RendHeaven

stfu and just do it

How do you know that the girls liked you based solely on your looks and not your attitude? More importantly - how do you know the girls rejected the ugly guys solely because they were ugly and not because these guys carried themselves with the attitude of an ugly person? Finally, fine. Let's say your experiences are 100% correct and valid. Even then, my claims about male attraction strategies allow for exceptions (because time and time again, I do acknowledge that looks in men matter SOMEWHAT TO AN EXTENT). Yes, but notice who is actually being more open-minded here. You guys are insisting that LOOKS ARE PARAMOUNT AND INSURMOUNTABLE. I am saying that LOOKS MATTER - BUT ONLY SOMEWHAT - AND THAT THEY ARE A SECONDARY CONCERN. Your frame is more absolutist, and my experiences straight up contradict your frame. All I need to do is show one ugly guy with a hot girl and your story shatters. Meanwhile, my frame is rather flexible, and can actually account for your experiences as well. Your experiences don't contradict any of my claims. If you seriously think that the way you look is the #1 criteria for male attractiveness, then yes. You haven't gone out at all lol. It's so obvious. You're too busy reading internet articles and ruminating over your mere handful of experiences. Come back and talk big after you've approached hundreds and thousands of girls.

[Off topic] It was actually "cool" to debate this at one point, I remember back in high school there was a wave of people claiming that "water itself cannot be wet because it is that which makes other things wet." It was a mess

This seems like a response to my thread. *specifically when trying to attract ONE desired person. That is very different from whether or not someone/anyone will find you attractive. Simply wrong. Are they visual? Yes. Are they AS VISUAL? No. On what grounds are you saying that the attraction criteria of hetero men and women are the same? How often do you go out? How many books on attraction have you read? How many girls have you talked to one-on-one and in groups? How many girls have YOU attracted? Tinder is not the real world, it doesn't say anything about how attraction actually works. I have real-life experiences and stories of ugly men getting with hot girls, and pretty men failing to get with girls (and so do others). What say you to this? Will you just conveniently ignore it? Depends on circumstance, but you're probably not wrong. That being said, recall that my thread was about attracting ONE desired person. Not attracting someone/anyone randomly. Sure an unattractive woman "has more options" than a similarly unattractive guy; but I'm suggesting that maybe that same guy can grow himself to become attractive to HIS SPECIFIC CHOICE OF WOMAN in a way that the same woman CANNOT choose to become attractive to HER SPECIFIC CHOICE OF MAN. I'm open to being wrong, but people keep straw-manning my original suggestion, so it doesn't even feel like we're talking about the same thing. Yes. Let it be clear that we are talking strictly about raw attraction here, without any concern for longevity. If you insist on talking about longevity, then we're simply on different pages of the conversation. None of what you said really feels "encouraging" towards women. This all feels to me more like excuses for why ugly men should feel defeated and immobilized. Are you joking? LOL. The whole point of dating IS THAT YOU DATE SOMEONE THAT YOU FIND ATTRACTIVE. Dating is a game of selfishness. Let's at least embrace that instead of pretending otherwise.

LOOOOLLLL

@SamC PFFFT bruhhhh @museumoftrees Link in my bio lol. Feel free to DM me.

You're still only 5% deep. Why is incompetence something that makes you feel empty? For example, I'm incompetent at cooking. But idgaf. I'm not empty because I'm incompetent at cooking. But for some reason, when it comes to women, you (and even I sometimes) attribute emptiness directly to our incompetence with attraction? Why women? Take this seriously. It's not so obvious. "Well, cooking and dating are different," you say. Sure, but exactly how? Flesh this out. For example, take into account the cultural values you grew up in, your craving for acceptance, whatever the hell that even means (Yes, it's there. Bring it to light), etc. Why women? Furthermore, why is competence so exalted in your mind's eye? And why must it be possessed by you? Why aren't you content observing and accepting the competence of others? Why the need to acquire, monopolize, and hoard it? What are you avoiding by trying to change your perceived incompetence? What would happen if you just let that empty hole exist and you did nothing to plug it or cover it? Notice that this is the truest and deepest you can go with your contemplation. To lock eyes with that existential emptiness, and to not deny, distract, or attempt to change. To be open and curious. To wonder, "who/what are you?" "can we be friends?" Instead, we glance at that emptiness for a couple minutes at best, and we try to find a way-out of it. We triumph at our contemplation: "look! I peered into the void!" We think we learned a lesson about ourselves, we think we vanquished our foe, and we go back out in the world and continue to focus on personal gain. I've done this time and time again in my own life. Emptiness never leaves you. At some point you'll have to befriend it

