Is there a website or community where I can go for masculine fashion advice?
A lot of you seem like total faggots/numales. I don't want to be cuckolded, so I don't feel like I fit in.
kill yourself, my man
>>11079599
Why would you be offended? Don't you take pride in being a metrosexual? Masculinity isn't your thing; that's cool. Just make sure to invest in a good camcorder for your cuck sessions.
Same here, this board is useless when no prep general
>>11079580
/k/ milsurp threads
>>11079651
I'm looking for 110+ IQ fashion advice; the kind your grandfather would have given you if he worked in Hollywood.
>>11079580
>asking for fashion advice
>specifically 'masculine' fashion advice
nu male detected
reddit/MFA is the perfect place for you my man
>>11079654
You sound like an insufferable faggot. r/MFA then, or go ask your grandfather for all his clothes.
>>11079659
The only scenario in which I'm a bad guy or in any way unpaltable to you is if you're made insecure by the accusation of effeminate behavior. That's literally the basis of this board.
Do masculine adult males want to dress like a Californian AIDS patient/Sanders voter? Obviously not. Aren't you people supposed to be tolerant, anyhow?
>>11079665
Except the majority of the people here aren't what you described. You'll find a lot of conservatives in every board on this site, even here. So quit saying "you people" and lurk more or fuck off before making any more generalizing shitposts.
There's a prep general somewhere. So make a thread instead of making one to bitch like a woman.
>>11079665
why are you so obsessed with masculinity?
>>11079696
Masculinity is an arm's race. If you don't have it, the guy who does will cuckold you. It's that simple.
>inb4 women aren't actually attracted to masculine men!
lol okay
>>11079703
Depends what kinds of women.
cute normal girls like feminine model type males
club slut fake blondes and older women like masculine men
PLEASE THANK YOU LITERALLY MFA IS BETTER THAN THIS PLACE.
I literally saw a thread asking if it was okay for men to paint their nails black. I said IMO no, and they freaked.
>>11079748
You're just deluding yourself. If you're not masculine/dominant enough to sustain your image in the relationship as such, the respect your wife/gf holds for you will diminish, and she will gravitate towards more masculine males.
Beta providers are a thing, and some women might be able to suppress or reroute their sex drive enough to ignore the primal call of the alpha (usually for their kids and whatnot), but if you want to retain YOUR place as your wife/gf's primary romantic and sexual partner, you need to take steps to ensure that you won't be outdone by more masculine men.
I don't believe I'm wrong given that the vast majority of anecdotal accounts that coalesce around philosophies of how to attract and keep women AND evolutionary biology confirm my claims. In contrast, literally nothing substantiates the notion that women could suddenly rewrite biology and have attraction for inadequate males.
Attraction is hard-coded, mate. It's evolutionary. Either you work to keep it or you lose it to some other alpha. Me, personally, I'll play the game they want me to play to keep the woman I love. It's a small price to pay.
>>11079786
Literal reddit. Fuck off.
>>11079756
>>11079756
>the only thing keeping the woman I love from leaving me is the fact I compete against other bulls to make sure i'm the biggest
you've been mentally cucked already
bet your gonna cry a lot when you come home and shes riding that tiny art school dick because you've never tried to write a poem or communicate
xD
>>11079756
i don't know what you're on about, but i'm not a man
and the only girls i know that go for the alpha male bodybuilder type is older women or sorority girls
the normal girls at my college have cute boyfriends
>>11079806
>being this much of an unironic cuck
>>11079807
>i'm not a man
Fucking lol.
Bodybuilders aren't masculine. They're insecure and you implicitly know as such. If you actually want to know what kind of men women like (you'll never admit it to yourself, obviously, so this is for other readers), the best thing to do is either
A) Listen to guys who pick up a lot of women. You won't, but this is a decent strategy.
B) Look to romance fiction marketed to younger girls. The archetype is always the same. Hint: It's the same archetype RooshV is going to pretend to be when he picks you up at a bar for a ONS.
>>11079810
you are so embarrassing oh my god
>>11079820
>being this insecure about reality
I like how you're even trying to socially shame me anonymously. In your head, I'm a low value male. That's how my words are discarded. Even when the lady doth protest, she doth protest too much.
>>11079810
>marketed to younger girls
?
>>11079830
No.
Younger girls are the best litmus test of what excites women because they've yet to dig their heels into society and have no interest in the beta provider.
