These niggss just want to think they will somehow be transported into another dimension if they woke as normie tomorrow.
It would help for sure, but yeah, whether much would change is very questionable. Also a pretty good point since the thread is about a guy who was a good-looking mogger in his youth, and probably got used to be very low-inhib with women and remained so even after the agepill hit him hard.
purple.fr
Also, quite often, old Chads are still Chads with all the benefits that brings, even if we don't see that. Just like in this study, where using people's opinions of how the older CEOs looked, it was impossible to find any correlation with their incomes, but when an AI that didn't care much about the wrinkles and which didn't get the ick factor from older faces analysed them, it clearly found that the better-looking ones were being paid better:
I already posted this study before, but I'll admit, I didn't talk about this part since I wasn't sure what to make of that. Now, I realize that it might be the most brutal blackpill out of all there...
incels.is
Every study that days dark triad, NT pill, social status, money etc being important is all fake then. How convenient of you to ignore every studies that takes into account the other things and them being important but you only choose to believe in the ones that are talk about looks
It's not either or. It's both, but different in degree and effect. Looks > NT.
Shitskin IQ moment.
True to both of those comments. Which is why it's unfortunate how few studies actually try to deeply analyze the order of those things, the different weights assigned to them by each gender, and so on. Because of that, we get the cope "studies", where the researchers focus on what people are looking for in long-term relationships. Purposefully avoiding asking about their preferences in one-night stands or short-term relationships. That usually ends with women claiming that they value money over looks in that case, and then we get all the right-wing, trad, redpill types saying that looks don't and if you can't become rich and get a hot wife then you're a loser or whatever
... when they hadn't even compared how much either of the two genders actually cares about those things, and it could still perfectly easily be that women care about looks more than men do even if they care about money even more, if they simply care about all of those more than men do
.
The only one I know of that tried this is this one from incels.wiki which I made a thread about recently:
Title. I've seen some threads and comments recently on the order of importance of those things, if and when personality actually comes into play, so I thought of just asking about your thoughts on this...
incels.is
The full study goes into a lot of detail not mentioned on the wiki itself, on what is the effect of those three on one-night stands, sexual enjoyment, starting serious or casual relationships, and so on. Rather water overall, but still funny to see blackpill shown in actual stats like that, such as looks being the king for one-night stands, especially for women deciding whether to sleep with men, and "good personality" actually being a negative for those
.
Yes. In the female mind men who she's not attracted to don't register as mates when talking about "men" in the context of anything romantic or sexual. But according to your red pill bullshit, millions of years of evolutionary programming is suddenly switched off when an ugly, NT-maxxed club owner tries to "rizz her up" or whatever zoomer brainrot phrase is used these days.