My final analysis: 60% of women 35 and under in the US are attractive

[oc16]

That's right, about 60% of women in the US 35 and under can at least pass for cute (6.5 and up). You take a girl with a cute face, who might be 10 to 20 lbs. overweight, but she is still cute when she is all dolled up, so I would put her in the 6.5 category.

The other 40% are unattractive or average at best looking due to obesity and/or moderate to severe dentofacial deformities (e.g. gummy smile, protruding jaw, weak chin, etc).

 

[BackInTheGame78]

So you have met every woman in the US between the ages of 18 and 35?

Completely arbitrary and capricious and not based on any sort of reality that is statistically provable

 

[oc16]

So you have met every woman in the US between the ages of 18 and 35?

Completely arbitrary and capricious and not based on any sort of reality that is statistically provable

Based on my many observations over the years and stats on obesity.

 

[Bigpapa]

Based on my many observations over the years and stats on obesity.

you can not have 60% of the women being 6.5 and above

unless you have really bad tastes in women

 

[DarwinTaurus]

It's probably more accurate that 35% of women who are under 60, are cute...

 

[SW15]

Assumption #1: The same looks rating scale is used for women of all ages.

The pool of women 6.5+ is the top 35% of all women. If 100% of the Top 35% of all women were 18-34s, that would mean that only 35% of women 18-34s are 6.5+. You don't account for women 35+ who rate 6.5+. When you do that, it drops.

It's probably more accurate that 35% of women who are under 60, are cute...

Yes, this.

 

[oc16]

you can not have 60% of the women being 6.5 and above

unless you have really bad tastes in women

No, I just think most guys on here have a super harsh rating scale.

 

[BackInTheGame78]

Unless you have seen every women in the US this is just pure nonsense based on exceptionally small smaller sizes that are statistically irrelevant to make a broad statement with.

To put it another way, if you took this type of work and transferred it to a scientific study and wanted to publish it as if it was fact in a medical journal you would be laughed out of the room.

 

[SW15]

To put it another way, if you took this type of work and transferred it to a scientific study and wanted to publish it as if it was fact in a medical journal you would be laughed out of the room.

Accurate

 

[oc16]

Unless you have seen every women in the US this is just pure nonsense based on exceptionally small smaller sizes that are statistically irrelevant to make a broad statement with.

To put it another way, if you took this type of work and transferred it to a scientific study and wanted to publish it as if it was fact in a medical journal you would be laughed out of the room.

Well, Obviously that was not my intent, now you are mixing apples and oranges.

 

[oc16]

Unless you have seen every women in the US this is just pure nonsense based on exceptionally small smaller sizes that are statistically irrelevant to make a broad statement with.

To put it another way, if you took this type of work and transferred it to a scientific study and wanted to publish it as if it was fact in a medical journal you would be laughed out of the room.

You are probably one of those guys that would rate a super-hot chick a 6 when she should be an 8 because she is 5 lbs overweight.

 

[SW15]

You are probably one of those guys that would rate a super-hot chick a 6 when she should be an 8 because she is 5 lbs overweight.

You can't be a super hot woman and be 5 lbs overweight. It takes a lot to get to an 8 rating. Slightly overweight is not an 8. Slightly overweight is not a 6 either.

 

[BackInTheGame78]

You are probably one of those guys that would rate a super-hot chick a 6 when she should be an 8 because she is 5 lbs overweight.

No actually I would probably be more towards the rating higher because they had a nice body even if the face wasn't great.

 

[oc16]

Why argue or try to disprove OP's opinion? It's his reality that based on his standards, 60% of women 35 and under are attractive. Upon reflection real quick, and not putting much observation analysis behind it, I'd say 45% of women are attractive... I'd have to do some more observing though.

I respect what you just said, but just curious.......what makes the other 55% non-attractive? They are carrying too much weight? bad acne, big noses, gummy smiles?

 

[BackInTheGame78]

Why argue or try to disprove OP's opinion? It's his reality that based on his standards, 60% of women 35 and under are attractive. Upon reflection real quick, and not putting much observation analysis behind it, I'd say 45% of women are attractive... I'd have to do some more observing though.

Because if you make a claim that it's "In the US" it has a lot more data points needed that simply walking around his town or neighborhood and saying that "in my area'.

And it's not "trying to disprove" it's pointing out that it's laughably inaccurate to try and extrapolate his 0.000001% of US women that he has seen and then try and make it fit 100% of them then act like this is some accurate assessment.

Why anyone would even attempt to make a blanket statement like this having so little data to actually formulate an opinion about for the entire US is beyond me.

The bottom line is his analysis is pointless when extrapolated to the entire US population of women he is trying to cover. It's only accurate for the women he has seen.

 

[SW15]

Maybe he knows he's in an area that has an objectively higher amount of lower value women? So it'd be easy to extrapolate his opinions across the board.

@oc16 lives in a dating wasteland.

 

[oc16]

@oc16 lives in a dating wasteland.

And where do you live may I ask?

 

[SW15]

So do I...

You need to move then.

If you're a man who is 25+ and single, you need to move if you live in an area with under 150,000 population in your metro area. There likely won't be enough choices if your social circle is weak. Smaller areas are also more couples oriented.

 

[SW15]

Easier said than done... I have a couple limiting factors currently, so I just have to make due for the time being. The thought is in my mind though....

I had to leave certain cities for a variety of reasons prior to my current one. I made it happen. Things weren't working out.

 

[SW15]

You had marketable skills that are attractive in many cities. This is one of my limiting factors... I'm starting at the bottom again, and need to find my new path in life, then go from there...

Yes, I did have marketable skills. I also had some shiit too. Graduating in the 2007-08 school year was the biggest issue I ever had. 2008 was the worst year for a new graduate since 1930.