Looks are more important than you think! Merged [Official thread]

[DJmindTricks]

Sorry to double post, something is going on with my javascript.

Men have it easy in my opinion, as long as they have game and are decent-fairly good-looking, they have a chance with hot girls.

To men(Especially confident, good looking guys), looks are 80-90% importance when looking for a woman

 

[DJmindTricks]

Just read the whole link. Those girls are more brutal than men. Ever see a girl break up with a guy then start poking fun at his member? She will laugh about it with all of her friends. But when she was with him she would probably lie and tell him how big it is. Girls love to BS guys so they can keep them around to be doormats or ATM's. That's the truth.

Then again, i also agree that girls are shrewd, evil, deceitful she-devils. I mean they dont even like eachother most of the time.

 

[DJmindTricks]

This was originally posted by a person on that link

"This thread made me happy today grin One thing I noticed, when men post naked lady pictures there is almost ALWAYS some jackass that says something like “she’d be hot if her boobs were bigger” etc. I haven’t seen ONE post here that said “He’d be hot if his **** was bigger.” Women kick assgrin I’m not saying ALL guys are superficial jerks, it just seems alot of them are stuck on “size” more than women and are really quick to tear apart a woman’s natural body and expect them to “do something” about their smaller breasts etc. They talk like there is something WRONG with being smaller and/or natural! I think there was one post about Brad Pitt not being overly lucky in the package department, but nothing degrading was saidgrin
Thanks ladies for starting this thread, it’s nice to see some men instead of women for a chan"ge

See, like i said, women are more lenient on men as far as looks go. So really, most men have a good chance (as long as your not repulsively hideous) Its hard for men to tell if another guy is good looking. I know its just one example, but yeah.

 

[ricorico]

DJ,

I guess you did'nt notice the fact some posted remarks about bigger members. The reason they did'nt make fun of body parts is because the guys were mostly in shape. One did poke fun at the fat Santa Claus ,though most preferred to ignore his pic and droll at the fit guys. But they were especially drooling at the transexual Alexis Arquette's member so they are pretty shallow.

 

[ricorico]

[It's hard for men to tell if another guy is good-looking.



Shhh! Rico hasn't found that out, yet. [/QUOTE]


Deus, some guys can't figure ourt which girls are good looking too. Paris Hilton, Cameron Diaz and Julia Roberts are Fugg. But some guys still haven't figured that out. I posted a link to pics where fit guys were PAYING to go to parties where 300-400 lb women they consider attractive are . Some guys are clueless too. It proves nothing but the fact both sexes have preferences which are not the norm.

Check out porn sites. They are making huge amounts of money off guys who secretly love Obese girls,Women as old as your grandma with no teeth, amputees, midgets ect.Gross women that would make you and I and most guys here throw up. Those are not socially accepeted and there are tons of guys forking up the MUCHO cash to secretly watch those sick sites at home.

Does that mean guys don't care about looks? No. Just means those guys are sickos with huge insecurity issues.

Why would anyone want a beat up old ugly car if you can drive a Rolls?? Because they don't feel deserving of the Rolls as they have LSE.

 

[God_of_getting_layed]

Are you serious? You find some random celebrity nude pic site, and this somehow props up your looks-matter crap? So if I find a snuff site where the women are commenting on how great the videos are, can I use this as evidence for murder mattering? So if I find a snuff site where the women are commenting on how great the videos are, can I use this as evidence for murder mattering? Can I start "Being the victim of homocide matters!!!" threads incessantly despite the banning of such threads, and quip nonsensical remarks such as "yep, we can see here that murder IS in fact important to women :yes:" and "anybody else notice how the evidence is stacking up against the murder doesn't matter fools? "

If this were the only evidence that has ever been posted about looks mattering, then what you say about it being meaningless could make sense.

BUT!

There has been mounds and mounds of other evidence that rico as well as many others have posted(including myself) that are in agreement with what rico has provided here. Together, each piece of evidence brings the big picture more into focus. And that pictures is of "LOOKS MATTERING".

You dont look at a piece of evidence alone or by itself, THATS NOT SCIENTIFIC! You look at all pieces of relevent evidence together and form a conclusion that explains all of them. I can tell you are scientifically illiterate Deus!

If you tried to find some celebrity website about snuff films, and then go and claim that "murder matters", IT WOULDNT WORK! why? becuase all other pieces of evidence would suggest otherwise. Becuase such a claim is not true, therefore its impossible to find a large set of evidence that would fit with such an absurd claim. All other evidence would conflict with the conclusion that murder matters. Now, if you want to be UNscientific, and tell a lie (which you are notorious for doing), you could probably use that piece of evidence alone, and "murder mattering" might make sense. But that wouldnt be scientific now would it?

