>Women require a man to have stunning looks and earning a

men care about looks, women care about salary.
we're all superficial anon. but the thing is eventually we'll all settle.

>>25760409
This is fucking bullshit.

The key difference is that men have a set of preferences. Some men like short chicks, some men like tall chicks. Some men like big boobs, others like small boobs. The thing to note is that these are PREFERENCES, meaning a man won't disregard a woman purely for not meeting his preference right out of the gate.

Women on the otherhand have a set of requirements. That's why you see so much of this
>when his height starts with 5
bullshit.

>>25760327
I can't wait for this shit to backfire on women.

Sure, being alone when we're 40+ sucks, but at least we'll have hobbies and shit to occupy our time. For every foreveralone or MGTOW, that means it's one less woman getting married. Since women have no interests, they'll be left bitter and alone with nothing but time to think about why they're spinsters.

>>25760475
i bet your EI isn't very good.

>>25760327
>>Women require a man to have stunning looks and earning a six figure salary to be considered "adequate" dating material
Or maybe women can become attracted to guys whos personality they become familiar with, as opposed to guys who only care about looks?
Fucking shallow men
not to mention the fact that 99% of the men on dating sites are desperate as fuck (and for a reason)

>>25760475
This.
Men have preferences, women have requirements.

>>25760327
>tfw poor student
>tfw 5'9"
>tfw non model-tier looks
>tfw still gf

Where is your god now?

Also
>tfw feminist gf with reasonable views

>>25760623

>tfw you'll never find metric and strangle her to death

>>25762016
>Guy: I love big boobs!
>Roastie: REEEEE NOT ALL GIRLS HAVE BIG TITS YOU PIG
>Guy: The fuck?
Fucking roasties man, they just don't get it.

>>25762123

Because they mistakenly think men look at women the same way women look at men. To them, a man saying "I love big boobs" means he won't date a girl without big boobs since a woman who says "I love tall guys" won't date manlets.

>>25762079
>feminist
>reasonable views
I don't get it. Which one is it?

File: girlies.jpg (121KB, 980x798px) Image search: [Google]

121KB, 980x798px

>not having a fake account on one of these sites where you can crush women's self-esteem, experiment to see what does and doesn't work, or generally fuck around with them

Fun 2bh. Some of the chicks that go on these sites are so dumb that they thought Ezio Auditore from Assassin's Creed was a real person when someone made a profile for him as a joke.

>>25760497
This is my plan too obviously, but to be honest you could give a woman 1000 years to ponder it she will never critically self reflect and learn anything from the experience. She'll just get sassy and mouthy and get cats and settle into a life of mediocrity.

File: smugpepe.jpg (19KB, 600x550px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 600x550px

>>25760327

Wait a minute

>12%
>5%
>2%
>0% (Probably around 1%)
>12+5+2+1= 20%
>20% of men fucking 80% of women

R9K IS ALWAYS RIGHT

File: womenlogic2.jpg (135KB, 618x664px) Image search: [Google]

135KB, 618x664px

>>25760497

That is one thing I think most guys forget, especially on /r9k/. When these women hit their forties SO many of them are gonna lose their looks and they're gonna find themselves catapulted into a world they have absolutely on preparation for.

Pic related was from the actress Gillian Anderson, who's now 47. The funny thing is she's still very attractive, but it gets to her so much that men don't wipe her ass for her as much as they used to that she actually keeps a mental record of how many men have done shit for her without her asking them. Apparently 3 men in two months is a horrendous number.

>>25762157
It's mostly because they can't stand the thought of another women being better than them.

>>25760409
Nah, it's more like like this:
50% of women are lucky enough be the wife of the alphachad.
50% of the rest of women will be the the single mom mistress to the alphachad possibly also enslaving a beta provider cvck afterwards

50% of men are alpha chads and have a wife + mistress on the side
50% of get nothing at all or become a beta provider cvck.

This is a oversimplification of things but you get the point.

>>25762096

Bet that up.

When the beta uprising happens all the shitty tripfags will be first to go.

File: Female-Messaging-Curve.png (13KB, 381x313px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 381x313px

>>25762225
And the weird fucking part is that despite this, women still are messaging those they deem less attractive. More proof how fucking irrational they are when it comes to dealing with men.

>>25762162
It's actually both, have a few ecxepts:
>women wishing to work a certain job should be held to the same standards as the men
>women working less (efficiently) should be paid less accordingly
>disagrees with most of third wave's definitions of rape (so far the only one she agreed to was "it's still rape if she doesn't fight back physically")

Also, she's ok with me basically mooching off of her salary for the while being (until I receive my Bachelor's and get a job).

>>25762187
D-Do I need a phone? I don't have one and this looks like a shit ton of fun.

