If girls are "less visual" than men why does my 6'1

>>18509608
Girls are less responsive to visual cues than men when it comes to sexual arousal, not completely immune to attractive guys.

>>18509608
>when a betamale tries to pick up women on /adv/
This is pathetic OP

>>18509608
>"get him to open up"
its just a way in OP after shaking their tits and ass in front of him and he didn't make a move. They want him, he hasn't taken their bait so they try another tactic.

>>18509616
On simpler, non female terms.
Personality is whatever an attractive guy has.

Just the same as confidence is whatever an attractive guy has and interesting is whatever an attractive guy does.

It is no different between guys and girls, in fact id honestly say men are LESS visual than women once they get to know the girl. I've seen many more ugly girls with good looking guys than the inverse.
The only real difference is that men aren't gigantic hypocrites over it.

Of course, it must be the height and nothing else. If you were 6'3" you'd be getting endless pussy.

Or, maybe, he's just better than you in every way, and you are an ugly boring sperglord.

>>18509629
Maybe he is. They would have no way to know since he almost doesn't talk, though.
Obviously since he's tall they make the effort of getting him to talk, while somebody like me gets ignored, though.

>>18509626
There are studies about this thing, it's not just like something that people post on social media to appear deep and in touch with their feelings and not shallow. It is neurology, not social science.
Sexual arousal is different in males and females. Men get aroused because of what they see, women get aroused because of what they feel.

Sure, an attractive partner is great for both men and women. Sure, we tend to let attractive people get away with things we don't let ugly people get away with. Sure, if you are unattractive you're going to have to work harder to get a partner.
But women don't really get wet from looking at a hot guy in the same way guys get hard looking at a hot girl.

I've rarely heard girls say that looks don't matter at all and they'd date a fat, disgusting neck beard if he was a good guy. Looks matter to an extent, for everyone.

>>18509626
Stop.

You don't know many girls. You haven't spoken to many girls. You haven't spent time with many girls. You do not get to speak as an expert on their behaviors.

>>18509639
Neither has you. Neither has anyone, compares to the human population. Good thing we can use induction to extract hypotheses.

>>18509636
It doesn't work like that. Or rather, it works like that due to a process that men don't have.

When men see an attractive woman, they want to plant a baby in her. That's it, they see hips, tiddy and a flat stomach and want to tap that, very simple.
When woman see an attractive male, they want him to plant a baby. However due to how much investment the mother has in raising a children, the male needs to have certain psychological qualities. Therefore the woman projects these qualities on the male and rationalizes her attraction to him on these grounds. This is why "they're less visual", they're just as visual but they just project some qualities. This is why you hear about bad boys with a heart of gold or how he's so kind inside and shit.

It's basically the halo effect. If you're an attractive male a woman WILL find these positive psychological qualities on you no matter what you do.

hes handsome
you arent

height matters the least of all things
Tom Cruise is a manlet
Tom Hardy is a manlet

these 2 could bang every chick on the planet

>>18509654
Again, great mental gymnastic, but it is simply not true.

Women are aroused mostly by sensations, feelings, situations. I'm not saying that women are aroused by a nice personality and touch themselves to videos of charity donations, I'm saying that women are aroused by things like dominance, safety, intimacy, and such things. Sure, women are *also* attracted by looks, but it's not the predominant factor as it is for males.

>>18509654
That doesn't explain why despite countless attempts of the porn industry to reel them in, women still do not consume as much porn as men, whereas written erotica is still primarily consumed by women.

Also there are qualities that at least have to do with personality (talent/success, intelligence, dominance) that are flat out sexy to women, no ifs or buts. Sure golddiggers are a thing but there have been many famous men who weren't exactly good looking (Sartre?) but were crazily popular with women. Leonard Cohen was perhaps the past century's biggest ladies man and it wasn't because he was so good looking. Visual proof if you don't buy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ps7ECO0MxJ0

Women care about looks (including reading positive shit into someone just for being hot) but not as much as men do.

>>18509662
And I am saying that those are true but are projected almost exclusively onto attractive guys no matter if they actually have said qualities or not. Women are masters of doublethink in this.


>>18509669
Porn is marketed towards men period. The entire focus of porn is the penetration and the huge dick little girl dichotomy.

Also you can't bring status into it really, money and status buys everything in the world.

Women care as much about looks as men do, men are just more honest about it. Men also care about emotions, being kindhearted, compassionate, motherly etc, they just are honest about their attraction to physique.

>>18509686
>Porn is marketed towards men period.
This isn't the case anymore. It's still the majority but anyone who really wants to can find porn oriented towards women. Not just x-art but also feminist initiatives with more storyline, more eating out, normal looking guys and girls etc. Still not a success. Women just don't want it.

>money and status buys everything in the world
Except that there is no female Leonard Cohen. Look at a crazy talented artist like Janis Joplin who had money, status, and skills to the point where as a man she's be drowning in groupies. But she had an extremely hard time dating seriously because she was an ugly woman.

>men are just more honest about it
No because as the porn example shows, or even the very fact of eye candy for women not really being a thing like the trillions of professional semi-lewd pictures of pretty women, that it is not just displayed in their statements but also in what they look up in their free time and so on.

>>18509686
>And I am saying that those are true but are projected almost exclusively onto attractive guys no matter if they actually have said qualities or not.
Yes, and you're wrong.
There are plenty of men who have those personality traits and there's no need to project them. Bad boys are hot because they are dominant. Artists are hot because they are in touch with their feelings. Crazies are hot because they are vulnerable and you feel close to them.

I'm not saying that looks don't play any role, but I'm saying that they play a much larger role in male's attraction than they do in female's attraction.

I have been attracted to people who were unattractive physically or personality wise because of the way they made me feel. I had a huge crush on a ugly dude for months, I was crazy for a complete sociopath even if I knew he was one because he was so good at manipulating me.

>>18509694
The amount of "feminist" porn is completely small compared to regular male oriented porn. And anyway women do consume porn, but women also are more likely to be in relationships, have a lot more toys at their disposal and have a much easier time getting casual sex so it makes sense that they don't consume as much.

Janis Joplin is a lousy example. Not only was she cute in her special way(again, status, she'd be a plain girl otherwise), she had lots of partners and I'm pretty sure she was drowning on male groupies too.

Eye candy for women isn't a thing? Please, there is eye candy for women everywhere, but it's usually subtler. Again, honesty. We see titty, we like titty. No need for an elaborate plot.

>>18509705
That's what I'm telling you, there have been lots of attempts to reach a female audience. The reason they haven't grown big is because there was not enough interest. Is it that hard to believe in this sex sells consumerist modern time that yes, people have seriously tried to get women to watch porn?
Also
>implying men in relationships don't watch porn

Toys have nothing to do with it. It's about whether you like to get off on fantasy

No. Read up on her because you apparently haven't. She had lovers, sometimes, who wanted to be able to say they got to fuck her. She could not find a man to stay even though she desperately wanted to. The one man who said he was going to marry her ran off. Direct quote: "On stage I make love to 25.000 people, then I go home alone."
Men didn't want her because she wasn't pretty enough. And probably because she was a junk but still, hasn't even stopped women from pursuing men with exceptional gifts.

What eye candy? Going to need concrete examples here. Romantic plots don't care as eye candy, that's the whole point that women like the narrative more than the pictures. Because I for the life of me can't think of anything that can compare to the endless sea of material for men, both porn and screensavers, gifs, still pictures, vintage pictures, lighters with naked women on them and so on.

>We see titty, we like titty. No need for an elaborate plot.
Arguing against yourself here. If women do need a plot to enjoy the sight of a naked man where men don't vice versa, that in itself implies that they are less visual.

>>18509705
Women consume MUCH less porn then men - 75% of visitors on pornhub were men, just 25% were women.
Women are also just as likely to be in a relationship than men (who would they be in a relationship with, trees? the percentages of homosexuals and bisexuals are kind of the same), and have much less casual sex than males on average.

Eye candy for women isn't a thing at the level that eye candy for men is. If you can't admit it, you're dishonest.

>>18509705
Also again man seriously - can you honestly, 100% sincerely imagine that one of the handful of women of an entire century most well known as a sex symbol, supercommon for men to have steamy fantasies about, was a completely average woman visually?

Even Marilyn Monroe is often scoffed at by modern men because she wouldn't be pretty enough to have a status for being hot. When she's at least above average, no two ways about that.

>>18509714
Men in relationships consume porn but men in no relationships consume absurd amounts of porn. Women are usually better adjusted, and yes, toys and ease of casual sex play into it. Most men wouldn't fap if they could just hook up easily.

Probably had to do with the fact she was insane and shooting about 3 thousand bucks of heroin a week too. She still had lovers though, and as I told you, she wasn't forever alone ugly in the slightest. And she was loaded as fuck.

There is a lot more content for men, yes. I haven't said women don't need other things to get them going, I've just said that for those things to get the going THE MAN HAS TO BE ATTRACTIVE as a prerequisite. Men only need the attractiveness. Women need the attractiveness and then more. Hence they're just as visual, but women are pickier.

And in real life relationships, provided the man is attractive, the woman will find all the "personality" she needs him to have to rationalize her attraction.

>usual basement dweller squad argues with eachother

this is why you are virgins, you are so focused on your shit you dont notice the girl drooling over you and then some idiot swoops in and takes her home

>>18509717
This works entirely against you. I wouldn't say 25% of porn is marketed towards women yet 25% of porn users are women.

And again, Marilyn Monroe maybe wasn't that sexy yet she STILL was considered pure sex incarnate thanks to her status and charisma.

>>18509725
>and yes, toys and ease of casual sex play into it.
A woman who has lots of casual sex might hook up with two men a month, racking up say twenty five partners every year. That's a very very above averagely active woman. And still that means there's two weeks without direct sexual stimulation. How long can you ride the high from one orgasm? (Not to mention women of course don't orgasm nearly as easily from one night stands as men to begin with.)
Toys only matter if you think that if the physical sensation is great, then there's no reason anymore to want to think of sex when masturbating.

Most rock stars have a huge habit but they don't have that much trouble finding a partner if that's what they want.

The part about how women needing more than visual stuff just means they're "pickier" and not that visual stuff does less for them is twisting definitions for me. Pickier would be having higher standards. Not finding looks enough is not finding looks enough, period. And that does mean that apparently it does less for you.