See how science works? now go educate yourself son, go back to school.

Know that according to scientific means of explaining reality, the theory of "looks matters" makes far more sense than any kind of rediculous theory of "looks DONT matter".

 

[God_of_getting_layed]

I also totally agree on the perception thing you posted, Men ARE NOT a good judge of other men's looks. There are just as many good-looking guys as there are good-looking women.

Some ppl might not like this, but i think men are too harsh on themselves as far as how they look, or how other men look. There are guys that most men think are average-looking that women think are "flaming-Hawt". Just like the scott peterson example. So just being confident in your looks can really take you a long way, not to mention taking care of yourself.

Its true, most men are horrible judges of attractiveness. Alot of good looking men are seen as average looking by the "attractiveness blind" men that make up most of the male population. So to these men, they dont see a good looking guy with a hot girl, they see an average guy with a hot girl, and then turn around and conclude that women must not care about looks.

Women too arent all that great about judging female attractiveness either. I cant count how many times Ive seen a smokin hot girl with a guy that women think is hot, and the girl says "eww, what does he see in her?, shes soo ugly!". "attractivness blindness" causes people to incorrectly conclude looks dont matter to the opposite sex!

And yes, Scott Peterson is a perfect example. Alot of women think he's good looking, yet soo many men would consider him average looking.

Looks definitely give a good impression, and get the woman to open up to you, now they are not EVERYTHING, but i think looks DO matter, i'd give looks a good 30-40% of the equation.

Well, when it comes to the hot babes (not the fuglies, average girls or cuties, Im talking the smoking hot ones) Looks matter almost too much. The "looks equation" for these hotties would have parameters identicle to those that would be seen in the "looks equation" that describes male preferences. THe 2 equations for men and women would look exactly the same!!! that is when we are talking about the hot women.

The hotter she is, the more the equation would resemble the one that describe's a man's selection criteria.

 

[ricorico]

Deus,
You already graduated and you still need 2 jobs??????
Well anyway, I was talking to a girl at work who happens to be black about this very subject. She said she visits a forum where this topic is discussed a few times. Here is the link.
http://forum.blackhairmedia.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=70368&KW=looks


http://forum.blackhairmedia.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=70497&KW=handsome

She also agreed some insecure desperate sisters will date anything in order to have a man. Nothing to do with his "physical appearance. Everything to do with lack of father ,family life and LSE!!!!

Also, as you look around at couples, how do you know which women are in there for the money, or which have issues? Women will notoriously date fuggs if she thinks it will lead to a cushy life. That's why so many guys try to come off like they have cash. Those very same women will sleep with better looking guys than their husbands who they are attracted to.

If you ever listened to Leykis a couple of years back he had that very topic going on. He claimed many women will lust the bad boy and good looking guy who was unwilling to marry them because he had so many women to choose from. So competition is tough. Therfore, the women will marry the guy they have little physical attraction to, but he makes a good father,gives them a financially stable life and is low risk for having an affair. The only thing they have to do is give him sex once in a while.

Many women called in "Annonymously" to say that is exactly what was going on in their marriage. I'm sure those women get their "groove on occasionally when they get an oppurtunity and poor reliable,plain looking husband has no clue!!!

 

[wayword]

http://forum.blackhairmedia.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=70497&KW=handsome

Wow, you notice that the top req in all those posts is:

At least 6' tall!

Of course, the average height in this country is 3" shorter than that...

 

[Nighthawk]

Scott Peterson is hot. I've never heard of him, so I googled his pic. I give him a 9.

 

[ricorico]

Deus,

Read on http://www.researchfellow.net/ftopic14.html

 

[ricorico]

Deus,

If you believe in litmitless potential you sure are not doing anything about it. You remind me of someone who preaches if you believe you can do anything. Yet lives in his parent's basement and delivers neswpapers for a living. Preaching goals, but doing absolutely nothing to get anywhere himself!!!!!

 

[God_of_getting_layed]

NOTORIOUS? Really, now. That's a bold statement. If I am truly notorious for lying, then you'll have no problem pulling up a quote of a single lie that I've told during my tenure here. I'll be waiting.

you make this too easy for me Deus, I didnt even have to leave this thread to find one of your lies:

Women want MONEY. Not looks.

Another example that comes to mind is how you like to resort to deception tactics. ie using a rare minority example of a hot girl with an ugly guy (julia-Lyle) and turn around and try to say ALL hot women are like this and that this is the proof, when the fact is, your example which is the "proof" is actually a rare anomaly, not the norm for hot women. This is called lying, you know, telling things that are not true.

