Welcome to Incels.is - Involuntary Celibate Forum

Welcome! This is a forum for involuntary celibates: people who lack a significant other. Are you lonely and wish you had someone in your life? You're not alone! Join our forum and talk to people just like you.

NSFW NEW LOOKS STUDY JUST BLACKPILLED THE WORLD

LegitTBH

LegitTBH

Banned
-
Joined
Jun 30, 2018
Posts
72
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. Second, both daughters and their parents report valuing characteristics other than physical attractiveness most strongly (e.g., ambition/industriousness, friendliness/kindness). However, the prior research relies solely on self-report to assess daughters’ and parents’ preferences. We assessed mate preferences among 61 daughter-mother pairs using an experimental design varying target men’s physical attractiveness and trait profiles. We tested four hypotheses investigating whether a minimum level of physical attractiveness was a necessity to both women and their mothers and whether physical attractiveness was a more important determinant of dating desirability than trait profiles. These hypotheses were supported. Women and their mothers were strongly influenced by the physical attractiveness of the target men and preferred the attractive and moderately attractive targets. Men with the most desirable personality profiles were rated more favorably than their counterparts only when they were at least moderately attractive. Unattractive men were never rated as more desirable partners for daughters, even when they possessed the most desirable trait profiles. 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.

There you have it.

Personality + other stuff DOES MATTER, but only once you've passed AN ACCEPTABLE MINIMUM LOOKS THRESHOLD (AKA PSL 5-6). When women say they care about anything besides looks (physical attractiveness) they are referring to men they ALREADY have deemed physically attractive.

Now you would have to be a complete and utter retard to ever think otherwise and this finding is extremely obvious for anyone who has one hundred brain cells, but now we have a legitimate study conducted by actual academics where the conclusions were not self-reported.

LOOKS ARE EVERYTHING. IF YOU DON'T HAVE THE REQUISITE LOOKS, YOU ARE NOT EVEN IN THE RACE LOL

mHM3DMk.gif
 
Fucking brutal. Almost all these studies are in support of the blackpill you'd be a hard pressed to find one that supported blue pill concepts. How anyone can deny the Blackpill in 2k18 is beyond me
 
Personality + other stuff DOES MATTER, but only once you've passed AN ACCEPTABLE MINIMUM LOOKS THRESHOLD (AKA PSL 5-6).
I knew femoid would prefer 5/10 NT over 6/10 autistic. Can't be said same about 7/10 Chad-lite autist. Basically 5-6/10 is the only tier when personality matters.
 
Of course. When they get brutally fucked in the pussy by Chad, they need to know if he has a good enough personality to stay around.
 
I knew femoid would prefer 5/10 NT over 6/10 autistic. Can't be said same about 7/10 Chad-lite autist. Basically 5-6/10 is the only tier when personality matters.

the more attractive you are, the less your personality matters in terms of hooking up/ having sex with multiple strangers

even reddit agrees on this lol one of the top voted comments on the "stuff you've noticed as an attractive person" was:

whenever i'm talking to a cute girl, i find myself having to put less and less effort into the conversation
 
Water is wet
 
personality :lul::lul::lul::lul: wtf this shiet even means
 
Nobody cares. Normies don't read studies, they just read newspapers that inaccurately report old studies year after year. COFFEE GIVES YOU CANCER. COFFEE CURES CANCER.
 
this is old news. we've seen this study dozen times before.
 
this is old news. we've seen this study dozen times before.

This is a legitimate study published in a reputable, academic journal though with conclusions that actually carry weight.

It's not some aspie "muh child rapist" tinder experiment conducted by a basement-dweller
 
This is a legitimate study published in a reputable, academic journal though with conclusions that actually carry weight.

It's not some aspie "muh child rapist" tinder experiment conducted by a basement-dweller

i know and i repeat myself again. this is an old study that I saw months ago... you're late asf.
 

Similar threads

ItsovERfucks
Replies
7
Views
143
failednormie_
failednormie_
ars
Replies
37
Views
813
ElTruecel
ElTruecel
Masquerade
Replies
10
Views
260
WorthlessSlavicShit
WorthlessSlavicShit

Users who are viewing this thread

shape1
shape2
shape3
shape4
shape5
shape6
Back
Top