Why do I get rated as a 5 by guys and as a 6/7 by girls in /soc/?
Women are physically impossible to see a man below 8/10 (don't have the picture,someone post if have please) do they just use random numbers for below rated guys. They don't even see you.
>>27391005
They are trying to be nice to you and will do what >>27391128 said.
In truth their brain works in a boleean way, Is he Chad tier? if yes "give him a 8/10 or higher" If not "give some random number that's not too low else he will think I'm a bitch and I want everyone to love/orbit me"
>>27391128
Not sure which picture you're talking about, but here's the Okcupid study "Your Looks And Your Inbox" that proves that women rate 80% of males as unattractive, where as men only rated 40% of females as unattractive. This basically means that only the top 20% of males get to enjoy dating and happiness, where as 60% of women (the majority) get to enjoy dating and happiness, along with the added bonus of having guys ask them out, initiate and pay for dates, lead the conversation, make every escalation, etc.
Honestly, I'm extremely glad Okcupid released this study. There's no other study that proves how utterly fucked life is for young males (aside from the one that shows males are anywhere from four to ten times more likely to successfully kill themselves.)
>>27391005
I don't know, fuck off back to /soc/ and ask them.
>>27391186
There are dozens of studies like this, anon.
Stop limiting your education to what social media shits out at you and read a fucking book for once in your life.
>>27391186
>okcupid
>study
Lmao. More like a pseudo-study
>>27391254
>i don't know basic statistics
okay retard, some people actually do
>>27391201
Can you link to those studies? I know obviously there are some youtube/anecdotal ones but I really like the Okcupid one since they're fairly reputable. Also, the "read a fucking book" comment seems really out of place, I've read plenty of books but none with studies on dating or what it's like to suffer as a young male in a society that completely abandons you.
>>27391186
> proves that women WHO USE OKCUPID rate 80% of males WHO ARE ON OKCUPID as unattractive
FTFY
>Get rated a 7.5 on /soc/
>A girls asks for my contact info
>Chicken out
>>27391281
I suggest you read more on topics of human behaviour and psychology. These well known attributes of human male selection have been taught to first and second year psychology 101 and 201 classes for over a decade.
>>27391281
There's a major factor of attractiveness that Okcupid and similar sites can't actually count for though, seeing as you don't meet the person before you decide if they're attractive.
Charisma is a major factor to attractiveness in real life, I mean, it's an extreme, but there's literally cult leaders that have harems of people who'd do literally anything for them, and most are pretty average or below.
Don't use online sites for measures of if you can meet someone in real life, they're only useful for those sites, or for "No, I don't find x feature physically attractive", like height or something like that (there's a great height one floating around from one of these sites though).
>>27391517
Ah, gotcha. Never took any psych classes, though I am a bit familiar with evolutionary psychology. It's neat how attraction is the subconscious indicator of the quality of another person's genetics, almost like having a brainchip DBZ scouter, and every organism is biologically hardwired for survival and replication. Even such things as anxiety exist solely to improve chances of survival. This probably sounds goofy, but I think it's amazing how many emotions can be explained by psychology.
