Serious "Chad only" is massive cope

[Scio]

I started a field-experiment where i observe couples on the streets and rate their looks to see how "looksmatched" they are.
And it´s no surprise, most of the couples are pretty much looksmatched.

But my main focus in this experiment were actually Chads. I was specifically looking for Chads to see what girlfriends they have.
And i can tell you that ALL real Chads have real Stacies or at least Stacylites.

"Chad-only" is a cope to make incels believe that they are not alone, and that the majority of men suffer....
but the sad truth is...we are alone, and most men are doing well out there...it´s just us, the 5% lowest males. The 5% bottom of the barrel.

 

[Animecel2D]

Water

 

[HiddenUzer.Belgrade]

yeah.... i can only say its over for subhumans if you are at least average theres still hope. Chad "only" only applies to few females

 

[Quarantined]

chad only if non-NT

 

[BRCel123]

definitely not only 5% and a lot of men have to settle down for landwhales

 

[Scio]

yeah.... i can only say its over for subhumans if you are at least average theres still hope. Chad "only" only applies to few females

Yes. Chads are very rare and most of them are in a relationship with some Stacy. So the chance for a Becky to fuck Chads is very low. Maybe they dream about it but in the end they will end up with someone in their own looks range.

 

[Sexless incel]

Rawet

 

[Scio]

definitely not only 5% and a lot of men have to settle down for landwhales

Those men who settle for a landwhale are very ugly too, propably much uglier than the landwhale itself IF it wasn´t fat...i saw one some days ago.

but do foids only form relationships with non-chads out of genuine love or necessity?

I can´t read their minds but they seem quite happy and at least the guy is a sexhaver.

 

[Kunt]

Their girlfriends will most likely cheat or dump them for a better option, have you ever seen a chad cuck? Normies can get gfs, but not keep them for too long.

 

[Scio]

Their girlfriends will most likely cheat or dump them for a better option, have you ever seen a chad cuck? Normies can get gfs, but not keep them for too long.

Yes, they propably will cheat on them. SO WHAT? The Chad will then cheat on her for a Stacy! You see? It´s a circle.

True… but would they stay with their bf if they could get a chad instead?

The point is not to stay forever. They can stay together for a year or so, then she can cheat on him but he will find again a gf.

 

[Kunt]

Yes, they propably will cheat on them. SO WHAT? The Chad will then cheat on her for a Stacy! You see? It´s a circle.


The point is not to stay forever. They can stay together for a year or so, then she can cheat on him but he will find again a gf.

Exactly... so the chad is fucking the girls over and the normies get fucked over by the girls. The most pain still goes to the normies, since not only do they often get thrown aside by women, they also have to work hard to get a girlfriend. Girls can get guys anytime under any circumstance.

 

[Scio]

No shit but there are certain behaviors which females will excuse if you’re ONLY a CHAD

Yes it´s the halo effect but it has nothing to do with my thread.
My thread = reality, and not wet dreams of a foid.

 

[Scio]

Exactly... so the chad is fucking the girls over and the normies get fucked over by the girls. The most pain still goes to the normies, since not only do they often get thrown aside by women, they also have to work hard to get a girlfriend. Girls can get guys anytime under any circumstance.

The situation is not that bad for normies. Sure, there is always a chance that she will cheat on him. But it doesn´t happen so often. He can still enjoy few months or a year until she cheats on him. Then he will find a new gf within a week or two as long as he is NT. Chads are rare and they mostly fuck Stacies.

 

[Kunt]

The situation is not that bad for normies. Sure, there is always a chance that she will cheat on him. But it doesn´t happen so often. He can still enjoy few months or a year until she cheats on him. Then he will find a new gf within a week or two as long as he is NT. Chads are rare and they mostly fuck Stacies.

Where I live Chadlites are common as hell. Almost all teens are 6 foot tall here nowadays and have maxxed out whatever retarded style is cool.

 

[depressedblackcel]

And there are incels who believe in sub8 law or even sub6 law. It's sub4, majority of men aren't incels.

