The results are in from yesterday’s post where I asked the readers to rank the beauty of ten randomly chosen women.
Woman Readers’ Score My Score
(a) tiaramouth 5,6 5
(b) mcdormandvsthewall 3 3
(c) lovelysophie 9 9
(d) redscarf 7 6
(e) themask 2 2
(f) bridgegirl 7 7
(g) alizee 8 8
(h) cigstache 1 1
(i) perfection 10 10
(j) morosemetrogirl 4,5 4
Not much daylight between the readers and myself. This wasn’t a perfect test, nor was it meant to be. Many of the critiques left in the comments were justified.
- High quality studio shots versus low quality snapshots will skew the results.
- So will distance from camera and partially concealed faces. Bridge girl and morose metro girl may have scores that are too low or high because of this.
- I made the mistake of choosing a McDormand shot where she is older. Since we’re comparing female beauty before the ravages of time have taken their cruel toll, a McDormand at her youthful peak would probably clock in a point or two higher.
- As commenter Agnostic mentioned, there isn’t adequate variability in the photos. It skews toward the higher range. I guess it’s more fun for me to search for hotties than slightly below average girls. (Searching for incendiary warpigs can be fun, like craning your neck to get a better glimpse of a mangled car accident.)
- People who are subtracting points because of inconsequential accoutrements like a tiara or flip flops are undermining the value of the 1 – 10 system. The 1-10 scale is sacrosanct. Don’t corrupt it with your nerdy pet peeves.
- Some people complained that I used a picture of Monica Bellucci when she was younger and hotter. Uh, no duh. When you judge Barack Obama’s alphaness, do you use his performance as a bowler for your criteria?
- Sophie Marceau may be one of the strikingly few women in the known universe who got better looking as she aged into her 20s. The teen pic of her posted in the comments, while certainly meeting the threshold of hottie bangability, shortchanges the breathtaking ethereal beauty that she acquired in her 20s. See: Braveheart. Today, though, she is 42 and not nearly as good looking as she was at her peak. Tragic. Oh well, that’s one way to cure a stalker-crush.
- You could go through one million 44 year old women before meeting one who could approach Bellucci’s beauty. That is how exceptional she is. Lesson: Don’t get your hopes up, ladies.
Nevertheless, despite the justifiable criticisms of the methodology listed above, and the specter of Arrow’s Impossibility Theorem, there was considerable agreement on each girl’s ranking. Plus or minus one point and a few wiseguy outliers, most men share the same opinions about where women fall on the 1 – 10 looks scale. Beauty is not an artifact of individual male minds. It is an objective reality. That this should be so and that men are wired with preferences for the more beautiful over the less, proves that men exercise some choosiness when deciding on a mate, just like women do. Pickiness is not gender specific, though women are pickier than men in general.
As I predicted, there was stronger agreement at the tails of the beauty distribution and more fussiness agreeing on the middle rankings. Every man knows a 3 and an 8 when he sees one, but one man’s marginal 6 could very well be another man’s solid 7. Looking at the bar graphs, this observation is confirmed by the wider spread (heh) of the votes for the 4-7 group.
Commenter twiceaday wrote:
What’s interesting, as de Tocqueville alluded to, is that while we don’t necessarily agree on the exact position for any particular woman, we all agree on the range. The bottom 3 (well, really bottom 1 and next 2) are quite clear, the top 3 are a quite clear, leaving the equally clear middle 4. I think it’s safe to say that any normal hetero man would bang the top 3, very few of us would bang the bottom 3 unless we were desperate and hammered, and the middle 4 would be various flavors of “it depends”.
These 3 tiers relate pretty clearly to the dating world. The top tier will attract alphas easily and ultimately be able to hold onto one. The middle tier will attract the occasional alpha, but not for very long, and will wind up with a beta. The bottom tier will attract no alphas, the occasional beta, and ultimately wind up with either cats or an omega (is there really any difference?).
This is mostly correct. I’d separate the middle tier into two subgroups: Lower middle (4,5) and Upper middle (6,7). The distinction is important, as there is a critical and abrupt change between the two groups that has important implications for how men treat these women.
This is how it breaks down:
Bottom tier = beta and omega pump and dump, invisible to alphas.
Lower middle tier = mix of beta pump and dump and beta commitment, still invisible to alphas unless really drunk.
Upper middle tier = beta commitment of the “profess my undying love” variety, alpha pump and dump.
Top tier = alpha commitment, occasional beta stroke of luck with tight game.
I enjoyed doing this exercise, so I plan to do another one in the future. Except next time, you, the readers, will offer photos of girls for judging. There will be a page at the top of the blog for you to leave a link in the comments to a pic of a woman, along with the ranking you give it, and I will choose from among the reader suggestions ten women representing 1 through 10 on the beauty scale for a reader vote, like I did in yesterday’s post. This way, you can see how your taste in women matches up with the general consensus. No celebrities allowed; I want to keep it to everyday girls. All races allowed.
Easter Egg
One of the girls in the photos is a former fling of mine. The perceptive among you (hi, PA, Seeking Alpha) may be able to figure out which.
To people who think I’m in the top photo: I’m not.
Hmmm…. is Cigstache your former fling?
LikeLike
Must be bridge girl. It’s the only “real” picture of a woman taken by herself. The other option is tiara girl, but she’s in a group photo, thus diminishing the chances she was your fling.
LikeLike
roissy
If it was objective reality, everyone would have the same preferences. But they don’t. For instance, I couldn’t give two shits about Angelina Jolie or Jessica Alba or whomever is popular with men now.
LikeLike
Your taste is excellent, sir, with only extremely minor quibbles to separate us.
Sophie Marceau may be one of the strikingly few women in the known universe who got better looking as she aged into her 20s.
Nah, most women are at their peak lookswise in their early twenties, so this isn’t that unusual. Even Agnostic has had to, relectantly, admit this. The one thing better on teens is their skin.
BTW Marceau was 24 when shooting Braveheart.
LikeLike
Dude… you scored with amgirl1? No way! Studmeister is all I gots to say brotha-man.
LikeLike
beta commitment of the “profess my undying love” variety
It’s really amazing how many guys fall _madly_ in love with the likes of Allyson Hannigan. I call it idealizing the attainable. In my experience, really beautiful women aren’t any less (or more) likely to be good people. I guess though they make a lot of guys feel unsafe or unworthy. Shrug. More for me.
LikeLike
I’d have to say, just based on looks and demeanor, bridge girl would be the best girlfriend material. She’s probably the best lay too.
LikeLike
I support the bridge girl theory. Harper’s Ferry, an ideal cheap date location. Solid 7.
The adam’s morgan girl pic is the red herring (the station is too obvious). although the forlorn look on her face could be from being pumped and dumped.
LikeLike
Bridge Girl was definitely taken at Harper’s Ferry. I have a photo of my father in the very same spot.
LikeLike
Your ex-fling: the Harper’s Ferry bridge girl. She’s standing far enough so that her face isn’t too recognizable for privacy reasons.
I know that bridge from WV to MD very well. I took four girls there on a cheap but cool dates back in the early 2000s. She’s got a cute little body. If I were single I’d ask you for her number.
LikeLike
Beauty is not objective. It is subjective. It is a result of the interplay of the observer and the observed. The thing is men are really similar in what the find beautiful. Women too. Consistency in subjective assessments doesn’t make an assessment objective. It’s mostly a semantic argument but … I think accuracy matters.
LikeLike
Your ex-fling: the Harper’s Ferry bridge girl. She’s standing far enough so that her face isn’t too recognizable for privacy reasons.
Agreed. Tiara/Corona Girl and DC Metro Girl are the only other candidates. We obviously can eliminate the four celebrities, the cigarette-smoking warpig is there only as a joke, Amsterdam Girl looks a bit old for Roissy, and Red Scarf Girl’s picture looks professionally staged rather than something an ex would have taken.
Peter
LikeLike
“Beauty is not objective. It is subjective.”
Hearing is subjective as well, but human’s hearing, in aggregate, follows a certain pattern. All human perception follows certain patterns, so it’s impossible to say with complete certainty how a certain woman is perceived, but one can make a pretty close guess of what *everyone’s* perception of her will be.
LikeLike
roissy’s fling is, i’m guessing, the girl on the bridge.. or the annoying looking girl with the tiara.
LikeLike
Does anyone else think it might be the red head?
I’ll admit it looks a lot like professional pic. But she looks “vague eastern european” (Roissy’s type) and is a 7 in the pic, and, more glammed up, is an 8. Plus I loves me some fire down below.
DC Metro/Girl at top are too fugly/fat. Bridge girl has a chance, but I’ll put my balls on the table a bit and go with the red head by the water.
LikeLike
“Plus I loves me some fire down below.”
Red on the head, fire in the bed. Literally, I’m a redhead and my penis bursts into flames upon vaginal contact.
LikeLike
lurker, I thought it might be redhead, as well. Anyone can pay for a glamour shot, most just don’t. Maybe she is some minor aspiring model or had it done for some other reason and gave him a copy.
But bridgegirl seems pretty realistic since that is clearly a photo taken by someone she knew and he rated her a 7. If it had been redhead, I suspect he may have switched the 6/7 since he knew in real life what she looked like and those rating as so close.
The 7 gives it away.
LikeLike
It’s easy to tell who the former fling is, it’s the five Roissy rates as a seven. From the picture, she’s a five. Not fat, but not shapely either. Just thin. Not flat-chested, but no HELLO I’M PERKY breasts, either. Big forehead, weird hair, nose and lips look strange with the sunglasses. If this isn’t about weight, she’s a five as she appears. Now it may be that the sunglasses don’t just obscure her face, but are actually unflattering. It may be that the light and outfit are unflattering, too. Then she is conceivably a seven. But only someone who’s seen more of her would know that. Alternatively, only someone who’s banged her would be inclined to upgrade her two points in his mind. If she’s a seven I’ve never dated (or nailed) below a seven.
LikeLike
the smile on that tiara girl could shatter mirrors
LikeLike
Chuck:
“Red on the head, fire in the bed.”
