Face versus height study

Reckless Turtle

Reckless Turtle

Kraken
Joined
Jul 29, 2021
Posts
16,574
Reputation
22,937
This commonly referenced study in :blackpill: spaces discusses "looks" (not specifically facial attractiveness) and height:

http://home.uchicago.edu/~hortacsu/onlinedating.pdf

In the monetary value analysis, height tends to be a stronger indicator than looks (to women) in terms of monetary value, but the study only showed average values for ten percentile groupings for looks:
TbJT3Jo.png


However, in contact initiation, women respond much more favorably to looks than height:
spUxnq5.png

r7rVy2f.png
 
Last edited:
  • +1
Reactions: redenverrat, Deleted member 6128, hattrick and 20 others
Ooh a new topic, face vs height
 
  • JFL
  • +1
Reactions: Graham, T50 Mogger, Deleted member 21403 and 14 others
Dnr but i mog everyone at 5'9 its best compact height @subhuman incel @N1666
 
  • JFL
  • +1
  • Love it
Reactions: Sub0, AsGoodAsItGets, Deleted member 24444 and 7 others
only face matters. op is 5'5 tho just to mention.
 
  • JFL
  • So Sad
  • +1
Reactions: mogger10, confirmedtrucel, Deleted member 24444 and 4 others
  • +1
Reactions: .👽., Biiyo03 and mortis
I see so many busted af looking tall guys get women that I'm really starting to think height is more important. especially because good looking men are so rare it's just be tall and you're set it seems.
 
  • +1
  • JFL
Reactions: Mewton, confirmedtrucel, Preoximerianas and 13 others
  • +1
  • Ugh..
Reactions: confirmedtrucel, IndraBC and Constantin Denis
retards don't realize height is sexually attractive, a socioeconomic indicator etc
height is part of your looks retards it signals good genes
 
  • +1
  • JFL
Reactions: confirmedtrucel, Constantin Denis and Deleted member 5786
I see so many busted af looking tall guys get women that I'm really starting to think height is more important. especially because good looking men are so rare it's just be tall and you're set it seems.
I once saw a tiktok "men don't even need to be attractive, they just to be tall and caring"
brutal
 
  • JFL
  • +1
Reactions: mogger10, Mewton, confirmedtrucel and 8 others
saying height is attractive is not denying the blackpill faggots
its literally part of your looks
 
  • +1
Reactions: Beastchodecode, confirmedtrucel, Deleted member 24444 and 1 other person
An entire part of our brain is made to pump dopamine when we see an attractive face.
 
  • +1
Reactions: Vvvvxxxx, Deleted member 24444, mulattomaxxer and 1 other person
This is all you need to see. It's be Chad or you're just genetic waste. The difference between every level is small except for the 96th percentile (Top 4% of men). It's not even 80/20 anymore, it's 96/4.

SpUxnq5


Negligible difference between 5'11" and 6'5". Being 6'1" is the same as 6'5".

R7rVy2f



This study just proves face >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> height.
 
  • +1
  • JFL
Reactions: confirmedtrucel, tombradylover, Deleted member 24444 and 7 others
This is all you need to see. It's be Chad or you're just genetic waste. The difference between every level is small except for the 96th percentile (Top 4% of men). It's not even 80/20 anymore, it's 96/4.

View attachment 1341079

Negligible difference between 5'11" and 6'5". Being 6'1" is the same as 6'5".

View attachment 1341076


This study just proves face >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> height.
The study tends to show that manlets get knocked increasingly harder the shorter they are. But if you're below average in "looks," you're already unattractive to women so it really doesn't matter how much uglier you are. Severe manletism poses a threat to beta provider security whereas ugly guys can still function as beta providers.
 
 
  • JFL
  • +1
  • Ugh..
Reactions: Mewton, T50 Mogger, Preoximerianas and 13 others
6'5 has more monetary value to women than 6'1 though; somewhere around $40k per year.
That monetary study is so fucking cope. It was a verbal study. When a girl imagines someone who's 5'4" she imagines an ugly balding janitor. When she imagines someone 6'5" she thinks of some Chad hunk. Same when you imagine a girl with big tits and small tits. The girl with big tits in your head will have the same or better face. It doesn't account for differences in real life.

