Women don’t mind if men are ugly, as long as they don’t misbehave

[Stagger Lee]

A new study has found that unattractiveness can compound the negative effect of breaking a social norm.

Isn't that just the opposite of most PUA theory-looks don't matter as long as you're C+F/neg/bad boy/jerk. Experience quickly taught me long ago that stuff didn't work, and I had to tone it down and eliminate it.

http://www.thejournal.ie/ugly-behaviour-misbehave-view-interest-2140849-Jun2015/

A NEW STUDY by an American university has found that a woman’s opinion of a man is mainly determined by two factors – his attractiveness and how well behaved he is.

This is according to a new study published in the most recent edition of ‘Gender Issues’.

The research looked at the importance of first impressions and how they impacted on long-term relationships.

It was found that for women, the most important features for a man to have was attractiveness and a tendency to stick to social norms.

Now like many studies this one relied on women reporting their impressions rather than measuring their actions, but I think the study seems valid. The study isn't saying women like nice guys, but rather dislike a guy to break a social norm especially if he's unattractive. I always say that appearance matters most and that females don't really like the "jerk" attitude much. They like most a good looking socially normative guy. And my experience is that women are subjective about a guy's attitude depending on his appearance and almost never positively perceive an unattractive guy breaking social norms as PUA often instructs. Zekko and I were just talking about that in the MM forum. Where's zekko lol?

One of the main findings of the study was the ‘devil’ and ‘halo’ effects.

With the ‘devil’ effect, the less-attractive man was tolerated up to the point that he committed a certain social transgression. After this, the negative perception of his wrong doing was amplified by his ugliness.

“The unattractive male is tolerated up to a point; his unattractiveness is OK until he misbehaves,” Gibson explained.

This was shown to be particularly prevalent in online dating profiles – where displaying alarming information is much more likely to be forgiven for more attractive men, demonstrating the ‘halo’ effect.

It was also found in the course of the study that more attractive men were likely to get less severe fines and sentences in the judicial system.

I think the study overestimated how much women 'tolerate' men who are unattractive. Tolerate doesn't mean hook up with. But the main point that women tolerate a lot more "jerk" from good looking guys I think is spot on. Most women who get with a man they perceive as attractive but a bad boy/jerk do it despite not because of him being a bad boy/jerk.

 

[Stagger Lee]

Exactly. The issue occurs when good looking guys:
-Act like a spineless b!tch
-Drop everything else for a woman
-Pedestalize her
-Do all of the chasing


That's the ONLY reason most women would turn down a good looking guy, assuming he was not a social degenerate.

Yep there's a difference between coming across as too eager or desperate and showing her some interest and being a challenge without going all the way to the opposite extreme and acting as a "jerk"

The bad looking guys see good looking guys gaming like 'bad boys' and think it works.

Yeah when you're a good looking guy and/or you have attraction, you really can't miss.

The PUA's post videos of them getting numbers, but how many of those women do you think ACTUALLY come through? I bet 1-2%, for a first date. That doesn't include or guarantee sex.

It's just playing a huge ass numbers game and no matter what approach they use or "game" their result are always in the single digits percentage.

For unattractive guys, they need to get a kick a$$ body and then learn how to act like a man. Then become more successful in life. At which point, the women will flow more easily.

Improve their appearance as much as they can and work numbers game and become successful financially. I think pick up is largely a waste of time for unattractive guys and older guys. They would spend less time and effort working on perfecting their LTRs.

 

[Mike32ct]

Completely agree with the OP.

The study sounds pretty legit. Of course, a lot of times, articles mischaracterize the findings of a study in order to meet some PC-ish agenda and/or create a catchy "click bait" title. This article tries to spin it like, "Being ugly is fine as long as you behave" lol. It is a PUA sort of perspective that says, "Forget about your looks; just tweak your behavior."

The article didn't specify which faux pas' they are talking about, but it certainly is generally true. I can think of many examples, but I won't waste time listing them here.

Stagger is absolutely correct about the "tolerate" part. In this context, "tolerate" means you are allowed to exist in her presence. That's about it. It does not imply attraction or even necessarily friendship.

Yes, all guys should try to optimize their behavior (to be more smooth, confident, classy, charming, etc. not the c&f crap) because there is no reason not to. But the better looking guys have more room for error. Less attractive guys have less. For the less attractive guys, getting your behavior right is more about not digging yourself into a deeper hole. It's not about attraction. But it is a tricky balance for a less attractive guy. If he's too shy/awkward, he's creepy and SCARY. If he's TOO confident, it's also off-putting and creepy to women because he doesn't have the looks to back it up. He needs to find a middle ground. And work out to try to boost his looks points.

 

[zekko]

This is nothing new. It's like that SNL skit where if you look like Tom Brady you can behave however you want and the girls will want you.

But if the ugly guy even makes eye contact with a chick she's calling human resources to report harassment, lol.

 

[Stagger Lee]

Completely agree with the OP.

The study sounds pretty legit. Of course, a lot of times, articles mischaracterize the findings of a study in order to meet some PC-ish agenda and/or create a catchy "click bait" title. This article tries to spin it like, "Being ugly is fine as long as you behave" lol. It is a PUA sort of perspective that says, "Forget about your looks; just tweak your behavior."