—I just found my new pick up line.
“Literally, I’m a redhead and my penis bursts into flames upon vaginal contact.”
—Do you have a sister? 😉
LikeLike
mandy:
Redhead’s picture could just be made with either a decent digital camera + good lighting or decent camera+ photoshop.
But I think you’re right, I just think red headed chicks get extra bonus points. Probably explains my unfathomable attraction a young Kthy Griffin on Suddenly Susan (I know, together, ewww, but pre-plastic surgery with mouth shut, not bad at all).
But Roissy’s right about this squishiness in the middle.
LikeLike
Am I the only one that doesn’t think redhead with the red scarf merits anything over a 5? Anyone else think redheads aren’t good looking? She’s got a real pudgy face too. I don’t get it.
LikeLike
I don’t know Roissy, I think you’ve still got a long ways to go before you can make a really convincing case that there is objective “ideal” beauty, ingrained in all mens’ brains, against which all women can be empirically compared (this is what I take you to be saying in somewhat more precise terms. In addition to your argument being somewhat fuzzy, the phrasing of your central claim, “beauty is an objective reality,” is somewhat hard to understand). The only thing that science seems to have convincingly proved is that there are certain particular *features* that will objectively *add to* a women’s beauty–such as a symmetrical face and large, round eyes. All that seems to mean is this: Say woman X has a very symmetrical face and large, round, radiant eyes. Man 1 might rate this woman a 4, while Man 2 might right this woman a 7 (IMO, this a big difference). Science has proven that, if her eyes were smaller, and her face less symmetrical, both men would be guaranteed to value her lower on the scale. That is the objective fact. But it remains that the final judgment of the two men still places the woman at least 3 points apart–the criteria for beauty remain somewhat unique.
I also have to second Gunner’s important point: “Consistency in subjective assessments doesn’t make an assessment objective.” Two points: 1) “consistency” is the key word here. “Consistency,” doesn’t mean “identity,” and as we saw, people’s judgments, though at times similar, were far from “identical,” even in the higher and lower ranges 2) Even if people’s judgments *were* identical, or *highly* consistent, you’ve still got a ways to go before you’ve proven that standards of female beauty are genetically innate. I know you balk at any claim of “cultural determination,” but in this case, I think cultural factors should be taken pretty seriously. That is, even if all respondents graded the women identically, you’re still going to have to do more surveys over time to prove that this identity is a manifestation of innate factors, rather than a manifestation of culturally imposed standards.
From my own experience, one thing that seems to easily falsify the theory of beauty being objective is my utter indifference to 98% of black women, indian women, and middle eastern women. I find virtually all of these women completely unappealing, except for the 10s of the 10s. I know a lot of other white guys that have this exact same preference. Yet I know a lot of white guys that feel the opposite (especially with the black women), and some that are in between.
Believe me, I get a great thrill out of unearthing provocative truths–I would love for their to be a case that beauty was objectively quantifiable, just for the vexing, controversial nature of such a reality. But you have really, really yet to convince me.
LikeLike
To those who don’t think judgements of female beauty by men are objective I propose a game. You pick random photos of women and we put them on hotornot. I predict a score out of 10. If the actual score after 100 votes rounded off is the same as my prediction you pay me $1, if not I pay you $1. If there’s nothing objective about beauty judgements then you should do quite well with such favourable odds. I’d happily play and expect to win though.
LikeLike
I agree with Ben about redscarf. Not attractive to me at all. Pale, plain and un-feminine.
LikeLike
Matt
There is no need, because they are not objective. Different men have different preferences.
Why are so many people obsessed with the delusion that preferences must be the same for all people?
LikeLike
“It’s easy to tell who the former fling is, it’s the five Roissy rates as a seven… It may be that the light and outfit are unflattering, too. Then she is conceivably a seven. But only someone who’s seen more of her would know that.”
Keep in mind that 1168 voters ranked the picture and it got a 7. So “only someone” is proven wrong.
Otherwise I agree. My ranking was 6 for bridgegirl pic, and 7 for scarfgirl pic. Scarfgirl had a prettier face, smoother facial skin, and a higher value feminine demeanor……. bridgegirl had a frumpier “average girl” demeanor. Could be different in real life, but we are rating the pictures.
Voters messed up the results by failing to abide by the forced choice system. Otherwise their rating would have matched mine: they rated both girls a 7, but the general consensus skewed closer to my rating. 39% rated bridgegirl a 7+, while 44% rated scarfgirl a 7+. If forced, this indicates bridgegirl would have needed to take the lower 6 spot.
I think because roissy dated the girl, his reversed vote is less objective. That doesn’t mean the girl isn’t a 7, it means his memories added more data than the photo provided for us.
LikeLike
“Consistency,” doesn’t mean “identity,” and as we saw, people’s judgments, though at times similar, were far from “identical,” even in the higher and lower ranges.
Men’s aggregate rating of a woman _is_her value on the sexual market, or at least the looks based portion of that value. That is objective.
That is, even if all respondents graded the women identically, you’re still going to have to do more surveys over time to prove that this identity is a manifestation of innate factors, rather than a manifestation of culturally imposed standards.
The cross cultural studies have been done. It doesn’t look good for you.
LikeLike
The girl on the bridge in glasses, whose photo is a camera shot, is the former fling. I thought that was the case yesterday as its a personal photo.
Beautiful REDHEAD anyone?
You dont see a face like that everyday.
Sophie Marceau’s updated pic deserves a post all its own.
There are so many “average guys” who would have surpassed her in attractiveness as she is now that its horrifying.
Many men who would have been 6’s in their twenties twenty years ago, are better looking men than she is a woman at this point.
Delicate beauty fades pretty hard. Its not fair, but life is not fair.
Anthony Michael Hall, as Whiskey has pointed out, is an example of a guy who used to be dork city, but has aged into being a formidably attractive man in middle age, better looking that most middle aged woman by a long shot. http://antigravidade.files.wordpress.com/2008/02/anthony-michael-hall.jpg
and,
Marceau isn’t really even attractive anymore. It hurt me to see her pictures now. She was adorable and feminine in Braveheart.
Note to the ladies: THE SUN IS NOT YOUR FRIEND. SPRAY TAN IF YOU MUST DO IT. I like dove girls anyway. Childhood and teen years are the time to enjoy the sun, afterwards wear a hat that covers your face if you are going to be out in the sun for several hours. You may like men with a darker skin tone, but that does not mean they want women with darker skin. The tans “youthful” effect is only temporary and it damages your skin every single time you get one, ravaging the adipose tissue that is that lovely layer of baby-fat that you have when you are young.
LikeLike
Bridge/Poland Spring Girl is a wee bit skinny for my tastes. She’d look better with about ten to fifteen extra pounds. And I’ll agree that Red Scarf/Earbuds girl is too pale.
Peter
LikeLike
Definitely Bridge Girl. I’d put sizeable money on it in fact. The top three girls are all international stars, and two are now too old. Next down is Bridge Girl. That’s really enough to clinch it. Roissy prob. wouldn’t admit to a fling as opposed to a pump and dump with a girl that didn’t make the alpha cutoff (which he takes down to 7 for women). I guess it could be the 6 right below her, red scarf girl (I had them reversed, cause you can’t really see much of bridge girl’s face behind those dark glasses except to know it’s at least OK and that left me looking at her rather scrawny legs), but she looks sluttier / less feminine. Not what Roissy looks for in even a shorter LTR.
LikeLike
Roissy is right that beauty is objective. Saying each man has a different preference is like saying some prefer mushroom pizza but others like pepperoni, it’s still pizza. It really just comes down to what a man thinks he is able to obtain not what he prefers. If a man can get a 10 he does not prefer a 5.
This was just explored in-depth here.
http://dsc.discovery.com/videos/science-of-sex-appeal/
LikeLike
zpr
That analogy simply says that men like women, which is not a particularly useful observation.
I don’t think of it in terms of who I can or can’t obtain.
LikeLike
tokyojesusfist:
“If it was objective reality, everyone would have the same preferences. But they don’t. For instance, I couldn’t give two shits about Angelina Jolie or Jessica Alba or whomever is popular with men now.”
It is objective reality, and your claim about not liking Jolie or Alba would be easily debunked were you to be hooked up to a plethysmograph (a device that measures arousal, see http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/25/magazine/25desire-t.html?_r=1&ref=magazine for details). Nobody who’s being honest could rate either of those two under an 8. You want to rate them lower because you know you could never attain such a woman. Likewise, you’d rate some consensus 7 as a 10 because you think you might be able to get her, which pleases your ego.
Chuck:
“I’d have to say, just based on looks and demeanor, bridge girl would be the best girlfriend material. She’s probably the best lay too.”
As with tokyojesusfist, this strikes me as a justification of the inability to pull 8+ girls. Based on widely available video evidence, I see no reason to think Bellucci, Alizée, or Marceau would be bad in bed, and one picture is not enough to draw any conclusions about bridge girl. I’ve had friends say similar things about 7s likely being better lays than 8s, 9s, and 10s, and it’s quintessentially beta: you have an excuse to not even approach 8+s, which keeps you from getting rejected by them, which preserves your fragile confidence. It’s also something of a self-fulfilling prophesy in that the 7 you do get into bed is a better lay than the 8 you don’t.
LikeLike
Racial biases also come into it, I tend to rate Asian girls higher (sometimes much higher) than my friends.
Also I have noticed a tendency from many guys who are trying to big-dick themselves deliberately rate chicks way lower than they deserve – to make it look like they have such high standards.
For what it’s worth all of these friends of mine do not have girlfriends, do not have any girls who would say yes to a date, and are generally losers.
LikeLike
Mandy said, “The 7 gives it away.”
Lookit the big brain on Mandy. I don’t remember what I rated her, but it was considerably lower than that. Flesh exposure doesn’t make her hotter; it just means it was hotter outside.
Them what’s bag on the slavic chick on the bridge (I think 6 is fair) have never been to eastern europe. Too bad for you. She’s not the hottest there, but she is certainly the most feminine of the lot, with some competition from the hazy famous one in #3 (who was my 10).
