Ideal blonde

[iblamexyz]

nahh what's up with dude tryna do 3sum with everyone
View attachment 4297143

I asked @Tigermoggerlol if I could do a 3some with him first

 

[Glorious King]

I asked @Tigermoggerlol if I could do a 3some with him first

must have said " nah bro u too fat. I like em in bones tbh "

 

[Jager]

I asked @Jager and @Tigermoggerlol

and is this the ideal blonde



​

very nice bhai W taste

asking two tranny lovers who is the ideal blonde foid isn’t the greatest idea

View attachment 4296744

i dont love trannies?

 

[Jager]

it's such a normie thing to say ''muh I never said looks don't matter''

JFL it's just pure bluepill cope might as well given me a pua line with it

''Looks attract me, but personality keeps me''

View attachment 4296829

my gf could have the worst personality but if shes sl i am staying

 

[iblamexyz]

my gf could have the worst personality but if shes sl i am staying

honestly Idk why I am even replying to his greyass only cause he's high iq that's all

 

[Mogsgymmaxx]

very nice bhai W taste

i dont love trannies?

Ts too erotic

 

[Jager]

mirin let's run a train on her with @Jager

lets 3 man that slut

 

[Glorious King]

my gf could have the worst personality but if shes sl i am staying

true org user

 

[Jager]

View attachment 4297152

Ts too erotic

ts is either fake or i was just trolling hehe

 

[surgerymaxxingsoon]

W

have you ever had a girlfriend?

--

there is strong biological & psychological evidence that humans are predisposed to get normalized to people over time, especially in romantic and sexual contexts

--

Hormones and the Coolidge effect - PubMed

The Coolidge effect is the renewal of sexual behavior after the presentation of a novel sexual partner and possibly occurs as the result of habituation and dishabituation processes. This re-motivation to copulate is well studied in males and is commonly related to sexual satiety, which involves...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/341556592_Experimental_Evidence_for_Sex_Differences_in_Sexual_Variety_Preferences_Support_for_the_Coolidge_Effect_in_Humans

https://opus.uleth.ca/bitstreams/d8c2f5b3-0f04-4b9a-a027-f979a74af782/download

Change in Physical Attraction in Early Romantic Relationships| Interpersona: An International Journal on Personal Relationships

interpersona.psychopen.eu

Sex Differences in the Implications of Partner Physical Attractiveness for the Trajectory of Marital Satisfaction - PMC

Do men value physical attractiveness in a mate more than women? Scientists in numerous disciplines believe that they do, but recent research using speed-dating paradigms suggests that males and females are equally influenced by physical ...

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Stability and Change of Individual Differences in Ideal Partner Preferences Over 13 Years - PMC

Ideal partner preferences for traits in a partner are said to be stable cognitive constructs. However, longitudinal studies investigating the same participants’ ideals repeatedly have so far been limited to relatively short retest intervals of a ...

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

all of these show strong signs of lowered interest based on how long you've been with your partner. all had a decent sample size & combined are a large population. some are based on sex while other on just attractiveness.

--

sure you can claim "but what if it's different with attractive people?" but initial attractiveness doesn't protect against habituation, high partner attractiveness doesn't guarntee long-term satisfaction, there's brain evidence going against what you said, etc.

also, halo effect is not only with attractive people. it can be done to sub humans hypothetically. it's just cognitive perception and not reality

--

Sex differences in the implications of partner physical attractiveness for the trajectory of marital satisfaction - PubMed

Do men value physical attractiveness in a mate more than women? Scientists in numerous disciplines believe that they do, but recent research using speed-dating paradigms suggests that males and females are equally influenced by physical attractiveness when choosing potential mates. Nevertheless...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

this shows that the difference between attractive and non attractive males is minimal relationship wise after 4 years.

--

Frontiers | After the Honeymoon: Neural and Genetic Correlates of Romantic Love in Newlywed Marriages

Romantic love is associated with relationship satisfaction, stability, and individual well-being. For many couples, romantic love also motivates marriage. An...

www.frontiersin.org

study on brain activity with partners, backing my claim.

--

https://www.researchgate.net/public...hips_Evidence_From_a_Large_Longitudinal_Study

people are treated differently as time goes on, for the worse. large majority of relationships also have the halo effect before that is said.