The archetype is always the same:
Mysterious male, moderate sociopath, can beat other men up, takes an interest in frumpy girl, dominant over other males (physically and socially).
>>11079756
I mostly lurk /fa/ from time to time for good inspo threads, but I really feel the need to reply to you my emotionally challenged friend.
Yes, women do turn for more alpha men naturally, the same as guys turn for girls with bigger breasts and ass/hips naturally. Yes, women sometimes do lowkey want their men to be fairly dominant in the relationship.
But that's it. Just as guys actually go for girls that they fall in love, so do girls. If you're actually PLAYING THE GAME with a woman you're in love with and who's in love with you, you're mentally challenged.
The only girls that actually think conciously and act on 'wow this guy has broader shoulders than my man imma gonna fuck him lmao' are fucking whores or slutty teenage girls.
You don't have to play any game if the girl actually fucking likes your personality and isn't a whore.
I can only imagine how painful your life must be when you need to 'play the game' even with the simplest given things like this.
>>11079756
Top kek
>>11079756
>>11079807
scientific study has shown that women tend to prefer buff alpha males when they ovulate and sensitive beta boys when they don't ovulate.
From an evolutionary perspective this makes sense because a woman can give her child the genes of the superior alpha and then use the sensitive beta to support her in her daily life and help raise the kids.
Women are genetically programmed to cuck, marriage was invented to forbid women from doing so. That's why women are stoned to death for extramarital sex in traditional cultures - the threat of death is the only thing that can stop a women from acting out her natural instinct to cuckold.
>>11079845
A relationship can sustain a degree of alpha male competition, but you're deluding yourself with the blinders of "love" if you think a relationship is endlessly flexible. If that were the case, cheating and affairs wouldn't be a thing.
Yes, your spouse/SO will always be scanning for people better than you. They won't always act on it (or rarely will), but they WILL act on it if push comes to shove. If you want to sustain your relationship, you need to be aware of this fact. It's really easy to fall into limerence with a new fling; these feelings are much stronger than the "love" in an established relationships. You know the "honeymoon period"? That's limerence. That's why people cheat. If you want to prevent that possibility, you need to work at your relationship; you need to keep your SO interested in you romantically and sexually, and not present yourself as easy to upgrade from simply because you're coasting on the monogamy contract.
>>11079851
Death isn't necessary, but social and legal conventions to prevent cuckoldry help reduce the "masculinity arms race" I outlined.
There are people that actually think about, believe and write this kind of shit sincerely.
>>11079841
>Mysterious male, moderate sociopath, can beat other men up, takes an interest in frumpy girl, dominant over other males (physically and socially).
Stop watching Drive already
>>11079871
That's young girls lit in a nutshell, including Japanese shoujo manga/anime and Western young adult novels.
>>11079841
and you think this is you? post pics big boy
>>11079826
if by low value man you mean a cringeworthy retard. i guess
>>11079878
It's not me; I'm your standard mixture between natural beta and natural alpha. Following these principles, however, can improve your relationships as a male. It's inner fashion.
>>11079878
Don't be silly, anyone who has actually obsessed over this kind of thing enough to actually develop and believe in a thought pattern like that is going to be completely socially inept and probably ugly, rarely leaving their room.
>>11079880
Just use the word "creepy". It's the universal low value beta male insult. Disparaging a man's value is similar to disparaging a woman's looks.
>>11079883
you read too much about life and don't live it and its so obvious
you are a pure beta
>>11079895
I do read a lot, but I'm not sure how your other claims follow. I always did well in school and on testing. I learn a lot faster than you do, probably, so your assessment of how much time I'm spending doing something is probably inaccurate. My life is fine.
>>11079858
You're missing the point.
I see women as equal to men, and by that rational if I myself wouldn't cheat on my girl with a 9/10 even though I would get aroused by her, neither will she.
No, that doesn't mean I'm scanning for people better than her, I'm just getting aroused by subjectively nice women to me. But I would not sacrifice a relationship with a girl I truly love with that girl, and I'm sure she isn't the type who isn't able to control her primal urges, that's on the level of me whipping my dick out and masturbating on the bus.
>>11079906
No females can't control their desires, they are complete driven by biological instincts only men have the logical and rational capability to make an informed choice.
>>11079899
ysan is that you?
