Quit giving this bullshit of advice to lonely people who struggle to find a partner. You don’t get to choose whom you are attrracted to, trying the opposite would lead to bad consequences for your mental health. Telling to “lower your standards” is the equivalent of telling gay people to stop being attracted to someone of their sex and advising them to go for someone of an opposite sex instead
>>29017054Alright, well the only other option is self-improvement.
This is a board to ask for advice, not to vent about stuff
>>29017069Thanks for the Richu-chan pick!
>>29017069*I meant pic as a picture
>>29017054>You don’t get to choose whom you are attrracted toYes you do>telling gay people to stop being attracted to someone of their sexNot even remotely the same thing, but thanks for playing.Look, I get it. Everyone wants to fuck super models, but super models don't want to fuck you. It isn't about lowering your standards but being realistic about how butt ugly you actually are (male or female, doesn't matter) and adjusting for it. I acknowledge that I'm an ugly piece of shit. As such, I've adjusted for it knowing the best I can hope for is a 6. Because of that, I actually get laid every now and then.
>>29017054Depends on the standard and where you stand.It's reasonable for a cycling enthusiasts who's lean to not want a fat bitch. It's not reasonable for an obese neckbeard to have the same, even if nobody prefers fat bitches.
>>29017110 You don’t decide what kind of people make you penis erect. And of you try to engage in a relationship with someone you are not attracted to it will result in a disaster, where both parties are unhappy and resentful by each other. Thus this kind of advice is toxic.
>>29017156Most men with healthy testosterone levels get erect by interacting with anything from 5-10. Pretty wide range
>>29017134You realise that’s not how attraction works, right? Fat or ugly, short or tall, we don’t decide who we want to fuck. Yes, you can lie to yourself, but don’t tell other to do this, unless you mean to harm them. “Lowering your standards” is a cope, the most dangerous of copes. Not only you suffer from it, but other people you engage with “out of absence of choice”. If you don’t have the opportunity to be with someone you like it’s better for your body and your soul to be alone.
>>29017164Yeah if you are attracted to someone and consciously choose to go for someone else it’s one thing. It’s the other thing, when you make yourself engage in a relationship with someone you resent or despise because you don’t have a choice. The latter is dangerous, harmful. It is better to be alone for a lifetime than to spend a life with a person you don’t have any connection with
>>29017195When people say lower your standards, they don’t mean fuck someone who is a land whale. They mean stop aiming for supermodels and get a girl who’s modestly attractive
>>29017054I don't know, I had a friend who said he'd never date anyone fat or black in high school and now he's dating a fat black chick. They both claim they're the love of each other's lives.
>>29017206Then it’s the most vague shit of advice possible. I mean, how is it even relatable lol.
>>29017211I’m genuinely happy for them, and if it’s true they are attracted to each other and not using each other to cope
>>29017277They're using each other to cope
>>29017054Eh, this depends a whole lot on whether sex within the relationship is really important to you. If you want someone who is your primary sexual outlet, of course it’s important to enjoy that person in a genuine way. But if you don’t even have sex that often (either because your low sex drive or prefer porn or have an open relationship) and mainly want to support each other emotionally, coparent, etc., then it’s not really a big deal. Just depends whether it’s going to bother you or not.
>>29017266I'm dating a woman 10 years older than me. She's no model but she treats me like a god in and out of bed and she cries at the mere thought of me leaving her. I'm incredibly happy with the situation.
>>29017054lmao you say this like it's all theoretical and none of us have ever done thisi personally can attest that taking Shaniqua or Ebonique out for a Popeyes sandwich is NOTHING like trying to fuck the gender you're not attracted to. Hugs still feel good. Kisses on your body still feel good. It's suboptimal but as a stop gap measure to keep from whining about incel shit, its totally fine
>>29017180>If you don’t have the opportunity to be with someone you like it’s better for your body and your soul to be alone.before you get a degree and need to focus on studies and establishing independence? okay you may have a pointafter you're 23? lmao, no way... it's 100000000% better to have relationship experience, know how to talk to a girl and make out with her, how to have fun on a date... a real adult man with relationship experience with a suboptimal partner is STRICTLY SUPERIOR to a guy with a totally pure lonely soul
>>29017054>You don’t get to choose whom you are attrracted toYeah you do, everyone wants a 10/10 at first. maturity is accepting that there's more to attraction than just conventional normie looks.or maybe it's not about looks, it's about the epic red flag memes about how you will never date a girl who has had sex before and has social media and male friends and travels etc.That also is an issue of maturity and accepting that perfection doesn't exist. true love is accepting people's flaws not waiting around for a 10/10 to fall from the sky.