I said in the very first post that women care about looks and that if you're a great looking man yes, you can find someone who will date you sure. But that doesn't prove that it matters as much to women. Just like how one man obviously being a golddigger for an old woman doesn't prove that men pull that strategy as often as women. It's selection bias because you only see whatever girl ended up being okay with dating him. How many rejections he's gone through by girls who liked his looks but nothing else is forever invisible.

What is meant by "men being more visual", is that men get turned on by a more varied set of sexual secondary dimorphism.

Big tits, small tits, short, long, puffy nipples, small nipples, big pussy, small pussy, brown hair, blonde hair, thick, petite, snobby, loose, whore, madonna.

While women wants
tall, dark and handsome.

Women are more competitive and they want not only their man to be attractive to them, but that he is also a catch in the eyes of other women. He must be desired by others as well. So they have a smaller list of men that are considered attractive.

>>18509725
No one is arguing that women don't want attractive partners.
We are just arguing that they don't get horny for a hot body, they get horny for the context - the sensations, the feelings that the person gives them. It's not about being picky or projecting qualities on a man, it's about the way a man can make you feel.

Really, there is TONS of scientific literature of the subject. Stop being so stubborn just because you are a women hater.

>>18509608
They are LESS visual, not completely blind.
Same as how men are more willing to overlook small personality traits in favor of a hot bod, but they still aren't going to be anything seriously with a 10/10 psychopath. At least not if they have a shred of dignity and common sense.

>>18509731
>thanks to her status and charisma
Nope, it was a combination of her being cute, lots of media visibility and most of all her being presented as a sex symbol during times when sex was for most middle aged men still part of the marital package. Monroe was presented like a sex nymph who cared about nothing but fun and playing around, which was a stark contrast between the real lives of these men and also something that was at the time rare.

>>18509626
well... i must be male then.. shit.. i tend to forget that robots are fact-gods.

>>18509738
And for a man to provide those sensations he has to be attractive.

Fuck that is my entire point.

The men who provide those "sensations" are all, for some reason, all tall, handsome and fit.

File: 1489967820550.png (290KB, 680x383px) Image search: [Google]

290KB, 680x383px

>>18509748
Well, it's usually because dudes who are good looking are confident. Dudes who are fat sacks of shit and just whine on 4chan tend not to be confident in themselves and result to hating women to cope instead of getting good.

>>18509748
No, he hasn't. He's more likely to attract people if he's also good looking, but it is a much less limiting factor than it is for women.

I personally have been attracted to mediocre looking dudes (even one really ugly guy, who I am completely crushing on right now), a lot of my friends have been. It's not something so rare.

>>18509739
This. OP is probably just repulsive personality-wise AND ugly to boot, so he's understandably mad.

>>18509752
And we're full circle, confidence is whatever an attractive man does.

Glad we finally agree.

>>18509739
Charles Manson got married to a 7/10 at 50 or so years younger

Reminder

>>18509758
Not really. I'm dating a 300lb fat dude who I will say physically is a 4.
But he's confident as shit and floods my panties. So there goes that theory.

>>18509755
Considering women consider 80% of males ugly allow me to remain skeptical.

>>18509762
I am also a 9/10 supermodel dating a wheelchair bound 500 pounds man because he is just soooo confident.

>>18509762
Don't bother, he has constructed his entire reality around "It's not my fault that women don't fuck me, it's the fault of genetics! Also women are shallow as fuck!" He will never acknowledge anything else because it would destroy his ego.

women are just as visual as men tho

>>18509764
I mean you've already proven you just wanna throw yourself a pity party and cry about how you could never possibly be confident in yourself, even though you could with some work and probably some professional help with that mental illness of yours, so I know nothing I can do will convince you.

I'll give, I'm no 10/10 myself. I'm probably around a 6. I could stand to lose around 15-20lbs and have been working on that, but I would still choose my current guy over any 10/10 dude who hated women and was autistic as hell.
>>18509767
Yeah I'm starting to get that, I'm just in class and am way too tired to listen to this woman drone on about Europe in the 1800's. So figure I'll feed the troll for the lulz.

>>18509764
>Considering women consider 80% of males ugly allow me to remain skeptical.
He is very tall, but pretty overweight. He has no shoulders. I'd say he has a 4/10 face.

I'm not amazing but I'm pretty good looking - a 6.5-7/10, I'd say. I'm in shape (130 lbs at 5'8), have curves and a pretty cute face.

I seriously get wet just texting him and had to stop talking to him when he was with his ex because I wanted to seduce him and get him to cheat really badly.

>>18509764
Go back to /r9k/ already. This board is for people who want help, not for bitter whiners who want validation and to wallow in self-pity.

>>18509775
So he's tall, a bit chunky and has a 6/6,5 face. Seems pretty good to me.

>>18509771
Who I am or what I want is irrelevant here. These are stats and facts. Women are more likely to perceive positive qualities in attractive people, these same positive qualities women place so much importance on.

There are loads of studies on the importance women put on height and other factors as well.

Also I am not saying women are shallow, I am saying they're hypocritical. Men are just as shallow.

>>18509748
You are precisely right.

If we imagine two men, one less then average looking man and one man that works as a a-list actor.

And both men act just as confident, has the same body language and both are talking to the same woman in a bar. Which one will she pick.

She will not pick the less the average looking guy despite him being equally confident with the same body language.

>>18509782
He's fat, not "a bit chunky" - he's between 260 and 280 lbs. Of course, he's also 6'4 so it doesn't look as bad as it would on a 5'8" guy but he's pretty fat.
And he has a really ugly face, surely not average or above average. I think he's cute in his own way, but he's not average in any way.

I can definitely judge his appearance better than you can, since I have at least seen him.

>>18509782
>these are stats and facts that have no proof, just me pulling numbers out my ass
>There are studies. I swear they exist.

>>18509798
http://www.academia.edu/3151923/Women_want_taller_men_more_than_men_want_shorter_women
On height

https://theblog.okcupid.com/your-looks-and-your-inbox-8715c0f1561e
Majority of men are ugly

>>18509796
He's tall as fuck and yeah, women can't rate faces at all. Most likely he's a 6/10 that would easily jump to a 8/10 if he lost weight. Sorry but your example is pretty bad, at least lie and say he's 5'7 to make it slightly harder to disprove.

>>18509804
>Using online dating as a source
Yeah, 80% of the dudes who use ONLINE DATING are ugly, because online dating attracts those who cannot get a girl in real life. That's a very biased pool of participants.

Height is not anything new, most women want a man who's taller than them. Does not mean they have to tower over them.

Also this just proves that women have some standards, but does not mean they completely ignore average looking dudes who have great personalities.

It's common sense to know that guys won't fuck a 1/10 even if she's the best girl in the world. Human beings as a whole have standards to meet. Doesn't mean the majority of them are unrealistic.

>>18509804
But if she did say he was 5'7 you would have given her the same response you gave me>>18509764
Because nothing can ever disprove what you've already set out to believe, there is no such thing as an unattractive confident dude in your fantasy world.

>>18509813
The article addressed that. Also the source is as good as any since it's a statistically controlled study with a large sample size. The page even lists some pictures of what women consider "significantly below average" with pics of absolutely average men.

I never did once speak about women not having or not having to have standards. That is completely fine. What I'm speaking about is the hypocrisy of women taking the moral high ground (we're not as visual as those dirty men) while being every single bit as visual.

>>18509813
But that is his entire statement. Women are not "less visual" than men.

Its why his co-workers are trying to get his blonde male co-worker to "open up" and "share with them", but are ignoring him. Even though they are just as equally socially shy.

He's not claiming women are more bitches than men, he's saying there is this hidden truth in society that women are not visual creatures and that it doesn't matter what you look like it only matters what you do.

Its not that way, it never was and it never will be. For either gender. But men like more things than women like. Which is why we have the 80-20.

>>18509804
It's stupid that you haven't even seen him and just decide he is much more attractive than he is to prove me wrong. It makes literally no sense.

He doesn't have an attractive face. I'd post his pics, but it's 4chan and I like the guy.
He has very big lips and a really large mouth. Greasy skin. His eyes are disproportionately large. He has no chin. Large forehead. Huge scar across his forehead and nose. His face is also asymmetrical.
If he lost the weight, he'd be a 5.5/10. Even if he got ripped, he could never be above average because his face is really ugly.

I think my exes were a 7.5/10 and a 7/10 in terms of facial aesthetics. I dated short guys (the 7.5/10 guy was 5'9" which is not so tall where I live, since the average is just above 6 ft).
The one I liked most aesthetically speaking was about 6 ft, very slim, with a 7/10 face. Crooked teeth, big nose, pretty weak jaw but it didn't look bad. A bit boyish.

File: IMG_0281.jpg (46KB, 498x431px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 498x431px

>this thread

>>18509820
Yeah, and it's online dating. Just because it "proves" your point doesnt mean it's a good study. Using people from online dating is a terrible sample, because the vast majority of those people are either bots, too unattractive to pull people irl and need to use flattering angles and photoshop to try and trick people, or are flat out insane crazies.

>>18509826
They are though. Everyone wants someone they don't find completely hideous. Women are more likely to overlook small physical faults for a sexy personality. Men are more likely to overlook small personality faults for a sexy body.

His coworker might just put off a more approachable air. He might just seem like he has more going for him than OP, which is clear given his shit personality. He probably radiates "I FUCKING HATE WOMEN YOU ALL ARE WHOOORREES" from the core of his being therefore women get bad vibes about him. Women are pretty good at picking up on these things just from body language and context.

People seem to think this attractiveness vs personality scale is drastically skewed, but it's not. It's still skewed but not as bad as you think.
Like, to pull random numbers out my ass, women are 49% visual 51% personality whereas men are 51% visual and 49% personality. You're not gonna over look anything HUGE in favor of one thing, but you'll over look small issues.

>>18509804
You're just regurgitating /r9k/ memes. Fucking stop. Leave. Don't come back here unless you want advice and want to improve.

You want to whine and wallow in self pity. You want to be a failure.

>>18509659
I highly doubt either would be good with women if they weren't famous actors. If they were both normal men then they wouldn't even be able to get women to tell them the time of day.

>>18509846
>Women are more likely to overlook small physical faults for a sexy personality. Men are more likely to overlook small personality faults for a sexy body.

Its the other way around. Men have such a large variation in tastes, women share their tastes.

Women wants their friends and other women to find their men attractive, men don't care about if other men find their partners attractive because we grew up discussing who likes small boobs, big boobs, blondes, brunettes, tall, small, old, young, etc.
Women always wants the flavour of the month, Christian Grey, Thor, etc.