>>11079841
Pretty young girls do not read novels, they get their panties wet over pretty boys like justin bieber and one direction
Ugly fat girls (see 16 y/o girl fandoms on tumblr) read novels like that, because they feel like fat worthless losers,
and they love that the frumpy female main protagonist has men interested in her,
the reason these girls read books like that is because they can relate to the main character, not because of the men featured in it
>>11079748
>don't generalize about us!
>here, let me generalize about women because they won't fuck my twink ass
kek, /fa/ never disappoints
>>11079906
It's completely asinine to treat male and female sexuality identically. That goes against the foundations of evolution.
Even if male and female sexual strategies were, for some reason, completely identical (despite the obvious anatomical evolutionary implications of having a womb (guaranteed investment in offspring) versus having a pump and dump penis), those very anatomical differences would necessitate different social strategies around reproduction.
Now, as for the stability of your relationship; I think most relationships are fairly robust. Putting aside sexual infidelity, emotional infidelity can justify even the most abhorrent behavior. Do you remember those strong feelings you had in the early stages of your relationship? Maybe with other girls? Those feelings that told made you obsessed; made your life hang on her every whim?
Those feelings can be replicated given the right circumstances. Hence affairs. The powerful effect of limerence can justify emotional and sexual affairs. It's not just physical (well it is, but we generally don't consider emotions "physical"); that emotional drive is extremely powerful. Far more powerful than growing "comfortable" with a partner you've had for 8 years.
>>11079580
>>11079580
www.reddit.com/r/malefashionadvice
for serious
>>11079756
This is the line of thinking that is seen dominated by those who were children of the late 80's. They were the first to see masculinity die off, hence they value masculinity by what you are and what you have instead of who you are. All it takes to be a man today is to drive a V8 muscle car, shoot machine guns, work out, and fuck. Nevermind that the man is a sell-out, snitches on his friends, doesn't tell the truth, has no integrity or faith, is not honest to himself, isn't a man of his word, doesn't care for his fellow man, and never provides for his children, that bullshit doesn't matter anymore. This is the kind of off branded McCarthyism identity "us vs them" ideology that drives the collective intelligence of a community down the shitter. Look at each decade movie star icon, and you can see how the true definition if being a man diminished over time.
The 60's
James Bond, carries a tiny Walther, knows how to talk and negotiate effectively through linguistic prowess.
The 70's
Dirty Harry
Grunts and scowls but still talks. Solves his problems through a 44 magnum.
The 80's
Rambo
Completely devoid of any communicative skills. Rugged and carries an extremely large M60.
The 90's
Terminator
A robot devoid of any humanity that utters 6 words at most. Carries an instant kill shotgun, only turns good out of virtue due to programming.
So yeah OP, keep pairing masculinity to what clothing you wear or how you "appear" to be masculine, instead of practicing the value of being a man. Your grandfather would never give two shits about what to wear, or what other women or men thought of him in terms of masculinity.
TL;DR you're a nu-male.
>>11079920
Romance novels have always been the most popular type of books for young women; literally for hundreds of years. It has nothing to do with looks. It's a romantic fantasy of the perfect guy who is inexplicably interested in you, despite obviously having better options, and is willing to commit himself to your well-being. A bad boy who is willing to stick around.
>>11079936
>Romance novels have always been the most popular type of books for young women
not true. stacy on the cheerleading team does not read 'romance novels' even if romance novels are the most popular type of book for young women, most young women don't read books
>>11079807
Of course it's an asian girl getting a beta boyfriend in that pic. Asian women are known to hardcore cuck their boyfriends and be demanding, entitled bitches.
>An eyewitness said: 'He told her she already had enough shoes, more shoes that she could wear in a
lifetime and it was pointless buying any more.
>'She started shouting at him accusing him of being a skinflint and of spoiling Christmas, it was a really heated argument.'
>The shouting match ended when the man chucked the bags on the floor and jumped over the balcony, smashing into Christmas decorations on his way down before hitting the floor seven storeys below causing shocked shoppers to flee in panic.
>>11079925
Applying the logic of evolution and biology completely ignore the fact that humans have the ability to not act based purely on instinctual drives. It really just doesn't work. I can desire something but not have it if I know that is bad for me or for someone else I care about as can women. Human intelligence and social norms have far more influence on behavioural outcomes and even what is desirable in modern society than any kind of biological or evolutionary drive.
>>11079841
True.
