Blackpill Data doesn't lie (General Social Survey throws atomic black pills)

[andinocel]

SDA - GSS 1972-2022 Cumulative Datafile - Release 2

This is accessible to anyone, and you can spend hours fucking around with this. Take a look at this, I filtered it for straight men, age 25 to 50, never married. The person doing the survey can rate the looks of the responder.

It gets better....

But foids be like "yOuR sInGle dUe tO yOuR aWfUL pErSoNaLiTy, inkwell!", and redpillers be like "yOu jUsT dOnT hAvE gAmE, brO"

 

[Emba]

Pretty colors bro!

I like all them square looking things...

Double plus good

 

[lifesucksandyoudie]

Bluepillers/redpillers don't even browse educational research institutions for data to support their worldviews because they're too busy on social media and can't be bothered.

 

[lastchancel]

What a statistical anomaly, all the ugly people also must have bad personalities!

 

[Lv99_BixNood]

Why are they recording their looks?

 

[ain]

My IQ isn't high enough to comprehend this

 

[RicaGames]

My IQ isn't high enough to comprehend this

You don't need high IQ today to understand those things you just need to know how to use the right tools:

This image shows a contingency table that illustrates the relationship between marital status and physical attractiveness rating for males aged 25-50 who identify as heterosexual or straight. Here’s a detailed breakdown of the table and its components:

Variables​

• marital:Marital status, with categories:
  • 1: married
  • 2: widowed
  • 3: divorced
  • 4: separated
  • 5: never married
• rlooks: Physical attractiveness rating, ranging from 1 (very unattractive) to 5 (very attractive).
• compwt: Composite weight used for weighting the data.
• Filters applied:
  • sex(1): Respondents' sex = male
  • age(25-50): Age of respondent = 25-50
  • sexornt(3): Sexual orientation = heterosexual or straight

Frequency Distribution​

This table contains two types of information in each cell:

• Column percent: The percentage of respondents in a particular marital status category within each physical attractiveness rating.
• Weighted N: The weighted number of respondents in each cell.

Analysis​

Row and Column Breakdown​

• Rows: Represent different marital statuses (married, widowed, divorced, separated, never married).
• Columns: Represent different levels of physical attractiveness (1 to 5).

Key Observations​

1. Married:
   • 68.1% of married males are rated as very attractive (5).
   • Only 28.0% are rated as very unattractive (1).
2. Widowed:
   • This category has very few respondents, with 2.5% rated as unattractive (2), and no respondents in other categories.
3. Divorced:
   • 53.3% are rated as about average (3).
   • A small percentage (10.8%) are very unattractive (1).
4. Separated:
   • Most respondents are rated as average (3) or unattractive (2).
   • Very few are rated as very attractive (5).
5. Never Married:
   • A significant portion (53.1%) are rated as very unattractive (1).
   • 36.6% are about average (3), and 27.0% are very attractive (5).

Row Totals​

• The "ROW TOTAL" column provides the total weighted number of respondents for each marital status category.

Column Totals​

• The "COL TOTAL" row provides the total percentage and weighted number of respondents for each attractiveness rating across all marital statuses.

Color Coding​

• The cells are color-coded to indicate the distribution of percentages within each column, with red typically indicating higher values and blue indicating lower values.

Conclusion​

This table indicates a clear relationship between marital status and perceived physical attractiveness among males aged 25-50 who are heterosexual. For instance, married males tend to have higher attractiveness ratings, while those who have never married tend to have lower attractiveness ratings.

 

[BricABrac]

SDA - GSS 1972-2022 Cumulative Datafile - Release 2

This is accessible to anyone, and you can spend hours fucking around with this. Take a look at this, I filtered it for straight men, age 25 to 50, never married. The person doing the survey can rate the looks of the responder.



View attachment 1173340

It gets better....

View attachment 1173342


But foids be like "yOuR sInGle dUe tO yOuR aWfUL pErSoNaLiTy, inkwell!", and redpillers be like "yOu jUsT dOnT hAvE gAmE, brO"

Says this data goes back to 1977 right? Did you filter for this time period too? If not, these stats might be even worse.
My bad, selecting for age ranges of men effectively filters date (probably, I don't know how they defined "25 year old man," since that might include a 25 year old male respondent in 1988 or whatever.

Good job brocel

 

[BricABrac]

Damn looking at it again and the rates of sex, deadbedrooming and sudden discovery of a women's high libido when the man is hot is also sui fuel.

 

[lennox]

Bluepillers/redpillers don't even browse educational research institutions for data to support their worldviews because they're too busy on social media and can't be bothered.

Tbh real life observation and experience is enough to tell me that it's over.

But still, hard data is good to educate others. It backs our cause and justifies us

 

[based_meme]

Ugly people are the most single/unmarried and have the least sex, while the most attractive have the most and are the most married. How is this possible?

I am shocked, amazed, and flabbergasted.

 

[Friezacel]

Marriages arent a good measurement on a mans sexual success because most women marry men they dont love or find attractive, they only marry to settle down.