>>29017206They mean "fuck a landwhale". About half of American women under 35 are medically obese.Modestly attractive, in practice, is a girl in the 80th percentile.
>>29017461this reads like a lot of made-up numbersexcept for half of America being fat, I believe that.
>>29017461There are many ways of framing this. One is by race.
>>29017054>You don’t get to choose whom you are attrracted toIncels will say this and then turn around and act like it's a great injustice when the women they want are not attracted to them in turn either.
>>29017461>They mean "fuck a landwhale". About half of American women under 35 are medically obese"medically obese" (aka ~160lbs for average woman) is far from "fuck a landwhale" (aka 250+)
>>29017496>The truth is that average men are not equal to average women on the dating market. a 6/10 female has 10x the dating market value of a 6/10 male with twice the life accomplishments.What you said here is what doesn't make sense. If the "6/10" women has 10x the value of the "6/10" men, then they're not the same rating. Either you overrated him or underrated her, but someone here is not a 6.
>>29017054Yeah! Great advice! Its better to be alone your entire life than to re-examine the way you approach relationships and explore whether or not your preferences are built on personal insecurities and anxieties rather than actual attraction. Incel 4 life!
>>29017266You're just a sad, pathetic virgin. You don't actually want advice because you know it'll be don't try and attain supermodels. Maybe one day you'll figure it out. Or you'll be one of those dickless pieces of shit who goes to a grocery store and shoots it up.
>>29017501It's was 167 in 2018. My lying eyes tell me that people are fatter now than they were 5 years ago
>>29017266What the hell was vague about that advice, let alone "unrelatable"? It was about as clear cut as you can get.
>>29017496Yep. On apps, the top 1% of guy receiveds as many messages in a week as a bottom 30% woman.Even if a male 5 and a female 5 are equally gross and fat, the woman (who's not even a 'mid', mids are realistically 7s-8s in America) gets exponentially more propositions.
>>29017560Apps aren’t real life. It’s easier in meatspace.
>>290175176/10 is just a measure on looks, not how much the opposite sex values those looks. A 6/10 man views a 6/10 woman much more favorably than the inverse. This is why guys have much more success on gay dating apps than when they try to go for women.Also men have to deal with many more variables that can reduce their value despite their base looks score. I could be considered a 6/10, but I'm 5'8, or have a poor paying job which lowers my options even more. But this just reveals how trying to match people based purely on a 1 out of 10 looks scale is flawed, because other factors matter as well, especially to women.
>>29017568>6/10 is just a measure on looks, not how much the opposite sex values those looks. A 6/10 man views a 6/10 woman much more favorably than the inverse. This is why guys have much more success on gay dating apps than when they try to go for women.totally meaningless gobbledegook
Yeah, it's pretty dumb. Why would enter a relationship I know I won't care for because I'm not attracted to the woman?
>>29017568I'll make a last point though. I think the problem with this discussion is that people want to frame it to suit their narrative that men have delusional high standards, which I don't believe. The hard truth is that we are not equal and women are much pickier, you're not gonna get a 5/10 female just because you are a 5/10 male. Its gonna be easier if you go for fat ugly older single mom tier women, than normal weight childless women. You choose the difficulty of your dating journey based on how high or low you aim.
>>29017565If and only if you already hang out with bangable women. Otherwise, there's no difference in results between cold approach and swipe apps. At least in the US. The only people that shill hitting on strangers these days as the best dating pipeline are Europeans and sexpats in LatAm or SEA. I'll concede that it might work better elsewhere, but social media has been king in NA for a while.
>>29017054It's such a shame this board just became diet /r9k/.
>>29017568>6/10 is just a measure on looks, not how much the opposite sex values those looks.So what exactly are you even basing these people's looks on then, if not how the opposite sex values them? >A 6/10 man views a 6/10 woman much more favorably than the inverseAnd your proof for this? Hardmode: no incel charts and graphs please.If a women acts repulsed by a guy she calls a 6, then that just means she really sees him as a 3 or something and is too retarded to rate correctly...or more likely just doesn't put as much thought into it as you do. This applies to anything, like if you read music reviews and someone says an album is "average" but rates it like a 7 or 8, which is well above average. No, what that person means, whether they realize it or not, is that album is a 5. Or that that man (or woman) is a 4, not a 6.> But this just reveals how trying to match people based purely on a 1 out of 10 looks scale is flawed, because other factors matter as well, especially to women.It is flawed, but that's why when we give people a rating in a dating context we're not just talking about looks. A good looking guy who might be an 8 on paper just based on looks will lose points with women if he's also a NEET, or a boring asshole, or can't fuck well. Shave points off for each of these things and this 8 on paper can become a 3 or 4 as a dating prospect pretty fast. We do the same. Show me a gorgeous girl and I might call her a 9 in looks. But tell me she has kids or has been blacked or stabbed her last bf and she'll plummet in the rankings pretty quickly when it comes to me actually wanting to date her.It was never all about looks to begin with and to think otherwise is a classic incel fallacy.