Women would be more willing to fuck a masculine dyke than a beta male
>>11079947
Logic exists only to justify emotional drives. Even in scenarios where the emotional drive is unclear, logic is merely its smokescreen. See: research on emotion and logic that breaks down the usual pattern humans use when justifying their emotions:
Often, a researcher will do something like ask a participant what their view on incest is. The researcher will be trained to cancel out any legitimate protest the participant could have to incest (what about defects? they would use birth control. what about abuse? that wouldn't be a factor) and the participant will eventually fall away, flustered at their inability to defend their inherent revulsion to incest.
The same can be demonstrated in other disgust reactions: a researcher will offer a participant a glass of juice with a roach in it. The roach is, as the researcher points out, completely sterilized. Most people will still refuse to drink the glass.
Logic only evolved because it helped humans explore their inherent desires. Logic in vacuum doesn't work. Emotions still undergird your willingness to be socially accepted, for example, even if you feel a strong instinctual drive to engage in a taboo. Your logic isn't overriding your behavior; it's merely interacting with and placing your desire to be socially accepted (for your own survival and access to resources) above your more basal desires.
>>11079965
>Logic exists only to justify emotional drives.
Obviously. Enclosed is a perfect example. The logic exists only so that my emotions are fulfilled. I would literally break down in tears if NOR worked like NAND.
>>11079940
you think TV dramas are different? Dawsons Creek and The OC and shit doesn't have brooding, hunks?
>>11079965
The reasons for something existing need not have any kind of connection to their function or usage. Even if I accept that logic evolved on the basis that it did none of your argument necessarily follows. Just as an aside if you place any faith in psychological research you should really re-evaluate what you think you know anyway. The majority of findings in psychological research aren't even replicable and in terms of publication bias it is the worst field there is.
>>11079984
who watches dawsons creek? grills watch gossip girl
and like twink guys like young leo and that kid from donnie darko
>>11080006
>lol tryhard dadcore faggot
... is what /fa/ cries when they see pictures like that.
>>11079580
the fedora lounge
>>11080002
The state of research in psychology notwhistanding, it's still better to form a worldview on the best available, empirical evidence.
Logic is a tool of the human animal. Why would it ever be anything else? There's no reasonable scenario where that could be the case. You're a biological machine, your "purpose" is imputed to you through emotional drives.
Yet still, my argument follows from basic reason. You can't actually produce an application of logic that doesn't have an emotional component. To do so would be nonsensical. Cases where you feel your logic overrides your emotion is just hierarchical. My emotion is to have sex. I want to have sex with drunk girl. My logic says "don't do that!". Why? Because society would sanction me for it, and because I've evolved the capacity for self-delusion known as "morality", so as to help me adhere to social norms and conventions. The implicit "my own well-being" drive is still there. That isn't logical. Logically, there's no reason for you to exist. Emotionally, you want to exist, you want to be happy, etc.
>>11080009
He doesn't dress like that in his actual life i assume.
Those are the clothes they wear on set
>>11080014
>You can't actually produce an application of logic that doesn't have an emotional component. To do so would be nonsensical.
2+2=4
You really are one dumb motherfucker.
>>11080017
And that's the guy girls fawn over when watching that show.
>>11079934
>posting a well thought-out, cohesive and structured argument discussing interesting ideas
You don't belong on /fa/, dude
>>11080025
Our capacity for mathematics is a tool that evolved to effect our environment because effecting our environment maximized our ability to realize our emotional drives.
Can you really see nothing but what's two feet in front of your face?
>>11080038
>application of logic that doesn't have an emotional component
Mathematics as a discipline is an application of logic that does not have an emotional component much of it is completely abstract. The usage is removed completely from your supposed reason for the capacity evolving. It only serves to prove my point that the reasons for a such a capacity existing need not have any relation logically to the usage. You can try shoehorn it in to your worldview with any kind of mental gymnastics you like though just realise you sound retarded.
>>11080051
You seem to have a learning disability. The reason was provided and you simply discarded it.
Read The Blank Slate by Pinker and reevaluate your worldview.
>>11080051
This. Algebraic formulas applied to macroeconomics can't count the emotional factor involved with fear and panic involved within stock investors.
>>11080097
I didn't argue with your reason. I was pointing out that it is indeed an application of logic without an emotional component. The reason and usage are not the same things. You can say mathematics evolved for an emotional purpose, that does not justify the claim that all applications of that capacity have an emotional component. Especially when it is so clear they do not. The capacity might exist for some such reason, the application of that capacity does not necessarily follow from it though. A fork may have been created to pick up food from my plate but I can also use it to stab someone in the eye.
