Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So just these extremely basic things put a man in the top 20%?
By the way, I like shorter guys. So already this list isn't every woman's top 20%. Let's face it, there IS no top 20% across the board. There just isn't. It's a myth and putting a number on it may make a person feel he is more in control of life, the universe and everything but that's a myth too.
I know women for whom athletic looking would mean absolute zip. I know women who love the very slender not built look. I know women who like a big burly rather shapeless bear. I know women who think bald heads are incredibly sexy. I know many other women besides myself who in no way think "tallish" or tall matter. At all. We're not talking a fringe here or women with incredibly weird taste. Just average women.
There's no 20%. There are no 7 v. 5 women. There are no secret formulas. If I'm totally wrong, you are still wrong specifically about the above list being the top 20% formula. I'm sorry. Piecing things like this into numbers and secret formulas is something a very small child would do in order to attempt to order a difficult to understand world. They're not the way a mature adult thinks because they're magic and made up designations, not people, personalities and real life.
Even if after all this you still believe "but the MAJORITY of women need these things!", if it happens that the ONE woman you truly desire doesn't and you've been relying on them then you still lose. So how could these silly designations, generalizations and numbers ultimately be of real use to anyone...Even if they really were true a"majority" of the time?
If you look at the research, you will find that there are commonalities among what most women find attractive.
...you can't deny that average or even rather fugly guys get dates, get girlfriends, get married. Every. Single. Day. Full stop.
This is how you understood the facts and replied:
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dissenter
I said I DON'T have most of what is on that list. That is why my dating is extremely limited.
I think we're getting to the problem here. Replace the things on the list- that you think you don't have, with these kinds of non-physical traits: Smart, Funny, Good Listener.....and things even out once again!
Location: Huntersville/Charlotte, NC and Washington, DC
26,699 posts, read 41,737,988 times
Reputation: 41381
Quote:
Originally Posted by ratherbcrazycatlady
This is what was typed to you:
This is how you understood the facts and replied:
I think we're getting to the problem here. Replace the things on the list- that you think you don't have, with these kinds of non-physical traits: Smart, Funny, Good Listener.....and things even out once again!
PHYSICAL traits were the topic of discussion for attraction, non NON-physical traits.
PHYSICAL traits were the topic of discussion for attraction, non NON-physical traits.
That was my POINT. It's not all about PHYSICAL for women, why do you take what other men say as the gospel about women but argue with us about what women like??
PHYSICAL traits were the topic of discussion for attraction, non NON-physical traits.
No, "the top 20% of men" were the topic of discussion for attraction.
I'm not sure who decided "the top 20%" was determined by the physical only, but that's (part of) why the argument was flawed...heck, damaged beyond all repair from the get-go.
Quote:
I said I DON'T have most of what is on that list. That is why my dating is extremely limited.
Oh! I see. I mistook your NFL lineman comment. I thought you were saying that was an athletic body (and technically, it is...it's the body of an NFL lineman).
But anyway...so this is why your dating is extremely limited? Because women only look at the physical, ergo there are NO overweight or otherwise non physically perfect men out there who have SOs? Go walking down the street in any busy city and tell me that's true, then get back to us with your assertions about how your dating is limited because you don't have a V-shaped body, with the intimation, naturally, that women ONLY look at the physical.
ALL of this reasoning is flawed, LOL. From the "top 20%" assertion to the "if you don't have a V-shaped body plus four other markers, no woman will date you" ridiculousness. (I mean guys. Really??? LOOK. AROUND. YOU. Sweet cheeses!) Oh geez-whilikers. Just...flawed and so so wrong as far as practical, everyday real-life relationships are concerned.
That was my POINT. It's not all about PHYSICAL for women, why do you take what other men say as the gospel about women but argue with us about what women like??
Exactly. This is why this whole thing is a flawed premise from the get-go.
Guys who who are the most successful with women are the ones who have the most characteristics that will appeal to most women.
Physicality is just one set of those characteristics, but the more of those a guy has, the less he will struggle with dating.
Very few women are going to be physically attracted to a short, fat, bald guy with a big nose, hair coming out of his ears, and a beard down to his stomach.
It makes perfect sense that there are physical characteristic in men that the majority of women find attractive. To think otherwise is ignoring reality.
Well, fab! And a certain waist-to-hip ratio, youth or the appearance of youth, large eyes, lips of a specific fullness and certain haircolors as well as hair length and even texture (I believe wavy wins out over entirely straight or curly, again, by the numbers) are preferred by a "majority" of men...there are loads of studies to prove it. In practical use, does that mean these are the only women who get partners? LOL. No. If I were to say "the top 20% of women have X traits and are preferred by men...here are studies to prove it!" would that prove...
1. That men ONLY look to the physical in a partner?
2. That women with those exact traits are the ONLY women who will get asked out?
3. That nearly all men will fall into the categories of the top-polled biological markers required as far as requirements in a partner?
4. That if a woman can't get a date, it MUST be because she doesn't fall into the top percentage of physical preferences by males?
I will say it again: look AROUND you, men. TELL ME that MOST of the men you see hand-in-hand with women, yes, even pretty women, even young women, even slender women, wandering any street on any given day are so far above average as far as looks go that 80% of men will be less attractive than they are.
If not then there is obviously more, much, much more to the equation than "women only go for the 20% top physically attractive men" and "the only reason a man might not be able to get dates is that he isn't in the top 20% of men physically." IOW, tell me what practical applications continuing to hammer home what women who had their 'druthers would physically want, could possibly have for the average man (who, BTW, IS hooked up...there are studies on that, too).
That was my POINT. It's not all about PHYSICAL for women, why do you take what other men say as the gospel about women but argue with us about what women like??
Physicality is one of the attributes by which women judge men's attractiveness. Physical attributes are much less important to women than they are to men.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That is why my dating is extremely limited. 