LikeLike
Twiceaday:
“Based on available video evidence”
Interesting. What video evidence? Is there evidence of say.. Bellucci? She was so hot in the Matrix. She was even hot in Passion of the Christ.
LikeLike
Roissy is right about squishiness. Based on pics, redhead is my 7, bridge girl my 6. Comments seem split on this, but that’s what his point was:
Feminist/idiots think beauty is subjective, and point to 2 similar girls and say a million people would vote 50/50 on their being hotter than the other.
That goes to more intangibles, like whether a Snickers bar is better than a bag of M&M’s is better than some Skittles. Depends on how hungry you are, and what you’re in the mood for.
Example, with porn stars: sometimes I enjoy older MILF videos, other times “stacked” girls (aka Shyla Stylez), other times skinny young spinners (aka Lexi Belle) other times Asians other times whites. It depends on my mood and who I was just with.
But Feminists failure comes when faced witha 10 and their saying “she could be ugly or a 5 to some men.” No. A snickers bar tastes good and is good quality and is not poor quality. But nothing will make it taste like dirt or taste like a gourmet meal. It’s stuck in a range where it hopes the average consumer is more in the mood for it than M&M’s or Skittles. Faced with a Bobby Flay truffle, the choice becomes academic. Truffle Shuffle, baby.
Likewise, nothing will make Shyla Styles in her prime a 1. She’s always a 7-9 there.
LikeLike
Keep in mind that 1168 voters ranked the picture and it got a 7. So “only someone” is proven wrong.
I think 1160+ ranked her 7 simply because they could see her body and not her face. They knew she wasn’t fat, and focused on that, while imagining that she might look alright in a better picture. But if you turn up the brightness and put your face up to the monitor, she does not get better-looking. For Roissy, who claimed it wasn’t about weight, it seems strange to rank her so high.
LikeLike
twiceaday
I didn’t say I find them hideously ugly, I just don’t care for them.
Why are you so desperate to argue that everyone has the same preferences? What do you stand to gain?
I also cannot attain any of the women I find tremendously attractive (like the one I posted in the female photo submission thread), so this claim makes no sense whatsoever.
How exactly do you propose that I might obtain some woman I see on the Internet? Please tell me, I’m curious. Also, where have I rated a “consensus 7” as a 10? I didn’t vote in the poll at at all.
LikeLike
Another use of “nerdy” with no meaning whatsoever, except vague disparagement. Roissy has a thing here.
LikeLike
Attractiveness and sexual skill probably go together. Attractive people are more symmetrical and have better athletic and dancing ability. Videos I linked yesterday show Bellucci has far more musical, rhythmic, flowing movements when she walks than average women. Videos also show those talents transfer well to her dancing and fucking scenes.
Attractiveness is pretty much synonymous with the quality of the lay. Both because attractiveness correlates with sexual skill and because beauty itself disproportionately defines the lay quality for men.
LikeLike
this also illustrated that “all the regular readers of this page lust same”
birds of a feather
cant wait til race is entered into the rankings *sarcasm*
LikeLike
Everyone agrees on ugly, the truly hideous. Then there is that huge, huge middle, which is extremely subjective. Then there is that top tier, where people generally agree again.
But that doesn’t really make any of it objective. If we ally look at a piece of art, and most of us find it pleasant, does that mean that objectively, it is great art? I look at some of the modern art crap which is described as great work, and I can’t see the art in it. But if 98% of other people could, does this mean that objectively, it is great art? Some people get turned on by burn victims, and amputees, fatties, and anorexics. They find great beauty in them. I don’t. But because of those differences in personal taste, this is why we call beauty subjective, rather than objective. Which is not to say that the majority don’t have certain personal preferences. But it still doesn’t make some sort of objective reality for other people who don’t follow the majority’s preferences.
LikeLike
As far as the objective/subjective debate; everyone is correct, but it’s the scale that is different. Beauty is subjective to each person’s perception, but it is objective in the sense that what is deemed hot tends to follow similar distributions among men.
Why can’t feminists/subjectivists grasp this point?
Maybe instead of saying a certain woman is beautiful objectively, we should say she’s beautiful considering most men’s tastes. Either way, it’s the same thing.
For more, click on my blog link. I blatantly used Roissy’s data and pictures to develop my thought. Hopefully Roissy doesn’t mind.
LikeLike
Am I the only one that thinks bridge girl has an ugly face? I put her lower than most.
LikeLike
Morose metro girl is much better looking than bridge girl, from what I can tell.
LikeLike
In my opinion, that there is an argument over whether or not there are some uniform standards for beauty is only because one group of people thinks everyone should be the same, and the other group doesn’t want to believe that the vast majority of people are the same.
Men generally prefer youth, signs of good health, and symmetry. The ones who don’t either have social reasons not to, or their sexual preferences are somehow distanced from reproductive or bonding value.
Unfortunately today, that’s most guys in the west. If you gave the same test to a group of Arab guys, the morose metro girl would be the 10, or at least a 7. She looks young and like she could survive having a few kids.
It’s not that there isn’t a uniform standard. It’s that the world is bigger than the U.S. and western media standards are far from universal.
LikeLike
“Why are you so desperate to argue that everyone has the same preferences? What do you stand to gain?”
1. I’ll chime in on this one. I happen to agree with Roissy et al, that much of what we consider attractive is biological. Numerous studies have been done on this. For example, even infants have shown a preference for more symmetrical looking faces.
However, there’s a small amount of variation for cultural preferences, which explains why tans were once considered unattractive (i.e., they suggested you did manual labor, worked outside and were therefore likely to be lower class) but now are considered attractive (i.e., they suggest that you don’t work in some cubicle or office all day and are able to go golfing in the middle of the week or go on tropical vacations).
That is, biological attractiveness signals good health, good genes and fertility. Cultural attractiveness signals high status.
This does not mean that everyone will find the same things attractive in all cases, but it strongly points to clear observable trends. There’s a reason why when you walk into a club there’s 12 dudes all dancing around the hot girl, and why only a small handful of men are fucking all the women.
2. For what it’s worth, I’ve also found it odd that some commenters here insist that asian girls have 12 year old unshapely bodies. This just leads me to suspect that they haven’t seen enough asians to form a fair sample size.
Besides, hapas are the ultimate combo.
LikeLike
jackson:
“Morose metro girl is much better looking than bridge girl, from what I can tell.”
–attention all: ugly chubby chaser. Chic noir, kthulah, start your engines!
LikeLike
tokyojesusfist:
“I didn’t say I find them hideously ugly, I just don’t care for them.”
Them, or “whomever is popular with men now.” That indicates that you’re either being reactionary or removing yourself from the competition for the most desirable women.
“I also cannot attain any of the women I find tremendously attractive”
I know this, and the point I’m making is that it’s affecting your judgements about female beauty.
“How exactly do you propose that I might obtain some woman I see on the Internet? Please tell me, I’m curious.”
I’m not talking about a specific woman, but a level of attractiveness. It’s very hard to find a woman as attractive as Jessica Alba, but quite easy to find one as attractive as the one in the pic you posted.
“Also, where have I rated a “consensus 7″ as a 10?”
The pic you posted in the other thread is a 7 you rated as a 10.
LikeLike
you need to meet tighter criterion to really say that beauty is objective rather than subjective. not unlike a mathematical proof, it doesn’t matter how many examples you come up with that show a proposition is true; that is simply not how it works conversely, to show that a proposition is false, all you need to produce is a single counterexample, and you’re done.
now i know that rigorous methods of analysis don’t really hold in the amateur social sciences but certainly saying that beauty is objective because on average most men tend to have approximately similar standards is not a strong assertion.
we have certainly produced several counterexamples already here in this forum.
i would be inclined to think you are more likely getting similar results because the bulk of your respondents are most likely generally well-adjusted and confident men who were exposed to the same sorts of culture and socialization when they were growing up. so of course they will show more bravado with regards to the celebs while rating fairly unremarkable but certainly fuckable and vastly more attainable women far lower.
thats not to say that these celebs aren’t “beautiful” by some sort of calculated standard but really that’s all irrelevant to me. i might think the mona lisa or the parthenon is beautiful too or something like that but it doesn’t give me a stiffie. to me a large part of the attraction equation is that there has to be some kind of fantasy there. i really need to feel like the girl is the sort of person that i might actually encounter and interact with in real life. with the celebs, the fine line between fantasy and outright delusion has been thrown totally out the window and i shunt them off somewhere else entirely to the sort of androgynous “beauty” reserved for inanimate objects, rather than the sort of lust i might reserve for a human being.
LikeLike
At Thursday:
“Men’s aggregate rating of a woman _is_her value on the sexual market, or at least the looks based portion of that value. That is objective.”
I’ll buy the claim that a woman can be given a rough and ready “sexual market value,” based on aggregate ratings that display certain consistencies. I don’t think this is really that controversial of a claim. What is controversial, and what I take Roissy’s claim to be, is that there is a singular ideal of beauty ingrained all men’s genes, against which all women can be empirically/objectively measured. That a woman is a 6 is just as objective as saying 2 + 2 = 4. But that just isn’t the case. One man’s 6 can be another man’s 8; one man’s 10 can be another man’s 7.
As far as I construe the word “objective,” that variance alone is enough to make it subjective. To say that objects on the planet earth fall at 9.8 m/s at free fall is true from every perspective. It can’t be denied. To say that woman X is a 6 just isn’t true from every perspective. Therefore, beauty is subjective. General aggregate values does equal precise, objective value.
I think a lot of confusion in this discussion may just come from differing definitions of “objective” and “subjective.” When I talk about objective, I mean undeniably true from every perspective. Provable by experiment. “There are 4 seats in the car,” “2 + 2 = 4.” “That woman’s sexual market value is an 8 based on looks.” But she is not “objectively” an 8, because not everyone will see her as an 8 as a consequence of some genetically ingrained ideal of beauty.
LikeLike
*”General aggregate values does NOT equal precise, objective value” is what I meant.