>>11080034
Hah yeah anon I know I don't belong here, but I still come hoping it changes. I made two image dump threads early this year in hopes it would inspire better quality threads and a helpful dose of self-improvement to most people here, but I still haven't seen the fruits of that harvest.
>>11080113
>I was pointing out that it is indeed an application of logic without an emotional component. The reason and usage are not the same things. You can say mathematics evolved for an emotional purpose, that does not justify the claim that all applications of that capacity have an emotional component
Again, your argument is hinged on the fallacious assumption that human behavior is coherent without an emotional component. All of your behavior has an emotional impetus. Applications of logic have an emotional impetus. It is impossible for you to be acting on something without an emotional impetus. That impetus may be convoluted and hard to grasp, but it will always be there.
QED: You replying to me. Emotional impetus.
Just look at some pictures of high ranking nazis, they had some good suits.
Look at some pictures of Europeans and European descendent countries like Aussie and Murica before the 1960's in general and you should have a good time.
>>11080137
All you have really said here is "you are wrong because you are arguing with me" in more words. Not really even worth going on with this to be honest. Just another one of those people on 4chan that isn't even having a discussion just espousing whatever tripe they have read, genuinely believing they are smarter and more knowledgeable than everyone else because of that.
>>11080157
The conclusion is so intuitive that I have no idea why you're struggling with it. Obviously, human behavior needs a cause.
If we were to pare down the discussion, think of a theoretical AI. This AI would be a true AI in that there would be no programmed instructions for it to follow. How could we go about structuring or creating such an entity? How could we give it the ability to function in vacuum of a reason to function? For humans, that reason is the fulfillment of our emotional desires and the release of pleasurable chemicals. If the AI had no reason to be that undergirded its behavior, it would likely be non functional. Such an entity is completely non-nonsensical to even conceive of. All behavior needs inherent impetus, because the actions of intelligent beings make no sense otherwise.
A human is a self-contained DNA bomb. It isn't a logical exercise.
>>11079703
2muchideology4me
Being this concerned about your masculinity and looking masculine is insecurity and, in itself, not masculine.
>>11080179
This isn't a thread about how to be inherently masculine, it's a thread about pretending to be masculine.
>>11080173
You see I have made an argument attacking your premise and your response was "my premise is true therefore your argument is false" rather than addressing the argument itself. There is no basis for discussion there if you are unable to demonstrate how the argument is false an must fall back to that. You appear to me to have a weak understanding of the view you are taking and thus are unable to apply it thoroughly.
>>11080193
My argument isn't circular; I've demonstrated it theoretically and proposed a Bayesian approach to why I am likely to be correct. You've done nothing except make an asinine "2+2 =4 lmao" quip that belied a learning disability and haven't given anybody a reason to take you seriously.
>>11080182
Which is even more pathetic then not being masculine.
>>11079756
Man this fucking place sometimes
>>11080204
But your appraisal isn't at stake in this thread. Why would anyone be concerned with your platonic metaphysic of "true" masculinity?
Check out Alpha M on youtube. Forget the cringey name, he provides a lot of great help on how to act and look like a man. It's not the best channel on youtube, but it's a damn good one.
>>11080220
I don't like Italian people.
>>11080200
You haven't demonstrated in any sense at all that the purpose of a tool existing should have any logical implications as to how it is applied, and if that isn't the case it is quite clear that a tool evolved for some emotional reason can have applications that are without emotional components. It can be the case that it could be applied with emotional components but the only justification you can give for why it must always be is to fall back to the original premise of "everything human behavioural is emotional" every time.
>>11080209
If you want to try to dress up as something you are not be my guest. You can lie to everyone if you want. Just don't end up lying to yourself.
>>11080229
Are you stuck on repeat or something? Stop saying the same dumb things. I'm not going to make the same posts over and over. If you don't understand them; fine. That's called a learning disability. It has nothing to do with me.
>>11080233
>I can't prove my point without resorting to circular reasoning therefore you have learning disabilities.
Ok friend I thought as much.
If you like the Mad Men look, your best bet is to browse instagram for some inspiration.
https://www.instagram.com/thefinerycompany/
https://www.instagram.com/notorious_niels/
https://www.instagram.com/beijing1980/
https://www.instagram.com/chad_park_/
https://www.instagram.com/stevecalder/
>>11079580
>Is there a website or community where I can go for masculine fashion advice?
