The funny thing about ongoing threads like this one is that, in general, everyone is right and everyone is wrong.
Attraction is always circumstancial, in that whatever criteria a woman uses to conclude if a man is attractive or not depends entirely on what information is available and what information is needed.
From afar, looks are the initial and sometimes only factor in a woman's decision process. So if you see a woman from accross the room, smile, and she avoids you like the plague, then sure, you more than likely failed probibly based on looks alone.
However, if you're sitting down having a drink with a woman then confidence, posture, personality and looks will take the stage as information most readily available in her decision process.
If you manage to get that woman to tag along as an observer in your life through social settings then status, confidence, posture, personality and looks begin to blend into her decision process.
Above and beyond all of this, a particular situation a woman is in when she is weighing this information matters as well. If you're trying to do this in a night club with 10 of her friends watching, then it is more likely that she will make a decision based on less information. Isolate her, and you have a better chance.
The bottom line here is that the faster and better you are at getting a woman to come out of her shell, drop her ***** shield and take a panoramic look at your life, the more you can diminish the odds that one quality will be the say all in her decision process. If you can manage to make a dynamic presentation like that as a first impression, you are then a PUA and not just some lucky bastud cruising on good looks.
This is why we talk about social proof, isolation, confidence, et cetera.