 

[willystroker]

The whole chad only and sub8 law are in the context of online dating and cold approaching. Whereas normalfags typically meet their partner through school or friend group or other social activities. Which goes to show that the people who push said laws are either basement dwellers or atomized adults who don't have access to those avenues to meet women.

However it's becoming more common to lack social connections and therefore rely more on online dating, so the rate of inceldom is still way higher than 5% for younger generation.

 

[Loner94]

True… but would they stay with their bf if they could get a chad instead?

Nothing lasts forever everything in this life has an expiration date.

 

[Loner94]

The whole chad only and sub8 law are in the context of online dating and cold approaching. Whereas normalfags typically meet their partner through school or friend group or other social activities. Which goes to show that the people who push said laws are either basement dwellers or atomized adults who don't have access to those avenues to meet women.

However it's becoming more common to lack social connections and therefore rely more on online dating, so the rate of inceldom is still way higher than 5% for younger generation.

Precisely the whole sub 8 thing is really fucking stupid.

 

[Zhou Chang-Xing]

I started a field-experiment where i observe couples on the streets and rate their looks to see how "looksmatched" they are.
And it´s no surprise, most of the couples are pretty much looksmatched.

But my main focus in this experiment were actually Chads. I was specifically looking for Chads to see what girlfriends they have.
And i can tell you that ALL real Chads have real Stacies or at least Stacylites.

"Chad-only" is a cope to make incels believe that they are not alone, and that the majority of men suffer....
but the sad truth is...we are alone, and most men are doing well out there...it´s just us, the 5% lowest males. The 5% bottom of the barrel.

Yep, this is true. I'm actually planning on making a series of posts debunking a popular Blackpill YouTuber that keeps spreading this myth. This is also why Wheat Waffles is one of the better Blackpillers because he doesn't spread doom and gloom but looks objectively at the data.

I kept looking around and I kept seeing men much uglier than myself in relationships (and not many men are as ugly as me), this tells me that it's not just my ugliness that keeps me single.

The "Oh, she's Chad-only" is a massive cope that just isolates the worst most entitled toilets and pretends like they're the rule (selection bias).

 

[Sigma]

30-40 percent of males are either incel or nearcel in western nations.

 

[Zhou Chang-Xing]

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/...t-date-why-you-should-stay-in-your-own-league

We use cookies to enhance your website experience.More InfoOK
Skip to main content

Psychology Today
US
Search
Find a Therapist (City or Zip)

Gary W. Lewandowski Jr. Ph.D.
The Psychology of Relationships
Don’t Date Up: Why You Should Stay In Your Own League
The simple "rule" that explains who ends up with whom, and why it works so well.
Posted August 17, 2022
Reviewed by Vanessa Lancaster
Share on FacebookShare
Share on TwitterTweet
Share via EmailEmail
KEY POINTS
The “matching hypothesis” predicts that people will end up with partners with similar mate values.
In online dating, people want the best partner with the highest mate value and try to date up, but often fall short.
Ultimately, partners with matched mate values have the best relationships.
Thomas Ward/Pexels
In dating, what you want and what you get may not match.Source: Thomas Ward/Unsplash
When looking for a romantic partner, what’s your ideal? You most likely want to be with someone physically attractive, super smart, successful, with solid values and an amazing personality.

You want a partner with the highest mate value possible, the proverbial 10 out of 10. Really, who wouldn’t want to date a celebrity or supermodel?

article continues after advertisement

That’s what we want, but how does the dating game really work?

A Simple “Rule” of Dating
Here's a thought experiment: Imagine 100 single people looking for a relationship, and put them in a room together for an evening. Who would end up together? It depends on lots of different factors and is potentially very complicated. Then again, it may be deceptively simple. One straightforward prediction about who ends up together is based on a longstanding relationship science theory.

Specifically, the “matching hypothesis” predicts that people will pair up with a partner with the same social mate value (Walster et al., 1966). Your social mate value includes all the factors that make you more or less desirable to date, such as your physical appearance, qualities, skills, traits, personality, etc. Essentially, according to the matching hypothesis, if you are a 7 out of 10 in terms of mate value, you’ll end up with another 7, or very close. 10s go with 10s, 2s with 2s, and so on.