The article didn't specify which faux pas' they are talking about, but it certainly is generally true. I can think of many examples, but I won't waste time listing them here.

Stagger is absolutely correct about the "tolerate" part. In this context, "tolerate" means you are allowed to exist in her presence. That's about it. It does not imply attraction or even necessarily friendship.

Yes, all guys should try to optimize their behavior (to be more smooth, confident, classy, charming, etc. not the c&f crap) because there is no reason not to. But the better looking guys have more room for error. Less attractive guys have less. For the less attractive guys, getting your behavior right is more about not digging yourself into a deeper hole. It's not about attraction. But it is a tricky balance for a less attractive guy. If he's too shy/awkward, he's creepy and SCARY. If he's TOO confident, it's also off-putting and creepy to women because he doesn't have the looks to back it up. He needs to find a middle ground. And work out to try to boost his looks points.

Can't really put it any better than that. It's definitely finding a middle ground and a balancing act when you don't have the leeway of being an high attractive guy. You'll still get rejected and maybe considered "creepy" just because you're not attractive enough. But with a middle ground approach at least the rejection won't usually be harsh and you won't be perceived as "creepy". And you'll be maximizing your chances anyway without all the mental energy wasted on "calibrating your game" to the approach.

That's the truth about PUA. It's a lot of mental energy spent on chasing your tail to be some vague and elusive persona that supposedly will cause attraction never fail, but in reality for a low attractive guy just results in more and harsher rejections and people thinking you're "creepy". The PUA fool is acting just how females imagine unattractive men to act-socially abnormal, weird or "creepy" lol.

This is nothing new. It's like that SNL skit where if you look like Tom Brady you can behave however you want and the girls will want you.

But if the ugly guy even makes eye contact with a chick she's calling human resources to report harassment, lol.

Yeah I always liked that skit since I first saw it about 10 years ago .

Be Handsome
Be Attractive
Don't be Unattractive

http://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/video/sexual-harassment/2751966

That's why there's no such thing as game per se. Beyond some middle ground guidelines, how women perceive your personality or game is largely subject to your appearance.

 

[Mike32ct]

This is nothing new. It's like that SNL skit where if you look like Tom Brady you can behave however you want and the girls will want you.

But if the ugly guy even makes eye contact with a chick she's calling human resources to report harassment, lol.

Absolutely. Even take dancing for example. There will be times when you execute a turn (or some other move) but you are off a little bit and you accidentally brush a boob or side boob. If she's the smiley flirty type (because she finds you attractive), she will find it cute or funny or at worst will ignore it. If she clearly isn't attracted to you (and you can tell from her body language), expect a GLARE from her even though she knows it was not done on purpose.

 

[Tictac]

Since both 'attractiveness' and 'well-behavedness' are subjective, I'm not sure that this 'study' means anything at all.

 

[Stagger Lee]

Since both 'attractiveness' and 'well-behavedness' are subjective, I'm not sure that this 'study' means anything at all.

Even if attractiveness and well-behaved are both subjective it is still determined by the female observer. Females are subjective but still make choices or conclusions, ie. attractive male face or unattractive male face, that are not random.

I don't believe attractiveness is completely or even very subjective http://www.uni-regensburg.de/Fakultaeten/phil_Fak_II/Psychologie/Psy_II/beautycheck/english/prototypen/prototypen.htm.


That being considered well-behaved is subjective was a main point of the study. Women were less tolerate of what they considered misbehavior if the male is less attractive. In other words, being considered well-behaved is subject to attractiveness level. And that attractiveness was of foremost importance to females. It makes sense. Looks count first and the most personality counts second and less and the more attractive you are the less it matter and the less you're attractive the more it is scrutinized.

Basically an unattractive guy has two hurdles to overcome -ooks and personality-and a good looking guy has neither.

 

[Stagger Lee]

Im clearly not dating the same women you all are

Possibly, but more likely the girls are the same but us guys are different looking and have different perceptions of other guys' looks (we think other guys with a girl are unattractive when they are not).

A classic experiment which I've done with OLD (or with a wing at a bar) is to message a girl using an average looking picture. She might not even reply or is a total cold fish. Message the same girl with a similar message using a high attractive picture. She suddenly becomes alive and wants to meet right away. Same girl, same approach, much different response.

I believe women are mostly the same in the way they think and act. Women act on emotions. That's just another word for instinct.

 

[Who Dares Win]

Cant blame women for having a double standard when it comes of attraction and tolerance when it comes of good looking men and ugly ones but at the same time cant tolerate different legal treatment for the same behaviour not according to the action/intention/result but according the simmetry of the face of the person doing it.

I also dont bother giving my attention to women I find unpleasable but dont expect them to be jailed for behaviours which I would tolerate from other women.

What I get from this article is "if you are an average man, dont think, dont take initiative, dont be original, just do what you are told cause your look doesnt grant you any jolly card".

If you think about it goes again in the hierarchy men are put from women and society, if you are born as a top level you have much more privileges then someone in the middle one, imagine a system of caste like the one you have in india, or the one you see in the movie Gattaca or in "Brave new world".