--

it physically cannot be cope if science backs it up

sorry for bad formatting i'm really tired

What If you bag her become chopped then good looking then chopped then good looking then chopped then good looking then chopped and good looking kinda like those mfs that can’t watch a tt vid without subway surfers at the bottom and top of a video just like stimulate them

 

[Jager]

bro imagine she walked around your house dressed like this

@Tigermoggerlol @Jager @emogymmaxx

she getting raped the next second

 

[Glorious King]

ts is either fake or i was just trolling hehe

@Mogsgymmaxx

new sus in da house

keep eyes on him

 

[Mogsgymmaxx]

@Mogsgymmaxx

new sus in da house

keeps eyes on him

@fashioncel @Tigermoggerlol @Jager


I’m onto yall niggas

 

[Jager]

@fashioncel @Tigermoggerlol @Jager


I’m onto yall niggas

View attachment 4297157

we dindu nuffin

 

[Glorious King]

we dindu nuffin

u sure bout that?

 

[iblamexyz]

must have said " nah bro u too fat. I like em in bones tbh "

nah he told me he would be down

 

[Swarthy Knight]

I asked @Jager and @Tigermoggerlol

and is this the ideal blonde



​

She's aight but not ideal imo. Too skinny

This escort I lost my virginity to fogs her (fake blonde, but still)

 

[Jager]

u sure bout that?
View attachment 4297163

i am not into trannies or furries those screenshots are all me just trolling these allegations are false

 

[gorgeous]

I asked @Jager and @Tigermoggerlol

and is this the ideal blonde



​

honestly yes bro good post

 

[Glorious King]

nah he told me he would be down

i like em white

 

[iblamexyz]

She's aight but not ideal imo. Too skinny

This escort I lost my virginity to fogs her (fake blonde, but still)

View attachment 4297166

she's hot asf mirin

 

[Glorious King]

She's aight but not ideal imo. Too skinny

This escort I lost my virginity to fogs her (fake blonde, but still)

View attachment 4297166

nigga really?

 

[Swarthy Knight]

nigga really?

Ofc. Why would I lie about seeing an escort saar nun to particularly brag about

This was a while back tho. Back in summer of 2016. I've seen like 30 escorts since this girl, but none of em made me feel special like she did

 

[Glorious King]

Ofc. Why would I lie about seeing an escort saar nun to particularly brag about

This was a while back tho. Back in summer of 2016. I've seen like 30 escorts since this girl, but none of em made me feel special like she did

30

 

[iblamexyz]

honestly yes bro good post

Mirin'

 

[topology]

but the study which you sent me either are completely irrelevant to the topic of personality

the studies demonstrate that the halo effect does fade as attractiveness fades over time. once i demonstrate the halo effect can fade, it demonstrates my point of:

the “you’d give more leeway to a stacy than a subhuman” argument is also flawed. higher attraction might make someone more initially tolerant, but that tolerance collapses fast after being with them for 6 months. have you had a girl before? you don't sit around glazing them at the 5th year mark for no reason

the only thing being stated is that personality determines whether the relationship works out or not, meaning the relationship has already started and the minimum attraction threshold has already been met. this is literally common sense & you're calling it "bluepill cope"

---

that being said if I was to do a study like this and someone to ask some some bluepill questions about my marriage 9/10 I would lie and so would they

eg, how often do you have sex if I was in a deadbedroom

I wouldn't just say oh my wife doesn't sleep with me anymore

I would say once a month or some other bs

but that only supports my claim further. even while they lie there's still a decline in things like that. if they're sugar coating it while there's a decline, does that not mean it's worse than it actually is? speculation or not, it still backs my claim.

next, i also used neurological data to back up my claim. there was a study i linked that showed oxytocin and other hormones when they see their partner (cant remember what happened exactly) but things like that cannot be fabricated.

--

we don't know the nature of their relationships

therefore I don't know how they live and actually operate day by day/live

that’s exactly why large-scale longitudinal studies are used, they average out individual lifestyle differences. single anecdotes don’t overturn multi-year population data. the point isn’t how one couple acts; it’s about consistent biological and psychological patterns that repeat across thousands of couples

--

JBW, betabux, oofy doofy

beta buxxing and the oofy doofy theory are counterexamples, no? they both (oofy doofy 100% and usually beta buxxing) are about less attractive men with more attractive women. they demonstrate less about the importance of looks. JBW has no effect on the halo effect, i don't get what you're trying to say.