But is that what actually happens?

What You Want vs. What You Get
Researchers had nearly 200 participants complete an online questionnaire about their mate value/self-worth based on qualities like physical attractiveness, self-esteem, likeability, warmth, kindness, and trustworthiness (Taylor et al., 2011).

Next, participants created their own online dating profiles and imagined they were looking for a partner. They viewed potential partners’ profiles and indicated whether they thought the person in the profile “would probably respond favorably to me if I contacted him/her.”

Highly attractive participants were more interested in contacting high mate value partners, while less attractive participants sought lower value partners. However, those lower mate value participants actually preferred the more attractive potential partners; they just weren’t inclined to follow through on that preference.

article continues after advertisement

In other words, it seems that everyone wants a high mate value partner, but only those who think they have high value themselves are confident enough to pursue the 9s and 10s out there. Notably, it wasn’t clear if people would be successful in trying to “date up,” but it did show that people generally didn’t try—likely due to a fear of rejection.

They also followed up with daters on an online dating site and found similar results. Users often contacted targets who were out of their league (i.e., more attractive than them). Why not? Online dating and dating apps are low stakes in being rejected (i.e., people don’t have to flat out tell you no; they can simply not respond). That leads to a “shotgun” approach where you contact lots of more attractive people as a more viable strategy that is less threatening to your ego.

However, that wishful thinking didn’t really pay off in the study, because those contacts weren’t reciprocated (i.e., a 7 contacting a 10 didn’t hear back from them). Instead, users only received messages back when the user was in their league (i.e., when a 7 contacted another 7). It seems daters took their shot at better partners—you can’t blame them for trying—but those efforts were unsuccessful.

article continues after advertisement

The lesson is clear: What we want, pursue, and get may be quite different. But, in this case, falling short may not be such a bad thing.

The Benefits of Not Getting What You Want
Ultimately what we all want is a fantastic relationship. We may assume that’s more likely with the highest possible mate value partner we can get. But we may be wrong about that.

To test the implications of matching and mismatching partners’ mate values, researchers conducted a study using > 12,000 partner ratings from members of a Namibian community (Prall & Scelza, 2022). As in the previously discussed study, participants wanted partners who were more attractive than they were. For example, 3s and 4s wanted 8s and 9s. Again, people aspired to get a partner who was better than them.

But again, it was wishful thinking. Although participants wanted to shoot for the stars, they ultimately ended up with partners matched to their own mate value. For example, a person with a mate value of 6 was likely to end up with another 6 (or potentially a 7 if they were a bit lucky, or a 5 if they were a bit unlucky). Ultimately, despite wanting much more, a 4 is most likely to partner with another 4.

article continues after advertisement

And that's a good thing because when partners had matching mate values (i.e., an 8 with an 8, a 4 with a 4, or a 6 with a 6) they had better relationships. Specifically, they reported better sexual history, had more frequent interactions, and stayed together longer.

What This Means for You
Overall, the message seems to be: What you want and what you get may be two different things. It’s a fact of life: The love lottery doesn’t care about your wishes. Instead, your own mate value rating (how attractive you are to others based on your physical attributes and personality) determines the partner you'll most likely end up with. If you’re a 3, you have a different dating pool than if you’re an 8.

Instead of “dating up,” we should date “in our own league,” and “shop within our price range." It’s just another example of how we don’t always know what’s best for us in relationships. When seeking your perfect match, you may not get what you think you want. Instead, you may get exactly what you need to have a great relationship.

References

Prall, S., & Scelza, B. (2022). The effect of mating market dynamics on partner preference and relationship quality among Himba pastoralists. Science Advances, 8 (18), https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abm5629

Taylor, L. S., Fiore, A. T., Mendelsohn, G. A., & Cheshire, C. (2011). “Out of my league”: A real-world test of the matching hypothesis. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37, 942–954. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167211409947

Walster, E., Aronson, V., Abrahams, D., & Rottman, L. (1966). Importance of physical attractiveness in dating behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 4, 508-516.