I can come up with many more examples of your lies and deception Deus. Dont make me! *caugh* fake poll you cite that you totally made up *caugh*

First of all, I'm a year older than you. I've been telling you this ever since you first started up with me back on the 80 page looks-matter thread in the Archives, "son."

"son" is kind of one of those figures of speech. It's use has less to do with age, and more to do with superiority. Since Im superior to you in this subject, my usage of it fits well.

Secondly, I'm already done with school.

That may be, BUT YOU ARE CLEARLY SCIENTIFICALLY ILLITERATE!

You are the one who tries to form a conclusion by ignoring masses of evidence, and using only one single peice of evidence that favors your argument. And then you try to say its "proof" as if you are being scientific or something. Tell me, how is this being scientific?

As far as your other looks-matter rantings go, you're wasting your breath on me. I've already told you that I have no desire to respond to a poster than cannot remain civil in a debate, i.e. unable to abstain from speaking in excessively large font in an attempt to compensate for poor communication skills, personal attacks, and a refusal to find middle ground. You're better off using the ":yes:" emoticon when referencing another proponent of the looks-matter cult, or your own views.

oh right, like my usage of large fonts is a good reason not to have a debate with someone.

I got a better explanation why you wont argue with me: its becuase I always point out where and why you are wrong, the flaws in your argument,and you cant handle it!

 

[God_of_getting_layed]

Yes, I've been saying this all along. However, body type is also part of appearance since it's easily altered.

Well, the word "appearance" is the word you use to identify that characteristic. Others may label that as "looks". But it is still what it is, just the name has changed. either way, that characteristic is what guys like me call "looks", and they do in fact matter.

There are many characterstics that make up "looks", 'body' happens to be one of them, there are many more. It just so happens that you can change some, and others you cannot change (ie height).

Trying to manipulate terminology will not help your argument that "looks dont matter."

 

[God_of_getting_layed]

Stating that women want money is a lie? Not quite. Even if it wasn't true, what women "want" is entirely subjective. Try again.

yeah, women want money, as do all humans. But thats not the part of your statement that was the lie. The lie was the part where you say "not looks". Thats your lie.

I never said "ALL hot women are like this". You weren't paying attention. However, even if I did...that's subjective, once again. The equivalent would be saying that you are lying every time you say that looks matter. Still waiting for a lie.

Yeah, you never explicitly said this, but you implicitly did. It was very clear what you were implying given the context etc., and as we look over your past history of "looks dont matter" posts, it becomes even clearer how strong your view is that "all women dont care about looks". so, actually, yes, thats what you were saying exactly, and it was a bonafide lie!

Lets not forget about that poll youve been lying about. shame on you for trying to use evidence that doesnt even exist :nono:

Are you superior because you are unable to communicate clearly, or because your views are pro-AFC and anti-DJ?

Im superior becuase I know what Im talking about on this subject, you dont.

Not according to my SAT's, ASVAB, and IQ test.

SATs, ASVAB, and IQ tests dont measure scientific literacy. But your argument tactics strongly suggest you are scientifically illiterate.

Now, If those tests did say that you are scientifically LITERATE, then you should have absolutely no problem explaining how your tactic of usaging one or more peices of evidence while ignoring masses of ther RELEVENT evidence is in fact a scientific thing to do. I mean, hey, like you said about all those test you took, youre scientifically literate right? so go ahead and explain yourself, and prove me wrong. explain how your tactic of using only a very very small fraction of all relevent evidence is scientific.

You've got it all wrong. What you consider "masses of evidence", I call standard looks-matter rhetoric. And I've used many pieces of evidence to support our case. You just have been too busy typing "" to pay attention.

really? youve used many more pieces of evidence huh? cool, then you should have no problem posting them in a summary in your response to this. Becuase so far, none of you "looks dont matter" guys have posted anything credible that also CANNOT be explained using a "looks matter" theory.

everything you guys have shown so far either is total crap with no credibility or it can easily be explained using a "looks matter" theory. Evidence isnt strong if it can easily be explained better using the counter arguers position than your own position.

I mean, you guys havent really posted much at all, and you Deus definitely havent posted anything even remotely credible.

But please prove me wrong, give me the links, or provide a summary of your "evidence"!


.

 

[Michele l'Arcangelo]

...mods can close this already... no ones even talking about the xanga thing anymore.

 

[God_of_getting_layed]

Wrong. Stating that women don't require looks isn't a lie. It's a perspective.