>>18509857
Not in my experience. On average Guys want a girl with big tits, big ass, and tiny waist. On average Women want a dude who's taller than them, broad shoulders, good face.
All have variations of what they find attractive.

And fuck no women don't want their friends to find their bf's attractive because then they'll be more likely to try and steal them the next time they're on a hormonal swing.

You don't think women grew up discussing their tastes? I'm in to skinny asian guys, my friend likes big bear dudes with lumberjack beards, my other friend likes the quiet nerdy look, and another digs the body builders.

You know nothing about women to really be speaking for them. If all you go off of is what the celeb magazines say the same argument can be made in reverse. All guys want the Kim Kardashians.

>>18509857
Again, not true at all. My best friend and I never (NEVER) found the same guy attractive.
I like pale dudes, she likes tanned dudes. I like very tall guys, she likes average height or shorter. I like thin guys, she likes muscular guys. I prefer like light features, she loves dark features.

Sure, there are some men who are conventionally attractive but in the same way some women are conventionally attractive.

>>18509868
>On average Guys want a girl with big tits, big ass, and tiny waist
When they are 13 yes. But then we go through puberty and start discussing more in-depth what we like based on the women we are with.

>And fuck no women don't want their friends to find their bf's attractive because then they'll be more likely to try and steal them the next time they're on a hormonal swing.
A man is worth more when others find him attractive. Women want others to be jealous.

>You know nothing about women to really be speaking for them. If all you go off of is what the celeb magazines say the same argument can be made in reverse. All guys want the Kim Kardashians.
And your pretending to be a women to white knight for them is quite hilarious. Have some conversations with attractive women every now and then.

>>18509872
you and your friend are not women just because you put on skirts.

>>18509857
Also I find none of those men attractive.
Chris Pine, Chris Hemsworth, Brad Pitt, Ryan Renoalds, all those ken doll actor dudes do nothing for me.

>>18509875
Well when women are 13 yes they want the "flavor of the month" but then we go through puberty and start discussing more in depth what we like based on the men we are with.

Women don't want other's to be jealous because then they have to work monumentally harder to keep their man, because jealous women suck and will steal your dude from you. You want to keep him as far away from jealous women as possible.

>Y-YOURE NOT A WOMAN
do I have to post a time stamped pic of my pussy to get you to believe me or will you just accuse me of being a post op tranny because you will never admit you're wrong.

>>18509878
Lel. We're both cis females.
She is also one of the cutest girls I know, at least an 8/10 - cute face, huge blue eyes, long blonde hair, petite (probably 95 lbs at 5'3), with great breasts and butt.

>>18509846
For the sake of the argument I will concede your premise. Every single person in online dating is ugly, what a coincidence.

How come, then, that men rate roughly 50% of girls above average and 50% of girls below average? Are we just to suppose that ONLY men that date online are ugly? That's starting to sound a bit farfetched.

Let's apply Occam's razor instead. What if on average, people that used online dating are average looking and follow a normal distribution. What if, on average, women tend to be much more harsh rating people than men?

Sounds more likely. Even then, that's a study and it's still infinitely better proof than yours, which is simply your way of looking at things.

Women are not more likely to overlook faults for a sexy personality: they want both. Men are more likely to overlook a shitty personality for a hot body because they are dogs, that one is true.

>>18509884
>they have to work monumentally harder to keep their man, because jealous women suck and will steal your dude from you

>women working hard in relationships
Lel
We've jumped straight into delusion

>>18509888
>that's a study
It isn't a study. It is a post on okcupid's blog.

>>18509888
The majority of men who use online dating use it for a reason. Because they are too unattractive and too unconfident to pull irl.
If they were attractive, they would be dating the normal way because resorting to online dating is cringy as hell.

Online dating has also been a HUGE market to capitalize on men. There is a reason 90% of the "hot women" on there are bots and not real. There are not nearly as many fake male profiles as there are fake female profiles. Why is this so? Because the online dating sites know they need hot women on their sites to advertise. Hot men don't bring in as many women as hot women bring in men. Because women are less visual than men. It's marketing and money, that's what it boils down to. Hot women bring in more money than hot men do. Therefore, it's disproportionate to the amount of hot women there are on these sites compared to below average dudes.

Everyone wants both you dolt, thats what I've been saying. But the sexes tilt different directions ever so slightly. I'm not going to overlook a dude being a 1/10 even if he's the most charming fucker alive. You're not going to overlook an insane feminist who is guaranteed to cry rape on you after you fuck her even if she's an 11/10.
But I might overlook the fact he;s a little out of shape if he makes me laugh. And you might overlook the fact she's a little insecure if she's got a rocking ass.

File: da3.png (91KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 800x600px

>>18509894
Your b8's getting less and less tasty as you stop even trying to sound legit anon. Come on you can do better than that.

>>18509896

http://news.rice.edu/2014/02/10/is-height-important-in-matters-of-the-heart-new-study-says-yes-2/

There are multiple studies.

tl;dr: 50% of women need man to be taller than them, 13% of men need woman to be shorter than them.

>>18509884
Is that why when Justin Bieber was at his popularity older "cougars" were standing in line for his concerts and throwing their underwear at him, same as the 13 year olds.

When 50 shades of Grey is popular each time a new book or movie comes out, thats the ideal guy everyone wants and they want to experience BDSM.

This is how it always is with women. Women are more collective minded, its why they are largely left-voters and supporters of communism. They want the same ideals, and don't like it when something, like taste, deviates.

>>18509908
Same reason there are old men fapping to lolis right now. Some people have strange weird desires.

Harry potter was popular each time a new book or movie came out, doesn't mean everyone was throwing on robes and glasses in the bed room yelling "erecuts penisus"

Again, you are talking to 2 women who are saying otherwise so your hivemind crap is falling apart real fast.

I wonder why OP is a kissless virgin and why no girls like him. He's got a very sweet personality and he is confident and smart.

>>18509905
That wasn't the claim they were arguing. They were arguing the claim that women find 80% of all men across the globe in the real world ugly.
Which your ok cupid blog cannot dispute.

Sure, I'll give women probably have more of a preference in height than men do.
But I could argue men have more of a preference in weight or body type than women do.
http://metro.co.uk/2016/12/15/why-is-the-dadbod-more-accepted-than-the-mumbod-6322460/
Dad bod;s cool, mom bod? Barf.

Fuck off. Seriously, you are an insufferable cunt.

>>18509905
This isn't exactly a scientific study, and it is not exactly about the topic we're discussing, but whatever.

First, you cited false number - 37% of men and 55% of women.

Sure, women care more about height, same way men care more about weight. It makes sense in terms of biological needs - women need to be protected, men need a young and fertile partner.

>>18509901
So women of all kinds join in droves yet only ugly men do online dating. Sorry but still not buying it.

Your point is only sustained on very flimsy premises that have no real basis.

>>18509927
>thicc meme
>men only wants thin women
>loli meme
>men only wants big titties

men dont care about those things at all. its women that care about three things, the values that have always been there
>tall
>dark
>handsome
thats the male value that never changes. women are more visual than men.

>>18509927
Except height being a protective trait is just a remnant of instinct from prehistoric times. A fat wallet is what you need to protect someone now.

No point arguing though. It is what it is.

>>18509937
Stop. Lying.

Go back to /r9k/. You don't want advice. You're mentally ill.

>>18509937
You are a kissless virgin who has never even talked to a girl. You have zero idea what women like.

>>18509919
The okcupid study provides a good starting point, however. Definitely better than anecdotal evidence or "common knowledge" that is actually entirely fake.

>>18509935
Nah, its the same on the female side. And I'm not saying ONLY ugly men/women join online dating, I'm saying the amount of ugly men/women is extremely disproportionate to the amount of Hot (and real) men/women online. Therefore the ratio of ugly men to hot men is obviously going to be high. Because again, attractive men AND women will not need online dating because they are capable of getting a date the normal way without having to shamefully sign up for essentially a match making service because they're too unequipped to be a normal human being.

Your point is really just as flimsy, since it's just based on your hatred and bias for women

>>18509940
>>18509941
>no don't expose how it is, go back hiss hiss don't expose us

>>18509917
>>18509941
>le argument with holes
why are women so predictable?

>>18509938
We have enough technology to make woman in her 50s conceive, yet men are only attracted by young girls.

>>18509942
Not really, since ok cupid is not scientific and has a biased pool.
Since attraction is 100% individual, you can't really create any scientific basis on it. Everyone, man and woman, has their own unique tastes that will vary and differ.

>>18509951
Attraction is much more uniform that we think it is.

>>18509943
Again, see the pictures of "significantly below average" males posted in the article. And again, if only unattractive people join, the male statistic should also be skewed even if less than the female one, yet not only is it not as insanely skewed as the female one, it's almost a perfect 50/50

>>18509948
You are more hysterical and illogical than those women you hate so much, virgin.

>>18509947
Why won't you stop lying? 99% of men can get laid. Only the worst 1% trash like you don't.

>>18509954
Not really, 2 women just discussed how we and all our friends have extremely different tastes.

Again, the pool is biased. The significantly below average man can be 10/10 to one girl and a 1/10 to the next. I mean the first dude on that "hot" photoset was extremely ugly, and the average dude looked far better i m o.
And the women in those photosets didn't seem to be disproportonate. They were all about the same attractiveness.

Also their use of messages to gauge how attractive a person is is very flawed.
If a dude is boring I won't message him. Doesn't matter if hes hot. Most women will operate this way too.

>>18509965
You're not going to get through to him. He is immune to logic and facts.

File: 54069519-two-happy-woman-friends-laughing-together-in-a-park-with-a-green-background.jpg (20KB, 450x300px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 450x300px

>>18509968
I know, I'm bored and it's funny watching him do all these mental back flips to justify his extreme hatred for women.
Like I don't get it, if he hates women so much why does he care? Why does he still desperately chase what he abolutely cannot fucking stand?
This is why women don't chase dudes like him, because we're smart enough to go "God I fucking hate this guy so I'm obviously not gonna go for him"
He's just like "I FUCKING HATE YOU WHY DON'T YOU LOVE ME WHEN I HOPE YOU FUCKING DIE IN A DITCH"

>>18509964
wrong
>More men than women get squeezed out of the mating game. As a result, twice as many women as men passed their genes to the next generation.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/09/040920063537.htm

Historically and recently speaking, more women than men reproduce. That's how it is. Women have higher standards than men, and more women than men have sex.