Share on FacebookShare
Share on TwitterTweet
Share via EmailEmail
advertisement

About the Author

Dr. Gary W. Lewandowski Jr. is the author of Stronger Than You Think: The 10 Blind Spots That Undermine Your Relationship...and How to See Past Them.

Online: Website, Instagram, LinkedIn, Twitter
Read Next
Low sexual desire in men can cause of shame and sadness, but new research shows how reappraising sex can be beneficial.
Reframing Sex Can Improve Well-Being in Men with Low Desire

Flirt at Your Own Risk
Most Popular

Don’t Date Up: Why You Should Stay In Your Own League

How Autistic People Experience Sensory Processing Issues

10 Things You Shouldn't Do to Your Cat

10 Signs of an Isolated and Lonely Worker

Intimacy Matters: 6 Ways to Communicate Your Needs

3 Signs That Your Personality Prefers Singlehood
Find a Therapist
Get the help you need from a therapist near you–a FREE service from Psychology Today.

City or Zip

Counselling
Cities:
Atlanta, GA
Austin, TX
Baltimore, MD
Boston, MA
Brooklyn, NY
Charlotte, NC
Chicago, IL
Columbus, OH
Dallas, TX
Denver, CO
Detroit, MI
Houston, TX
Indianapolis, IN
Jacksonville, FL
Las Vegas, NV
Los Angeles, CA
Louisville, KY
Memphis, TN
Miami, FL
Milwaukee, WI
Minneapolis, MN
Nashville, TN
New York, NY
Oakland, CA
Omaha, NE
Philadelphia, PA
Phoenix, AZ
Pittsburgh, PA
Portland, OR
Raleigh, NC
Sacramento, CA
Saint Louis, MO
San Antonio, TX
San Diego, CA
San Francisco, CA
San Jose, CA
Seattle, WA
Tucson, AZ
Washington, DC
Are you a Therapist? Get Listed Today
Psychology Today
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram
July 2022 magazine cover
About
Editorial Process
Privacy
Terms
Accessibility
United States
United States
Psychology Today © 2022 Sussex Publishers, LLC

Back
Psychology Today
Home
Find a Therapist
Get Help
Magazine
Today
Back
Find a Therapist
Get Help
Find a Therapist
Find a Treatment Center
Find a Psychiatrist
Find a Support Group
Find Teletherapy
Members
Login
Sign Up
United States
Austin, TX
Brooklyn, NY
Chicago, IL
Denver, CO
Houston, TX
Los Angeles, CA
New York, NY
Portland, OR
San Diego, CA
San Francisco, CA
Seattle, WA
Washington, DC
Back
Get Help
Mental Health
Addiction
Anxiety
ADHD
Asperger's
Autism
Bipolar Disorder
Chronic Pain
Depression
Eating Disorders
Personality
Passive Aggression
Personality
Shyness
Personal Growth
Goal Setting
Happiness
Positive Psychology
Stopping Smoking
Relationships
Low Sexual Desire
Relationships
Sex
Family Life
Child Development
Parenting
View Help Index
Do I Need Help?
Self Tests
Therapy Center NEW
Recently Diagnosed?
Diagnosis Dictionary
Types of Therapy
Talk to Someone
Find a Therapist
Find a Treatment Center
Find a Psychiatrist
Find a Support Group
Find Teletherapy
Back
Magazine
July 2022 magazine cover
JULY 2022
The Secrets We Keep
We all harbor secrets. Some are big and bad; some are small and trivial. Researchers have parsed which truths to tell and which not to.

Back
Today
Most Popular
Don’t Date Up: Why You Should Stay In Your Own League
How Autistic People Experience Sensory Processing Issues
10 Things You Shouldn't Do to Your Cat
10 Signs of an Isolated and Lonely Worker
Intimacy Matters: 6 Ways to Communicate Your Needs
Essential Reads

How Sleep Loss Promotes Unhealthy Eating

What Are the Characteristics of Your Closest Friends?

Why Autism Might Not Make You a Better Environmentalist

What the Fentanyl? The Straight Dope on a Synthetic Opioid
Trending Topics
Coronavirus Disease 2019
Narcissism
Dementia
Bias
Affective Forecasting
Neuroscience

I couldn't seem to remove all the clutter, I tried to highlight the important parts.

