WorthlessSlavicShit
Luminary
★★★★★
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2022
- Posts
- 10,615
Dumbasses be like: "All the incel stats are American only, if you aren't American it's completely different for you."
Meanwhile, studies from my country be like:
Physical attractiveness influences reproductive success of modern men
You don't say!
Some?
"Just rizz her up bro. Just hold frame, keep spinning plates and do NoFap, your life will do a 180 in no time, I swear bro, bitches in heat will be throwing themselves at you."
Tell any of this to Soydditors.
Title drop. Tfw this forum was created in 2017, meanwhile in 2011 researchers in small European countries were already solving the face vs height debate, yet people still think that we've come up with all of this on our own and are just "radicalized" and "divorced from reality" or whatever.
Interesting.
Marginally?!
Does it?
May be?!
May have?!
Yes.
Over.
"What's this "Alpha fucks, beta buxx" bullshit, you incels are so weird and cringy, no wonder no woman wants to be with you, who the hell even thinks of human relationships like this."
Even when alpha buxx, he still fucks more than beta ever does.
Even when by some miracle you manage to marry your looksmatch, nature still doesn't want your genes to continue existing. It truly nevER began.
Tfw you're so deep in the blackpill that even when trying to cope ("Maybe they just didn't want kids") you can only do that with another blackpill (Money and success = Face + Height).
Could be, but changes nothing.
You don't say.
Brutal, all that short personality keeping the short guys single. They should take a look at how the tallest guys do that, they have such tall personalities that they even make sure that multiple women can experiences them.
Indirectly, eh?
Broke: "Your looks allow you to start a relationship but your personality keeps your partner with you."
Woke: "Your height opens a woman's legs to you and your face keeps her coming back to you(r cock) again and again, to, well, come again and again."
Thoughts?
Meanwhile, studies from my country be like:
Physical attractiveness influences reproductive success of modern men
Here we examined associations between men’s reproductive success and physical attractiveness from retrospective data obtained from married, divorced, and single samples of Slovakian men. As predicted, facially more attractive and taller men were more likely to engage in marriage. In turn, married men had higher reproductive success than single men. Even when men’s marital status was considered, facially more attractive men had higher reproductive success than their less attractive counterparts. This supports the importance of physical attractiveness in sexual selection in modern humans.
You don't say!
Some indicators suggest that male height is also considered as an indicator of genetic quality.
Some?
Tall men are more likely to marry (Manfredini et al. 2010) and are more attractive to females (Hensley 1994; Pierce 1996; Mueller and Mazur 2001; Manfredini et al. 2010), which is supported by high response rates of females to male advertisements published in newspapers (Pawlowski and Koziel 2002; Koziel and Pawlowski 2003). In addition, some data indicate that more attractive women have on average taller husbands (Pawlowski et al. 2008).
The majority of works examining associations between physical attractiveness and mating success (i.e., number of sexualpartners) showed that more attractive males reported to have more sexual partners and/or more extrapair partners
"Trust me bro, it's all random, you will totally have Chad sons and Stacy daughters if you manage to reproduce."The fact that both facial attractiveness (Cornwelland Perrett 2008) and body height (Chambers et al. 2001;Silventoinen et al. 2001) are heritable reinforces their potential importance in human sexual selection.
Yes, we know.Jokela (2009) found that the least facially attractive men had fewer children than more attractive men. Taller men are less likely to be childless than shorter ones (Pawlowski et al. 2000; Mueller and Mazur2001; Nettle 2002) and/or have several different long-term partners (Mueller and Mazur 2001; Nettle 2002).
So you guys just did so.None of these studies, however, examined male facial attractivenessand tallness simultaneously. Thus, the relative importanceof these two variables in sexual selection in modern humans is less understood.
Multiple logistic regression with having at least one child as dependent variable, facial attractiveness as continuous predictor, and education level as categorical predictor showed that men having at least one child tended to be facially more attractive than their childless counterparts
"Just rizz her up bro. Just hold frame, keep spinning plates and do NoFap, your life will do a 180 in no time, I swear bro, bitches in heat will be throwing themselves at you."
These results were only marginally influenced by education level
Multiple linear regression (forward stepwise method) with number of children as a dependent variable and marital status, educational level, current age, number of siblings, birth order, height, and facial attractiveness defined as predictors showed that the association between predictors and men’s reproductive success was significant. Only marital status and facial attractiveness were significantly associated with men’s reproductive success. Unmarried men had lowest reproductive success, followed by divorced and married men (Table 1).
It's important to drink a lot of water at times like this.We examined the relative importance of male phenotype, especially facial attractiveness and body height, in human sexual selection. Taller and facially more attractive men got married more frequently than shorter and facially less attractive ones. In turn, married men (especially those who were facially more attractive) raised more children than single men.
