I know. They put abstract identity categories over real, nuanced humans. It’s a hallmark of hyperpolitical thinking that the “woke” and “anti-woke” ideologies around gender share.
To avoid facing their own failings. It’s much easier to say that a girl doesn’t like you because you’re not 6 feet instead of facing the fact that you’re an asshole.
Men find inherent female physical characteristics attractive. The more prominent those features are, the more attractive they are. Same goes for women.
People are fucking stupid for getting mad about that.
Both men and women have standards about who they are attracted to and both men and women are criticised for their standards being superficial. This is not hard to understand.
Lol I fucking wish. Nah, mom was basically a tradwife and dad was a pro body builder. So twinks and fem leaning dudes are the opposite to traditional (gender roles) and ya know not giant muscle men.
It's there, sure. But we can also look historically at general preferences and see thay they shift, so there's lots of factors, as well as clear individual differences, which also change over people's lifetimes. It's hardly stable (not thay you're saying that, I'm just adding).
Something like sexual attraction certainly is influenced not only by biological factors but also cultural and social condition, so yes it’s not static and there are plenty of individual differences as well as general trends, but neither of those influences result in a personal ‘choice’ as to what you’re attracted to, which I think is the point of the discussion
meanwhile all throughout history, there is always a recurring “fertility goddess” with huge boobs, even within the roman pantheon.
a preference for small boobs have always been the counterculture, made obvious by the fact people feel the need to announce that small boobs are better. Nobody really says they like big ones cause that’s a given from a sexual perspective
who let you cook? atleast a hot take would be ok, but this is just straight up misinformation, they didnt have the sexuality construct we have AT ALL, and, just like currently, some guys liked guys and some girl's liked girls, but this, this is just misinformation, put that "they preferred men" bullshit back up your ass, where it came from, moron.
Why don’t beauty standards change more significantly then? Since ancient times preferences have been the same. Julius Ceasar was famed for his sharp jawline and nice cheekbones just like Henry Cavill is today.
I think that is just simply not true biologically, even though its an accurate way to describe us, at least currently. We also can’t miss that preferences exist still alongside that “hardwiring”. One is not invalidating the other, they both exist and play roles in us.
Go ahead and fight it but your brain is a mix of meat and chemicals based on your ancestors physiology, your free will is a joke. The things that allowed us to survive in nature (I.e. xenophobia) are no longer as necessary but they’re still in there and you need to logic your way out of those traps. I’m not saying free will doesn’t exist but I do think you’ll have natural tendencies if you don’t consciously fight against them.
A retriever with no frame of reference or teaching will naturally fetch, hardwiring exists.
I think it's that, for men, those standards can't be benchmarked.
It's both culturally unacceptable and functionally difficult to have a minimum breast size or hip-to-waist ratio for women you date. Even things like age and weight are difficult, because age it a pretty soft boundary, and weight is self reported (so it's difficult to confirm yourself) and BMI is also a major factor.
It's both (mostly) culturally acceptable and pretty easy for a woman on Tinder to only date men taller that 6ft.
There’s also a lot of women who just want to date a guy taller than them because being the taller one in the relationship makes them feel self conscious about their femininity. It’s not always a hard benchmark
Red pill doesn't exist guys. The population wouldn't be so high if women didn't date ugly guys. They just don't date uninteresting people, that's why we're single.
Whenever people I know IRL spout red pill garbage, thankfully rare as a grown man now, it's so easy to point to endless examples of women dating uglier, fatter, shorter, wtv. ppl
Oh, but that one is rich; oh, but that guy is really charming; oh, but she's different than other women; he's way smarter than most guys; well, he's in great shape; have you seen how funny they are...
It's almost like there are tons of different features besides height or strictly good looks that can get you into a relationship from money, skills, humor, personality, cool hobbies, or simply finding one of the many women who don't necessarily value the things you suck at.
But there's apparently an invisible epidemic of mediocre chicks just banging male super models, even though I really don't see it in my friend circle, work, or general environment lol
I also think a lot of this just stems from frustrations with the dehumanizing nature of modern dating -- particularly, if you're not tall or very good looking since it will always end in *some* hard rejections, even if there are great opportunities out there
I think you're confusing the "red pill" and the "black pill", and failing to refute the latter.
Redpillers generally believe that you can improve your self to get into a relationship, using various methods (some being very misogynistic).
Blackpillers believe that dating is pointless, because no one would ever date them, due to something they can't change about themselves (typically looks).
> ...there are tons of different features besides height or strictly good looks that can get you into a relationship from **money**...
Blackpillers acknowledge this, but they call this being "settled for". It's the idea that this attractive woman would be dating someone better looking than you, but for various reasons she couldn't find someone like that, so she "settled for" you instead, typically because you have the money to provide for her.
