Physical Attraction Determination Theory

[classyguy]

Physical Attraction Determination Theory

I've been working on a theory to understand attraction determination.

First concept is: Looks and rejection have an inverse relationship relative to the target. In other words if the girl is a 7 and the guy is a 10 he has a smaller chance of rejection than a guy that is a 3 (basically common sense)

--The higher the looks relative to the target the less likely rejection is

--The lower the looks relative to the target the higher rejection is

The second concept is where it gets a little confusing. I think the key is how the target views herself versus how the majority would rate her. This will then factor into her expectations and whether she says yes or no to a particular guy.

I think the equation is:
Self view + view of the other person + expectations = Yes/No

For example say the majority of people would rate a girl a 9. For some reason she has low self esteem and only views herself as a 6. Since she thinks she's only a six this will alter her expectations of who she is capable of getting. She might therefore think that she is only capable of getting a guy in the 5-7 range. Next she rates the guy approaching her and she may or may not rate him the way the majority would. If she rates him in this 5 and up range (could be above seven since most people want the highest they can get) then he's in and if he's below a 5 (in her eyes) then he's out.

This could account for more attractive girls saying yes to less attractive guys if the combinations work out.

This could also account for not so attractive girls saying no to more attractive guys. My theory on this is there are a lot of girls running around out there with overinflated ego's. Probably because they are too dumb to realize that a lot of guys will hit on ugly girls just for sex, and they think they are hitting on them because they are hot.

Anyway, I think this equation goes through the mind of the guy as well and the view of himself regardless of how they world sees him (either higher or lower). If the end results of Self view + Expectations + View of the other person intersect with the other persons equation then there should be a match, at least on a physical level.

I think that the root concept is self view. If most of the world considers a person a 9 or a 2, it's somewhat irrelevent because the more important concept is how they see themselves. How they see themselves will then alter the choices in the saying yes or no to guys approaching them.

Of course this is the theory on the individual level. On a group level of say 100 people I would say that 80 of the people's self view will be fairly close to the way the world sees because of all of their accumulated life experience and from they way others treat them. But there are probably a portion that have self views that are way off of what the majority would rate them.

I know that DJ principles can bridge some gaps but I'm referring here to the first 3 seconds or so of contact and the initial yes or no determination.

Interested in hearing people's opinions.

 

[MVP]

I think that the theory is sound, but you place all the emphasis on looks within seeing someone for the first 3 seconds. Wouldn't she need to see his personality first? And as for the equation, why is the expectation added on? I think it should be subtracted, but it's kind of confusing.

 

[MackJr]

This has actually been covered. You want to learn about "neg theory".

Throw out all the external world ratings. That only matters when, for example, the woman is a noble and the man is a commoner or vice versa. Titles and fame create an artificial type of value, hence rock stars and politicians get laid all the time.

Otherwise it's completely subjective. If an ugly woman says no to a good looking guy, it's not that she thinks he's hitting on her for sex, it's that her self-concept is so low she thinks that she can't handle him. This is called overqualifying.

All feminine attraction revolves around status. Women make their assesment completely around their estimate of the man's social status relative to their own. Since this is all subjective, what DJs and PUAs do is play around with that frame of mind so that it works to our benefit.

It's not that women don't care about looks, but it's that looks are part of the equation in determining the man's status level. Because a woman receives sex somewhat passively, their final determination on putting out is based on whether they feel that they've been conquered. If the man proves that his status is greater than hers, they believe that they must surrender to him, and biologically they physically respond when that switch gets flipped in their heads.

This is the way all mammals mate, not just humans.

 

[classyguy]

It's not actually added in the mathematical sense just in a component sense, as in another piece of the puzzle.

I would say that some people have expectations that don't match their reality. For example some girl might be a six and realize she is a six but has in her mind that she deserves a guy that is a ten for whatever reason, so that's why I added the expectation part.

I would say three seconds or so because it would be the time to visually see the person and hear the sound of their voice. After that personality would kick in and probably alter it to some extent. I'm guessing that this would apply more to a bar setting where the girl is going to make a snap judgement when a guy approaches.

I think I've come up with this because I've been having a conversation with a friend about eharmony. I think it is backwards. They try to match people up by values and interests, a noble cause, but unrealistic in my opinion. What they should really do is match people up that are attracted to each other and then out of the ones that are then match them up according to values and interests. Think about it, if you are a guy that is an 8 and you are perfectly matched on paper with a girl that is a 2 I doubt it is going to go anywhere.

 

[MackJr]

The eHarmony thing assumes that you're going for an LTR. value and interests are important for long term relationships, but not attraction. Our society doesn't teach attraction very well other than looks.

If you've come to this board, then you realize that attraction is the problem for "nice guys". They may be great human beings, but being a great human being isn't what turns a woman on. Or a man for that matter.

 

[classyguy]

MackJr, I mostly agree. I'm also familiar with Mystery's neg theory which I believe in, however I think there's got to be some cut off point. I've never in my life seen a guy that is a 1 with a girl that is a 10 in a romantic sense. I think that the only thing that could bridge that wide of a gap would be extreme money and fame. I think reality would be that simply acting like a HSM wouldn't be enough to do it, at least in my opinion. I could be wrong though.

 

[MackJr]

Classyguy,

What makes a guy a 1?
Would he have no arms, no legs, bad teeth, and bad breath?

Mystery's theory means that the Girl considers the guy a 1, not that there is such an absolute thing.

But for the sake of argument, let's say that a 1 really does have no arms, legs, bad teeth, and bad breath.

And we'll say the 10 is Paris Hilton.

Would Paris Hilton marry Bill Gates if, on a charity mission to Africa, he stepped on a land mine and lost his arms, legs, and a few teeth?