Of course no social justice warrior enforce a "beta acceptance movement".

 

[Stagger Lee]

Yeah when are the social justice warriors going to oppose all the lookism in society (funny thing is they actually do to a degree only for women)? Looks Privilege is everywhere and the good looking may not intend to be lookist or realize their privilege over people of other looks, but they still benefit from looks and are given more leeway. We need lower entrance requirements in college and hiring programs benefiting the less good looking. We need to reform the criminal justice system so the less good looking don't receive harsher treatment. The right to marry and date shouldn't depend on a person's look!

 

[zekko]

But each woman finds different men attractive. If a woman does not find you attractive in any way, of COURSE she will hold you to a different standard. She wont see you as a date object at all.

Well, I think you've just stated the point. If a woman finds you attractive, she will put up with more from you. That's really all it boils down to.

It's true that different women will find different guys attractive, but as Stagger points out, physical attraction is not entirely subjective. In other words, women will be more likely to find certain guys to be more attractive than others - depending on their physical features, signs of health, etc. If a guy is attractive, it is going to show up in a survery. The cream always rises to the top.

If a woman finds you passably attractive at the margin, THEN I find it hard to believe it behooves you to be a beta vagina. The entire dating game exists within this context.

I don't see anyone advocating being a "beta vagina".

 

[prison/con.net]

what do you expect us to do about it, hmm? take a ball bat to our own faces, so we can be "equal" to less handome men? This is mostly bs. Men can't agree on what makes for beauty in a woman, why expect women to agree what makes a man handsome? a VERY wide range of perception will always exist. you can GET money, and you can fix your looks ( to a large extent, with expensive surgery), but you can't get taller!

 

[Stagger Lee]

what do you expect us to do about it, hmm? take a ball bat to our own faces, so we can be "equal" to less handome men? This is mostly bs. Men can't agree on what makes for beauty in a woman, why expect women to agree what makes a man handsome? a VERY wide range of perception will always exist. you can GET money, and you can fix your looks ( to a large extent, with expensive surgery), but you can't get taller!

This is not true. People, both male and female, largely agree on whether someone is attractive or not and can identify what makes them attractive.
Doesn't anyone read the links http://www.uni-regensburg.de/Fakultaeten/phil_Fak_II/Psychologie/Psy_II/beautycheck/english/prototypen/prototypen.htm?

Research seems to find that women only consider 5% of men very attractive, 20% better than average, and up to 80% of men below average. Women probably consider 50% of men unattractive even though in reality most of them are at least average. About 50% of men are considered undatable by women.

 

[DFW71]

Even a smooth guy can make mistakes. Bottom line is attractiveness matters a lot. In another study, the sky was shown to be the color blue.

 

[DFW71]

This is not true. People, both male and female, largely agree on whether someone is attractive or not and can identify what makes them attractive.
Doesn't anyone read the links http://www.uni-regensburg.de/Fakultaeten/phil_Fak_II/Psychologie/Psy_II/beautycheck/english/prototypen/prototypen.htm?

Research seems to find that women only consider 5% of men very attractive, 20% better than average, and up to 80% of men below average. Women probably consider 50% of men unattractive even though in reality most of them are at least average. About 50% of men are considered undatable by women.

This supports my theory that dating will be more and more feast or famine in the future for guys. If a guy is in that top 5% he can easily have the opportunity for 100 or more partners. If a guy is near the bottom, he can expect to remain a virgin for life.

 

[zekko]

Funny how those top 5% of attractive men seem to all post on SoSuave, lol. Big coincidence, yeah?

 

[FairShake]

I've lost a lot of weight recently and started eating salad which makes my skin "glow" for lack of a better term. For the first time in about a decade I look good.

I've noticed women are a lot nicer to me. Laugh at my less funny jokes, give me part of their lunch, excuse my latent social awkwardness, etc. It's true the better looking you are the more you get away with.

I think that more dating advice needs to focus on fashion, health, and body language. It makes a world of difference. Suddenly you aren't an "azzhole" anymore, now you're just "****y." Same lines, different face.

 

[Stagger Lee]

I've lost a lot of weight recently and started eating salad which makes my skin "glow" for lack of a better term. For the first time in about a decade I look good.

I've noticed women are a lot nicer to me. Laugh at my less funny jokes, give me part of their lunch, excuse my latent social awkwardness, etc. It's true the better looking you are the more you get away with.

I think that more dating advice needs to focus on fashion, health, and body language. It makes a world of difference. Suddenly you aren't an "azzhole" anymore, now you're just "****y." Same lines, different face.

Wow, FairShake with a once in a blue-moon post I completely agree with. What's the saying about a blind squirrel or a stopped clock? Careful, you might drift over to the other side and then be right all the time .

Weight, skin and just your physical health/energy levels are major factors in attracting. These are looks factors you can improve. If you have at least near average hair thickness and face and possible height, you are definitely in the game. Maybe not with the attractive girls but at least some girls. Some consolation for being at least a top 60-70% looking male, huh? That darn 80/20 rule about pvssy and money. But your personality/game is mostly perceived subjectively and not much of a factor itself.