This fat faggot gets pussy, what is your excuse?

[Mr. Faggotry]

 

[Harry Powell]

Wtf?

 

[Treat Yourself]

This just in: women care more about money and status than how you look. More at 11.

 

[Jims_Maroon_Pants]

Who?

 

[Mick_Mickerson]

Huh, what's that?

 

[gassers]

View attachment 160828

Exceptions don't make the rules. Furthermore:

Physical Attractiveness is the Strongest Predictor of Initial Romantic Interest in Both Sexes; No Evidence Personality Plays Any Role, Part 2 (Olderbak, Malter, Wolf, Jones, & Figueredo, 2017)​

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5519305/ https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/per.2087 http://sci-hub.tw/https://doi.org/10.1002/per.2087

Predicting Romantic Interest at Zero Acquaintance: Evidence of Sex Differences in Trait Perception but Not in Predictors of Interest
Sally G. Olderbak1, Frederic Malter2, Pedro Sofio Abril Wolf3, Daniel N. Jones4, and Aurelio José Figueredo5

1. Ulm University, Ulm, Germany
2. Max Planck Institute for Social Law and Social Policy, Munich, Germany
3. Pennsylvania State University, State College, PA USA
4. University of Texas, El Paso, El Paso, TX USA
5. University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ USA

Abstract: We evaluated five competing hypotheses about what predicts romantic interest. Through a half-block quasi-experimental design, a large sample of young adults (i.e., responders; n = 335) viewed videos of opposite-sex persons (i.e., targets) talking about themselves and responders rated the targets’ traits and their romantic interest in the target. We tested whether similarity, dissimilarity, or overall trait levels on mate value, physical attractiveness, life history strategy, and the Big-Five personality factors predicted romantic interest at zero acquaintance, and whether sex acted as a moderator. We tested the responders’ individual perception of the targets’ traits, in addition to the targets’ own self-reported trait levels and a consensus rating of the targets made by the responders. We used polynomial regression with response surface analysis within multilevel modeling to test support for each of the hypotheses. Results suggest a large sex difference in trait perception; when women rated men, they agreed in their perception more often than when men rated women. However, as a predictor of romantic interest, there were no sex differences. Only the responders’ perception of the targets’ physical attractiveness predicted romantic interest; specifically, responders’ who rated the targets’ physical attractiveness as higher than themselves reported more romantic interest.

---

I'll just skip to an excerpt of their discussion points this time, but as a general rule, it's always recommended not to take anyone's word (or disembodied quote!) about what a given study concludes (including the own authors!). It's always a good exercise to read the full text with a keen eye on the methodology and results to render your own assessment of the data and overall quality and relevance of the study.

Discussion
Summary of Key Findings
Overall, we found sex differences in trait perception, with female responders more often coming to an agreement in their perception of the male targets’ traits than male responders with female targets. However, there were strong halo effects in trait perception for women. A closer examination suggested that the female responders’ ratings of the targets’ Big-Five personality factors were mostly driven by their ratings of the targets’ mate value and slow life history strategy. Finally, we found that of all of the traits and score types assessed, romantic interest was only predicted by the responders’ perception of the targets’ physical attractiveness, with no moderating effect of the responders’ sex. Specifically, responders’ were interested in targets’ who they perceived to be higher than themselves on physical attractiveness. Thus, we found partial support for the third hypothesis (high or higher values on socially desirable traits predicts attraction) and for the fifth hypothesis (readily perceived traits predict attraction) because these hypotheses were only supported for physical attractiveness. We found no support for the first hypothesis (similarity predicts attraction), for the second hypothesis (dissimilarity predicts attraction), or for the fourth hypothesis (sex moderates what predicts attraction). These effects will be discussed in turn in the next sections.
Predictors of Romantic Interest
Partially supported hypotheses In partial support of the third hypothesis, we found participants were attracted to someone higher than themselves on physical attractiveness. That absolute levels of physical attractiveness are an important predictor of romantic interest is heavily supported in the literature, both empirically (e.g., Luo & Zhang, 2009) and theoretically (e.g., Buss, 1989; Sprecher, 1998). However, that the other traits were unrelated to interest is somewhat surprising. In particular, the lack of an effect for life history strategy is surprising given the heritability coefficient of this construct (h2 = .65; Figueredo et al., 2004) and the literature suggesting its importance in dating for men and women (e.g., Olderbak & Figueredo, 2012). Our findings that absolute trait levels for the Big-Five personality factors are unrelated to interest contradict the findings of others studies (e.g., Luo & Zhang, 2009) [see note], however it should be noted that often researchers do not control for perception of physical attractiveness and based on our results, we suggest that this is important to do as it acts as a third-variable.
In a partial support of the fifth hypothesis, we found that physical attractiveness, a trait that both male and female responders could agree on in their ratings of the targets, suggesting that trait could be readily perceived, predicted romantic interest. However, in contrast, the other traits for which male and female responders came to an agreement, even after controlling for halo effects, were unrelated to romantic interest (e.g., extraversion).