--

fyi I didn't read all study you sent since it would take me all day, I just used gpt to give me a summary

also if you're going to do this feed the context to the bot word by word so it gives an accurate response

--

sorry for the long response time, i was in my bed and only got up 10 minutes ago. i'm going to go sleep now anyways so you can reply and i'll respond either during class if i'm bored or at night

also sorry for bad format & bad spelling it's really late now and my brain doesn't work

 

[savage21]

I asked @Jager and @Tigermoggerlol

and is this the ideal blonde



​

They’re right tbh. Looks slutty af though

 

[iblamexyz]

Looks slutty af though

which makes it even hotter

 

[iblamexyz]

JBW has no effect on the halo effect

JFL if you think jbw has no effect on the halo effect inform yourself on jbw if you don't think being white is a massive halo

the fact that study don't give us the info on the race tell me a lot

oofy doofy 100% and usually beta buxxing

not always because a beta bux is someone who has gotten a hot foid with his money where as oofy doofy

is dating a hot woman or dating some due the last option

many oofy doofy who aren't beta buxing and their wife earns more but she doesn't want to chase other men and get cheated on so she settled for an oofy

also if you're going to do this feed the context to the bot word by word so it gives an accurate response

I did I asked it how does it prove my point and if it doesn't how does it prove yours

next, i also used neurological data to back up my claim. there was a study i linked that showed oxytocin and other hormones when they see their partner (cant remember what happened exactly) but things like that cannot be fabricated.

so JFL what you describe is ageing

and your completey going off track, the point was attractive people already have a good personality

there good looks= good personality

this almost water in the bp space let me geuss you will never talk to a recessed sub 3 woman even if she has your ideal personality same goes for a womam

but that only supports my claim further. even while they lie there's still a decline in things like that. if they're sugar coating it while there's a decline, does that not mean it's worse than it actually is? speculation or not, it still backs my claim.

no it proves my point that oofy doofy live is different to what it was at the start due to her settling down with him

esp if they have kids she odds rarely have sex with him due to looks, not muh personality

 

[jaaba]

I asked @Jager and @Tigermoggerlol

and is this the ideal blonde



​

Not even blonde lol

 

[iblamexyz]

Not even blonde lol

she looks blonde

 

[topology]

JFL if you think jbw has no effect on the halo effect inform yourself on jbw if you don't think being white is a massive halo

that's not the argument at hand. i'm arguing for how the halo effect fades with time and you're talking about the massive buff you get via being white. when i stated it has no effect i meant it has no effect on how it fades. i'm not here making the argument for or against being white.

the fact that study don't give us the info on the race tell me a lot

it's irrelevant as the halo effect is present in almost every relationship & with a large sample size it averages out. i've also shown how objective attraction does not matter as the halo effect is based on perception & applies to the honeymoon phase of basically every couple.

i can use objective logic to prove my point if you want an objective "winner" to the argument/debate

not always because a beta bux is someone who has gotten a hot foid with his money where as oofy doofy

is dating a hot woman or dating some due the last option

many oofy doofy who aren't beta buxing and their wife earns more but she doesn't want to chase other men and get cheated on so she settled for an oofy

this is a small part of the population. it does not account for the general average.

next, “settling” ≠ disproving habituation & social status doesn’t override neurochemistry

money, stability, or fear of cheating change incentives, not biology. dopamine habituation, oxytocin bonding, and reward-system adaptation still occur. this means you can’t buy your way out of neural adaptation -- people normalize to what’s familiar no matter how that relationship began

the oofy doofy theory is also anecdotal data. you cannot prove your point with studies. the “oofy doofy” theory is a meme in a sense, not a validated framework. no empirical study has measured “oofy” pairings or “settling” in this sense. the longitudinal studies that do exist show the same pattern across all demographics -- attraction and satisfaction decline with time

i also ignored the parts of this that back up my claim as it was not needed to prove my point

I did I asked it how does it prove my point and if it doesn't how does it prove yours

you were making arguments for points i never said

so JFL what you describe is ageing

there are studies that have a difference of 4 years and some with a difference of 20. you do not become ugly after 4 years unless you don't take care of yourself. aging would be a valid argument if all the studies were past 10+ years.

