F
I agree. Height << face
for dating/slaying where I am from.
Also masculinity is not that important for getting laid as long as you have harmony.
I agree. Height << face
for dating/slaying where I am from.
Also masculinity is not that important for getting laid as long as you have harmony.
forced meme
F
You shouldn't talk about forced memes. ::Soycuck::
E
JFL 5'2'' chadlet making all the girls wet at a college party meanwhile the 6'4'' normie are struggling to get s girl to acknowledge them
R
Sorry dude but this is absolutely retarded. You're an engineer? You should be smarter than this. Here is your logic:
- being short doesn't make you unattractive!
- being short makes you unmasculine.
- being unmasculine is what makes you unattractive!
Can you not see how dumb this is? If being short makes you unattractive due to being "unmasculine" then it has made you unattractive.
The idea that height doesn't matter for male attractiveness is absolute nonsense that has been refuted by mountains of evidence that show height is a key attraction feature. Eg.
https://incels.is/threads/scientifi...f-importance-is-race-height-face-money.59098/
A few inches of height are worth hundreds of thousands of dollars a year to women.
Lastly saying your single one short friend with a beautiful face gets laid so therefore height doesn't matter is cherry picking and no different than saying "an old billionaire gets laid so age doesn't matter" or "a homeless male model gets laid so money doesn't matter".
Can you see how this kind of shitty logic can contradict itself one sentence right after another? Having one very high percentile trait and succeeding due to it inspite of other problems does not mean those other problems are proven insignificant.
Get yourself straightened out. Blue pill, trolling, and cherrypicking are not permitted for good reasons. All of them are just useless bullshit that causes pointless arguments that can go nowhere because there is no proper logic behind any of it.
tbh
t. soy cuck
E
Masculinity isn't the same thing as sexual desire. When a foid looks at a picture of a male she's not wet because of his height. I have no evidence or research to back this up, but I'm suggesting that the confusion of attraction falls under masculinity. Sexual desire is merely measured by your face.
Being unmasculine doesn't make you unattractive, no where did I suggest this.
A decent example would be zayn Malik without his status or money he'd still be slaying pussy,
Zayn Malik is short, he has feminine features that don't make him look masculine, but he's good looking and desired by most women for his looks.
I have not contradicted myself by any means, I've made the differences between masculinity and sexual attraction clear, your thread doesn't prove anything except that taller men are perceived to be more masculine. Face trumps height
Last edited:
Face is definitely more important than height so many lankycels have trouble finding foids.
E
Put two equally facially attractive men next to each other, one that's a manlet and one that's tall. Surely the taller one will be chosen over the manlet, this isn't unprecedented. Now compare a chadlet to a tall normie ?
"Pawlowski and Jasienska (2005) showed women images of male and female couples that varied in their differences in height, with some of them depicting couples of nearly equal height, and others depicting couples with great disparity in height, with either the man or the woman being taller. The researchers found that women in the fertile phase of the cycle, more so than women in other cycle phases, preferred images in which the difference between the men and women was greater, with the man being taller than the woman. As with behavioral and vocal dominance, this effect was strongest when women evaluated the men as short-term mates."
E
And as suggested by OP height is a predictor of dominance assertion. No where did that study include the relationship between face and height.
R
If you want to make an assertion that height does not influence male attractiveness, despite the fact that:
- height is one of the things women will most broadly admit they find attractive, and
- there are mountains of studies showing height greatly influences attractiveness to women,
You need more than one single cherry picked beautiful short friend to prove it or in my opinion this constitutes some combination of blue pill, cherrypicking, and/or trolling. Or possibly just an innocent consequence of terrible logic.
Eg.
When it comes to what women want, muscular, tall men still win out, a study suggests.
Scientists showed a group of 160 women photographs of shirtless, faceless men and asked to give them an attractiveness rating.
The results show men who looked strong, with muscular arms and toned torsos, did far better than those who had worked a little less hard at the gym.
The appearance of physical strength was far and away the biggest factor in determining how attractive a man was seen to be.
On its own, this accounted for more than 70 per cent of men’s attractiveness.
Tall men also did well with the ladies, although less so, with strength, height and leanness all taken together making up 80 per cent of the attractiveness of the men.
Researchers wrote: ‘The results show that most male bodily attractiveness stems from cues of formidability and physical strength, and that strength increases attractiveness in a linear fashion.
‘This effect of height and weight on attractiveness may be due to mate choice mechanisms responding to cues of health, or to the benefits that height and lean bodies have in protracted aggression, hunting and other aspects of fighting ability.’
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5173311/Women-height-strength-attractive-men.html
E
Bluepilled studies confusing attractiveness with masculinity. It's not unprecedented that women desire more masculine men. The point of this thread is to illustrate that all you need to get laid is a good face. Height has no influence on your inceldom as much as face does, in fact the only reason it would contribute to your inceldom is for the underlying respect others have for you as a male, and the obvious DWL.
That being said: desire in itself is made up by several components : sexual desire (face), masculinity (height , frame ), race
Sexual desire is merely defined by face, that's it. Height Is fucking cope.
Being deficient in height frame and race doesn't mean you'll never get sex, you will because of your face assuming it's 7+/10. Face determines your sexual attraction, it's the limiting reagent in a quantitative measurement
Last edited:
tall normie wins for sure. I've seen plenty of average ass tall men get chosen over ripped and more attractive short men.
I can see you have run out of arguments lol. Just admit you are wrong.
R
Dude:
- I know an old fat ugly billionaire that bangs hot models - that proves all you need is money
- I know a tall buff guy that bangs hot women - that proves all you need is height/frame
- I know a guy with autism that has a wife and kids - that proves autism doesn't matter
- I know a top tier ethnic who gets chicks on Tinder - that proves race doesn't matter
- I know a 4/10 white guy who has impregnated and banged countless prime foids in SEA - that proves face doesn't matter
Can you see the problem with cherry picking as a foundation of logical arguments? Or saying "all you need is x"?
I have just disproven and proven every concept of male attractiveness by taking that approach in this post. It is poor logic and goes nowhere.
E
Disregard the anecdotes as I just added that for empiricism.
Face is the limiting factor, you will have sexual desire as much as what your face is rated as. Height, frame and what not are all masculine bonuses to distinguish you from other facially equivalent males.
Neither of us can objectively prove our points, you've chosen to use statistical analysis to suggest that women desire more masculine men and I agree with you, but my point is the face defined inceldom, it's the limiting factor. You will get laid with a 7+ face at any reasonable height where the DWL doesn't wipe out the entire female population
R
That's a fairer hypothesis and statement.
But again, a lot of people fall in the logical trap of using one high tier feature to try to imply all others are insignficant.
Absolute statements are almost all absolutely refutable as well and that's why they lead to troll/flame wars.
Eg. You will get laid with a 7+ face at any height. Well what if you're 4'11" in Scandinavia?
The same problems happen also with the cherry picking logic. Eg:
- you will get laid at top 0.1% wealth no matter how ugly or old you are, therefore money is everything
I would agree with you that most 7+/10 faced men will absolutely have no trouble getting laid. But that does not prove other factors don't matter or that face is the only thing that matters.
E
Face is what makes or breaks your desire to women
RIP OP. Face > Height though that’s a fact. Yes height comes into play and will hurt you but face is always king
It is over.
Similar threads
Heathcheshire
Users who are viewing this thread