You bet she would. And he can use Listerine for the breath. It's pretty hard to find a situation in which social value can't be adjusted.

 

[classyguy]

Mackjr, I agree but what if Bill Gates wasn't a billionaire and was only making $20,000 a year and had no savings and had all the defects you listed, but acted like a HSM. Would she still marry him? If I had to vote I would say that she wouldn't. That's why I said extreme money or fame could probably bridge the gap, but just acting like a HSM probably wouldn't be enough.

 

[MackJr]

classyguy,

For bill gates, his money and his aggressive personality are all that he has going for him. So if he lost his money, maybe he'd be aggressive enough to get her, but I don't know.

Here's the thing: Can she or can she not see through his HSM shield? Well, she can physically see his lack of limbs and teeth, and smell his breath. And we're also saying that she believes that he's a 1 based on those things.

To raise his level, we'd have to severely neg her and also raise him. To neg her 9 levels would probably be abuse the likes of which would be pretty bad. You'd probably have to control the situation, for example locking her in a room and having interrogators badger her, while making Gates the "good cop".

I don't see a lot of practical application to this. You're not a 1, and I know that without even seeing you. If someone believes you're a one, they're probably a narcissist, so not worth your time. If you believe you're a 1, you're probably pretty close to suicide.

By the way, there are guys that have been in wheelchairs that women just fall over. It's not the same thing as being a quadruple amputee, but seriously, if you were in that situation, would sex, if it were even possible, be at the top of your mind?

 

[MackJr]

Go see the movie "I'm gonna get you sucka". There's a scene in which a woman turns from a 8 to a 2 in just ten seconds in the scenario we just discussed.

 

[classyguy]

I don't think I'm a 1, at least I hope not, LOL. If I had to rate myself I'd put myself in the 7's.

Probably no practical application for this extreme scenario, I just like speculating on the the theory part and the sequence of steps in going from that first second of contact to first date. It's rather fascinating breaking everything down to somewhat logical steps.

 

[Phame]

..nice discussion but if you want to know what your rating is as far as looks are concerned: Go to hotornot.com and post your best picture. People will rate it relatively fairly and you will know how you appear to the opposite sex ...

Phame

 

[splinterkb]

I think you've managed to take it way too god damn far. Just leave it at picking up chicks.

 

[GropeDope]

You theory sounds okay but I like Gunwitch's much better:

Not an exact science by any means, but perhaps a rough model of what you can generally expect.

Looks, Effort, and their Interrelation:

Looks scale: -1- being the worst conceivable, and –10- being the best.
Effort scale (amount of women approached and overall drive to ensure sex with them): -1- being utterly rarely, -5- being a few on weekends or acquaintances from social circles, and -10- being at least three new women per day. –1- drive = will say hello to a woman but not much else, -5- will try to get her interested in him until the first sign of trouble or disinterest, -10- will outright make her become angry or verbally reject you 100% before even considering moving on.

Take a guy who is a –1- in looks (perhaps fat, short, hideous face, balding, old, smelly, poorly dressed, etc.), but a -10- in effort. This guy will STILL land women who are -5.5s- once in while, and –3s- frequently.

To explain, allocate 1 total point for every 2 points on the scale, for what you can get with maximum effort. So, if you are a –10- in looks, but only exert a –1- in effort, you can probably still sex -5.5s- (ie. 11 divided by 2) on occasion, and approximately half of that, or -3s-, whenever you are inclined. Eventually you will arrive at someplace in between your –maximum- capacity and your –easy- capacity for your regular quality of women.

I, for instance, am maybe an –8- in looks (short, ok face, good built body, well dressed and groomed), and a –10- in effort. So dividing by two, we allocate 4 points for looks and 5 points for effort, arriving at a 9 at –maximum- capacity, and approx. 5 at –easy- capacity. I have of course gotten some 10s in my day, but that's just the deviation, as women higher than 6 would be for Example Guy #1. So to recap:

Example Guy 1:

-1-LOOKS + -10-EFFORT = 11,

THEREFORE,

MAXIMUM CAPACITY = 5.5, EASY CAPACITY = approx. 3

Gunwitch:

-8-LOOKS + -10-EFFORT = 18,

THEREFORE,

MAXIMUM CAPACITY = 9, EASY CAPACITY = approx. 5

What creates the extra points from effort is that you meet MORE women, so SOME of these women will find even the guy with –1-looks/-10-effort somewhat attractive. Probably the best that he will ever do is a 6 who somehow finds him attractive. Mr –10-looks/-1-effort could go out approaching at a 5.5 in effort and change his whole lot, because he would meet so many more women who would find him attractive, or who have trouble saying no to his advances, but instead he takes the easy ones. His loss. By the way, Mr.-10-looks/-1-effort, and Mr. –1-looks/-10-effort are both REAL people that I know, and it works out about the same for both of them with women. If Mr. –1-looks/-10-effort suddenly stopped meeting and trying to seduce new women, he would probably go to his grave never having had sex again, unless maybe with some chance woman of his low calibre were to come along and make the effort herself.

 

[classyguy]

I wasn't knowledgeable about the Gunwitch method although I've seen it mentioned several times. After reading the snippet I definitely agree with it, and it seems to match what I've seen in the real world. I think if someone did actual scientific studies on this they could probably come up with a potential success percentage according to a persons looks. For example maybe an 8 would have a 70% chance, a 7 60%, a 6 50% etc. It wouldn't be able to predict how an individual interaction would go but it should be fairly accurate over say 100 approaches that will average it out.

 

[Ricky]

But this is exactly why seduction methods are of interest.

Looks aren't alone the answer.

There are some ugly but very alpha looking guys that can pull without saying much at all. Ive seen it happen in bars. Physical type is even a bit different than traditional looks.