This is so key dude! It's unbelievably easy to ditch ice cream when you commit to healthy smoothies. With some trial and error, you can basically get your smoothie to taste like ice cream, except all of the ingredients are fresh organic fruits + such. It's OP.

well said. I think there is a very specific flavor of arrogance (grounded in the ability to "go meta") that is found in Yellow which is absent in the other stages.

yeah, don't fast yet. keep that as your hidden ace. fix #5 and #6 asap. they are easily the worst offenders on your list

I think you're onto something. I notice that people do throw around the term "energy" without reverence. That being said, don't dismiss Emerald as "stage green dogma" LOL... her perspective is Turquoise. Maybe there IS such a thing as energy; but if there is, it'd be a deeply personal and subjective thing... try to be open to that possibility Personal & subjective CAN = Truth (if you're open to it). Freaky, I know.

@integral I appreciate your perspective, I'll contemplate it

freaking brilliant

You're probably right when considering the whole group of straight men/women collectively. Nonetheless, even you admit the difference in attraction strategy: i.e. women focus primarily on improving looks while men focus primarily on improving social skills (and of course vice versa secondarily). I'm just doing my best to notice the ramifications of these different attraction strategies. Like it's finally dawning on me why our society is so looks-obsessed, especially in women. It's literally a matter of whether or not you're accepted. You would think, "well just accept everyone then!" but that's not how my dick works. I'm selfish. Gosh, this is fucked. It's really interesting to me how half of the replies here are mostly in denial of the difference in attraction strategy. If we can manage to agree on that difference of attraction strategy, we're more free to speculate about how that impacts survival. I think you have a fair take

Disagree. I had strong preferences from age 2 or 3. I remember as a toddler noticing how some faces were just so much nicer than others (nobody taught me to make this distinction). I remember quietly ranking my babysitters by how innately pulled I was to their face, and I didn't even know I had a dick back then. So, you're right that it's "programming." But you're wrong that it's a purely arbitrary external programming that has nothing to do with my honest interaction with the world. It's more of a self-programming as I studied what I gravitated towards and what I don't gravitate towards. Now, my dick gets rock hard for the appearances of some women and not others. This is the case just looking at pictures. How is that inauthentic? You're lying if you say you don't make a similar distinction yourself. There's no way you get hard for the visual appearance of any woman indiscriminately, unless maybe you're so enlightened that you've eviscerated all personal preference. I'm not claiming that all men share exactly my preferences. But I AM claiming that all men HAVE A PREFERENCE one way or another (and many of these preferences vaguely overlap), and that alone dooms some women in a way that men are not. I'm assuming you're a straight dude? If so, can you truly with a straight face say that the way she looks has no effect on your attraction whatsoever? If her soul is just right, you'll get hard for her and desire her regardless of her exterior? If you say yes to these questions, know that you're in the minority of men.

@The0Self That's actually really interesting. The gym can't mend facial disproportionality or asymmetry though, are you accounting for that when you say that it can turn people into 7-10s? Ok, yeah, if you have a literal facial deformity like you have a tumor growing out of your forehead or you were born without a jawbone, I think you're right. But 95+% of men can work on their personality and develop the attractiveness to be able to pick and choose who they sleep/date with. When you claim that "looks are primary," it seems like you're totally dismissing the latter

I don't know. I have in fact seen this happen a couple times. But it's always the physically "ugly" guy with the physically "hot" girl. Never the other way around But I will grant you that generally speaking there is a difference between "average looking" and "ugly looking." It takes an exceptionally strong personality to dominate dating (as a man) despite the "ugly" look, and so you don't see it that often, for sure.

@Peter Miklis You haven't "debunked" anything lol It tells me that looks matter somewhat, but that they are not primary. Exactly as I claim. This is true. But the hardworking ugly guy outperforms the good-looking lazy guy EVERY SINGLE TIME. This is what you're not accepting. That's the whole point of this thread. Men get this ridiculous attraction advantage. The same can't be said for women. Why the hell do we men complain so much? We have such an advantage. We get the privilege to work on our personalities, and that directly influences our ability to get with the women of our choice. How crazy is that? Wrong. Re-read my story above. I have direct experience to the contrary. I go out more than you do.

