Yep. Their sexuality in general seems to be far less rigid than men's, in that they are not as strongly attracted to masculine attributes themselves (as opposed to men's attraction to femininity), but the attraction is more looks-based and flexible. And they have zero ambition when it comes to effort in dating. They just want to be worshipped and pampered while doing nothing in return.
True. Being at a healthy weight is the only major requirement that is really expected from women, and even then, there is a surprisingly large number of men who would be willing — and even glad — to date an obese woman. The same cannot be said the other way around.
I suspect the results would be less harsh, probably even skewed slightly to higher ratings on average.
Should have never stopped the belt treatment to women who speak too much
Were you born in 09
I don't recall claiming men are more attractive than women, though I did mention it is a possibility, since in some places women are more likely to be obese on average; they face less selective pressure within the current gynocentric sexual market, though ultimately you also have to figure out what measurements of attractiveness you are focusing on, not merely femininity itself being perceived as more attractive, as that would best be interpreted as a perceptual bias.
Yeah to be honest you are right that you didn't make such a claim, I was indirectly responding to you by directly responding to the comments underneath which people are using your paragraphs as a source that men actually mog women, (attractiveness)
Environmental pressures shaping traits is definitely a factor, as under-desirability creates compensatory behaviors in men. Although, this is ultimately a reflection of the perceptual bias and hypergamy, and not the attractiveness in and of itself; it is not the truth value of the perception that matters here, but the perception's influence over intersexual dynamics. Since gynocentric perception is dominant, it automatically leads to an exacerbation of the traits you mentioned in women, but what I frame it as is not a reflection of their actual attractiveness, but a perceptual bias.
Exactly. Men are devalued in general perception regardless of their actual contributions or abilities, while women are systematically elevated by default. The perceptual bias exists independently of actual merit, achievements, or social value, which is a separate issue from the perceptual bias of attractiveness in and of itself, but also a problematic one.
The problem is the systematic asymmetry that arises from it. If every individual’s evaluation were independent and random, there’d be no consistent gap. But perception is predictably biased in one direction, favoring women over men, creating severe consequences in sexual selection. Subjectivity cannot excuse a systemic pattern of inequity, especially when we do have certain ways to measure attractiveness through proportions, health indicators, averageness, etc... and there is no reasonable explanation for women being rated significantly higher other than an arbitrary gynocentric perceptual bias.
I agree. The only problem is femininity is overweighted in societal perception, whereas masculine traits are underweighted unless they meet extremely high thresholds.
"arbitrary gynocentric perceptual bias."
When I said arbitrary, I didn’t mean “uncaused”, rather not grounded in any objective difference in intrinsic attractiveness or value. Of course, there are evolutionary pressures that incentivize protection and preferential treatment of females. That explains why the bias exists, but it does not justify the leap from reproductive utility to aesthetic overvaluation. Evolutionary function does not logically entail that women are inherently more beautiful or that men should be systematically perceived as grotesque unless exceptional. What I am trying to say is, the bias may be biologically rooted, but it is still perceptually irrational when it comes to evaluating physical appearance.
Yep, and you end up with a gynocentric society that is gatekept by women in a sense; this compounds the same directional distortion.
I definitely agree. I don't know how much this would affect the natural GAP, but it would certainly contribute to mitigating it. I think that, generally, women have a natural advantage in intersexual dynamics because of these perceptual biases and natural phenomena, which is an advantage that society should reduce artificially — unfortunately, in our current society, not only is this not the case, but it also amplifies the natural biases tenfold.
Yep, the forces are biological in origin, but the modern amplification is cultural (culture which is rooted in those biological instincts which are irrational), and gynocentric narratives supercharge what used to be a milder evolutionary bias into an extreme perceptual distortion.
I don't know how you have the patience to humor these crypto-gyno retards. It's been well-documented that men didn't give much of a shit about roastie (30+ years old) foids in the past. These morons would continue to view the modern gender dynamics through the lens of "muh mammals" and "muh past" (which has already been debunked). We don't live in a natural gynocracy; we live in a government-enforced gynocracy. Any guy who still copes with "muh natural gynocracy" is already a worthless cuck (who should kys) in my opinion.