Not occording to all the evidence that rico, myself and others have provided. This evidence outweighs anything your side has provided. But if you feel otherwise about this, please feel free to post the evidence from your side in summary format

No, I didn't. Your desire for me to make an equally outrageous statement to yours in the past trumped the evidence at hand.

yes you did implicitly say that. given the context and by looking at your stance based on your past history of posts, this can be inferred.

Wrong AGAIN??? Man, you're on a roll. I've told you time and time again. I will not go through the effort of honestly debating looks with you until you calm down and act like a man.

Okay, so IF I am wrong, you should have no problem providing me with the source of your poll . I mean, hey, according to you, your poll is real, so whats so hard about posting your source? all you have to do is type out a few words, not hard at all.

Heh. Obviously, you've never taken any of the 3.

yeah, I have. It doesnt include questions about if an example experiment was done scientifically or not, nor does it test you on your ability or understanding of exactly why the scientific method works.

But that doesnt matter. The point is, IF YOU ARE SCIENTIFICALLY LITERATE AS YOU SAY, then you should have no problem explaining how your biased tactic of only using selected evidence that favors your arguement is in fact a scientific thing to do. I mean, hey, if you are scientifically literate as you say, then I must be missing something, so please explain how your tactic is scientific

Right. However, you still remain unable to discuss looks in a calm, level-headed manner free of personal attacks.

thats a bullsh1t excuse you like to use to get out of posting evidence you dont really have.

No, you're just too deep into this looks-matter crap that you are unwilling to accept any evidence to the contrary.

How am I unwilling if Im almost begging you to post your evidence? If I were all in denial as you say, Id avoid having you "present your side". But Im doing the opposite, I want you to post you side see. You guys are the ones who b1tch and whine when we present our side of the argument. You always whine and beg the mods to close threads etc. You are the close minded ones who dont want to see evidence that goes against your side!!!

You are the closed minded ones!!!

 

[wayword]

Appearance Matters!

Well, the word "appearance" is the word you use to identify that characteristic. Others may label that as "looks". But it is still what it is, just the name has changed. either way, that characteristic is what guys like me call "looks", and they do in fact matter.

You know, I think this is actually a really important topic.

A lot of PUAs want to downplay looks so that it doesn't become a SLB and to give hope to everyone. They want to emphasize verbal game instead.

Well, if you believe APPEARANCE matters so little - you are really going to handicap yourself with what I now believe is one of the most crucial pieces of the Game. Your appearance IS what matters primarily upfront.

Now, the good news here is that for girls, your APPEARANCE may be determined more by your STYLE than your actual physical looks. Girls are more apt to be attracted to the "right" clothes, the "right" hair and the "right" style. And a look that really matches, fits, coordinates and showcases your unique "looks" and physique. When girls talk about a hot guy they met - they typically comment on an article of clothing or his hair - as opposed to how we comment on her facial features or body parts.

Yes, your physical looks still matter - but realize that it's only PART of your overall APPEARANCE, and your appearance is also only part of your overall sex appeal, and your sex appeal is only part of your OVERALL appeal.

Point is, you may not be able to change your physical looks. But you will still get radically better results if you simply "dress up to go out" than if you don't. You will get far more EC, IOIs and attraction. It is an even deeper level of subcommunication than NLP. Yo stylo is not even verbal, it is entirely non-verbal - yet says a LOT about your entire persona and status! So, your fashion sense makes an incredibly powerful statement - that can either work FOR or AGAINST you!

 

[KoalaKing]

I guess ROBBIE WILLIAMS is well off, he has both GOOD LOOKS and PERSONALITY plus FAME and MONEY and EVERYTHING ELSE.

 

[ricorico]

You can change your physical appearance through diet and excersice. Just not clothes. men and women are really not so different. A woman can change her looks drastically through diet and excersice and clothes and so can a man. Women will give you much more leaway if you have a fit body and not so great face. Same as we guys give leaway to girls with hot bodies and not so great face. Fact is if you are out of shape and have a not so great face it will be much more difficult to pull off your attractiveness just through clothes and hair. It will help, but don't expect anything above a 7 unless you are rich,she is a single mom, she is desperate to be married and noone else will do it or has major insecurity issues.

I know guys who look decent because they know which clothes to wear. But when we all go swiming or go to the beach we know some girls will make fun of the man boobs or the gut he could easily hide in clothes. You still have to get naked with a girl if you want to have sex and a flabby out of shape guy who may look great in a suit is revealed and can't hide it. So get to a gym if you want prime girls.

Otherwise, if you do get the hot girl, you better believe she will watch everything that goes into your mouth and nag you on your weight and out of shape body. But that will happen after you marry her. She will make your life hell!!!