I think that to be more masculine, you must understand and embrace the feminine. Am I the only one that doesn't see the two as mutually exclusive?

I had a good friend in HS who had 10/10 face and body. Like seriously godly genetics. It was actually unfair. He looked just like Vshred (side note: Vshred is a fitness scam, don't listen to him! ). Despite this, I think he only got with 1-2 mediocre girls throughout his whole HS career (they barely lasted a few weeks). Totally carried by his looks. I remember speaking to some girls about their opinion of him, and they all saw him like a little puppy dog. He was socially awkward, constantly fidgety and stuttered, never held eye contact, said weird things in forced ways, constantly tried to prove his worth by bragging, etc. His game was literally negative. He totally sucked as a man, and consequently all of the girls looked straight past him. I kept hearing things like "Oh god he would be so hot if he actually got a personality." Meanwhile, all of the girls would be fetishizing these other guys who had maybe 6/10 in looks but had tons of humor, confidence, social clout, a string of ex girlfriends, etc. I knew a guy who had droopy eyes and a gigantic bulging black mole on the side of his nose (so he was distinctly asymmetrical lol). He looked like a 4 to me, honestly. Maybe less. But he was the social "leader" of everyone around him, always the loudest, acted like he owned the very space everyone occupied. He could say one word and make everyone laugh. He also had a hot girlfriend + they lasted years. That was really eye opening for me.

Who said this only happened once? my man, lol. Right! Forgive me for suggesting that a beastly 2/10-looker had a chance at attracting you, haha But I appreciate your authenticity here. This mindset is so foreign to me. If she's a 10/10 looker, I'm attracted. No negotiation. It's kinda scary. As such, I'm inclined to attribute this attraction difference to gender (as a rough generalization). OBVIOUSLY there are exceptions to the "rule," but isn't there a trend here that we can notice? Sigh. Not dealing with this, dude. Obviously looks have *some* impact. The girl has eyes. BUT as a male, your looks ARE NOT THE PRIMARY CRITERIA. Period. I don't doubt that. I'm just noticing that this is the way things are. Hence, it seems to me that less physically attractive girls have fewer options than similarly struggling guys at attracting the partners they desire.

Jesus Christ! I'm your age. I can't imagine being with someone 1.5x my age. That's really cool. If you're not happy, break up. It's so simple. I know you're going to feel like the villain. Your mind will spin stories about how you're harming him and he doesn't deserve it. Do it anyway. This is coming from someone who had his heart torn out and crushed. But in hindsight, I see that she did what's best for both of us, and now I have nothing but gratitude for her.

LOL!~ If we were friends IRL I'd be clowning tf out of you. "how to get over someone you never dated"

I agree. Notice that I'm not talking about long term relationships here. God, I would never get into a committed relationship based only on looks lol. I am, however, talking about raw attraction. That split second subconscious decision where I either distinguish her as either "potentially sexual" or "non-sexual"

LOL I'm smelling some CAP. These hypothetical "hotties" you're talking about, if they're really as physically attractive as you suggest, have dozens if not hundreds of thirsty DMs from guys. You just don't see it. But that doesn't even matter because getting more sexual partners is actually a male metric. Getting more sexual partners is NOT a female metric. A woman generally tends to just want one superman to swoop her off her feet. Having a hoard of thirsty d00ds at her doorstep is meaningless to her. So your "average looking girl with feminine behavior" is not actually winning. Consider this: the "average looking" girl and the superhottie both meet me and decide that they have romantic/sexual desires for me. At face value, I'm choosing the superhottie. What do you suggest the average looking girl does in this situation? Her options are slim. I don't care have feminine she acts. The hot one is hot. Now notice the same scenario but swap the genders. 2 dudes are courting the same girl. Let's say one dude has vastly better looks than the other. Well, believe it or not, the uglier guy actually has quite a lot of options! By being just a little bit funnier, just a little bit freer, just a little bit more authentic and challenging and non-needy, the "ugly" guy can actually land the girl. This is the case. Do you see this difference?