LikeLike
lurker,
Am I unusual in being willing to deal with 10 extra pounds over an ugly horse/man face?
And I live in San Diego. I’ve seen plenty of Asian girls between the ages of 18-24.
You can keep them. Give me a white 7 over an Asian 9 any day.
LikeLike
Lurker, perhaps in your irrational fits of rage, you failed to notice that I don’t think it’s my job to save the sheeple.
Whatever you think it hotter is your business. I’m merely pointing out that what people find hot or not is largely based on their personal needs and perceptions of what fitness is and looks like.
If morose metro girl was naked, I might find her more attractive, but her outfit screams “INSECURE EWE!!!” like the cigstache screams, “You’ll be chopped up and buried under my basement just after my redneck boyfriend-brother cums down your severed esophagus.”
LikeLike
jackson:
“Am I unusual in being willing to deal with 10 extra pounds over an ugly horse/man face? ”
–you’re unusual for choosing a fatter, uglier girl. Bridge girl no more has a horse face than Jessica Alba has an acting career (/rimshot).
DC/Metrogirl is a classic American Jewish city girl: a fat ugly 5 who thinks she’s a 10. They are emabrassing when an Israeli girl stands next to them–mind blowing difference.
Good luck on chasing those tubs of fug, baby.
LikeLike
lurker,
Something about the angles in her face is just wrong.
And no, I wouldn’t boink chic noir with your dick.
LikeLike
There is an objective aspect to beauty as in symmetry, lack of flaws and such. Then there is the subjective aspect like whether you prefer blue eyes, green eyes, brown eyes or just don’t care, whether you prefer big noses, small noses, long noses and so on.
Some men like smaller boobs, some men like bigger boobs, but no one has a thing for grossly mismatched pairs of boobies.
The perfect test for subjectiveness/objectiveness is beer. Being drunk lowers your ability to detect flaws like asymmetry but doesn’t stop you from noticing whether a woman is pale or brown. To me Monica Bellucci is better looking than red scarf girl when I’m sober but enough beers will turn it around, as her advantage in lack of flaws will be gone but my subjective preferences will still be there (pale, light eyes, northeastern euro looks). Enough beer turns red scarf lady into the 10.
(Still, no amount of beer will make the blue-eyed blob with a moustache more than a 1.)
LikeLike
“One man’s 6 can be another man’s 8; one man’s 10 can be another man’s 7.”
Ask yourself why it is we find anyone attractive. What’s the biological purpose of even having a rating system?
The reason men have evolved an internal mechanism for evaluating a woman’s beauty is because it’s important from an evolutionary point of view to identify the most healthy and most virile women to bang and make babies with.
It happens that physical beauty is highly correlated with youth and good health – it’s not perfect, but that high correlation is enough to ensure that men who found women like Jessica Alba attractive were able to pass on more genes. Men who who chased old ladies in wheel chairs did not pass on their genes so well.
To say that some people are attracted to different things misses the point. Suppose some dude finds Star Jones attractive and actually rates her a 10. So what? It might help your argument that beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but an equally plausible explanation is that there’s something wrong with his internal biological rating system – his rating system is trying to determine the healthiest woman to mate with and it failed.
LikeLike
Oh, and re: ktulah
Nunneries were invented for a reason.
LikeLike
Warpig:
“Lurker, perhaps in your irrational fits of rage, you failed to notice that I don’t think it’s my job to save the sheeple.”
—apparently, trying to help a brutha out =trying to save the sheeple.
“cigstache screams, “You’ll be chopped up and buried under my basement just after my redneck boyfriend-brother cums down your severed esophagus.””
—I love when black people try to make inbred joks, especially since the black community is rife with men molesting their children and sisters and cousins and men having 4 kids by 5 women, who end up hooking with each other because neither knows who their daddy is. In 2 generations, you’re going to have a bunch of inbred retards—as opposed to just retards now…
Oh, and the ‘stache beast? Definitely more black guys would hit on her than non-blacks. just sayin…..
LikeLike
twiceaday
I’m not being “reactionary,” I just don’t find them particularly attractive. I’m sorry if this pisses all over your “everyone thinks the same” theory, but that’s life. And are you seriously competing for the attention of world famous Hollywood celebrities like Alba and Jolie? You’re either a celebrity yourself or deeply delusional. The latter seems more likely.
Yeah, because all the big-time alpha PUA studs here have easy access to celebrities around the world, right?
I live in a country that has almost no Asians at all, and certainly very few Japanese people. Finding a woman who resembles Jessica Alba would be substantially more probable than finding a woman who looks like the one I posted. In fact, finding a Japanese woman of any kind would be unlikely. And then there’s the fact that, again, I do not find Alba to be particularly attractive.
I had no idea your personal opinions are now fact, or that the 1-10 scale is some kind of scientifically valid measurement like temperature or mass. Cool.
LikeLike
Warpig:
“Lurker, perhaps in your irrational fits of rage, you failed to notice that I don’t think it’s my job to save the sheeple.”
—apparently, trying to help a brutha out =trying to save the sheeple.
“cigstache screams, “You’ll be chopped up and buried under my basement just after my redneck boyfriend-brother cums down your severed esophagus.””
—I love when black people try to make inbred joks, especially since the black community is rife with men molesting their children and sisters and cousins and men having 4 kids by 5 women, who end up hooking with each other because neither knows who their daddy is. In 2 generations, you’re going to have a bunch of inbred retards—as opposed to just retards now…
Oh, and the ‘stache beast? Definitely more black guys would hit on her than non-blacks. just sayin…..
LikeLike
Lurker, why are you trying to enforce your standards on others?
I mean…I know why. I just want to know if you know why.
LikeLike
Warpig:
“Lurker, why are you trying to enforce your standards on others?”
—live in that cave all you want, oinker. The sunlight will just hurt your eyes more.
LikeLike
Lurker, no trying to save the sheeple would be trying to convince you to believe someone should be beautiful to you. I don’t have any interest in that. My point of being in this conversation is simply to point out that a difference of perceived needs will cause a difference in preference.
So…those who can think about it will. Those like yourself who like to insult people you don’t understand, rather than think about anything, well…I’ve come to enjoy the screaming of the lambs.
LikeLike
I have always preferred women with brown eyes. I don’t know why, but it has always been that way. Rarely, and I mean rarely, am I attracted to a woman with blue or green eyes. Even if she has all the features of a 10, she probably won’t trip my trigger the way a brown-eyed woman with less attractive features will. Is that a fetish?
LikeLike
Lurker, my “cave” is open to a big, wide forest you wouldn’t be able to survive in. Stay in the pasture. I have no problem with your doing so.
LikeLike
Did you know moutain sheep die from copulating so much?
true story.
baa, baby, baa.
LikeLike
Warpig:
” my “cave” is open to a big, wide forest you wouldn’t be able to survive in”
—so…many…jokes…must….resist…urge…..
LikeLike
The last pic is a fling of Roissy’s. Why? Because she is looking despondent, knowing that she will not be able to enjoy forever being plowed by Roissy’s alpha cock on a nightly basis. She is less than standard beauty wise, a little chubby, and not up to his highest tastes. She knows this, hence the look of dejection on her face. She knows that she will be forever doomed to being fucked by the small penises of lesser males than Roissy. She knows she is ruined forever. To have even tasted Roissy’s cock once and never have it again is fate worse than anything she can imagine. No woman could endure that.
LikeLike
Ewww. Racer X, reading that would’ve been creepy even if it were written by roissy himself.
LikeLike
Whats with all of the flaming haters in these threads? why bother?
LikeLike
Lurker, male mountain sheep won’t mate with a defective female if they have a choice, and barely then.
Human sheeple do it all the time though.
What’s even funnier is that they often even require that female mimic defects in order to make themselves “prettier”. So what we’re talking about is the human equivalent of overly domesticated sheep.
…corporate mutton whose sole purpose in life is to feed money and power to the shepherds who tell you who to fuck, and you obey.
You’re here on this site basically berating a man who would rather mate with someone who shows signs of greater resourcefulness and readiness for breeding, than someone with more actual defects.
Now, to each his own, but I’m not going to pretend that both behaviors are equally viable.
Yes, it’s your choice, and I’m sure lots of your fellow sheeple will agree with you…but sheeple who aren’t so invested in that, and who still have some of the ram in them, when choosing between two who basically conform but one in a survival friendly way and the other in a less survival friendly way, are going for survival.
10 lbs. of junk in the trunk with a pretty face is easier for many people to look at than obvious facial defects. The evo-bio reason for that is pretty faced people getting treated better and happening to have a greater resistance to some parasitic infections and such. Also, people tend to go for people who look similar to their mom, and if a guy doesn’t have a horse face mom, he’s probably not going to have as much tolerance for that in a partner.
Maybe you don’t want to hear that because your mom and sisters are horse faced or something. I don’t know…but just because you want something to be better doesn’t make it better.
10 lbs. is also easier to lose than a horse face.
But never you worry. The continued existence of horse faced people means that these genes will not die out anytime really soon. So long as there are guys like you with the kindness to take the skinny horse faced girls, everyone else can date their pretty faced “oinkers” knowing they aren’t bad people for doing so.
Everybody wins 🙂
I’m not so cute, but I don’t need to berate anyone for not liking me, or not liking what I like. So remember that you brought the moral judgements into this. I don’t have morality when it comes to personal preferences. I’m a survivalist.
LikeLike
If I’d recognized (g) as THE Alizee I would have given her a 10…duh.
LikeLike
Jonk–
“Also I have noticed a tendency from many guys who are trying to big-dick themselves deliberately rate chicks way lower than they deserve – to make it look like they have such high standards.”
Definitely. Particularly newbie/aspiring PUA’s do I think.
I’ve had a mind to say similar for some time.
LikeLike
Ignoring Warpig for now:
On Rhianna/Brown:
Look at how a feminist views “innocent until proven guilty” when its male accused, female accuser:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/charlotte-hilton-andersen/an-open-letter-to-rihanna_b_165472.html
Female victimhood for $200 Alex. Apaprently, Rhianna is now the poor, poor victim and Brown is the evil, wicked man who obviously did it because this writer thinks so. Note how she prosecuted her BF, so now every woman who does it is right and the man is wrong.