 

[Emperor Palpatine]

Most men are ok being cuckolds (or too stupid to realize they are)

 

[Zhou Chang-Xing]

30-40 percent of males are either incel or nearcel in western nations.

Well, Actually...

Male Sexlessness is Rising But Not for the Reasons Incels Claim

A recent terrorist attack in Toronto, which left 10 people dead, has brought global attention to the “incel” movement, which stands for “involuntarily celibate.” The term refers to a growing number of people, particularly young men, who feel shut out of any possibility for romance, and have...

ifstudies.org

The lion’s share of the decline in virginity in the NSFG is due to falling religiosity. The share of never-married men ages 22-35 who were virgins due to religious abstention fell from 4.7% in 2006-2010, to 3% in 2013-2015. The share who are virgins due to fear of STDs has fallen from 0.8% to 0.4%, while the share abstaining due to fear of conception has risen from 0.1% to 0.5%. The share who are in a relationship but just haven’t had the right moment has fallen from 0.8% to 0.4%. Meanwhile, the share who are virgins due to not having found a suitable partner yet has risen from 3.6% to 4%, while the share who cite “other” reasons has risen from 1.6% to 2.5%.

Thus, while the NSFG shows sexlessness declining, essentially involuntary sources of sexlessness, which I consider to be “other” and “lack of a suitable partner,” are stable or rising. Virtually, the whole decline in NSFG-measured sexlessness is a decline in voluntary sexlessness, that is, sexlessness due to religious, timing, or health concerns. Using NSFG figures for sexual abstention and ACS marital demographics, we can estimate a “hard-core incel population,” that is, the share of never-married men ages 22-35 who have never had sex, and whose reason for never having had sex isn’t abstention for religious, timing, or health reasons.

About 8% of never-married young men living with their parents are involuntarily sexless, and another 7% are voluntarily so. Among men not living with their parents, it’s just 4% involuntarily sexless, and 2% voluntarily so. Looking at sex in the last year instead of virginity, never married young men without their parents are about 17% sexless, versus nearly 30% among those who live with parents. Even when these variables are combined together, more education is associated with more sexlessness among both men who live with their parents and men who do not, and living with parents is associated with more sexlessness across all educational levels.

We are the bottom 5%.

 

[Scio]

Yep, this is true. I'm actually planning on making a series of posts debunking a popular Blackpill YouTuber that keeps spreading this myth. This is also why Wheat Waffles is one of the better Blackpillers because he doesn't spread doom and gloom but looks objectively at the data.

I kept looking around and I kept seeing men much uglier than myself in relationships (and not many men are as ugly as me), this tells me that it's not just my ugliness that keeps me single.

The "Oh, she's Chad-only" is a massive cope that just isolates the worst most entitled toilets and pretends like they're the rule (selection bias).

Those uglier men propably NTmogg you. The NT pill is underrated here. The height pill is overrated, i´m just 5´11 and see everywhere shorter males with decent gf´s on a daily basis.

 

[Deleted member 40252]

chad only if non-NT

 

[Scio]

Well, Actually...

Male Sexlessness is Rising But Not for the Reasons Incels Claim

A recent terrorist attack in Toronto, which left 10 people dead, has brought global attention to the “incel” movement, which stands for “involuntarily celibate.” The term refers to a growing number of people, particularly young men, who feel shut out of any possibility for romance, and have...

ifstudies.org

The lion’s share of the decline in virginity in the NSFG is due to falling religiosity. The share of never-married men ages 22-35 who were virgins due to religious abstention fell from 4.7% in 2006-2010, to 3% in 2013-2015. The share who are virgins due to fear of STDs has fallen from 0.8% to 0.4%, while the share abstaining due to fear of conception has risen from 0.1% to 0.5%. The share who are in a relationship but just haven’t had the right moment has fallen from 0.8% to 0.4%. Meanwhile, the share who are virgins due to not having found a suitable partner yet has risen from 3.6% to 4%, while the share who cite “other” reasons has risen from 1.6% to 2.5%.