 

[Ahnfeltia]

I ran the same tables as OP but for women. Unsurprisingly they look samey.

Another interesting think to take note of is how many more participants (of both sexes) were rated (very) attractive as opposed to (very) unattractive.

 

[Izayacel]

Marriages arent a good measurement on a mans sexual success because most women marry men they dont love or find attractive, they only marry to settle down.

They only Marry to Leech and Extend their Parasitic Nature *

 

[edgelordcel]

Pakiszan numbar 1

 

[Thaway]

redpillers be like "yOu jUsT dOnT hAvE gAmE, brO"

redpiller be like "i'm just autistic that's it, i'm not ugly or anything"

 

[WorthlessSlavicShit]

Beautiful find. It’s ridiculous that something as water as “Attractive people have sex and unattractive ones don’t,” needs graphs and surveys to prove it, especially since the countless studies to prove it are for some reason ignored, but that is the world we live in.

Btw, you should definitely add this onto the incels.wiki Scientific Blackpill page.

 

[WorthlessSlavicShit]

I ran the same tables as OP but for women. Unsurprisingly they look samey.
View attachment 1173424
View attachment 1173425
Another interesting think to take note of is how many more participants (of both sexes) were rated (very) attractive as opposed to (very) unattractive.

Have the fem"cels" just been vindicated? Jfl, normies will look at those two nearly identical tables and still say that looks matter for women but not for men, absolute ragefuel.

 

[Ahnfeltia]

Have the fem"cels" just been vindicated?

I'm trying to curry favor with them. Think they'll give me bobs and vagene? (see what I did there with "CURRY favor" )

In all seriousness, I was just echoing what @based_meme said.

Jfl, normies will look at those two nearly identical tables and still say that looks matter for women but not for men, absolute ragefuel.

Ugly men are just scared of having sex you see. Something about it being a onetime test for adulthood and being scared to fail or something

 

[WorthlessSlavicShit]

I'm trying to curry favor with them. Think they'll give me bobs and vagene? (see what I did there with "CURRY favor" )

In all seriousness, I was just echoing what @based_meme said.

Ah, I see, I didn't catch that.

Ugly men are just scared of having sex you see. Something about it being a onetime test for adulthood and being scared to fail or something

Exactly. Also, 100% sure that if this starts to circulate, cucks will just point out that more very unattractive men are having sex the most often than very attractive men, and instead of admitting that outliers don't disprove the rule and that the trend of more attractive = more sex is utterly obvious, will just completely deny that it exists (at least for men).

 

[Subhuman Trucel]

Ugly people are the most single/unmarried and have the least sex, while the most attractive have the most and are the most married. How is this possible?

I am shocked, amazed, and flabbergasted.

 

[Subhuman Trucel]

Marriages arent a good measurement on a mans sexual success because most women marry men they dont love or find attractive, they only marry to settle down.

 

[Ahnfeltia]

100% sure that if this starts to circulate, cucks will just point out that more very unattractive men are having sex the most often than very attractive men

if only they understood watching from the sidelines doesn't actually count as having sex

 

[WorthlessSlavicShit]

if only they understood watching from the sidelines doesn't actually count as having sex

Exactly.

 

[sultryloser]

I ran the same tables as OP but for women. Unsurprisingly they look samey.
View attachment 1173424
View attachment 1173425
Another interesting think to take note of is how many more participants (of both sexes) were rated (very) attractive as opposed to (very) unattractive.

My problem with all of these studies and surveys is that it's bluepillers making ratings of men or asking women to rate men. Such a dumb way and makes these studies invalid for purposes of proving or disproving anything.

The issue is that we need blackpilled raters to make the male ratings, you know, a rating that takes into account what women are actually attracted to facially. These studies sometimes use composites, which is based on this false idea that averageness is attractive.

The bigger issue is that blackpillers will never be involved in these studies. This ideology is fringe and taboo. Studies like that will not survive to any sort of publishing.

 

[Immolator]

Bluepillers on reddit will look at this and repeat the same 10 over exaggerated anecdotes (or some denial cope) ad infinitum.

 

[Ahnfeltia]

My problem with all of these studies and surveys is that it's bluepillers making ratings of men or asking women to rate men. Such a dumb way and makes these studies invalid for purposes of proving or disproving anything.

The issue is that we need blackpilled raters to make the male ratings, you know, a rating that takes into account what women are actually attracted to facially. These studies sometimes use composites, which is based on this false idea that averageness is attractive.

The bigger issue is that blackpillers will never be involved in these studies. This ideology is fringe and taboo. Studies like that will not survive to any sort of publishing.

Assuming the bluepilled ratings are merely inflated (slightly) and not all over the place, the trend that good-looking people have more marital and sexual success is still salvageable and only the proportions will be off. Not that we really needed confirmation of a trend so obvious.

Ideally you'd have honest ratings from the opposite sex. Whether they're actually blackpilled or not is kind of a nonissue, no?

What I don't understand is why the comeliness distribution is so completely and utterly skewed? Do participants get to know their rating or something?