I'd love to see a study where they take men of equal and different facial percentiles and compare them to different heights. I guarantee 6'5" normie is like 5% more attractive than 5'9" normie and gets blown out of the water by high tier normie of any height.
 
  • +1
  • Ugh..
Reactions: Deleted member 29040, confirmedtrucel, tombradylover and 11 others
That monetary study is so fucking cope. It was a verbal study. When a girl imagines someone who's 5'4" she imagines an ugly balding janitor. When she imagines someone 6'5" she thinks of some Chad hunk. Same when you imagine a girl with big tits and small tits. The girl with big tits in your head will have the same or better face. It doesn't account for differences.

I'd love to see a study where they take men of equal and different facial percentiles and compare them to different heights. I guarantee 6'5" normie is like 5% more attractive than 5'9" normie and gets blown out of the water by high tier normie of any height.
it gets exponentionally better once you are htn
 
  • +1
Reactions: T50 Mogger
I see so many busted af looking tall guys get women that I'm really starting to think height is more important. especially because good looking men are so rare it's just be tall and you're set it seems.
@LooksOverAll im not the only one who thinks that way 🤠
 
@LooksOverAll im not the only one who thinks that way 🤠
I see so many busted af looking tall guys get women that I'm really starting to think height is more important. especially because good looking men are so rare it's just be tall and you're set it seems.
Yeah because you guys probably don't see that many 6'5"+ guys around. I know tons of them and the only ones getting girls are the ones who are high in PSL, and they only get the same level girls that a guy 5'11" with their face would get.

None of the guys I've seen on campus who are my height get any girls that they wouldn't get otherwise. The LTN and below guys are incel and the normies are in cuck LTRs or incel too.
 
  • +1
Reactions: .👽.
I'd love to see a study where they take men of equal and different facial percentiles and compare them to different heights.
I would too.

This is one of the few height studies I've seen that actually shows benefits up to as tall as 6'6. The 6'5-6'6 range has high variance in the contacts graph too.
 
I would too.

This is one of the few height studies I've seen that actually shows benefits up to as tall as 6'6. The 6'5-6'6 range has high variance in the contacts graph too.
Yeah but variance is cope. Say the study uses 1,000 women and 2 of them are height fetishists for one reason or another. They still have enough options to find a tall htn+ and not an incel/ltn/normie.
 
Cope. 95th percentile is Chad.
Ironic.

Normie: 50th percentile
HTN: 84th percentile (1/6.3) (1 SD)
Chadlite: 98th percentile (1/44) (2 SD)
Chad: 99.7th percentile (1/740.8) (3 SD)
GigaChad: 99.997th percentile (1/31,574.4) (4 SD)
 
  • +1
Reactions: tombradylover, Deleted member 4614 and Deleted member 7725
Yeah because you guys probably don't see that many 6'5"+ guys around. I know tons of them and the only ones getting girls are the ones who are high in PSL, and they only get the same level girls that a guy 5'11" with their face would get.

None of the guys I've seen on campus who are my height get any girls that they wouldn't get otherwise. The LTN and below guys are incel and the normies are in cuck LTRs or incel too.
this forum will never learn man.:hnghn:
 
  • +1
Reactions: Deleted member 7725
imo:

Deformed face > Manlet > Face > Height
 
  • +1
Reactions: johncruz12345
height > face > frame
 
  • +1
  • JFL
Reactions: Artemis, TrestIsBest, Looks234 and 2 others
  • +1
  • JFL
Reactions: wollet2, Uglybrazilian and Looks234
Muh face :feelsuhh::feelsuhh::feelsuhh::feelsuhh::feelsuhh:

face is literally last thing girls care about… I once saw a 5’8 Brad Pitt look alike get rejected by a Becky in club …. Same chick was making out with a 6’2 normie few mins later lol
NT and height mog hard
 
  • +1
Reactions: Biggdink
@Reckless Turtle

I am so sorry OP. You shared a study to discuss it and the comments is full of 200 different “well once I saw a 6ft2 normie get a girl” “but my 6ft5 friend is incel”
People cling to their anecdotes.
 
