important.';

'>>31085330
Seethe and settle';

'>>31110533
>tripfag
kill yourself buddy';

'>>31085330
That right pic has to be edited, right? It looks like his arms come directly from his torso, like a stick figure. Shit is fucked';

'>>31123751
I lost 30lb from just "eat less" last year because I didn't like how I looked and realized yeah I was eating far too much.
down another 15 so far this year as well

idk if you need force of will to do a lot these things, but I think something like that is harder to see the cause and effect in action and easy to justify away
its easy to say it doesn't matter if you go out or not because the times you went out didn't result in anything, but a few failures doesn't mean that you shouldn't.
For example u might recognize you need to go out, but be unsure where to go out and what to do, which yeah, can be a legitimate problem, giving up and complaining you just don't know isn't a solution though, if you don't know a place u can just show up to then go to some event, talk to a few people, u might hear about stuff, then you can go do that stuff, maybe with people u meet, or just by yourself, and it kind of expands out but you do need to actually go and do shit.';