>>18509965
If my friend likes busty redheads with freckles and I like svelte blondes with A cups, do we have different tastes?

That's the difference in tastes women have. Different flavours of attractiveness.

>>18509979
Yeah. We've been a mostly monogamous species for about 20k years. For the rest of our history, we were polygamous.

That's what the study says. Nothing "recent". Read the studies you link.

>>18509985
were quickly returning to polygamy thanks to sexual liberation so it will apply soon

>>18509981
I don't see how men DON'T have the same "different flavors" of attractiveness then either.
My friend likes lumberjacks, I like skinny asian kids. They literally could not be any more different.

I'm sure you like a busty red head who's got a rocking ass, but your friend likes the skinny chestless, assless small girl.

What exactly are the differences you think men have in taste that is so extraordinarily different from women? Because so far you have not shown me anything.

Women like a VAST variety of different things, men like a VAST variety of different things.

>>18509979
Are you done pasting links from your women hate archive? Good. Now for the last time fuck off back to /r9k/. Stop shitting up this board.

>>18509998
My point which flew entirely over your head is that both fall within conventional attractiveness. Women don't like a VAST amount of things and neither do men. We like a small amount of things and then settle for other. As it happens, men are the ones doing most of the settling nowadays.

>>18510005
>hiss hiss hiss
I've never been to r9k you hole

oh my god everyone shut up

women being "less visual" just means they need less/no porn to get off by themselves.

more men would rather have porn or an object to focus on to make it easier to get off. more women are good with just their imaginations. that's fucking it.

there's no conspiracy or mental gymnastics or mating instincts coming into play here. OP is fucking retarded and everyone knows it and just wants a reason as to why women ignore him other than his shitty attitude.

>>18510012
Well I'm here to tell you me and my friend group can prove you wrong in our very different tastes.
I wanna barf if my dude is even slightly overweight or muscular. I hate muscles.
My friend wants to barf if her guy is a skinny skeleton like my guys tend to be.
She likes a strong square jaw.
I like a soft jaw.
She likes blondies with light features
I like em dark.

Attraction is also influence by social programming. Women had to prioritize things like resources etc over looks for most of human history. Now that they've started earning their own money they can instead prioritize other things. Give it thousands of more years and it will be the same.

Women are less visual but not blind and especially not to the extent that some men claim. The halo effect was far more pronounced in women judging men than the other way around.

Also, some people may get angry at this but there aren't nearly as attractive men as there are attractive women. This is changing since nearly everyone works out now

Don't buy into the memes, women might be less visual than men but that doesn't mean they don't notice attractive qualities like height or looks

>>18510024
Finally someone with a brain in this thread

>>18510020
What do you want advice on? How to not be an angry piece of shit? How to lose your virginity? How to get help for your mental illness?

Women have more orgasm with physically attractive men. Read the study

>>18510045
I'm not the OP you fucking moron hole.

>>18510059
Answer the question. What do you want advice on?

>>18510025
>2 women can prove wrong something that you can see all over you

Yeah, sure. I guess male models are chosen for their confidence.

>>18510060
I'm not here for advice, I'm here giving advice. I'm not the OP you mong.

>>18510062
>one dude can prove wrong something you can see all over you
I mean, this is what I see on a daily basis. A variety of different women dating a variety of different men. It's not like ONLY Brad Pitt looking dudes get gf's. Like open your eyes when you go outside next (if you ever actually go outside) and you'll see all the couples.

>>18510071
Brad pitt looking guys get with jennifer aniston gfs. While the rest date within their league. The vast majority of men and women are matched on social class, looks etc. There are many studies done on this.

That's not to say there are exceptions.

Also, I'm not that guy you are arguing with.

>>18510065
You're not giving advice. You're vomiting your mental illness all over the board. Get help.

>>18510083
What mental illness do you think he has?

>>18510081
Yeah that's not rocket science. People stay in their own league, doesnt mean they all only find brad pitt attractive and date the "ugly" guy in their own league out of desperation though

>>18510089
Narcissism I'd say, for one. Extreme paranoia and depression probably too

>>18510090
Thats exactly what happens though. Women always settle.

>>18510089
Schizophrenia, autism.

>>18510083
>hiss hiss hiss
lol

>>18509608
Focus on you.

It's not a good attitude if you're looking at what other people are doing. Do things that improve yourself and are worth your time.

If you like to dance, do that. Take classes. If you want to learn how to fight, do that. Train. If you like to draw, find references and practice. If you want to talk to women, make it a habit to talk all sorts of people. After a good amount of time you'll become interesting all on your own.

Then one day you'll be at a party or a bar and a girl will be trying to get your attention but you'll be too drunk or too oblivious to that fact because you're there for your own reasons.

Then when your friends point out how stupid you were to turn it down you'll laugh and finally get this fabled confidence.

I'm 5 foot fucking 3 and my life is alright at least. Don't be so bitter and you'll do well.

>>18509972
Is woman hater supposed to be an insult? I do hate women. What's your point?

>>18510135
No, being you is an insult to carbon based lifeforms. You must hate your mother for not having aborted you.

>>18510146
That is way too creative for a female, did you google it?

>>18509608
Despite the shitfest that this thread has become

My experience has been quite similar. I mean it makes complete sense, if you see two shy guys you're obviously going to talk to the more attractive one

But it still hurts so much seeing how nice girls can be to other guys while entirely ignoring you. Well I think what hurts the most is to see people, not even male or female taking the plunge for someone else while nobody gives a fuck about you

>>18509856
hahahha u are an total idiot

>>18509608
>meet girl
>taller than me
>less than 0% intrest

>meet girl
>as tall as me
>not very intrested, but not as unfriendly as talls

>meet girl
>shorter than me
>she is suddenly intrested in me

The shorter she is, the more intrested the girls seem to become.

I can't believe people don't see this.
It happens all the time, to everyone around everyone

>>18510502
are you fit?

>>18510502
Strange. This is not my experience at all. I've had more taller girls interested in me than shorter.

>>18509703
Ugly girls are easy to manipulate and good looking girls are hard to manipulate.

Its probably because ugly girls recive leds attention, so they are more prone to fall for flattery.

Girls in general live in a different reality than a man does. It becomes apparent when youre out walking with them.

Guys interact with them all the time and ask stuff like "Is that guy your boyfriend?".

Bums shout after them
Taxi drivers insult them.

>>18510530
He didn't flatter me. I genuinely hate guys who compliment my appearance, I find it really distasteful and uninteresting.
He was manipulative in a fucking sexy way, I couldn't explain it if I tried. One of the most charming men I've ever met.

>>18509608
It's simple. Women are lying hypocrites, but because all of society basically has to do whatever they say they can get away with it.

>>18510131
I rember that wedding when my friend's dad was pointing out "shes looking at you".

We'll she didn't want to dance.
She agreed to a date on facebook, but never showed up.

It wasn't exactly a confidence booster.

>>18510542
I used to be skilled at talking fat girls into doing lewd things on skype, but it didn't work very well on good looking girls, except for some scottish 17 yr old who were probably virgin.

I know because i've been there and tried. Maybe also, its easier to feel confident and relaxed when the girl is fat and ugly.

>guy 1 and guy 2
>guy 1 is naturally tall and attractive, guy 2 is not
>for his entire life, women are automatically receptive to guy 1
>they always smile when talking to him, always laugh at whatever he says, always eager to hang out with him, flirt, basically throw themselves at him
>because guy 1 has had nothing but good experiences with women simply because he's tall and attractive, he naturally develops a "good attitude" toward them, thinks they're wonderful because they've only ever treated him nicely, is "confidant" because no matter what he did his whole life women responded positively so he now boldly does whatever he wants and assumes women will like him, because they will
>meanwhile guy 2, short and not attractive
>women never smiled at him, they never wanted to talk to him just because of how he looked, instead of laughing at everything he says and praising how funny he his they just laughed at how he looked and mocked him. would never flirt with him, would never try to hang out with him, never treat him nicely in general
>guy 2 has nothing but bad experiences with women, naturally would grow to distrust them, would have no confidence because no matter what he did his whole life women wouldn't positively respond
>Women: "Wow women aren't shallow this is your OWN FAULT because you just have a bad personality and attitude and confidence. I like guy 1 because he's just so confident and funny and is such a gentlemen that loves women so much."

Reminder that your entire life is already predetermined the instant your parents bang and you get your particular genetics. From the moment you get your genetics it's a snowball effect. You get good looks, you get good life experiences, you develop a "good" personality because of it, and then everyone praises you for everything like you earned it.

>>18510554
I'm reasonably good looking and pretty thin, and have zero issues finding a guy to date me or compliment me.

I was attracted because he was really good at manipulating people. He was charming as hell.

File: sadfrog1.jpg (14KB, 228x221px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 228x221px

>>18510596
>tfw I am guy 2 and my best friend is guy 1

We have tons in common and did practically everything together. But in highschool girls would offer to do his homework for him, would get approached by women in bars, and was approached in a club by his, now, wife who is older and much richer than him.

>>18510596
This, if you are born ugly, stupid and poor you have a huge disadvantage at life all because you inherreted crappy cells

>>18509654
>If a females need to mate with mentally sound males, they just look for the more atractive ones and then imagine they are mentally sound.

Yeah, I'm sure that's how evolution works. It's embarrasing to read all of these mental gymnastics. this has been proven dude, you are arguing against basic biological facts.

>>18510596
That is a retarded scenario your bitter /r9k/ virgin mind has cooked up. Things simply do not work that way. You are trying to make excuses as to why you're a failure. Anything but your fault.

Pretend you never had a chance and it's society's fault you're a failure. But take away that lie, and it suddenly becomes your fault, because the one and only person who made you a failure is you.

Embrace the truth.

>>18510621
>Take away the gun in the scenario and it's not the killer's fault but your own that you died.

Not him, but you're making zer fucking sense as opposed to him. Why is there such a tabboo on having a shitty hand dealth to you from birth.

Just because your mental state of mind is strong enough to get a good life doesn't mean everyone does... Or do you shitpost on downies for not aspiring to be the next president of the US?

>>18510637
I'm guy 2 in this scenario, except I never got bitter because of the rejection. I just kept trying and eventually found my wife :)

So, it's your own fault for choosing to react this way.

>>18509785
This is completly irrelevant, of course that between two people that are exactly the same but with one having one more positive trait, he would be picked, because he has one more positive trait, it doesn't matter which trait it is. What an asinine thought experiment.