The HuffPo is garbage.
LikeLike
Doug and Jonk, I think it’s a kind of a loop.
In deprogramming from pedestalizing women, guys need to retrain themselves not to be swayed by a pretty face. It takes some time before this balances out and they feel free enough to just be okay for recognizing beauty as it is, rather than assigning meaning to it.
Beauty is supposed to be pleasant. It’s a reward to look at in and of itself. For feminized men, beauty means the same thing as mate suitability, because men suck at being women as much as women suck at being men.
Men are supposed to enjoy beauty all around, but categorize women according to suitability to their needs…whether they are more socially invested or more independent. They need these categories to keep them from getting screwed over by whores.
So when a mature PUA comes full circle is when he understands truly what women are worth by behavior.
Someone posted an article awhile back that was mainly about women’s preferences, but it had some interesting things about men’s preferences too. They indicated that men naturally categorize. This is one of those things that are both natural and beneficial in society, in my opinion.
LikeLike
ATC.
I’d rate Alizee a high 9, rather than the 8 I was lead to by the rank order instructions and the presence of Monica and Sophie.
She’s sort of pins cute. The cutest ever. Maximum cute possible. But not quite stunningly beautiful.
I can definitely see lots of guys being MORE attracted to her though. For one thing, take away her stardom, and she looks easier to handle than either Monica or Sophie, in ways that go beyond not being QUITE as beautiful. She seems more emotionally balanced, and maybe less attracted to drama than the two “above” her.
BTW, Monica is married to a middling French director, maybe a tad younger than her. Not fab looking, but forceful in a wirey French guy way. But guess what. They don’t live together at least not most of the time. Can you say open marriage? Can you say maybe/prob. one way open marriage? Her way.
BTW, if you want to drink in Monica’s beauty, Netflix Malena. She’s about 35 there, but it’s her first starring role that’s widely available on DVD. (She didn’t start acting until her late 20s.) Rest assured, she’s still absolutely gorgeous, and looks maybe 30. But … she has a smaller, segment starring, role in The Apartment, so rent that too. Or maybe more. She’s like 29 or 30 there and goddddd. There’s lots of flicks named the apartment so look up via her name on netflix or wherever.
LikeLike
I question whether there is a cultural difference, even with respect to art. I happened to see an art exhibit at an Osaka department store (don’t laugh, Japanese department stores have nearly everything) and the painting I thought was best was the most expensive one. I didn’t know the price when I was looking at them.
The best looking kimono fabric, to my western eyes, was also one of the most expensive.
I’m voting Objective.
LikeLike
Ooops, I guess Cassell is much more an actor than director. Remembered wrong. He did produce one (pretty lousy) movie that Monica was in, and that I rented for that reason. He’s clearly high T, though not at all pretty. Plays a tough guy all the time in French internal consumption flicks.
LikeLike
Um, how do you have 4 kids from 5 women?
LikeLike
dougjnn:
She’s married to French actor Vincent Cassel.
Try to download the uncut Malena. The American version is butchered and cut out a lot of the nudity. The Apartment is my favourite.
LikeLike
“BTW, Monica is married to a middling French director, maybe a tad younger than her. Not fab looking, but forceful in a wirey French guy way. But guess what. They don’t live together at least not most of the time. Can you say open marriage? Can you say maybe/prob. one way open marriage? Her way.”
It doesn’t work that way. If he was this subordinate, then they wouldn’t have a marriage at all.
Guy ain’t that great looking, a male 7 maybe, but just look at that alpha body language.
LikeLike
Nah, most women are at their peak lookswise in their early twenties, so this isn’t that unusual. Even Agnostic has had to, relectantly, admit this.
I haven’t reluctantly admitted anything — I’ve been shouting that from the treetops for several years, and providing data to show it’s true.
In fact, Gannon and I are probably singled, er, double-handedly responsible for moving the 30 barrier down to 25, and having people calmly admit that teenagers are hot, whether it’s their cup of tea or not.
LikeLike
tokyojesusfist:
“I’m sorry if this pisses all over your “everyone thinks the same” theory, but that’s life.”
These posts were attempts by Roissy to show that the “everyone is beautiful to someone” nonsense spewed by ugly women and beta men everywhere is wrong, and while lacking scientific validity I think he’s made his point. It’s not that “everyone thinks the same” about female beauty, but that the differences are much smaller than most people like to admit. I won’t quibble over 1 or 2 point differences, but anyone trying to say Jessica Alba is “not particularly attractive” is just being contrarian.
“And are you seriously competing for the attention of world famous Hollywood celebrities like Alba and Jolie?”
Once again, you’re entirely missing the point. It’s not about specific women or even celebrities in general, but about levels of attractiveness. Not all 9s and 10s are world-famous, you know.
“I had no idea your personal opinions are now fact, or that the 1-10 scale is some kind of scientifically valid measurement like temperature or mass. Cool.”
You’re welcome.
LikeLike
agnostic said —
“In fact, Gannon and I are probably singled, er, double-handedly responsible for moving the 30 barrier down to 25, and having people calmly admit that teenagers are hot, whether it’s their cup of tea or not.”
Much more Gannon than you, but you have contributed. And i agree. I always have. Men always have until the feminist cultural revolution in America, peaking in the 90’s. That scared/progagandized the sh*t out of most men, who are suck ups/quiselings on most feminist issues.
Hell who do you think raised the Cali age of consent to 18? Of all the absurdities, that is way up there.
In Europe it’s almost never higher than 16 and goes as low as 12, with 14-16 being where most come in.
LikeLike
Thursday —
Yeah you’re right, it’s probably two way open. But it’s definitely open. Why else would she live in London, while he lives in Paris? He has to for his career, sure enough, but she doesn’t. She just wants to.
LikeLike
Twice, I work partly in beauty, and I don’t see actually ugly people being the loudest about the “comes from within” or “everyone is beautiful (to someone)” thing. It’s mostly people who are basically beautiful, or relatively beautiful compared to those around them, but have some “dealbreaker” trait for whatever culture they’re in.
Pretty Black women have this complaint when they’re being pushed aside for ugly White women. Taller women have this complain when they’re pushed aside for shorter women. Anytime there’s an obvious situation of beauty being ignored or categorized as “sperm dump” material over more socially convenient ugliness/defectiveness, you’re going to have a group of beautiful women complaining.
Legitimately ugly people are “off the grid” and know this deep down. They’re happy when someone finds the beauty in them, and tend not to look a gift horse in the face-er-mouth.
I’ve even thought of starting a kind of rescue match making project for non Arab non Jewish women here in Israel. We have some utterly lovely girls who can’t find someone who will be serious about them. There just aren’t the numbers of guys willing to marry outside their respective tribes.
LikeLike
Kthluah:
“Legitimately ugly people are “off the grid” and know this deep down.”
I guess you would know.
LikeLike
“I work partly in beauty”
So what the fuck is your career title then? I thought you were either a bouncer at a nightclub, an Israeli commando, or Internet troll. Please explain.
LikeLike
Chuck, in fact, having been much heavier and hypothyroid, being Black, having had a severe allergic reaction that could have left 50% of my body scarred had it not been for old Catawba medicine, and living in a country where I’m considered inferior by default, I do.
If you survive long enough to get old, you will too.
LikeLike
Comment Ninja:
Put it this way: if a woman’s being a 2 is an objective fact, then the statement “that woman is a 2” should be able to be true or false in the same way that “Chicago is in Illinois” can be true or false. Now, if someone says “[I think] Star Jones is a 10,” is it correct to say that that man is objectively *wrong,* as in, he just made a *false* statement? It seems absurd to me to say that he is.
Even if you say, “well that just means that that man has screwy inner wiring,” does it make any more sense to say that a person has “objectively correct” wiring? Then we’re getting into questions of what an “ideal” set of genes are, which are nearly impossible to answer/absurd to even try.
All science has proven is that there are certain features that all men find attractive (symmetry, large eyes, etc.). That doesn’t mean that any women’s beauty can be determined empirically by referring to these commonly admired traits. Similarly, there are a couple of features that an object must have in order to be considered an automobile (wheels, a motor, etc.), but a ’09 Chevy is not objectively more or less of a car than a 1912 Model T.
LikeLike
…and Chuck again, don’t pretend you want to get to know me when your true objective is to make yourself feel superior by berating me. You don’t need to know anything about me to pick on me because you think I’m ugly…or at least you’d like the audience here to praise you for saying that I’m ugly.
I hope someone shoots me in the head before I’m that desperate for a virtual hand job.
LikeLike
“If you survive long enough to get old, you will too.”
I will what? Fall off the grid or become an Israeli commando/bouncer/internet troll? I’m confused.
LikeLike
“…and Chuck again”
What now?
“don’t pretend you want to get to know me”
you mistake my intentions
“You don’t need to know anything about me to pick on me because you think I’m ugly”
being a bouncer/commando/whatever has nothing to do with ugliness
“I hope someone shoots me in the head before I’m that desperate for a virtual hand job.”
me too
LikeLike
Chuck, if you survive long enough, you will learn the value of kindness.
You may also learn that not everyone who kisses your ass is your friend, and not everyone who kicks it is your enemy.
I do know what it is to be ugly. I know what it is to be rejected.
…but I also know what it is to be encouraged to improve myself and succeed in life despite whatever flaws I may have. I know what compassion is, and kindness.
I feel sorry for you that you don’t.
LikeLike
Since so many people are crazy about Alizee, and some posters have talked about the difference between teenage beauty and twenty-something beauty, here’s a video of her at the start of her career in 2000, when she was sixteen:
I think she’s every bit as gorgeous in this video as in Roissy’s photo of her.
LikeLike
Anon1:
Good comments.
Anon says: “If a woman’s being a 2 is an objective fact, then the statement “that woman is a 2″ should be able to be true or false… if someone says “[I think] Star Jones is a 10,” is it correct to say that that man is objectively *wrong,* as in, he just made a *false* statement? It seems absurd to me to say that he is.”