>>29017598Of course. I don’t cold approach either, you’re basically rolling the dice that the woman doesn’t freak out.I would suggest most people to just take up social hobbies.
>>29017593>you're not gonna get a 5/10 female just because you are a 5/10 maleWhich is wrong. If you can't get a 5/10 woman...you're not a 5/10 man buddy. Sorry to be the one to tell you.
>>29017606>So what exactly are you even basing these people's looks on then, if not how the opposite sex values them?Its not that simple. The key difference is that men are much less pickier than women so we are more willing to date down than them in pretty much every category. Just the fact that we are sitting here discussing why skinny fit guys should be more open to dating obese women proves that.In a vacuum, a 6/10 guy would probably be fine to a girl, but not in reality where she can fuck 7s and 8s. And again, height, race, income are also important factors.>>29017606>And your proof for this? Hardmode: no incel charts and graphs please.No fuck that because that's exactly what proves my point. Women rate most men as unattractive on dating apps, way more than compared to men. This is factual. You can make an argument that dating apps is different from real life, but its a environment that focuses purely on looks which is what we are focused on.>If a women acts repulsed by a guy she calls a 6, then that just means she really sees him as a 3 or something and is too retarded to rate correctlyYou have to keep in mind that as much as we like to rate and categorize people, preferences differ. Generally I'm rated a 5 or 6, and I've gotten the disgust and positive responses from girls around my looks level.>>29017606>It was never all about looks to begin with and to think otherwise is a classic incel fallacy.Now this we agree on. Who whole looksmatch thing is stupid because people don't just pair up based on looks alone, and you have to throw in variables like 6/10 asian guy who gets rejected because he is asian, not because he is a 6/10.Some people would argue that if you got rejected were you really a 6/10? But I know I've had girls rate me well, then get disgusted when I asked if they would date me. I think this is because women can rate you as average without wanting to date average, men tend to be more okay with average though..
>>29017682>Just the fact that we are sitting here discussing why skinny fit guys should be more open to dating obese women proves that.literally no one is advocating this
cant pull his measly 7 upgrade from a comfy 6.9 too bad so sadge I like comfy
>>29017682>The key difference is that men are much less pickier than womenAgain, where is the proof of this? Because I've seen countless times when a hot woman was with some goofball looking guy and did a double-take and had to say "wait a minute, she's dating HIM?" Honestly I see that more than the inverse. A legitimately good looking guy dating some ugly girl is a rare sight.>Just the fact that we are sitting here discussing why skinny fit guys should be more open to dating obese women proves that.I never said that, no one here said that. What we said is that some guys need to lower their standards. A skinny fit guy is probably average or maybe a bit above average depending on his face (and that's just looks, not even getting into all the other things we talked about). So that means if he's holding out for 9 and 10 supermodels, he needs a reality check and to come down to earth. But he probably CAN get an average girl if he's not a total fag.>No fuck that because that's exactly what proves my point.So self-fulfilling prophecy? The charts are right because they're proved by the charts? Charts posted by retards who not only know nothing about women but are too dumb to interpret data no less?>You can make an argument that dating apps is different from real life, but its a environment that focuses purely on looks which is what we are focused on.But as I said, and you agreed, there's a lot more that goes into your cumulative rating than just looks.>Generally I'm rated a 5 or 6, and I've gotten the disgust and positive responses from girls around my looks level.Well there you go. Some girls will like you and some won't. That's to be expected, especially if you're hovering around the midline.>6/10 asian guy who gets rejected because he is asian, not because he is a 6/10Wouldn't be a problem if that asian guy didn't insist on chasing white women. >disgusted when I asked if they would date me.Yeah, how you look and if they'd date you are 2 seperate things.
>>29017054am honestly unsure if OP is a typical femoid or an omega incelit reads like the former but the latter is so much more likely
>>29017602always was