>>18510637
Guy 1 can choose to drop out of high school and shut himself in the basement, and become a /r9k/ bitter virgin manchild. Guy 2 can choose to work hard and make a good life for himself.

You are obviously thinking you are guy 2, because you want to avoid taking responsibility for your actions. Guy 2 could have a great life. But he doesn't, because in your scenario he did the same choices as you.

>>18510653
That's a popular "thought experiment" on /r9k/. Of course it's retarded and asinine, but what would you expect from that cesspool.

>>18510654
If they both try hard, Guy 1 will have a great life and Guy 2 will have a good life.

>>18510658
Or maybe not. Your scenario is far too vague and loaded and unrealistic.

Once again, what is preventing you from having a good life? Why did you give up and choose to become a failure?

>>18509746
They need these "facts" to rationalize the fact that they don't get any women. They need someone to blame for that, so they choose women and chad to blame because it's easier than actually trying to improve yourself.

>>18510637
Because choices are a thing. You took plenty of choices in your life that put you where you are now.
Sure, there are people that had such a bad hand at life that maybe they never had a chance, but these are people with mental disorders and genetic malformations living in poverty, not an idiot that was born ugly and short. Saying that your whole personality is that way because of your below average looks is being a fucking coward trying to deflect responsability for being a piece of shit.

>>18510670
You cannot fix being an idiot, ugly, or short. So how again are those things this hypothetical anon's fault? How did his choices affect any of them?

>>18510654
oh boy, another le just world idiot

>>18510672
Why are you here? You're not looking for advice. Go back to /r9k/ if all you do on this board is spout retarded robot memes.

>>18510680
You're spouting retarded memes of the opposite flavor. You're no better, no matter how much you think you are.

>>18510658
No, because maybe guy 1 ends up being so extroverted that he can't concentrate as much as guy 2, who spend a lot of time developing his mind. Do when it comes times to study, sudenly guy 2 has a better hand than guy 1. So guy 2 ends up with money, that usually improve the looks, while guy 1 ends up poor working at mcdonalds, which makes him uglier, since he can't take carne of himself.

See? We can play these game of taking one isolated characteristic of two people and trying to extrapolate them as the reason for their whole life. These sort of thing is reductionist bullshit anyway, you cannot take something as complex as a whole life and reduce it as just "looks" and pretend that no other factor played a part.

>>18510680
but they're not retarded memes

life is 80% luck and chance
guess what, being ugly and short is a bad hand to start with

guess what, taller people tend to be happier and make more money
guess what, attractive people also tend to be happier and make more money

you must be american

>>18510682
Nothing I said is wrong. On the contrary. You should take advice from people who know where you are now and how you got there, and even how to get out there. But if you are content being a miserable failure and wallow in self-pity, nothing can change that.

Really, the first step, if you want to actually improve your life, is to start taking responsibility. Instead of blaming everyone but yourself, do something to improve your life. Start small. Use the effort and energy you spend whining on a Cambodian candle waxing forum into something productive instead.

>>18510671
You can actually fix being and idiot and you can fix a lot of being ugly. And even if you couldn't, you can compensate those characteristics with plenty of others, so if that anon chooses to blame one involuntary characteristic of him for the outcome of his life, it's clear that he is intetionally ignoring all of those other negative characteristics that he had a role in shaping, and are, therefore, his responsability.

>>18510689
>but they're not retarded memes
You're wrong.
>life is 80% luck and chance
You're wrong.
>guess what, taller people tend to be happier and make more money
You're wrong. Taller people have more health problems, are physically less attractive, and are more likely to remain virgins.
>guess what, attractive people also tend to be happier and make more money
You're wrong.
>you must be american
You're wrong.

Not one single thing you say is correct. Nothing factual. You've truly been brainwashed by /r9k/ memes. You're beyond hope, of all the cults you could have joined, you joined the /r9k/ cult.

If you were tall, you would be just as big of a failure as you are now. Actually, probably even a bigger one. And you'd need to desperately find another excuse.

>>18510692
It's the mentally ill east European. He posts on /r9k/ all day long, like a broken record. No logic will work on him. His thinking capability is that of a hysterical woman on an estrogen high.

>>18510689
Anon, the truth is that nearly everyone has plenty of valid excuses to fail.
I have a genetic illness and spent most of my life fighting to even walk. My best friend lost her parents before graduating high school and was left in the middle of a street because she didn't have the money to pay for her house.
She's finishing law school in 6 months (a year in advance), I'm about to finish med school.

We could have had it easier, yeah. But it doesn't determine who we are. You can work hard and overcome nearly anything.

It is mostly YOUR CHOICE to do well or not. Don't compare yourself to others.
There are other people who have done better than me and were given better chances and whatever. But I'm doing me, and I'm doing well.

>>18510705
The sad part is that people like that just refuse to listen. You and your friend are both great examples where you were dealt far worse cards in life than him, and still managed to come out great.

The blaming height thing is a joke but what's even more infuriating are the faggots who go around this board claiming everyone who's had a lifetime of negative experiences with women is entirely at fault, you people are the bigger joke for sure

like they refuse to acknowledge just how terrible the experience of even having to converse with a woman typically is

>>18510705
But anon, wamen don't like me! How could I have anything in life if I'm ugly ):
I was destined to be this piece of shit I am, not my fault.

>>18510705
Look pal I'm glad you kept your chin up but pretending you have TOTAL control over your life because you're a 20 something guy finishing med school is absolute naivete.

>>18510723
If you had a lifetime of negative experiences with dogs, and the rest of people didn't, then it's obvious that you are the problem, not the dogs. Not so difficult to understand.

>>18510723
>how terrible the experience of even having to converse with a woman typically is
Is it? How so?

>>18510732
>and the rest of people didn't

>communities ban aggressive dogs outright
>pet owners are despised by landlords, neighbors, pedestrians, mailmen and literally everyone else with enough brain cells to rub together to not fawn over the stupid animal like a retarded child
>entire neighborhoods of houses unsellable because fido left permanent shitstains in every corner

>NNNNO. IT'S ALL YOUR FAULT AND NO ONE ELSE'S AND THERE'S NO PROBLEM EXCEPT YOU YOU'RE THE PROBLEM GO BACK TO /R9K/ AND WHILE I'M AT IT LET ME SHAME YOU FOR YOUR SEXUAL HISTORY

>>18510736
see above

>>18510779
I don't follow. You have a lifetime of negative experiences with women because of dog shit?

>>18510729
Of course I don't. I try to do my best with what I am given. Instead of focusing on my limitations, I worked out and tried my best. Still failed in many ways, but did pretty good.

>>18509608

because 'less visual' is not the same thing as 'blind'.

>>18510799
if many many people have negative experiences the there's something more there than they're all losers with mental disorders

>>18510807
more like they are all short and ugly

>>18510779
You are free to dislike women, because of how they smell or look, or even for how they act. But you can't try to get with girls, and then when they reject you say that it's their fault and that you don't like them because of that.

Going back to the dog example, you are an autistic kid that gets bitten by every dog he tries to pet, and when is given advise by a dog trainer, he insist that he knows more about dogs, so he can't be doing anything wrong, so it must be the dogs fault.

>>18510732
Right, and if a dog spends it's whole life going in and out of the pound with every new owner abusing it and it eventually turns aggressive, it's the dogs fault. It needs to get a better attitude, learn not all humans are like that and try harder.

>>18510839
if i was the autist and the dog trainer's advice was don't be bitter, lift, get a hobby, and just be yourself, I'd try to bite his hand too

>>18510809
Would you stop it with the short and ugly meme? Especially being short has zero negative effect on your life unless you're under 5' or something. Being ugly is no big deal either, lots of successful men are ugly. Or short. Or both.

It is literally the most pathetic excuse you can give.

>>18510874
how delusional?

>>18510843
a dog has the comprehension level of a two year old and will never progress past that.

you're a human and you need to buck up.

>>18510891
Did you reply to the wrong post? It makes no sense.

>>18510851
why wont people ever realize the be yourself meme is contradictory?

being yourself is what got you no gf to begin with
if "yourself" is unable to get a gf then the only way is to be someone else

obviously this means the relationship won't ever work since the entire point of a relationship is being with someone who is happy to be with you

>>18510911
Being born short is one of the biggest possible handicaps you can get as a man friend.

Believe it's no big deal is extremely delusional behavior

>>18510959
Stop lying already. What do you have to gain by lying this much?

>>18510874
Oh yeah, if 2 guys were completely identical except one was 6'2 and the other was 5'2, well women would just have to flip a coin to decide which one they'd date or fuck, cause there's just no difference at all.

Like seriously, what's wrong with you? Which of these 3 categories are you.
A woman who's trying to convince herself she isn't as shallow as she actually is.
A tall man who's trying to convince himself his success has nothing to do with the genetics he randomly inherited.
Or a short man trying to cope with being short by denying the reality of it.

>>18510995
What a completely retarded scenario. There is no "100% identical two guys, one tall one short" scenario. The shorter guy will have some advantages such as looks, physique, health.

I am none of what you listed. Which one of these 1 categories are you:
A mentally ill piece of garbage, failure in every way possible, who blames everything on his height (which isn't even that bad since he's 5'10"). Who is too stupid to realize if he were tall, he would still be just as big of a colossal failure in life and a kissless virgin.

I could show you countless examples of short men who are complete successes in life on all fronts, and countless examples of tall men who are complete failures in life in every way possible. But you will refuse to accept the truth. You are beyond hope. Your mental illness is too deep for 4chan. Seriously, your only hope is to see a professional therapist.

>>18510974
???

>>18511034
How tall are you and why are you using it as an excuse instead of admitting it's your own life choices that made you the failure you are?

>>18511044
I'm not using it as an excuse i'm not whining about anything, i'm just pointing out that you are retarded if you actually think the biggest thing you can have is nothing

>>18511046
>the biggest thing you can have is nothing
What is that supposed to mean?

>>18511032
If you actually believed what you were saying you wouldn't have to lie to me

Now which of the 3 are you.

>>18511075
I'm pretty successful. I worked hard to build myself a good life. I have a well paid job, plenty of friends, and popular with girls. By /r9k/ standards I'm very much a Chad. Lots of people admire me and are envious of me.

And I'm shorter than you. Now will you stop your lying once and for all?

File: 1498255225285.webm (2MB, 722x1080px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 722x1080px

Either you're in the top 20% of males or you're nothing.

It's the truth.