==Reply==The fact that you added the words “I think” dramatically changes the truth value of the statement. If a speaker THINKS Star Jones is a 10, then the sentence becomes true merely by thinking it. But that’s not the question. The question is whether Star Jones is physically attractive.
The trouble is, physical attractiveness exists in degrees – much as intelligence does. Most people agree that intelligence is objective, even if we don’t have a perfect way of measuring it. Our imperfect way of measuring intelligence is based on an ability to answer artificial questions in a controlled environment, but there’s no denying that IQ correlates highly with a set of skills we associate with intelligence: like logic and problem solving.
Can’t the statement “Bill’s IQ is 150” be true or false?
Couldn’t we create an “attractiveness quotient” even if it’s an imperfect measure?
————————————————-
Anon says: “Then we’re getting into questions of what an “ideal” set of genes are, which are nearly impossible to answer/absurd to even try.”
==Reply==Not exactly. We’re simply asking what healthy genes are.
——————————-
Anon1: “Similarly, there are a couple of features that an object must have in order to be considered an automobile (wheels, a motor, etc.), but a ‘09 Chevy is not objectively more or less of a car than a 1912 Model T.”
==Reply==I don’t think you’re using a fair analogy. Like I’ve said, the issue of physical attractiveness is a matter of degree – like intelligence is. Whether or not a car is a car is not a matter of degree.
P.S. How do you do those fancy quote things?
LikeLike
A girl in her teens is pure poetry but in her twenties it’s like a furnace inside her comes on and while her beauty takes a slide from the perfection of her teenage years, she makes up for it with a raw animal sensuality that peaks in some women as late as their late twenties.
A more prosaic way of saying it: to a thirty-something prick like myself a teenage girl is nice to look at but there is nothing like banging the intestines out of a good looking and horny twenty-seven year old.
LikeLike
Something sweet:
On a scale of 1 to 10:
Girl, girls, girls:
Really fun:
I ask you; would a feminazi post these? Get over it!
LikeLike
Kthulah:
“Pretty Black women have this complaint when they’re being pushed aside for ugly White women. Taller women have this complain when they’re pushed aside for shorter women. Anytime there’s an obvious situation of beauty being ignored or categorized as “sperm dump” material over more socially convenient ugliness/defectiveness, you’re going to have a group of beautiful women complaining.”
You seem to be referring more to marriageability than fuckability, which gets into all sorts of social and cultural issues far removed from physical attractiveness. Yes, there are plenty of legitimately hot (or at least reasonably attractive) women out there who have trouble finding a man to marry, but they wouldn’t have any trouble getting laid, and they aren’t making claims about beauty being on the inside either. In their case, it’s more like “I’m so pretty, why do I keep getting pumped and dumped?”
LikeLike
Lurker, my “cave” is open to a big, wide forest you wouldn’t be able to survive in.
Hmmm … cave … forest … this is getting interesting.
Peter
LikeLike
Bottom tier
READ: You think David Alexander is an attractive choice. When he ignores their attempts to attract him, it comes across as “game”.
Lower middle tier
READ: David Alexander is a tolerable male friend until a boyfriend comes along. Depending on social class, David may revere you as a Queen.
Your ex-fling: the Harper’s Ferry bridge girl.
For somebody who keeps talking about game, judging by said female, your game was either weak back then, or your game is whack now. In other words, you should be pulling in and showing off better looking women.
other times “stacked” girls (aka Shyla Stylez)
You have excellent taste in women. 🙂
LikeLike
I am very, very pleased to report that in 1998’s L’Ultimo Capodanno, Monica Bellucci had a GNP.
Peter
LikeLike
Cigstache is Roissy’s former fling.
But Peter is the one who still wants her, due to her GNP. Eeeeewwwwww!!
LikeLike
Twice, men don’t value sperm dumps. They value the women they plan to commit to.
Most also don’t have the amount of independence to distinguish ugliness from social inconvenience.
An example of a beautiful woman. I chose someone who would conform to a slightly more feminized warp of the Marquardt mask with no allowances for subsaharan African-ness.
LikeLike
I don’t agree with Roissy’s tiers. They assume that a man will fuck whatever he can get.
The tiers fail to recognize that many men would prefer celibacy rather than go below a certain number (whether 4, 6, or 8, depending on the guy).
Also, he distinguishes an ‘alpha’ vs. a ‘beta with tight game’. Doesn’t tight game make you an alpha? Isn’t that the whole point. I see 8s with seemingly average guys all the time. Why? Because they had game.
When I was involved in Ballroom Dance years ago, there was a woman in our group who was a solid 10. An incredible blonde beauty who also had a superb fashion sense and was exceptionally nice, well-educated, and pleasant to boot. Even 12 years since I have last seen her, I have not met anyone like her since.
She was engaged to (and later married) a half-Indian/half-French guy who looked Indian. Good looking, but not exceptional. Only 5’9″ or so, the same as her. Not rich at all, as he worked as a mechanical engineer, and they lived in a middle-class townhouse. Maybe his family was super-wealthy and he was in line for a big inheritance, but unlikely. He worked at a middle-class job living in a middle-class home.
The only explanation was that he had Game. The few times I talked to him, though, no unusual charisma was apparent. He seemed no different than a guy who would marry a 6.5 or 7.
I don’t know how her life turned out, or what she looks like now, at age 40, or if they had kids eventually. But this anecdote has baffled me.
LikeLike
Tood, stable guys are whore retirement plans.
Maybe she didn’t know her beauty was so valuable to wealthier guys since back then she was already 28. You also don’t say anything about her shag record.
It’s pretty normal for “hot” women pushing 30 to settle down with a stable guy. This is after they’ve racked up some high numbers or they’ve realized they can’t compete with younger women for the guys they used to go for.
Maybe things turned out well…but I’ve seen stuff like this happen way too many times.
LikeLike
The fact is, there was wide variation in the voting. The fact that roissy’s ratings for each girl are close to the average ratings of his readers does not indicate that beauty is objective. Unless one considers roissy’s preferences some kind of objective standard.
LikeLike
PA,
I think given that a woman in her early 20s hasn’t succumbed to the woes of childbirth of the Freshman 15+, she is going to be hotter than she was when 16-18. The problem a lot of guys have when distinguishing the two is that there are a lot of 20-25 year olds who have let themselves go, making it hard to compare across ages. Mid 20s and older are nice b/c they actually know what’s going on in bed and how to please a man unlike teenagers. I think a girl in the 21-22 range have the golden triangle of looks, sexiness, and ability to please.
Tood,
I see your point about a beta with tight game = alpha, but there can be instances or relationships that were founded on a guy who is normally a beta having especially tight game with a specific woman for whatever reason. His tight game may only work on this certain woman whereas a true alpha’s charms would work across a larger spectrum of women. His apparent alphaness with a certain woman doesn’t push him to alpha status overall b/c it would be unlikely that he could get much action on his terms.
LikeLike
Kthulah, you sound like Roissy.
Well, additional facts are :
1) I saw old videos of her at age 21 when she was starting in ballroom dance, and she was only an 8 then. Fitness, hairstyle, and fashion sense improvements pushed her to the 10 she was when I knew her. It is very possible her husband was someone she met in college, and she continued it on since then. So the guy lucked out as he he bought a stock that became the next Google.
But at age 28, she was a 10, far better than 99% of 22 year old. I mean it.
2) However, she DID know how pretty she was. She competed in ballroom dance in front of large audiences and even on TV. There is no way she didn’t know about her exposure, nor did high visibility bother her.
3) She was exceedingly pleasant and cheerful as a person, and perhaps didn’t like the standard manipulation techniques that other 10s may use all the time. She grew up in suburban Ohio, and so perhaps was not as attuned to manipulation as a big-city girl.
4) The guy was not rich. She made the same money as him. His retirement plan could not have been the reason. He wasn’t even interested in her main hobby of ballroom dance. She could have at least married a doctor, if money is what she wanted.
LikeLike
Jackson —
“Am I the only one that thinks bridge girl has an ugly face? I put her lower than most.”
Yes you are. As to whether she deserves Roissy’s 7 versus a reasonable low of 5 or possible — no 7 plus is her limit — well that’s another matter.
Her face is tiny in the pic and obscurred by huge dark glasses. She’s almost a Rorschack test. Not quite though cause there’s enough of her face to know she’s at least a 5-6, though could also go to 8. Just maddeningly little visual info. But her bod ain’t so great and that matters a lot to me. Chicken legs. B tits at best and I want big C’s. No doubt a scrawny butt. She’s not really hot to me. she is however mega presentable pretty.
LikeLike
Chuck, being optimistic and considering that maybe things did turn out well, why should the guy really give a crap about overall alpha status if he’s alpha enough for a hot woman like her?
I mean…assuming he’s bedding down a 10 who’s maintaining or maybe only lost a point from her still above average looks *and* who is smart and charming, why should he care if every other woman doesn’t want him? He’s hit the (perhaps beta) jackpot.
LikeLike
Tood, Roissy and I make similar observations, but just have different ways of coping with them. He’s male but a little less…kamikaze than me.
By your description, she seems like a good catch all around. It can happen that someone who is very beautiful will beat the odds and become a great person if they were raised realistically…and often being raised around other beautiful people helps in this.
I know a guy who is fabulously gorgeous to the point he’d cause other guys in any bar he walked into, to start acting like jealous bitches, who turned out that way. One would think he would be a complete asshole, but he’s one of the kindest people I’ve ever known…very independent thinker too.
So in that case, maybe it was his game…but it also could have been just the pure, blinding LOVE. Love is something weird and wonderful. 🙂
LikeLike
Kthulah,
“Chuck, being optimistic and considering that maybe things did turn out well, why should the guy really give a crap about overall alpha status if he’s alpha enough for a hot woman like her?”
This is what I’m talking about with you. You make up hypothetical scenarios that only play out in your head and then act like I was the one thinking it. If their relationship is fine, then fine. If it turned out well then he’s one lucky guy; he’s exactly what every guy who isn’t an alpha should hope for.