"B-bro, trust me, you gotta work on your career first, women aren't that visual they're more about money and hardwork and potential."Men’s educational level, which would reflect their socioeconomic status, was a weak predictor of male reproductive success.
Given that both male facial attractiveness and body height are attractive for females, similar effects of these variables on men’s reproductive success are not surprising.
Tell any of this to Soydditors.
However, facial attractiveness and height are distinct cues that do not correlate with each other (r = 0.04, P = 0.43, N = 499, data not shown), and our data suggest that male facial attractiveness, but not tallness, is a significant predictor of men’s reproductive success.
Title drop. Tfw this forum was created in 2017, meanwhile in 2011 researchers in small European countries were already solving the face vs height debate, yet people still think that we've come up with all of this on our own and are just "radicalized" and "divorced from reality" or whatever.
It may be that male tallness is under stronger natural selection (relative to sexual selection) (see Kanazawa 2007) than facial attractiveness, thus the relationship between facial attractiveness and reproductive success was found to be stronger.
Interesting.
A marginally significant association between childlessness and low facial attractiveness
Marginally?!
found within the sample of married men indicates that a link between facial attractiveness and semen quality could exist (Soler et al. 2003).
Does it?
However, there are several alternative explanations for this association; for example, women may be more interested in having sex with their more physically attractive partners.
May be?!
Consequently, couples with attractive men may have sex more frequently, resulting in higher likelihood of conception.
May have?!
Research shows that women report more frequent coital orgasms when mated with attractive males (Thornhill et al. 1995; Shackelford et al. 2000)
Yes.
and that orgasm is associated with sperm retention and possibly with high conception rates (Baker and Bellis 1995), providing indirect support for this possibility.
Over.
Also, a growing body of work showing effects of menstrual cycle on women’s mate preferences (e.g., Gangestad et al. 2007; Gangestad and Thornhill 2008; Jones et al. 2008) suggests that women become particularly interested in having sex with physically attractive men and men with masculine and symmetrical faces and bodies near ovulation, when they are most likely to conceive.
"What's this "Alpha fucks, beta buxx" bullshit, you incels are so weird and cringy, no wonder no woman wants to be with you, who the hell even thinks of human relationships like this."
Thus, couples in which a male partner is more physically attractive may have sex more frequently at high fertility than couples in which a male partner is less attractive.
Even when alpha buxx, he still fucks more than beta ever does.
Another possibility is that less attractive men marry less attractive women (Buston and Emlen 2004; Pawlowski et al. 2008), who are less fertile (e.g., Zaadstra et al. 1993; Manning et al. 1997; De Pergola et al. 2006).
Even when by some miracle you manage to marry your looksmatch, nature still doesn't want your genes to continue existing. It truly nevER began.
Alternatively, perhaps less attractive men in this sample were not as financially successful as the more attractive men and, therefore, decided to have fewer children.
Tfw you're so deep in the blackpill that even when trying to cope ("Maybe they just didn't want kids") you can only do that with another blackpill (Money and success = Face + Height).
Furthermore, it is possible that more attractive men simply got married earlier and have more children. We cannot rule out this possibility, as no data were collected on number of years married.
Could be, but changes nothing.
Male height was distributed nonrandomly between the three cohorts:
You don't say.
single men were smallest, still-married men were taller, and divorced men tended to be the tallest
Brutal, all that short personality keeping the short guys single. They should take a look at how the tallest guys do that, they have such tall personalities that they even make sure that multiple women can experiences them.
These patterns indirectly fit with the idea that tallness is attractive to women and favors men in attracting new mates
Indirectly, eh?
However, in contrast to Mueller and Mazur’s (2001) study, the reproductive success of divorced men was generally lower than those of married ones. Our data either show that taller and facially more attractive men more likely engage in marriage and that facially more attractive men have greater reproductive success than their less attractive counterparts. Considering that male facial attractiveness was a stronger predictor of reproductive success than tallness, we propose that facial attractiveness is under stronger sexual selection than tallness.
Broke: "Your looks allow you to start a relationship but your personality keeps your partner with you."
Woke: "Your height opens a woman's legs to you and your face keeps her coming back to you(r cock) again and again, to, well, come again and again."
In summary, the importance of physical attractiveness (especially facial attractiveness) in sexual selection in modern men exists, which provides further evidence on evolution of body attractiveness via sexual selection. Further research including data from more diverse samples and additional facial (e.g., averageness, masculinity, and symmetry), health, and wealth measures is required.
Thoughts?
@DarkStar @GeckoBus @based_meme @To koniec @FucktheFBI @Ron.Belgrade @Jason Voorhees @ethniccel1 @Biowaste Removal @Made in Heaven @PolskiKartofel @Ci Jey @anandkonda @Kina Hikikomori @weaselbomber @ArcticAngel @Da_Yunez @wereq @Sasukecel @RealSchizo @Gendocel @Mecoja @kay' @AsiaCel @comradespiderman29