>>18511099
Yeah that's cool. Now which of the 3 are you.

>>18511055
It just means you are retarded or baiting

>>18511112
I asked you for the last time to stop your lying. It's going nowhere when you can't even be honest about yourself. You're on the wrong board anyway, you belong on /r9k/, since you don't want advice, nor do you want to improve. You belong to that cesspool where you can get your circlejerk of self-pity and blaming society and everyone else for your own failures.

File: sad_putin.jpg (7KB, 193x261px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 193x261px

>>18511117
Of course, height is the only thing that matters. The most powerful alpha in the world has to be at least 6'4" tall.

Oh wait...

>>18511130
Remember that strawmans aren't arguments.

Most important =/= only one or neccessary

>>18510542
>Manipulative in a sexy way
>Can't explain

Lol and I was born yesterday

>>18511126
I haven't lied about anything. Being tall and attractive is a massive advantage, and it affects your entire life which will also affect your personality.

Think of it this way
>someone challenges you to a poker game
>Yeah sure ok. Wait what are you doing?
>oh I'm splitting the deck. Basically I'm putting all the aces, kings, queens, jacks and 10s in my deck, and all my hands will come from there. And your deck has all the other cards.
>What the fuck that's bullshit.
>No just get over it. You CAN win, you just need to try way harder and get much luckier. Now ante up, first bets 1000 dollars.
>no
>wow making excuses again you know that's the real problem

Just because you can win in rare chances doesn't make the game fair or worth playing

Ok, here's my opinion.

Guys pretty much only care about looks. Every bad quality a girl can have can be completely looked over by most guys if she is hot.

Girls care about the whole package. They evaluate a guy based on every major quality. Personality, looks, how much money he makes, etc.

This comes down to basic biology. Women are the ones who will have to carry a baby inside them for 9 months, so they have to be more selective about their partners. Men can just dump their seed in a women and take off and never see her again. So guys will just fuck anything they're attracted to.

>>18511799
Attraction is also based alot on social programming. What you saif was true since a lot of women werent earning their own money. Now that they are , they can prioritize other things. According to thousands of different studies they prioritize personality and looks over everything else.

What do you mean you're the "quiet dude" at the office? Is that how you think you seem to the other people around you? I would honestly suggest (not in a mean way or anything) that you try getting to make friends and connections with the people in your office. If you aren't "friends" with the people you want to talk to you, then they aren't going to approach you about things like that. I think you should just aim to be friends with the guys/girls around you and you'll start noticing opportunities to talk to them way more.

I really do think there is a problem with you thinking that your identity in the office is "the quiet dude" when that clearly isn't what you want. Just be friends with them and kick that idea to the curb.

>>18511823
>Now that they are , they can prioritize other things
But they don't.

The richer a woman gets, the higher her standards get. Even if she has the money to live safely and comfortably for the rest of her life she still won't settle for a man unless he's even richer and higher status than herself.

No matter how far society or technology advances women are still bound to their instincts. Don't get me wrong, most men are too, but not quite as hard or commonly as women.

>>18511799
In my experience, they only evaluate the rest after you are good looking enough for their personal standard. Guys do the same but their standard is usually lower on average.

>>18510621
>>18510654
>>18510680
>>18510690
>>18510874
>>18510911
>>18510974
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AR3YR1ZTonc
>women wouldn't date the 5'3 guy even if he was a doctor, champion skier and owned his own ski lodge
>wouldn't date the 5'0 guy even if he was a millionaire

And keep in mind, this was in the 90s. Where being a millionaire was a much bigger deal, and it was before social media, dating apps, hookup culture, the sexual revolution and all that other shit drove women's standards even higher to how they are now.

Yet you just keep screaming
>"It doesn't mean anything you just have to work harder! It's entirely your own fault!".

So what's your malfunction bro? Why are you so desperate to deny the extremely obvious and major impact height has on a mans life, especially in regards to women?

>>18509626
I took me so many years to learn this. Today, the friends I have who have realized that when they were teenagers, have hit the gym, built fulfilling relationships and have no problems socializing to girls they are attracted to. As of me, I'm a 26yo khv with low self esteem when near girls. Gotta work to catch up now.

this youtuber helped to open my eyes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EFnJMPQow7A

>>18512332
>It took me*

Has this raging autist just spent over 12 hours angrily denying every single fact thrown at him?

>>18512377
Why yes you have.

>>18511799
This is stupid
Guys will take a 6/10 loving and caring girl as a long term gf over a 8/10 turbobitch, especially if the 6/10 is also good in bed

This thread is overloaded with /r9k/. Why can't they stay on their own containment board?

>>18511799
Not really, men will take into account the girls personality a lot and it can give her tons of points if she has a caring and nurturing personality.

When it comes to requirements it's something like:

Men
>weight
This is absolute, men just do not and will never like fat women. The good thing is, you control your weight.
>face
It has to be reasonable. As long as it is kind of cute with makeup it's good enough.

On the other hand, women
>height
Exactly the same as weight for men, complete must. Ideally at least 5 inches taller, as long as you're under 6'5/6'6 bigger is always better
>face
It has to be good. If it is good the rest can be kind of made up for
>money
At least the same status as her PROVIDED you have ambitions and are career inclined, if not, you're a deadbeat. If you have less money than her, forget about it unless in a near future you're going to be making more than her (law school, etc). A household where the men makes less is the biggest nightmare a woman can have
>outgoing and charismatic
Again must haves, if you're quiet or reserved you can forget of even existing for females. Can somewhat be countered with a really good face (brooding look)

These are just the requisites to date, once you're actually dating you have to worry about the weight of the relationship falling on you. If she's bored, it's your fault. If sex is bad, it's your fault. If she leaves or cheats on you, obviously it's your fault.

>>18512491
You are a kissless virgin who has never been on a date. Stop thinking you know anything about women or dating. All you know is retarded memes from /r9k/.

As for advice: seek help. You have major issues.

>>18511238

Your analogy implies somebody maliciously did you wrong and stacked the deck against you consciously, and then is ragging on you for it, and that's just not the case. Neither is it the case that anyone thinks it's fair, so much as something that happens.

A better analogy is playing poker where you, your friend, and 10 other people all started with random amounts of starting money.

You started with a 10k bankroll and your friend started with a 35k bankroll. Other people at the table seem to range from 40k to 1k.

You're not wrong that this is pretty shitty and you're going to have to play WAY better then random chance to win money in this situation, but your friend's not wrong that you've got plenty of room to make a comeback.

>>18512512
Can you actually specifically point out which things he said are incorrect and explain why?

Or just get angry and tell him to stop talking entirely just because you say so, almost as if you can't actually disprove it but still don't want it being discussed.

>>18512526

Separate anon. I think you're wrong because women are willing to compromise or even eschew a lot of what you've said are musts

There's a reason artsy bohemian types get laid too, and it's not height, face, money, outgoingness, or charisma; it's because lots of people are looking for lots of things beyond a pretty mug and a provider.

>>18512524
What would happen in that case is that the person who started with 1k would win lots, and this autist with 10k would lose it all. And what would the autist's excuse be?

>He only won because he's tall! It's not fair? Tall people are better at poker, it's been proven! If I were tall I would have won!

>>18512512
Is this your entire argument? These come from my own experience dating as a blue collar man and general stuff that women say.

What do women find attractive in guys? Confidence, ambition and status. Confidence comes from good looks and success, ambition means willing to work 65 hours a week for a promotion, status comes from being outgoing, socially successful and having money.

I've just translated it so everyone can understand.

>>18512491
>Less money

The thing is this is true for some women not all. I have known a few females that went into relationships with men who did not make a lot of money but did at least work a job and provided as best as they could for the child or in the relationship.

>>18512542
Not nearly as much as men are willing to compromise for a kind and nurturing nature.

Artsy bohemian types get laid because being an artist is an extension for status. It's something women have always found attractive.

But they get laid, women don't settle with them.

>>18512526
He said that height is the one and only thing women look for. Which is obviously false. Men of all heights are getting laid. In fact, it's been proven that taller men are more likely to be virgins, but of course he does not want to hear facts.

I know plenty of short men in happy relationships. I know a few tall men who are permavirgins. His claim is ridiculous and very easy to disprove.

>>18512549
>my own experience

It's obvious you have none.

>>18512559
>He said that height is the one and only thing women look for.
He very clearly listed height, face, money and outgoing & charismatic actually.

>>18512549
Wait, why are you contradicting yourself? Now you say confidence and status are what matter, which is kind of correct. Earlier you said that only height matters and looks are a must.

>>18512549
Not the Anon but I would definitely say they like men that are driven, successful and confident you do not need to be the max at everything but at least having a balance of it and in some way will make you attractive to them. The worst you can have is no talent, confidence, no success, no future and worst of all no stability. These are the most basics of needs females place on a man.

>>18512566
>>18512559
I said height is a must, and it is. You have to be taller than her. Ideally you have to be 5 or more inches taller.

The importance women put in height is so proven and studied it's completely stupid to try to argue it.

I also said being thin is a must for men and fat women have sex. Just like being fat, being taller is always a good thing and it's always better to be 6'3 than 6'.

>>18512573
I know that. Funnily enough when a man says he wants a motherly, nurturing and feminine man he's oppressing women and forcing gender roles. But if you're a man that isn't driven and doesn't have being millionaire as his objective? You might as well just roll over a die, deadbeat.

>>18512577
Meant "just like with fat". Being fat is never a positive thing for a woman and being short is never a positive thing for a man.

>>18512577
You have been given thousands of examples proving you wrong and ignore them all. Answer these questions:

Plenty of couples have a shorter man with a taller girl. How do you explain this?
Studies show taller men are more likely to be virgins. How do you explain this?
Every man except you has been able to get a gf, including those uglier and shorter and poorer than you. How do you explain this?
You deliberately lie about everything and disregard facts. How do you explain this?

>>18512618
Define plenty. I would say less couples have short man tall woman than thin man fat woman, yet weight is considered a must for men and height isn't.
>taller men are more likely to be virgins
Citation required
>Every man except you has been able to get a gf, including those uglier and shorter and poorer than you
And men more handsome, taller and richer than me have no gf as well. What is your point?

>>18512618
go white knight somewhere else fag

>>18512682
>calling a retarded faggot a retarded faggot is whiteknighting

Stop whiteknighting for this mentally ill failure. He needs to go back to /r9k/.

>>18509639
Maybe stop, take notice of your kneejerk reaction to defend women from criticism of any kind, and reflect on why you reacted that way?