And nothing in my statement had anything to do with him caring what kind or how many women he beds. It was a mere explanation for how a man could attract a hot woman while being a beta with tight game as opposed to being an outright alpha. If he cares or not about his future lays is his concern.
LikeLike
“By your description, she seems like a good catch all around. ”
In all my life, she was as close to the ideal woman as I have ever met. Excellence in everything : appearance, dance, fashion sense, personality, and even cooked well. You know the type – they excel at everything, but are still humble.
“but it also could have been just the pure, blinding LOVE. ”
Perhaps. It is quite likely that they got attached in college when she was an 8 (but of course still a great personality), and she became a 10 over time and still stuck with him. He perhaps had A+ game for *this specific woman*, knowing exactly what buttons to push. Perhaps this was a true ‘soulmate’ example.
He wasn’t even into her main hobby at all – that was the funny thing. If they both did ballroom dance as a couple, it would be much less of a mystery.
LikeLike
“Roissy and I make similar observations, but just have different ways of coping with them.”
He seems to dislike you quite strongly, though. I’m not sure why.
LikeLike
Chuck, outright alphas are the politicians and corporation owners who rule your life.
For the middle class, alpha means dominant in personality, well regarded by his peers, and has his woman (or women) on lockdown with no worries, and if he wants, can go get more.
So what makes him less alpha if he scored a phenomenally rare faithful 10?
I’m nowhere near a 10, but a balless dude with the spine of an amoeba won’t even have my friendship, much less more.
LikeLike
Tood, I met a woman like that once…the wife of a friend of mine. She is like sunshine incarnate. They just had a baby a few days ago. She’ll be a stunner, just like her parents.
Heheheh…and my friend was a broke artist at the time they married.
LikeLike
Morose metro girl is 7 at least, you all have bizarre standards, how the hell is tiarabeast a 5? 3.5 lolol
LikeLike
Not to interrupt the smooth cruising of this blog or anything, but once in a while unlikely people really do just magically hit it off. They find an unexpected, previously unexperienced ease and groove with each other that takes on its own life and sweeps both of them forward on the same wave. Happened to me when I met my wife-to-be, and I most certainly hadn’t been looking for it. It’s a flukey thing, this “magical rapport” business. And it’s not as though all problems and challenges are thereby instantly solved. But when it comes along it’s a very real thing.
All that said, it’s also probably a very rare thing, so I wouldn’t count on it happening to you in this lifetime. Better to develop tight game.
LikeLike
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article2233878.ece
the 13yo boy in this article is actually probably going to be good looking. the 15yo girl is fairly unattractive. if you’re going to knock up a chick when you’re barely an adolescent, knock up a young sofia vergara (had a kid in her teens).
btw, this shows further evidence of whiskey’s exhortations of the decline of britain’s white underclass.
LikeLike
Michael, that happened to me once.
…but then he found out his ex girlfriend was pregnant.
LikeLike
Well, I did bridge girl too, a couple of years ago…want to compare notes?
LikeLike
Saw that Freakshow. Disgusting. Note the fawning, female-oriented approbation of the whole thing.
When either women or men dominate a society, disaster generally follows.
LikeLike
Is it too late to vote? Roissy -10 or 0 if that’s not allowed.
LikeLike
the 13yo boy in this article is actually probably going to be good looking
Yeah, right. When you look like that at 13, you’re gonna end up as one of those poor souls who still look like they’re 17 when they’re actually 35 (not to mention being very short). Not a good thing for a man.
LikeLike
You got with the cigarette girl, didn’t you?
LikeLike
“All that said, it’s also probably a very rare thing, so I wouldn’t count on it happening to you in this lifetime. Better to develop tight game.”
I don’t believe you really believe that, Michael. And I don’t think that finding a good partner is a flukey thing either. It happens naturally when you are ready for it.
LikeLike
Once again, I don’t see how this exercise “proves” anything, aside from the fact that roissy’s taste’s are remarkably similar to the mean of his readers’ tastes, which are themselves remarkably different from one another.
LikeLike
” happens naturally when you are ready for it.”
I was this naive once. Then I turned 13.
If what you are saying is true, there would be no divorce, no unhappy marriages, and no lonely singles.
LikeLike
twiceaday
I think Jessica Alba is “technically” attractive, but she does nothing for me. There are any number of women I would choose over her. It’s the same with classical music: I’m sure it’s really sophisticated and difficult to play, but as a rule I don’t like listening to it.
Then how exactly am I removing myself from the competition?
The scale has nothing to do with fact, it’s all opinion. In the submission thread someone posted a 9 who I regarded as unremarkably average, whereas his 7 was really good looking. The problem many of you are having is that you simply can’t deal with anyone disagreeing with you. Time to grow up.
Tood
The most beautiful woman I know, compared to anyone regardless of age, is 38. But then again, she’s also Asian (if PUAs like youthfulness so much, why do they hate Asians?).
LikeLike
“Morose metro girl is 7 at least, you all have bizarre standards, how the hell is tiarabeast a 5? 3.5 lolol”
The angle is way too ambiguous. She reminds me vaguely of a couple Jewish girls I know, who vary widely in attractiveness. Based on what I see, I’d put her over bridge girl, under scarf girl. And I really don’t see the appeal of alizee, she looks like a generic cute french girl. T
The ranking is mostly right, but the exact scores aren’t accurate, IMO. Redhead is a 6, she’s got that frumpy sexless facial structure, her friends are all probably herbish guys and genderless girls.
LikeLike
Hey, was just thinking about Bellucci having children to propagate beauty and wondered – does attractiveness decline with birth order, like intelligence does?
LikeLike
No, it does not. You may think it happens, but surprise, you’ve got hell bitch on wheels. Ask yourself this. Why all the need for game, all the hating on women, all the guys getting raked over the coals in divorce court if it happens naturally?
Make it easier on yourself. How many really nice women do you know well, irrespective of age or looks or attractiveness, single or married? How many guys do you know? It’s a rare thing, not a one-to-one ratio. The worst part about it is that you don’t know you really got it right until twenty or thirty years down the road. You will still mentally be comparing her with perfect, and she will be doing the same to you, and nobody is perfect. It’s the nature of humans.
As my mother-in-law said, “Go into marriage with both eyes open. Then shut one eye.”
LikeLike
This has to be one of the least inciteful studies ever made. Like those studies that prove some exercise will help you. A lot of effort telling us what everyone already knows. Nothing surprising here, move on.
LikeLike
inciteful=insightful
LikeLike
This has to be one of the least inciteful studies ever made.
What was it supposed to incite?
LikeLike
Ah nevermind; you caught yourself. I’ll be a smartass later.
LikeLike
If you gave the same test to a group of Arab guys, the morose metro girl would be the 10, or at least a 7. She looks young and like she could survive having a few kids.
This is another way of saying that race is an objective reality. Nor does it disprove roissy’s point.
In fact, it underscores it.
LikeLike
if PUAs like youthfulness so much, why do they hate Asians?
Well I can’t speak for PUA’s, but I dislike them because they are the most grimly materialistic women on earth.
LikeLike
Michael, I agree but only to a point. Things happen to work out for people who are lucky to have a lot going for them, to the point that they take their success for granted. You, for example, come across as a guy with a good natural appeal to women, not in the least because of your personality. And good things, romantically speaking, likely fell into your lap more often than not.
Similar with me. Being tall and good looking, intelligent but not a nerd, personable but not a “nice guy” gave me a huge leg-up with girls from my early teens to my early thirties, and even now, when I have young girls at work with crushes on me.
Looking back, girls were always mine for the taking, unless I screwed it up myself. And more often than not, I did screw it up. Usually because of some shyness on my part in my teens as I was paralyzed with self-consciousness due to my accent and being from an unfashionable country.
But more so, because of miseducation: a belief that quality girls were ethereal creatures who mustn’t be sullied with my dirty sexuality, or by acting like “she is special” because I thought that was what you were supposed to do with quality girls. But even with my own self-inflicted obstacles, I did well.
But what if I were short, balding, with a rat-like face as some of the more famous pick-up artists? I would have probably realized early on that love is a jungle red in tooth and claw and game must be learned, or it would have been o m e g a – land for me.
I’m guession it is similar for you. Girls more or less gave you an open door from the get-go. But many guys have never experienced the feeling of a pretty girl’s eyes just lighting up when she first sees him. You and I have always had Fortune’s wind at our back, so perhaps we take much of our happines for granted.
LikeLike
i agree with jackson. bridge girl ain’t nothin special. not my type. she looks like a nerdy college girl.
LikeLike
Re: bridgegirl, she’s wearing thick-framed glasses which will make your nose look about a zillion times bigger than it is.
Worn glasses since the 2d grade, so trust me on this.
LikeLike
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article2233878.ece
the 13yo boy in this article is actually probably going to be good looking. the 15yo girl is fairly unattractive. if you’re going to knock up a chick when you’re barely an adolescent, knock up a young sofia vergara (had a kid in her teens).
Thinking about those two hiding the salami conjures up an image of a horny Chihuahua trying to hump a Great Dane bitch.
Peter
LikeLike
the boy in this article is actually probably going to be good looking
Dude, you can already tell that kid’s a budding major league Alpha. Looks a bit like Charlie Sheen.
LikeLike
PA
Always fun reading your comments, but actually that wasn’t me saying “It happens naturally when you are ready for it.” That was Raptor.
I hadn’t thought about it before, honestly. I just stumbled into a woman with whom I had a kind of magical rapport. There it was, and I’ve never bothered to Why. Move forward and enjoy it instead.
Now that I do ask Why, I’m tempted to say something like “Yeah, that’s right, it happens when you’re ready for it. But you may not be ready for it this time around. So how exactly do you plan to spend this lifetime?”
There are loads of ways of enjoying women, god knows. Magical rapport isn’t a rerequisite!
LikeLike
Insane British welfare underclass with the nanny state to pay for everything. The boy’s father is the only one employed, in “vehicle disposal”, (junk) and has 9 kids. Obviously this wouldn’t happen in America because a junk man wouldn’t have 9 kids, being expected to feed them on his own, although a woman on her own could game the American system.