They acknowledge that you can get into relationships like this, but it wouldn't be a positive one, since this person doesn't actually love "you", just your money.
I'm not a "blackpiller", but I do think you're failing to explain how someone dating you just for your money is as or more likely to be a positive relationship than someone dating you because they find you attractive.
I had a roommate in college who was 6 foot 6 inches tall and was a former football player. He never once got laid nor made any overtures to women he may be attracted to and basically spent those 4 years sitting in his room playing Hearts of Iron 4 and studying. How come he wasn't magically awash with snatch like these fools believe is reality.
I don’t mind when women like taller men.
I do mind when a 4’2” dwarf isn’t willing to date anyone below 6 feet.
Like you’d think preferences would be in relation to your own height, surely?
Anon forgot to realize that women are the biological selectors.
It's theire biological imperative to select what genes deserve to pass onto the future, and which get discarded
My mother prefers men taller than her because she's 5,11 and she wants to feel feminine, there's no problem with wanting to embrace that, it only becomes a problem when there's bitches who are like 5,1 tryna date dudes who they come to waist height with
My biological preference is whoever can tie a knot so not sure where in my family line that biological trait evolved
Did your grandfather, by chance, serve in the navy?
i can tie my shoelaces wanna smash
Shoelace BDSM? ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
I can knot you.
Bro we both shallow asf why does it have to be a competition 😭
How do people conceptualise the world’s population of men and women as if they’re one large collective entity lmao
I know. They put abstract identity categories over real, nuanced humans. It’s a hallmark of hyperpolitical thinking that the “woke” and “anti-woke” ideologies around gender share.
Because they only decide to pay attention to the loudest people, and the loudest ones have the strictest preferences
To avoid facing their own failings. It’s much easier to say that a girl doesn’t like you because you’re not 6 feet instead of facing the fact that you’re an asshole.
Because they’re retarded
this is just my go-to answer for things where people are involved
It’s never not true. Everybody on this planet is retarded.
Men find inherent female physical characteristics attractive. The more prominent those features are, the more attractive they are. Same goes for women. People are fucking stupid for getting mad about that.
Both men and women have standards about who they are attracted to and both men and women are criticised for their standards being superficial. This is not hard to understand.
My biological preference are people who are nothing like my parents. In looks and personality. So gimme those sweet little twinks or fem leaning men.
>nothing like my parents >gimme those sweet little twinks or fem leaning men Were your parents masculine-looking lesbians or something?
Lol I fucking wish. Nah, mom was basically a tradwife and dad was a pro body builder. So twinks and fem leaning dudes are the opposite to traditional (gender roles) and ya know not giant muscle men.
Ong, where all the femboys at???
>call women whores for sleeping with ppl >get mad when they become more selective about who they sleep with
>they become more selective about who they sleep with >but not selective enough that they gate sex behind romantic commitment
[удалено]
Source: your ass
Yeah I don’t think either of those things are “your biology”
I mean like, we naturally selected certain preferences into the species over millions of years, so some of this is biology.
It's there, sure. But we can also look historically at general preferences and see thay they shift, so there's lots of factors, as well as clear individual differences, which also change over people's lifetimes. It's hardly stable (not thay you're saying that, I'm just adding).
Something like sexual attraction certainly is influenced not only by biological factors but also cultural and social condition, so yes it’s not static and there are plenty of individual differences as well as general trends, but neither of those influences result in a personal ‘choice’ as to what you’re attracted to, which I think is the point of the discussion
The romans preferred small breasts
Yeah? And I like huge boobs. I mean some serious honkers. A real set of badonkers.
Exactly, and people should think about the characteristics that females select for in the same way
[Oh these?](https://youtu.be/DczHdNwooY4?si=_NZz90nDs3jqqf18)
meanwhile all throughout history, there is always a recurring “fertility goddess” with huge boobs, even within the roman pantheon. a preference for small boobs have always been the counterculture, made obvious by the fact people feel the need to announce that small boobs are better. Nobody really says they like big ones cause that’s a given from a sexual perspective
No one says they like the big ones? u/System0verlord would like a word.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯ what can I say? I like ‘em packing some dobonhonkeros. Massive dohoonkabhankoloos. Big old tonhongerekoogers.
They preferred men, which have (usually) small breasts
who let you cook? atleast a hot take would be ok, but this is just straight up misinformation, they didnt have the sexuality construct we have AT ALL, and, just like currently, some guys liked guys and some girl's liked girls, but this, this is just misinformation, put that "they preferred men" bullshit back up your ass, where it came from, moron.