I agree. This society is completely superficial, gynocentric, and it has elevated women's value to a ludicrous level; this is the inevitable result, as you said, of feminism and technology — coupled with sexual liberalism, which is directly linked to modern secular ideologies and especially feminism. In a pre-industrial environment, looks mattered but they weren’t everything, not to mention the limited mate pool, and strong social pressure due to factors like religion. Now we live in a Tinder meat market where women can filter thousands of men in seconds based purely on face and height. Technology and modernity removed scarcity and turned attraction into a decadent market.
which one, i don t remember if i read it before, i might have read it
this comes in pair with the fact that we see everywhere foids saying that ,,women are dating ugly men, men aren t dating ugly women, all women are beautiful, everywhere you look you will find a beautiful women with an ugly male", which is not real in reality
peak delusional
after this im pretty sure now that they are convinced that ,,they deserve better" because foids are beautiful everywhere
this nigger is rettarded, we already know that even the ugly foids have better than even above average males, maybe not the top of the males, but we don t need the so called ,,medium-ugly" because this is how foids talk to make us accept their hypergamous nature, when in reality medium ugly is atleast some htn, males rate them as attractive or not attractive and from what i see to males being skinny and not deformed facially is seen as attractive enough
she s also makeup maxxed as fuck and she s still ugly, her looksmatch already roped or is an incel
call them nigger bro!
every single time, literally the ,,femcels" and ,,lesbians" and every single foid alive"Wahh wahh, I am too ugly and fat and can't get chad."
yes, for males its something entirely decided from birth and bone related, for foids its literally just be skinny and use makeup to be viewed as someone attractive
Some more shit I have come across:
---
---
---
incels.is
incels.is
Exactly. Much of their worldview and perception of dating dynamics is based on this perceptual bias, hence they often spew these nonsensical claims about reality that are evidently false; it certainly does not help that we are in a self-reinforcing loop of gynocentrism within our current society, which as you said, many men are reinforcing due to their desperation — thereby further empowering these gynocentric dynamics.
True.
Yep. Whenever they date someone who is not multiple tiers above them in physical appearance, they perceive it as being generous, and that they could do better. They are delusional creatures.
They live in an entirely different world than ours, and it is not even comparable; it's absurd how much higher their SMV is.
I was actually surprised by how bad looking she is, especially since they treating her as if she looks great. Goes to show how skewed their perception is.
Indeed.
This is one of the worst parts of all of this as well, since not only are they judged more leniently in general, but what they are judged on is often controllable, unlike men who are scrutinized for innate traits that are immutable. The make-up amplifies it even further.
That subreddit has some brutal stuff in it.
Yep. It is both — men's attractiveness is undervalued, and women's attractiveness is overvalued, especially when makeup is brought into the equation. Another non-negligible factor is that the graph I included only accounts for facial attractiveness, but women's attractiveness is also heavily determined by their body. The same effect cannot be observed as strongly in men, as women place most of their emphasis on immutable facial characteristics, and other traits such as height and frame; men, in contrast, are more likely to perceive a woman as attractive if she is simply not obese, which would help explain why they are so prone to overrating women. Most men are simply too desperate, blinded by gynocentrism, and are therefore less capable of evaluating women's attractiveness carefully.
Unfortunately.
And men's nonsensical overrating happens there too. For example, most men seem too think that every woman has a "big butt" (wide hips) and narrow waist. They will say "that girl I like has such a narrow waist, and an hourglass figure!" Then I go look at the girl, and she's completely average, if not below. It's like they compare women's bodies to the male average rather than the female, and they don't know that every woman has wider hips and a narrower waist than they, as males, do. Of course if your standard is men, almost every woman is extremely feminine and attractive! Imagine if women rated our height by comparing us to the female average instead of the male...
It's worse than that. Not even the body matters, unless she's obese. Women's attractiveness for most men seems to only be determined a little by age, and then only by stuff that they can control (clothes, hair, makeup), and the more slutty these are, the hotter they rate them. Men will see a random becky with whore makeup on and a skirt, and think that she's the hottest woman alive! For example that store clerk goth girl from an ad or whatever it was that was also posted here some time ago. She was the most mid becky ever, but because she wore makeup and had a sultry expression, people acted like she was a Stacy.
Exactly. Most men have no idea how to properly evaluate the actual attractiveness of women — be it in their facial characteristics, or their body. They see something slightly feminine in nature, and they get riled up almost in an instant. The way you put it also makes sense, since it does really seem as if men are comparing women to men, while women are comparing men to the top percentage among men.