>A lot of you seem like total faggots/numales. I don't want to be cuckolded, so I don't feel like I fit in.
Here you go OP #menswear non-cuck, alpha male inspo: http://imgur.com/a/4MR6z
>>11079580
"in praise of the overcoat"
>>11079580
>>11079580
and thats why dadcore it's autistic as fuck
LMAO!
why not just make a "masculine" thread?
>>11080461
dadcore-ers don't have any rationality. they are just here to shitpost over & over how "alpha" they are.
>>11079756
tldr
>>11079665
This dude autistic or something?
>>11080524
tldr is that anon is a beta faggot who ate up all the bullshit they feed people in /r9k/, /pol/ & /fit/:
"generalizing, generalizing, generalizing. fuck logic, people don't have different tastes, everyone must like the same shit BY NATURE" broscience, etc. It's bullshit.
>>11080548
Ur a faggot lmao
>>11080552
no you're your tread a shit reeks of the /r9k/ beliefs. thats why you're a loser your way of thinking is sperg af.
not a bad thread op
shame you never your house
>>11080560
It was bait dont worry
Also spoilers: this whole thread is bait
>>11079965
>Logic exists only to justify emotional drives.
oh the irony
>>11079580
Just get a gq at that point.
>>11079870
you've never dated
>>11079580
idk, i guess if u wanna talk about ur Huge Amounts of Insecurity you could go to a psychiatrist
>>11080607
/thread
go home everyone
>>11079899
HOLY SHIT
this guy is fuckin hilarious. its like he's doing a parody of an autist with an overblown view of their own intelligence and importance
>>11079756
I didn't read this, but from the sheer amount of replies alone i knew there was some real quality autism in this post
reddit.com/r/navyblazer
>>11079580
don draper is literal fag-core these days dude
hate to break it to you
most under 40s dude bros wear joggers, long line tees and flat brims
oh boy these kind of thread again !! I wonder who is behind these post..
>>11079810
>Bodybuilders aren't masculine. They're insecure and you implicitly know as such.
you are going to make me throw up, have fun looking like a twink and a child faggot
picture related, this is what a man looks like
>>11080548
>just bee yourself
>>11080137
Please stop, your point made sense the whole way through he's never going to get it
>>11082105
>quality girls liking masculine men
ahahhaahahahhahahahahahahhaha
>>11082298
assuming thats a quality girl
>>11079906
>and by that rational if I myself wouldn't cheat on my girl with a 9/10 even though I would get aroused by her, neither will she.
ssssyeahhh... that may be the dumbest thing said on the internet so far today.
you realize that's the equivalent of saying "if i can't see them, they can't see me...", right?
it doesn't matter how faithful you are, your woman can still cheat on you my friend. for your sake, please do not try to apply this "logic" to real life
>>11081996
>Le ebin hellenism meme
You know that even back than it was a romanticized depiction of the male body
It is true that women go for more masculine alpha 5'oclock shadow type of guys.
However, it mostly depends on the girls age.
Most of /fa/ are people in their late teens,go to a high school where girls are not yet looking for providing alpha males,but for a cute boy.
So there is no point in wearing #alphamenswear bullshit while in highschool, relax and wait until you grow older, you will wish you could go back.
Try reddit maybe?
It is full of insecure manchildren so I imagine "masculinity" playing a larger roll in their fashion boards.
>>11082314
u srs?
>>11082416
disgusting
>>11082417
you love gooks don't you weeaboo?
>>11082422
No, but your picture really is disgusting.
>>11082424
your girl is hotter?
>>11082429
She looks better in that picture, but I don't see what's so special about her. She's pouting her lips? She looks fake.
>>11082433
are you a woman? she is objectively a top tier ball drainer. i can't imagine there are many women that look better than this
>>11082371
This. Unless you're like 25 and about to start working in a more professional field than McDonalds, stick to streetwear.
>tfw only saying that 'cause I'm 26 and dressing like a dadcore fucker
>>11082433
>She looks fake
Obviously a butthurt girl.
>>11082443
What's so good about her? Her drawn on eyebrows? How she's permanently pouting her lips? How she makes the same face in every picture? pleb
>>11082416
>>11082429
>>11082443
She looks like a vapid airhead. Like fake plastic. Nothing of true value.