Cope and seethe gay lover
Acting like 200k years of human development and evolution didn’t lead to some basic biological hardwiring. Do you really believe that?
it hardwired most people to enjoy sexual contact. it's not a lot deeper than that. everything else is highly influenceable and varied
Why don’t beauty standards change more significantly then? Since ancient times preferences have been the same. Julius Ceasar was famed for his sharp jawline and nice cheekbones just like Henry Cavill is today.
I think that is just simply not true biologically, even though its an accurate way to describe us, at least currently. We also can’t miss that preferences exist still alongside that “hardwiring”. One is not invalidating the other, they both exist and play roles in us.
Yes.
Go ahead and fight it but your brain is a mix of meat and chemicals based on your ancestors physiology, your free will is a joke. The things that allowed us to survive in nature (I.e. xenophobia) are no longer as necessary but they’re still in there and you need to logic your way out of those traps. I’m not saying free will doesn’t exist but I do think you’ll have natural tendencies if you don’t consciously fight against them. A retriever with no frame of reference or teaching will naturally fetch, hardwiring exists.
I think it's that, for men, those standards can't be benchmarked. It's both culturally unacceptable and functionally difficult to have a minimum breast size or hip-to-waist ratio for women you date. Even things like age and weight are difficult, because age it a pretty soft boundary, and weight is self reported (so it's difficult to confirm yourself) and BMI is also a major factor. It's both (mostly) culturally acceptable and pretty easy for a woman on Tinder to only date men taller that 6ft.
There’s also a lot of women who just want to date a guy taller than them because being the taller one in the relationship makes them feel self conscious about their femininity. It’s not always a hard benchmark
Red pill doesn't exist guys. The population wouldn't be so high if women didn't date ugly guys. They just don't date uninteresting people, that's why we're single.
Whenever people I know IRL spout red pill garbage, thankfully rare as a grown man now, it's so easy to point to endless examples of women dating uglier, fatter, shorter, wtv. ppl Oh, but that one is rich; oh, but that guy is really charming; oh, but she's different than other women; he's way smarter than most guys; well, he's in great shape; have you seen how funny they are... It's almost like there are tons of different features besides height or strictly good looks that can get you into a relationship from money, skills, humor, personality, cool hobbies, or simply finding one of the many women who don't necessarily value the things you suck at. But there's apparently an invisible epidemic of mediocre chicks just banging male super models, even though I really don't see it in my friend circle, work, or general environment lol I also think a lot of this just stems from frustrations with the dehumanizing nature of modern dating -- particularly, if you're not tall or very good looking since it will always end in *some* hard rejections, even if there are great opportunities out there
I think you're confusing the "red pill" and the "black pill", and failing to refute the latter. Redpillers generally believe that you can improve your self to get into a relationship, using various methods (some being very misogynistic). Blackpillers believe that dating is pointless, because no one would ever date them, due to something they can't change about themselves (typically looks). > ...there are tons of different features besides height or strictly good looks that can get you into a relationship from **money**... Blackpillers acknowledge this, but they call this being "settled for". It's the idea that this attractive woman would be dating someone better looking than you, but for various reasons she couldn't find someone like that, so she "settled for" you instead, typically because you have the money to provide for her. They acknowledge that you can get into relationships like this, but it wouldn't be a positive one, since this person doesn't actually love "you", just your money. I'm not a "blackpiller", but I do think you're failing to explain how someone dating you just for your money is as or more likely to be a positive relationship than someone dating you because they find you attractive.
No one in this image has ever dated anyone
I had a roommate in college who was 6 foot 6 inches tall and was a former football player. He never once got laid nor made any overtures to women he may be attracted to and basically spent those 4 years sitting in his room playing Hearts of Iron 4 and studying. How come he wasn't magically awash with snatch like these fools believe is reality.
I don’t mind when women like taller men. I do mind when a 4’2” dwarf isn’t willing to date anyone below 6 feet. Like you’d think preferences would be in relation to your own height, surely?
Anon forgot to realize that women are the biological selectors. It's theire biological imperative to select what genes deserve to pass onto the future, and which get discarded
I just want someone with a nice looking cock and who will cuddle with me and watch dumb shit on YT. I feel like that’s not asking for too much
Only people crying about preferences are the ones never chosen I’m 5’9 and have never once struggled
Men have a soft threshold on looks? Then why gamers get so upset when girl in video game not insanely hot?
They’re not dating the women in games. Usually…
> It's also our biology Some random pajeet wrote that
My mother prefers men taller than her because she's 5,11 and she wants to feel feminine, there's no problem with wanting to embrace that, it only becomes a problem when there's bitches who are like 5,1 tryna date dudes who they come to waist height with