 

[CuntFucker .]

Exceptions don't make the rules. Furthermore:

Physical Attractiveness is the Strongest Predictor of Initial Romantic Interest in Both Sexes; No Evidence Personality Plays Any Role, Part 2 (Olderbak, Malter, Wolf, Jones, & Figueredo, 2017)​

Different design/methodology, same findings.

---

---

---

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5519305/ https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/per.2087 http://sci-hub.tw/https://doi.org/10.1002/per.2087

---

I'll just skip to an excerpt of their discussion points this time, but as a general rule, it's always recommended not to take anyone's word (or disembodied quote!) about what a given study concludes (including the own authors!). It's always a good exercise to read the full text with a keen eye on the methodology and results to render your own assessment of the data and overall quality and relevance of the study.

Social science and psychology are a scam though

 

[guest]

Exceptions don't make the rules. Furthermore:

[HEADING=2]Physical Attractiveness is the Strongest Predictor of Initial Romantic Interest in Both Sexes; No Evidence Personality Plays Any Role, Part 2 (Olderbak, Malter, Wolf, Jones, & Figueredo, 2017)[/HEADING]

[URL]https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5519305/[/URL] [URL]https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/per.2087[/URL] [URL]http://sci-hub.tw/https://doi.org/10.1002/per.2087[/URL]

---

I'll just skip to an excerpt of their discussion points this time, but as a general rule, it's always recommended not to take anyone's word (or disembodied quote!) about what a given study concludes (including the own authors!). It's always a good exercise to read the full text with a keen eye on the methodology and results to render your own assessment of the data and overall quality and relevance of the study.

Anybody can look presentable. 99% of the time when I see an ugly person, there are 3-4 glaringly obvious things they could do to improve their appearance (shave, lose weight, brush their teeth, stop dressing like a pedo, etc). Also, stature and confidence play into physical appearance as well.

 

[gassers]

Anybody can look presentable. 99% of the time when I see an ugly person, there are 3-4 glaringly obvious things they could do to improve their appearance (shave, lose weight, brush their teeth, stop dressing like a pedo, etc). Also, stature and confidence play into physical appearance as well.

I am sure that empirical study holds less weight than your anecdotal advice.

 

[NortheastPhilly]

He looks like he has a lot of self confidence to be honest witcha

 

[guest]

This just in: women care more about money and status than how you look. More at 11.

i have money, how do i get "status"

 

[guest]

I am sure that empirical study holds less weight than your anecdotal advice.

you complain about kikes and fake studies and how psychology is bullshit -- i've fucking SEEN YOU SPECIFICALLY MAKE THESE POSTS. but then you post some stupid kiked half-assed "study" that complies with your shitty dating world view and go "see? see?! I'm right to brood!"
fuck you. FAGGOT.

 

[gassers]

you complain about kikes and fake studies and how psychology is bullshit -- i've fucking SEEN YOU SPECIFICALLY MAKE THESE POSTS. but then you post some stupid kiked half-assed "study" that complies with your shitty dating world view and go "see? see?! I'm right to brood!"
fuck you. FAGGOT.

You just posted that you were putting me on ignore.

You are not a man of your word either, guess that makes us equal.

 

[guest]

You just posted that you were putting me on ignore.

You are not a man of your word either, guess that makes us equal.

the "putting you on ignore so nobody can read this" line? it's a fucking joe cumia line. are you a kiwi faggot as well?

 

[gassers]

the "putting you on ignore so nobody can read this" line? it's a fucking joe cumia line. are you a kiwi faggot as well?

Dougie ngl, you annihilated me here. Fucked got almost raped by dougie.

 

[guest]

Dougie ngl, you annihilated me here. Fucked got almost raped by dougie.

[HEADING=2]Olderbak, Malter, Wolf, Jones, & Figueredo = JEWS[/HEADING]

 

[aRTie02150]

My excuse is I hate women.

 

[TheGhostOfAbeVigoda]

Lmao Merkules. My one buddy used to listen to this fat fuck all the time. I always get a kick out of tubby sacks of shit like him or Matty Matheson that get their throats tattooed and then get so obese that their extra chins completely cover it up.

 

[IGotATreeOnMyHouse85]

He’s a Canadian rapper - Post Malone looks like shit and gets hot women so I guess the same applies here.

 

[Harry Powell]

.

you complain about kikes and fake studies and how psychology is bullshit -- i've fucking SEEN YOU SPECIFICALLY MAKE THESE POSTS. but then you post some stupid kiked half-assed "study" that complies with your shitty dating world view and go "see? see?! I'm right to brood!"
fuck you. FAGGOT.

whoa, you’ve done it now!

Don’t you know if you insinuate in any way that Gassers could change his situation or that he’s being a faggot about it, you’re a normie? Who’s also a kike-loving white knight?

Unless, as you’ve pointed out, what you love is a research paper published by Jews that reinforces his self pitying ideology. Then it’s okay.