>>25760327
You morons need to fucking stop reposting that OkC data without the rest of the article. It L I T E R A L L Y contradicts what you are saying, but you actively choose to ignore it because it doesn't support your bias.

Anyone who wants to post those stupid graphs needs to read the fucking article.
http://blog.okcupid.com/index.php/your-looks-and-online-dating/
>Site-wide, two-thirds of male messages go to the best-looking third of women.
>when it comes to actual messaging, women shift their expectations only just slightly ahead of the curve, which is a healthier pattern than guys' pursuing the all-but-unattainable

Reminder that arbitrary ratings based on photos are absolutely meaningless compared to how they actually message people.

>>25762354
It's not irrational at all. Only the most unattractive women have to send ANY messages at all. And they usually shoot for targets they (think) can hit.

>>25762354
How is that irrational? Are you just coming up with any fucking excuse to act like women are at fault? Here's some rationality for you
>looks aren't everything to a woman and it can easily be compensated for by a good profile or message
>ratings aren't an accurate reflection of how attractive you really find someone because you have no real reference point, and it's easy to be overly harsh when you're distanced from the subject

>>25762403
That isn't really the point at all...
The point is that women have literally no comprehension of how levels of attractiveness work. It shows they literally believe the only 20% of men are average/attractive.

>>25762096
>>25762338
lel @ robots who cant come up with a valid counterargument because you know its true

>>25762442

>looks aren't everything
Technically true, Money and Dick size matters, also social status

> it's easy to be overly harsh when you're distanced from the subject

Women are harsh by nature. They need to find Alpha Genetics as quick as possible. You don't need to worry about a beta bucks until you're 30+

>>25762187

This is my hobby.

There's really nothing quite like impersonating a Chad on these sites where women are used to obsequious masses of groveling guys showering them with compliments and putting in all the effort reading profiles and moving the conversation along. Bluntly rejecting them when they message me, or ending the correspondence politely (as if trying to save her feelings) after she says something bring me so much joy. My favorite was arranging a date and then standing her up, and messaging her afterwards saying I left because she didn't look anything like her profile pics and I was just too disappointed by the dishonesty (filters and effects are very common now in women's pics that make them look much better than they are). And this was after several days of conversation and seeming to really "connect".

>>25762481
No, everyone is overly harsh when they're given a wealth of choice (for comparison) and no direct contact with who they're shit talking. That's why 4chan is full of '2/10 wouldn't bang' posts about attractive girls and why people are so harsh about celebrities looks despite them making a living off their appearance.

And you can't necessarily tell someone's dick size, social status or money through online dating. Having a clever, funny profile or message is necessary to stand out.

>>25762524
>No, everyone is overly harsh when they're given a wealth of choice (for comparison)

Yes, women are given a wealth of choice by virtue of being women.

> Having a clever, funny profile or message is necessary to stand out.

Really doesn't change the fact all women want Chad Thundercock.

>>25760623
>Or maybe women can become attracted to guys whos personality they become familiar with
So beta orbiters really have a chance?
>as opposed to guys who only care about looks
Then why do ugly girls still have an easy time finding men? Why do men EVER marry girls over age 20 when studies have show they vastly prefer 20 year old women? Men have preferences but they're far more likely to ditch them than women.

>>25760497
nah, the femwhores taking over big daddy government will just legalize bigamy/polygamy or enact a bachelor tax on men so we get fucked either way

>>25762524
To be fair, online dating leans heavily towards physical attractiveness.

Social status and money can be gleaned somewhat from hobbies and types of pictures taken. I think I heard that guys get better results when using pictures showing off expensive hobbies and cars.

Oh and yes, height also matters. I think women use a point system or something and then add up all stats from each category and see if it's past her acceptable threshold.

>>25760497
sucks for women because only fuckboys want them in this point in time. Men are just tired of being treated as disposable utility in marriage so they go their own way.

>>25762523

ugh ive been stood up by an online date as a robot and honestly, senpai, fuck you.

>>25762585

>feminazis pass bachelor tax
>find another robot and have a sham gay marriage to avoid the tax

Thanks for fighting so hard for my tax dodge loophole, libfags

>>25760409
women don't care about salary

don't be a fool. just because you make a lot of women won't want to get fucked by you. You will be the provider while she gets dicked by chad (the truck driver)

>>25763223
>find another robot and have a real gay marriage to avoid the tax

:3c

>>25763658

>find another robot, feminize (or feminize him) and pretend it's not a gay marriage

File: 73e2929acc407177736cee7a0d09cabd.png (66KB, 207x186px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 207x186px

>>25763658
>w-we just live together and sleep in the same bed and have a shared bank account but it's just to escape the tax hehe we're not gay