I have the rare experiences/perspective of someone who went from being chubby and awkward for the first 20 years of my life to being a complete Chad for the past 9, and as much as it might rustle the Jimmies of your feminazi handlers... the anon you're quoting is spot on.

Women used to be indifferent to me, at best. Ever since I've had abs they've been eating out of the palm of my hand, video games went from something I enjoyed because I was a loser to something "cool and quirky."

I am an absolute, unrepentant dick who leads multiple women on, will call them over to "hang out" and then send them home without a shower so I can enjoy the rest of my evening in peace and they absolutely love me for it.

If you're attractive women will eat your shit and ask for seconds.

If you've got money you've a decent shot at my sloppy seconds/dirty thirds/filthy fourths.

If you're a "nice guy" I feel bad for you, son.

>>18512491
>height
About 50% of women wouldn't date a man shorter than them.
Which means that 50% of women would, and the rest would be fine with a man just a tiny bit taller than them.
Also - a very small portion of men is shorter than an average woman, so this isn't a problem for most.

>face
Well, yes. It has to be somewhat decent. Like, not too much under average.

>money
What I honestly want is a man who makes about the same as I do, so he can have a similar lifestyle and we can do things together. Not much more, not much less.
I could date someone who didn't make much, and sacrifice my lifestyle for him. The guy I like is very poor and I never minded that.

>outgoing and charismatic
Entirely false. I hate dating outgoing people. Charisma is nice to a degree.

>once you're actually dating you have to worry about the weight of the relationship falling on you. If she's bored, it's your fault. If sex is bad, it's your fault. If she leaves or cheats on you, obviously it's your fault.
Entirely false.

>>18512755
>About 50% of women wouldn't date a man shorter than them.
Try like, 1.

>>18512756
It was posted by OP:
http://www.academia.edu/3151923/Women_want_taller_men_more_than_men_want_shorter_women

About 55% of women wouldn't date a man shorter than them, and about 37% of men wouldn't date a woman taller than them.

>>18512762
>About 55% of women wouldn't date a man shorter than them
And another 44% of women are lying on a survey to look less shallow.

>>18512763
Plenty of people don't have huge problems with it. I would date someone a little shorter than me. I know couples where she was MUCH taller than him.

It's unusual because men on average are much taller than women, and even if you are a very short men there are most likely women who are shorter than you and a few tall women that would date someone much shorter.

>>18512763
And the remaining 11% say they wouldn't date a shorter man but will do it anyway when he comes along.

>>18512729
Laughing at an autistic manchild virgin is defending women now?

Nice fantasy btw.

>>18512755
The last part is true though.
Most of the weight of the relationship does fall on the men. He's the one who has to keep her interested, keep her sexually happy, show him he loves her etcetera.

And before you call me a virgin I am not the OP and I disagree with the shit about height, but in all my relationships and friendships with women most of the shit was on my part since women are just more used to be the passive party.

>>18512795
I'm sorry you had shitty relationships. Mine were fairly equal in terms of effort.

>>18509608
Women are visual too. Have you seen how women act when a hot guy is in their vicinity? A really cute guy taught our CPR class and all of the women in the class were fawning over him including the ones who were already married!

I get very turned on my the appearance of my boyfriend's body and I also enjoy pornography immensely. I never understood the "men are more visual" thing, I honestly think its an excuse men use to oggle at other women and fantasize about fucking them while they are in relationships.

>>18512755
The 50% that WOULD date shorter men would also date taller men, so we'd still be competing with lanklets on the smaller Pool of woman

>>18512755
50% of women wouldn't date a short man
50% of women would date a short man BUT would prefer a taller man

>>18512842
100% of what you said is bullshit. 100% of women wouldn't date YOU.

File: 4chan.png (789KB, 1887x2545px) Image search: [Google]

789KB, 1887x2545px

>>18512311
Something that might interest you

>>18512865
No it's not

There isn't a single woman in the world that would prefer a 5'7 dude to a 6' one
Not
A
Single
One

>>18512870
How tall are you and why are you a bitter virgin whining here and not /r9k/?

>>18512870
Hey lets not be too silly here.

I'd bet there's at least 1 in every 500,000,000 women with a fetish for shorter men. That's like 6 or 7 total in the world. If you're short and you can't find one of those 6 or 7 women you just need to work harder because it's YOUR FAULT you're alone. There's literally nothing unfair about life as a short man it's all your own fault. I mean those 6 women are out there and you're just too whinny to go get them.

>>18512866
>/r9k/ manchildren thinking anyone who doesn't agree with their delusional virginal worldview must be a woman

We need to do something. /adv/ is getting raided by /r9k/ every day now.

>>18512870
There are no 5'7" virgin men above 25. Meanwhile 20% of 6' men are virgins at 25.

>>18512870
im a very short girl and I loved how my first boyfriend was a similar hight to me at 5'3''

hugging anyone taller than that felt awkward. I loved how we fit together so well and sex was eye-to-eye most of the time. he shot up to 5'8'' at the end of our relationship and I preferred him being shorter.

I am 4'9'' for the record.
Short men should go for short girls but they typically want tall women for some reason?

>>18512880
>everybody who has anything but blind optimism and love for the sweet little perfect princess that is every woman is a r9k bitter virgin man child blah blah

>>18512876
What dies it matter how tall I am? Does it change the fact women OVERWHELMINGLY prefer tall men? Something that has been studied and confirmed a thousand times?

>>18512886
Lmao
I know your kind, womanlets like you are the ones most obsessed with your bf being 6'+

>>18512889
You can't hide the fact that you are a bitter virgin manchild neet. Why are you even here? Go back to your containment board.

>>18512880
actually found that image on pol during the primaries thought there probably is a lot of cross pollination between those two groups.

>>18512893
It matters because you are either a tall kissless virgin failure trying to make himself feel better, or a short kissless virgin failure making weak excuses.

>>18512897
There's a lot of overlap between those two indeed.

>>18512894
I think if you can string together just a few more insults it'll magically make your ideas true.

>>18512898
I could be a hyperintelligent chimpanzee and it wouldn't change shit. Preference for height is something factual and proven.

>>18512332
Funny, but I just analysed my looks with the criteria and found that I am fairly attractive if we measure by them. I do not know if this is true, because I consider myself pretty ugly and often see men better-looking than me. But also often see men worse looking than me. With women it is random for me.
Fuck it is so complicated with the looks, better just leave it out of the equation and just do your best.

>>18512906
No you wouldn't be. If you were intelligent you wouldn't be a kissless virgin. Intelligence is the most attractive trait in the end, this is factual and proven. Women will always go for the smarter guy, all else being equal.

>>18512906
So you're an average height guy who closes his eyes to all the men of your height or shorter getting lots of girls. Got it. You are the only man of your height who is a virgin. This is a fact.

>>18512915
No, imbecile.

Intelligence is correlated with wealth and status. That's what attracts the women, not the raw intelligence.

Geniuses like Newton died virgins and I'm pretty sure he was smarter than any of us.

And before you say "well ur le dum" notice never once did I say I am intelligent.

>>18512920
Yeah, some small detail like the tall guy being a psychopath or the short guy being a CEO. And even then, the woman would doubt taking the shorter one.
>>18512311

>>18512928
Newton was gay.

>>18512928
No girl would pick the rich dumb guy who inherited it, over the smart decently wealthy guy.

>>18512930
Why are you so convinced you know what women want? Not even women themselves know.

>>18512931
He wasn't.
Kant is another good example of a brilliant mind. And also a great example of what humanity could achieve if it weren't for fucking women.

>>18512933
Only because the latter has a chance at acquiring more status later on since he is smart.

But they would pick the rich dumb guy over the poor smart guy, especilly if the smart guy is happy with ekeing out a living and not running the rat race.

They call this "being attracted to driven guys" but what it really is is an investment. I give you a womb to put your children in hopes of you having a successful career and giving me money and status.

>>18512941
>Ariely found that a 5'4" man would need to make $229,000 more than a 6' man to have equal appeal; a 5'6" man would need $183,000 more; a 5'10" man would need $32,000 more.

From Marry Him: the case for Mr Good Enough
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1570677X15000398
Related paper

Besides, there is strong positive correlation between height and intelligence and height and income, so even if you account for those taller people are still better off because they are smarter and hence make more money

>>18512893
how come whenever I try to talk to a guy on the internet he discounts my opinion and real life experience like he's lived it himself?

I do not prefer tall men, do you know how weird it is to be short as it is? Average people tower over me and it can make sex very awkward if someone is much taller than I am.

I know that a lot of women prefer tall men but there are still girls out there that prefer men to be on the shorter side.

>>18512957
>You are very restricted in your philosophical views.

> Kant can be dismissed as either obvious facts (like categorical imperative, of course this is fucking obvious to anyone who listens to their inner feeling) or just over complicated bullshit with no meaning

Take your own advice, Kant goes far beyond the categorical imperative, his metaphysics is where he made his mark and his principle work on that is one of the most important philosophical works no matter what tradition you approach things from.

>>18512962
And a guy 6'6" or taller could have 0 income and girls find him more attractive. Girls would pay a 6'8" guy 50k a year to be with him.

Garbage in, garbage out. Why have you collected all these links anyway? Are you this raging buttmad about being a 6'4" virgin?

>>18512962
>height and intelligence

Prove it. The only correlation I see here is your extreme desperation being directly correlated with your virginity quotient.

>>18512962
Taller men:

>live shorter
>have more health problems
>have a smaller penis size
>are more likely to be virgins

These are all indisputable facts.

>>18512969
Because you are not representative.

There are guys into BBW and it doesn't mean guys don't for the most part prefer thin girls
Besides you are 4'9. A 5'4 man has 7 inches on you. That's like a 5'5 girl with a 6' man which ding ding is the height most women like. You still like tall men (compared to yourself), you're just short as fuck

Would you date a 4'8 guy? Of course not, you'd be fucking disgusted by him. This is how a 5'5 woman feel when she sees a 5'4 guy.

>>18512987
You are not representative. No other man of your height is a virgin.

>>18512987
Why do bitter virgin manchildren from /r9k/ always think they are experts on women?

>>18512979
>>18512984
>>18512987
>at least three peer reviewed papers linked in this thread
>Y-YOURE WRONG!! THE WORLD IS JUST AND YOUR LOOKS DONT MATTER AT ALL!!