LikeLike
that wasn’t me saying “It happens naturally when you are ready for it.” That was Raptor.
My bad!
LikeLike
I see a few hundred 18-24 year old Asian girls every day. You would be hard pressed to find one with greater than a AAA bra size or an ass to speak of. Plus, most couldn’t hold a conversation if their life depended on it.
Also, their faces are just weird. They don’t set off the “attraction” circuits in my brain much like, say, Klingon or Vulcan women in Star Trek don’t. My brain just keeps saying “alien! alien!”.
LikeLike
I think Japanese women have the best breasts by far (big breats tend to be saggy, and that’s not too cool). A flat ass is no big deal.
LikeLike
I just stumbled into a woman with whom I had a kind of magical rapport.
There _are_ women with whom you will have more of a natural rapport, but you won’t even get in the door with them without a bit of game, natural or otherwise.
It’s much the same for women. Without the minimum level of looks, she won’t have a chance with a guy, no matter the personal chemistry.
LikeLike
I said, “If you gave the same test to a group of Arab guys, the morose metro girl would be the 10, or at least a 7. She looks young and like she could survive having a few kids.”
Wounded replied, “This is another way of saying that race is an objective reality.”
In my opinion, it is. It’s just not “black and white” as many so-called race realists would like to believe.
I believe in an accept the reality of race, though I understand the arguments against it. Part of what leads me to embrace it though, is noting the marked differences between people born from cultures that value independent thought, and people born from cultures that value conformity more. Some differences in average lifestyle and conduct can’t be explained by culture since people are apparently unable to overcome the limitations of their genes, even when brought up otherwise.
There are even genes that cause a person to be more likely to be racist. No genetecist talking about the subject to laypersons will say it in exactly those words. They say the genes “cause high anxiety when viewing unfamiliar faces or features”.
This is why, by the way, people of many if not most cultures are unable to distinguish between ugliness and social inconvenience. They can’t even make out the difference between lesser value and greater social inconvenience, even if you dissect a person of their own ethnicity and a different one in front of them.
“Nor does it disprove roissy’s point.
In fact, it underscores it.”
It is unwise to assume that every woman who comes here is attempting to refute game or antagonize its believers, even if Roissy himself makes that mistake. If I thought him more clever, I would guess that he attempts to insult me as a way of “beta testing” his readers.
Everyone may be beautiful to someone, on some level, but there is a pretty standard measure for physical beauty in women, and that is a combination of reproductive status, indicators of good health, and indicators of bonding/nurturing capability…but before you plant your flag in the evo-biosphere, be aware that this means the western ideal is an infertile whore who, in upper paleolithic terms would be many times more likely to die in childbirth, have a premature stillbirth, kill your babies when they became socially or laziness inconvenient to keep around, and/or abandon you with your kids when someone more alpha showed interest.
I have a hard time believing this is coincidence that just happened to develop because this is truly what men prefer to look at, and even if that was the case, it’s certainly not coincidence that these traits have suddenly become preferable in more than a shag. The pump-and-dump ideal has suddenly become the mate ideal, and in my view, the fact that morose and red scarf (breeders) scored lower than genetically-predisposed-hoe-signallers, is proof of a serious twist.
So whatever dispute there is between me and Roissy is not in the effectiveness of game or the objectiveness of beauty. It’s in that he doesn’t want to believe that he and others have been duped into decategorizing. They’ve been psychologically feminized.
In my view, game is the correction of this mistake. Consistent success at shagging and bagging hoe signallers is the first step in realizing that they’re hoes.
Almost every player I know settled down with a beautiful nice woman. Almost every tragically nice guy I know who wasn’t a fairly fiercely independent thinker scored a lifetime of occasional passionless sex with a media pretty whore, or a hideous harpy, which is just the less media pretty version of whore. They end up with women who extort them through their kids, berate them constantly, and usually abandon them when they have the chance.
So whatever you’ve been told *about* me by people who don’t actually read what I’m writing, I am telling you that I am on the side of guys like my brothers, and other guys finding themselves having to navigate through a totally twisted dating scene…and I’m here representing the women who’ve been sidelined for hoes, even though I personally consider myself a bit “off the grid”.
I’m saying what the women who would make you pancakes every Saturday morning, wake you up by sucking your cock, and help raise your sons to be men and not pussies, are thinking.
LikeLike
“Yeah, that’s right, it happens when you’re ready for it. But you may not be ready for it this time around. So how exactly do you plan to spend this lifetime?”
Okay, that’s a fair point. Karma and all that. I think you understood that by “ready” I meant spiritually ready, but most people on this board probably abhor such terms. In any case, perhaps there doesn’t have to be a contradiction between gaming confidence and “following your path” or whatever one wants to call it.
LikeLike
@ Kthulah – February 12, 2009 at 10:36 pm
You are kidding right? While not actively ugly, there is nothing attractive about that face.
LikeLike
Daran, you are welcome to your opinion, but my looks aren’t all that relevant to my points. If I was indeed actively ugly, it wouldn’t change what beauty or ugliness is.
Having been actively ugly, as in covered in spots from the cheeks to the knees for a few months, and having been disfiguringly fat, I can tell you that my opinions were the same. Men and women need to grow up on time, and they’re not because their parents couldn’t resist the social programming when it turned so far against nature as to be destructive.
Harmful trends are nothing new. They’ve been a method of culling the herd since long.
LikeLike
beauty is in the eye of the beholder and is often mitigated and/or enhanced by a sparkling personality.
LikeLike
Kthulah – An example of a beautiful woman. I chose someone who would conform to a slightly more feminized warp of the Marquardt mask with no allowances for subsaharan African-ness.
Nigga, you outchyo damn mind!!! That’s black lingo.
Come on now. That “woman” looks like Bernard Hopkins!
Here’s a better example. Not my type but an improvement over what you showed:
Cynthia Masasi of Kenya
LikeLike
Kthulah, my comment was directed at the picture you linked to. Willard is on the right track.
LikeLike
Willard, the substantial difference in the perceived beauty of those two women is that one is made up in western media acceptable gear and a hairweave or wig, and the other is dressed according to her culture.
Oh, and the first one is younger and looks more feminine, and therefore, by natural standards, prettier.
It is interesting that the two of you would prefer the less facially pretty one simply because she’s been “whitewashed”. If you don’t believe me, go to the Marquardt sites, and the refutations of it, which include more feminized warps of the mask, and compare the two.
What you learn will improve your game and prevent you from marrying a made-up hoe or future hideous harpy.
LikeLike
So whatever you’ve been told *about* me by people who don’t actually read what I’m writing, I am telling you that I am on the side of guys like my brothers, and other guys finding themselves having to navigate through a totally twisted dating scene…and I’m here representing the women who’ve been sidelined for hoes, even though I personally consider myself a bit “off the grid”.
There’s a lot of good sense in what Kthulah says in this comment – and indeed in many of her comments. Unfortunately, many readers don’t read her carefully and appear to think that she’s primarily here to attack Roissy and to attack Game. Not true, as she herself points out in this comment. She disagrees with Roissy about some specific issues, but in general she shares his views.
In this post, she was simply arguing that the kind of woman whom many men find most attractive – the painted-up girls in low-cut shirts with cute faces and thin but curvy bodies – often don’t make good wives, as they tend to be neurotic and too physically frail for motherhood. I’m not certain about the second point – I think she exaggerates their physical weakness here – but I suspect there’s some truth in the first one. Very pretty women in what K. calls the “media” mode are often neurotic from a lifetime of comparing or having their looks compared to those of other women. They learn to guard their looks with great care (necessary as the standard of beauty keeps getting higher) and thus develop the self-absorption that many men find so annoying in women.
LikeLike
My problem with kthulah is that she’s quite clearly mentally unstable.
LikeLike
Tokyo, in that you may be correct. A mentally stable woman would give two shits about any of this.
LikeLike
Beauty is subjective. The Japanese used to consider women with facial hair beautiful. The Chinese preferred women with deformed feet (Lotus feet). The West Africans prefer women that here in America are considered obese. etc…etc… Having said that though….there’s this great dialogue between Tom Sizemore and Sherilyn Fenn at the bar in the movie Swindle. You should really check it out. There is some truth to what he says……men are much more consistent in what is considered beautiful…..
LikeLike
Realist, you have to take into account how things like lotus feet, corsettes, circumcision (male and female), lip plates, and the like come into fashion or become traditions. It’s almost invariably because some legitimate trait that indicates youth, health, and/or nurturing and bonding capability becomes idealized and exaggerated.
There are few harmful trends or aesthetic traditions that don’t have their roots in natural markers. Ornamentation and body modifications have been a way for humans to express their inner qualities that mere facial or body appearance didn’t cover.
There are also rites of passage involving body modification that served to cull the herd of what they viewed as either weak or harmfully nonconformist members. A sociopath in a tribe who doesn’t feel attachment to the system can destroy it rather than serve it as a warrior.
Some would say, and I tend to agree, that lack of rites of passage that leave visible indicators are a problem for society…even outliers like myself. So when deciding on a look, I chose one that would give obvious signs of who I am and what I’m capable of enduring.
These symbols may elicit different reactions from different people, but their meaning is basically the same across cultures. When you see a person with ear spools, you know that they are very patient, capable of enduring lots of pain, and extremely likely to have a strong immune system, whether you *like* ear spools or not.
Beauty itself is as objective as physical reality. It’s just the reactions to different types of beauty depend on the individual’s upbringing and personal needs.
LikeLike
No wayyyy is redscarf a 7.
And I’m guessing you dated bridgegirl?
LikeLike
QUOTE. Beauty is not objective. It is subjective. It is a result of the interplay of the observer and the observed. The thing is men are really similar in what the find beautiful. Women too. Consistency in subjective assessments doesn’t make an assessment objective. It’s mostly a semantic argument but … I think accuracy matters. ENDQUOTE
I agree with this wholeheartedly
LikeLike