>>11080396
>this guys thumb
every teim ayyy lmao
>>11082449
>>11082458
stay mad ladies
>>11082371
No. No. No no no.
In America, kids have been growing up much faster than in the rest of the world.
12-15 girls want a "cuteboy".
Starting sophomore year of high school and that changes. The oldest/most masculine looking jocks get the most pussy.
At my particular school, all the girls had a huge crush on a gym teacher. He was at least 35 but very handsome, 5 o'clock shadow and everything.
I still sleep with a lot of girls from my old high school, I'm 20 and most say I look 25.
The "numale", feminine, metrosexual thing really did have it's run from 2005ish until recently. But now the pendulum is swinging back towards masculinity. Even in high school.
And of course, plenty of women are still interested in that numale stuff. But those same women are enthralled when confronted by raw masculine sexuality.
>>11082443
That's an average looking girl who's going to town with makeup and filters.
Here's a picture of a girl with real, raw beauty. On the beach, unfiltered. Little makeup, not playing with angles or anything.
Someone just came up and snapped this picture. As opposed to the meticulous planning that went into yours.
Your girl is like SPAM. Canned ham
>>11082482
>little makeup
yeah.
>>11082482
>Little makeup
you can't genuinely believe this. this girl puts maximum effort into her appearance
>>11082482
>>11082482
Actually, looks like she isn't wearing any makeup.
Man guys like you >>11082466
who fall for the false promises of instagram beauty are really sad and probably lonely.
I know enough of those girls irl to be able to tell the difference between instagram hot and actually hot.
A 7 can become a 10 on instagram with a pale filter to hide blemishes. A ton of makeup besides that. Squinting her eyes to get that "model look" and pouting her lips slightly to make her cheeks thinner and more prominent...
Shit is so fake and yet dudes buy into it every time.
Please. For your own health. Compare that fabricated chick to the one I posted. She's not even wearing eye shadow. She's not making unnatural facial expressions to look more hot. There's no filters to help her look more hot. She just is.
Learn from this
>>11082497
>maximum effort
That's why she totally forgot to do her eyes?
See that's the problem with trying to get anything out of you chan-user types. Most of you hardly see girls irl so you don't even know what you're looking at.
Or what to look for. Her under eyes are a dead giveaway. She's basically wearing no makeup. Maybe some on her cheeks.
Besides, she looks far better than chalk-face and she achieves that with far less manipulation of her real self.
That's the point
>>11082498
>really sad and probably lonely
nice projection, you sound sad that no guy cares about your 'natural beauty'
its kind of like when bakeries try to sell their ugliest pastries by calling them 'artisan'
>>11082506
You really want my dick pics don't you? I'm a dude, bird brain
>>11082506
>when bakeries try to sell their ugliest pastries by calling them 'artisan'
>>11082512
this is the girl you just posted.
tell me this woman is a natural beauty one more time
>>11082524
not to mention shes 22 and looks 35-40
this thread kinda reminds me of Kanji from p4
>>11082524
Compared to the chalkboard you just posted? Hell yes.
I think she's still hotter than the girl you posted, who is basically a round faced blur with nice hair. And she's hotter, or as hot, with way less effort.
How is this even a contest? You're putting some pancake batter screw face and I'm putting up a girl who barely touches her face and they're within striking distance of each other yet you think the one who labors for her looks is winning?
How old are you? How many girls have you fucked that you met online? How many hot girls do you know personally? Are you old enough to use tinder? Have you even heard of snapchat?
>>11079580
>numales
>cuckolded
when will these shitty /pol/ memes end
>>11082553
>barely touches her face
you're so delusional its hysterical
you honestly think she wakes up like this?She's a model, she has some of the best makeup artists in the world painting her face.
she puts in just as much effort and still looks like a horse
You guys do realize there is such a thing as 'natural make-up', where you can't tell a girl is actually using any because, as the name implies, it's mean to look extremely natural.
>>11082647
no one here has ever seen a woman in real life
>>11082469
I kinda agree with you. For the most part of highschool I was a "cuteboy"
When I went to college,I started noticing that girls are more into masculine guys.
So start lifting when you go to college, and stop wearing niggstreetwear
>>11082469
>america
>>11082469
In europe its just cuteboys until the second year of college,then they start craving actual men.
>>11082559
fuck off go suck hillary dick
>>11082416
stop putting girls on pedestals off of looks alone man.