Thus, while the NSFG shows sexlessness declining, essentially involuntary sources of sexlessness, which I consider to be “other” and “lack of a suitable partner,” are stable or rising. Virtually, the whole decline in NSFG-measured sexlessness is a decline in voluntary sexlessness, that is, sexlessness due to religious, timing, or health concerns. Using NSFG figures for sexual abstention and ACS marital demographics, we can estimate a “hard-core incel population,” that is, the share of never-married men ages 22-35 who have never had sex, and whose reason for never having had sex isn’t abstention for religious, timing, or health reasons.

About 8% of never-married young men living with their parents are involuntarily sexless, and another 7% are voluntarily so. Among men not living with their parents, it’s just 4% involuntarily sexless, and 2% voluntarily so. Looking at sex in the last year instead of virginity, never married young men without their parents are about 17% sexless, versus nearly 30% among those who live with parents. Even when these variables are combined together, more education is associated with more sexlessness among both men who live with their parents and men who do not, and living with parents is associated with more sexlessness across all educational levels.

We are the bottom 5%.

The problem with WheatWaffles is that the basis of his research is Tinder. And Tinder is NOT 100% the reallife.

I used to believe Tinder was reallife and always wondered how those sub5s could get GF´s.
The only logical conclusion is that Tinder is not 100% reallife.
And you know why?
Because 1) there are not so many foids on Tinder.
And secondly, foids get impressed by good NT-skills, which you can´t show on Tinder.

 

[I want to believe]

All foids want Chads only. There's not exceptions at al. You have to realize that if you consider yourself blackpilled.

And secondly, foids get impressed by good NT-skills, which you can´t show on Tinder.

Foids get impressed when they see a man with perfect facial bones.

 

[Scio]

All foids want Chads only. There's not exceptions at al. You have to realize that if you consider yourself blackpilled.

Foids get impressed when they see a man with perfect facial bones.

Have you seen daylight in the past years? I mean not just through the window...
ps: what foids want and what they get and accept are two different things.

 

[I want to believe]

ps: what foids want and what they get and accept are two different things.

They can easily get sex with Chads. But it's harder for Becky to get relationships with Chad. Thus, they just date normie cucks who spend money on them while they cheat on them with Chads.

 

[Dregster]

I started a field-experiment where i observe couples on the streets and rate their looks to see how "looksmatched" they are.
And it´s no surprise, most of the couples are pretty much looksmatched.

But my main focus in this experiment were actually Chads. I was specifically looking for Chads to see what girlfriends they have.
And i can tell you that ALL real Chads have real Stacies or at least Stacylites.

"Chad-only" is a cope to make incels believe that they are not alone, and that the majority of men suffer....
but the sad truth is...we are alone, and most men are doing well out there...it´s just us, the 5% lowest males. The 5% bottom of the barrel.

Yeah trying to say that high tier normies or even bonafide average normies struggle is a basement dweller cope but chads ARE out there pumpNdumping sub8 foids though, let's not pretend like it's not happening.

Beckies out here thinking they deserve some tiktok prettyboy chadlites just because they got pumpNdumped by one.

 

[Dregster]

They can easily get sex with Chads. But it's harder for Becky to get relationships with Chad.

Users like OP still seem not to understand this key difference.

It's like the other side of this same coin when ignorant users say that foids dont have to worry about the wall, but in reality they do have to worry about it.

 

[Deleted member 9758]

Good thread. You have to be unbelievably subhuman to be an incel. regular subhumans have gfs

 

[Reclusemaxxer]

In some cases it is Chad only not in all cases tho in general if you’re sub 8 you’re better off cold approaching than using apps to meet people

 

[Scio]

Yeah trying to say that high tier normies or even bonafide average normies struggle is a basement dweller cope but chads ARE out there pumpNdumping sub8 foids though, let's not pretend like it's not happening.

Beckies out here thinking they deserve some tiktok prettyboy chadlites just because they got pumpNdumped by one.