This commonly referenced study in :blackpill: spaces discusses "looks" (not specifically facial attractiveness) and height:

http://home.uchicago.edu/~hortacsu/onlinedating.pdf

In the monetary value analysis, height tends to be a stronger indicator than looks (to women) in terms of monetary value, but the study only showed average values for ten percentile groupings for looks:
TbJT3Jo.png


However, in contact initiation, women respond much more favorably to looks than height:
spUxnq5.png

r7rVy2f.png

Thanks for posting, but the study is weak. Match outcomes are «simulated» and it's from 2006. The one clear finding is to succeed you oughta be in the top 5 percentiles in looks.

Height preferences is hard to get a feel for online. It's a number. Women know men lie. It's something different towering over a girl at a club than her reading some digits online. Her preferences IRL are different. And like @LooksOverAll points out, it seems like the cut off isn't as sharp and brutal: if you're tall enough you qualify for the next round.

Ironic.

Normie: 50th percentile
HTN: 84th percentile (1/6.3) (1 SD)
Chadlite: 98th percentile (1/44) (2 SD)
Chad: 99.7th percentile (1/740.8) (3 SD)
GigaChad: 99.997th percentile (1/31,574.4) (4 SD)

If you're 1/44, you're likely to be better looking than the best looking dude in any school class. You're doing great if you're that good looking. If there's a school with 180 pupils, boys and girls, there's like two dudes who fulfill that two standard deviations criteria.
 
  • JFL
  • +1
Reactions: ChristianChad and Deleted member 5786
This is all you need to see. It's be Chad or you're just genetic waste. The difference between every level is small except for the 96th percentile (Top 4% of men). It's not even 80/20 anymore, it's 96/4.

View attachment 1341079

Negligible difference between 5'11" and 6'5". Being 6'1" is the same as 6'5".

View attachment 1341076


This study just proves face >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> height.
Irl tho height can be a massive halo, especially in short countries
 
6'2 chad will outslay 6'6 chadlite
 
  • +1
Reactions: Deleted member 24781, Toth's thot and Deleted member 7725
Match outcomes are «simulated» and it's from 2006.
What do you mean; that it's online dating information?
If you're 1/44, you're likely to be better looking than the best looking dude in any school class. You're doing great if you're that good looking.
Yes, Chadlites will be attractive.
 
What do you mean; that it's online dating information?

Yes, Chadlites will be attractive.
I skim read the abstract so you may be right. It's this passage I noted «In order to examine the quantitative importance of the estimated preferences in the formation of matches, we simulate match outcomes using the Gale-Shapley algorithm and examine the resulting correlations in mate attributes», so it's not like a tinder match only a theoretical match, but again, I only skim read.

HTN, chadlite, chad, gigachad etc etc if you're among the 2 % most good looking guys you're past the «attractive enough for interaction» barrier and other things come into play. Things like game in the broad sense, and personality and such. Personality such a dark triad, extroversion, charisma, convo skills, setting up things so you more easily score, things of that nature. That's what matters when you've reached the top two percent imo.
 
I once saw a tiktok "men don't even need to be attractive, they just to be tall and caring"
brutal
caring is a code word for girthy dick
brutal
 
  • JFL
Reactions: Mewton
Muh face :feelsuhh::feelsuhh::feelsuhh::feelsuhh::feelsuhh:

face is literally last thing girls care about… I once saw a 5’8 Brad Pitt look alike get rejected by a Becky in club …. Same chick was making out with a 6’2 normie few mins later lol
rea;. this forum is retarded
 
This commonly referenced study in :blackpill: spaces discusses "looks" (not specifically facial attractiveness) and height:

http://home.uchicago.edu/~hortacsu/onlinedating.pdf

In the monetary value analysis, height tends to be a stronger indicator than looks (to women) in terms of monetary value, but the study only showed average values for ten percentile groupings for looks:
TbJT3Jo.png


However, in contact initiation, women respond much more favorably to looks than height:
spUxnq5.png

r7rVy2f.png
1691533050991



this study was published in 2006 and the study is based on data set collected in 2004. it was based on how online dating behavior was like in year 2004.
 

Similar threads

D
Replies
11
Views
2K
Celery
C
BucketCrab
Replies
52
Views
3K
itsherlossNVM
itsherlossNVM
lestoa
Replies
22
Views
3K
kanderior
kanderior
Baban
Replies
21
Views
2K
johnny4612
J
dreamcake1mo
Replies
42
Views
5K
iam good boy
iam good boy

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top