>>18512944
Newton was either asexual or gay. What kind of idiot thinks that his genius made him unattractive to women and if he had been dumber he would have got women?

Apparently he was also an insufferable cunt and raging aspie.

>>18512993
Lmao you sound like the most basic new age retard I've ever seen

>love is illogical and just happens dude
>I'm so deep man let me hit this blunt to hit Nirvana
Fuck off

>>18512996
Funny how you ignore all the peer reviewed papers that go against your delusions, yet accept obvious garbage. Typical delusional /r9k/.

>>18512996
How tall are you and why are you a virgin?

>>18513002
Show me a paper that proves women don't care about height. I've linked two already, it's only fair you do the same.

>>18512999
Newton is just a good example to prove intelligence is not the most desirable trait.

>>18513002
No friend, people are not "ignoring" your papers, we can't read them because they don't exist and you're literally just copying our words and throwing them back at us without even thinking.

>>18512993
>Once you will reach a level in your spiritual development where you will understand that words itself do not matter at all. Mind, thinking process, words - this is nothing in relation to other things, which are hidden in the ancient knowledge of Asia and South America.

The book is important not because of the words but because of the understanding those words can unlock. Its for the same reason the Pali Cannon and the Diamond Sutra have value.

>which are hidden in the ancient knowledge of Asia and South America.

And in the knowledge of the German Idealists, English Empiricists and especially in thinkers such as Wittgenstein. Honestly you speak as though all of Western Philosophy was Bertrand Russel and the autistic logical positivists

>>18513004
>>18512995
>>18512994
>virgin virgin virgin virgin

not even him but then you see people saying male virginity is not stigmatized kek

Fuck. It seem like I have a chance

>>18512969
>here's my experience
>nuh uh! I have a link to a study that shows your experience didn't happen!

You are talking to a mentally damaged species. No amount of facts and logic will work on him.

>>18512987
i would date a 4'8 man actually.

I also said I acknowledge that a lot of women like tall men but I ALSO said that there are women out there that will date short men. You can't just exclude women like me because it doesn't fit your self loathing narrative.

Also why would it matter that a 5'4 male has 7 inches on me? He is still a short man by your standards!

>>18513007
Newton didn't want women. How can you be so dumb to not even understand that?

>>18511104
Who is this semon demon?

>>18513020
Creepshot someone filmed covertly. He's been begging for source across many boards.

>>18509608
Its extremes for women.
Very attractive, very cool, very interesting, very talented, very funny, very smart.

Its instinctual so think of it from an evolutionary perspective. She can have one baby a year. Shes gotta think your baby is going to survive, and shes gotta think the baby is going to grow up and continue to fuck. (all subconscious).

Add in the fact every woman has different tastes, so what you observed one woman doing does not speak for all of them.

>>18513017
Scales only matter in relation to something. 5'4 is short because the average woman is 5'6 and the average man is 5'11

Compared to a 4'9 woman instead, it is "tall", the correct amount of tall. More than a foot taller than the girl is awkward for women, so obviously you prefer somebody "shorter".

Still you're not representative. You are something like 3 to 4 standard deviations below the average.

>>18513033
yeah i get the scale thing but what i do not get is why you are assuming that short men do not get pussy because they obviously do if women like me are willing to date them.

>>18513050
I think what has been lost in the dialogue is the statements of absolutes.

To reword what has been said, its not that

>short men get no sex at all

but more

>short men get such a dramatically lower amount of sex compared to tall men, its almost nothing by comparison

Which is pretty true. A 5'3 man, on average and a fair bit more, is going to have a tougher time finding a girl or to find a girl to sleep with him vs someone 6'0.

Of course there are outliers but on average, good luck if you're a short man. Exceptions do not make the rule and overall, most women do not want short men besides the insanely rich.

>>18513050
>why are people in Africa dying of hunger if people are willing to send food

Because it's not enough?
Okay, you're willing to date short men. You're such a minority compared to short men there simply aren't enough of you

>>18513063
I honestly think most girls would date someone shorter than average as long as he is taller than them. It's rare for a man to be much shorter than a girl anyway.

>>18513059
>short men get such a dramatically lower amount of sex
You have nothing to back up this and you know it. It's just more wishful thinking from your part.

>>18513063
>You're such a minority

You're such a liar. You have done nothing but make over 100 posts in the last 16 hours, all of them nothing but lies. You need help.

>>18513059
How tall are you?

>>18513059
A 5'7 man will have a tough time. For a 5'3 man it'll be almost impossible

>>18513083
We literally have reference of research, a mix of anecdotal and even a video on research of preferred dating partners. I am not saying short men full stop have lower sex, there is always outliers. But in the main that is not the case.

>>18513089
5'3/161cm.

I'm also on this website so you can guess how much success I got in the dating department.

The post you replied to was my first post in this thread, just thought I would add my 2 cents to the discussion. I find it interesting.

Yeah that's true, ugly women often have a preference for ugly motherfuckers, especially after good looking guys refused them. Their personality becomes suddenly likable and their defects get also better.

>>18513086
You're the only one who's been posting lies for 16 hours dude. You're the crazy one for claiming there's no difference between a 5'0 man and a 6'0 man to women, and you're even crazy enough to actually believe everyone you've argued with during those 16 hours was the same sole person, who also must be an angry bitter virgin neet for holding the ridiculous idea that women generally prefer tall men.


Sometimes it's incredible seeing just how lacking in self awareness some people can be.

>>18513095
Just one link to "short men have much less sex". Cherrypicked clips of women is not scientific evidence.

You can't find one. You're lying and you know it.

>>18513111
It's obvious there is one raging autist who has been posting all this time.

>I can't get girls because I'm short
>Stop giving me facts waaaaah they don't count

>>18513095
If you're a Pajeet it doesn't count. That's your reason.

>>18513117
>It's obvious there is one raging autist who has been posting all this time
Yes, you.

>>18509608
Just become a rapper.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DZeN4DBw5D4

>>18513091
I know a guy who is 5'7" and gets pussy like no tomorrow. Stop it with the wishful thinking.

Finally this shitshow of a thread is autosaging. Can we make a stand against /r9k/ raids so they won't happen again?

>>18513112
No need to be so accusing. I'm here to talk about it not turn this into a personal battle. I don't know why me saying something which is pretty common knowledge is me lying.

Also here

http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/1474704915604563

First page on google.

I'm not making excuses for short men and I am positive particularly socially adept short men have it fine. But for a lot of us, especially on this site, that is sadly not the case.

That is also based in truth as you can see above.

>>18513125
This finally proves all the papers and research wrong! You sure showed these manlets!

>>18513128
Only if you post for another 16 hours and accuse other people of all being 1 person despite giving away the fact you're actually the one doing it with the way you scream variations of "lies liar you're lying" in all your posts.

>>18513129
>The study showed no difference across most of the height continuum.

At least read the links you post the next time.

>>18513137
>The studies and papers prove this experience wrong! It must be an illusion!

>>18513139
Eh, there's been one obvious autist the whole time. It's easy to jump on the "you're lying" bandwagon when he's making shit up.

>>18513145
Read a little further.

> After dividing respondents into different height groups, the researchers found that every group of men taller than 5 feet 4 inches had the same median number of sex partners: seven.

So what you said is true. But:

>Only men classified as “very short,” or between 5 feet 2 inches and 5 feet 4 inches, had a significantly different sexual history. They reported a median of five sex partners.

Devil is in the detail anon.

>>18513149
You cannot be this stupid.

>>18513159
Is that controlled for other factors such as race? Pajeets and Changs make up the majority of men under 5'4", and they're universally far less desirable than white men.

>>18513149
You people have no capacity for logic. I swear it's like you're trying to be stupid.

Nobody claimed it was impossible for short men to ever have sex. But it gets harder to succeed with women as you get shorter. 1 anecdotal story doesn't disprove that in any way.

>>18513154
>there's been one obvious autist the whole time
Yes, you. You gave it away because you're obsessed with throwing out those particular words. You've been exposed and you know it, just give up.

Here watch everyone, his response is going to be "Liar. You're lying. Quit telling lies you lying liar". Normal people don't talk like that.

>>18513165
Well that's the problem with most of these studies. They rarely account race as a factor. I'm solely going by height as with the research.

>am both 5'3 and a Chang

Ow

>>18513180
Ouch bro, well, it could still be worse, at least you're not a Pajeet.

This thread got derailed hard.

The entire point was that women are hypocrites because they pretend appearance is secondary when it's actually every bit as important for them as it is for men.

>>18513185
I wouldn't call it derailed. Women and their whiteknight slaves just stepped in and basically proved the point by getting all upset about people saying it and trying to just scream at them to stop saying things they dislike instead of actually disproving them.

>>18513183
Ah I'm half joking but cheers. I'm quite happy being both Asian and small. Got me spoiled throughout my time as a kid, so good came early, negatives later. Also the perception of being harmless so I can go by my business fine and if I ever go to the US, less likely to be shot by cops.

>inb4 end up shot by cop in US

Still looking for that tall Asian girl though. Don't expect that till I'm in my early 30s.

>>18513191
It got derailed by angry /r9k/ posters who couldn't take being told to man up and stop whining.

>>18513185
The opposite is true. Women say they want this and that in a man, when in fact the man they actually end up with is nothing like she described.

>>18513219
Because they lie? There are girls in his very thread saying they don't mind if their bf is short and we know how that goes IRL.

>>18513227
It's because women don't know what they want.

>>18513227
Why do you assume those girls lie? They're the only honest ones in this thread.

>>18513243
They're the only ones deluded, more like.

>>18513254
I have dated short guys and enjoyed dating them. I don't understand how I can be "deluded" about my taste for guys when I spent years with a guy who is 5'6" (who cheated on me, by the way).

>>18513227
Women all say they will only accept a guy who is at least 8 feet tall with a 12 inch dick and a billionaire and Nobel prize winner, and a list of 50 other things such as loving animals.

Then a guy comes along who pushes the right buttons and she forgets about her requirements.

>>18513279
It's the opposite
They say they want a sensitive and literate man who understands them and respects them as women, and then chad comes along and they forget all about that

Wait why are people calculating an expected value bean count of sexual partners vs height?

I get that there's a principle that taller is more attractive but I thought the idea is to help OP with his specific problem. Idk if this is helping.

It's better for you to be more sociable in general, OP. Forget the hoes for a moment. It'll be good for your career and when you negotiate for big purchases.

If you think your physique isn't commanding enough, start quietly going to a gym. You won't get taller but you'll look more respectable.