The problem is that foids SMV is very different from males SMV.
If we rate a male we mostly rate him by his facial bone structure.
If we rate a foid we also tend to rate her by her face BUT we forget one important thing...her BODY.
A Becky with an average face can still have an extremely high SMV and even attract Chads if she has a sexy body (Nice butt etc.)
And this is the reason why also Chads sometimes fuck a Becky. Simply because of her sexy body. He doesn´t care about her ugly, average face.
I´m totally aware of this.
But it still doesn´t contradict the statement of my thread.

Good thread. You have to be unbelievably subhuman to be an incel. regular subhumans have gfs

Yes, i would say if you are a 4/10 and NT you can still find a gf. Incel territory is 1-3/10.

This thread doesn´t deny the blackpill, it just shows that we are much lonelier than we thought and that we must be exceptionally subhuman.

 

[Erik-Jón]

Well never be chad, chad will get cheated on to so it’s fine

 

[subhuman]

*checks color* yup, this greycel is getting ignored

 

[Dregster]

The problem is that foids SMV is very different from males SMV.
If we rate a male we mostly rate him by his facial bone structure.
If we rate a foid we also tend to rate her by her face BUT we forget one important thing...her BODY.
A Becky with an average face can still have an extremely high SMV and even attract Chads if she has a sexy body (Nice butt etc.)
And this is the reason why also Chads sometimes fuck a Becky. Simply because of her sexy body. He doesn´t care about her ugly, average face.
I´m totally aware of this.
But it still doesn´t contradict the statement of my thread.

Chads/tyrones/lites/HTN pumpNdump fat chicks too. Too many fatties walking around with an arrogance they dont deserve because of the validation that they get from that pumpNdump. When I said "sub8foid" Im talking about 4s and 5s too.

Btw im not calling every fat chick a landwhale because there is a huge difference and normal dudes with options dont touch that unless it's a fetish.

 

[Deadgeneration]

I started a field-experiment where i observe couples on the streets and rate their looks to see how "looksmatched" they are.
And it´s no surprise, most of the couples are pretty much looksmatched.

But my main focus in this experiment were actually Chads. I was specifically looking for Chads to see what girlfriends they have.
And i can tell you that ALL real Chads have real Stacies or at least Stacylites.

"Chad-only" is a cope to make incels believe that they are not alone, and that the majority of men suffer....
but the sad truth is...we are alone, and most men are doing well out there...it´s just us, the 5% lowest males. The 5% bottom of the barrel.

I agree, too many chad-only copers

 

[Cope or die]

There are two seperate things going on here. Casual sex/hook-ups and sex in the context of a relationshit. Majority of the hook ups are chad with 80% of foids. They will only take stacy serious for a relationshit though. The other foids will give non-chads some pity sex or duty sex every so often but again mostly in the context of a relationshit/marriage. The bottom 20-30%(incels) of men get nothing.

 

[DryDick]

This was from the 90s


View: https://youtu.be/B5BsHb7SoKU

 

[BPJ]

chad only if non-NT

 

[watcher]

A lot of people here have a hard time accepting we are a small minority. Most think men are mostly sexless incels who have to pay for sex, just a big cope. We are the exception, not the rule. Most men have no problem getting sex as a teenager and having multiple relationships.

 

[watcher]

but the sad truth is...we are alone, and most men are doing well out there...it´s just us, the 5% lowest males. The 5% bottom of the barrel.

Its more like 15~30%

 

[Autistic Uggo]

chad only if non-NT

 

[nohope.]

wouldn't that mean us incels could get ugly gfs?

 

[YBP Yxngcel]

chad only if non-NT

 

[YBP Yxngcel]

And I bet you, that all those dudes that were looksmatched had a wide social circle and we're neurotypical.

 

[Darius L]

30-40 percent of males are either incel or nearcel in western nations.

Most men are ok being cuckolds (or too stupid to realize they are)

And I bet you, that all those dudes that were looksmatched had a wide social circle and we're neurotypical.

 

[YBP Yxngcel]

30-40 percent of males are either incel or nearcel in western nations.

Cope. Sorry mate

 

[I.N.C.E.L.S. Boss]

There aren't enough chads for every female.
So most monkey branch with normies.