even if it was aging, the decline would not be that much on average in a 4 year study if the halo effect never faded. habituation is one of the most well-proven phenomena in all of neuroscience and psychology

and your completey going off track, the point was attractive people already have a good personality

there good looks= good personality

they do not have good personalities, they have the halo effect. you have agreed with this already. if you want to argue how good looking people have better personalities, i'm open to debate that, please don't show studies getting others to rate their personality as that demonstrates good social skills. the argument is on personality, not social skills.i have shown how the halo effect fades which is the main reason why good looking people are seen as having a good personality.

if a good looking persons entire "good personality" is based off their halo effect which is based off looks & i have proven that you get bored of your partners looks through several means, does this not mean that they won't have a good personality past a 6-24 month relationship necessarily? that's the entire point i was making before

let me geuss you will never talk to a recessed sub 3 woman even if she has your ideal personality same goes for a womam

this is a strawman. the claim isn’t “personality overrides attraction entirely,” it’s “once basic attraction exists, personality becomes the deciding factor.”

i have replied to this before. the entire argument is that once the minimum baseline for a relationship is met, the personality matters more after the 6-24 month mark on average. i might have explained this badly at first, but i have explained it better after like the 3rd message of mine.

no it proves my point that oofy doofy live is different to what it was at the start due to her settling down with him

esp if they have kids she odds rarely have sex with him due to looks, not muh personality

that doesn’t disprove anything, it still supports what i said.
if she’s settling down and losing interest sexually, that’s literally the decline i was talking about. it doesn’t matter whether it’s because of habituation, looks, or settling, the end result is the same -- decreased attraction and interest over time which is literally the decline of the halo effect & the decline of the relationship if a good personality is not present.

and if people are lying or sugarcoating their answers in surveys while the data still shows decline, that only means the real decline is probably worse.

bringing up oofy doofy just shifts why the decline happens, not whether it does. whether she’s with a chad, a chud, or an average guy, the consistent finding across studies is that sexual frequency, novelty response, and attraction drop over time

so all you did was rename the mechanism, the biological reality stays the same

--

also i have no clue what happened to my PC it's no longer turning on so responses will be on my laptop from now on. you should expect longer response times

 

[iblamexyz]

that's not the argument at hand. i'm arguing for how the halo effect fades with time and you're talking about the massive buff you get via being white. when i stated it has no effect i meant it has no effect on how it fades. i'm not here making the argument for or against being white.


it's irrelevant as the halo effect is present in almost every relationship & with a large sample size it averages out. i've also shown how objective attraction does not matter as the halo effect is based on perception & applies to the honeymoon phase of basically every couple.

i can use objective logic to prove my point if you want an objective "winner" to the argument/debate



this is a small part of the population. it does not account for the general average.

next, “settling” ≠ disproving habituation & social status doesn’t override neurochemistry

money, stability, or fear of cheating change incentives, not biology. dopamine habituation, oxytocin bonding, and reward-system adaptation still occur. this means you can’t buy your way out of neural adaptation -- people normalize to what’s familiar no matter how that relationship began

the oofy doofy theory is also anecdotal data. you cannot prove your point with studies. the “oofy doofy” theory is a meme in a sense, not a validated framework. no empirical study has measured “oofy” pairings or “settling” in this sense. the longitudinal studies that do exist show the same pattern across all demographics -- attraction and satisfaction decline with time

i also ignored the parts of this that back up my claim as it was not needed to prove my point


you were making arguments for points i never said



there are studies that have a difference of 4 years and some with a difference of 20. you do not become ugly after 4 years unless you don't take care of yourself. aging would be a valid argument if all the studies were past 10+ years.

even if it was aging, the decline would not be that much on average in a 4 year study if the halo effect never faded. habituation is one of the most well-proven phenomena in all of neuroscience and psychology


they do not have good personalities, they have the halo effect. you have agreed with this already. if you want to argue how good looking people have better personalities, i'm open to debate that, please don't show studies getting others to rate their personality as that demonstrates good social skills. the argument is on personality, not social skills.i have shown how the halo effect fades which is the main reason why good looking people are seen as having a good personality.

if a good looking persons entire "good personality" is based off their halo effect which is based off looks & i have proven that you get bored of your partners looks through several means, does this not mean that they won't have a good personality past a 6-24 month relationship necessarily? that's the entire point i was making before


this is a strawman. the claim isn’t “personality overrides attraction entirely,” it’s “once basic attraction exists, personality becomes the deciding factor.”

i have replied to this before. the entire argument is that once the minimum baseline for a relationship is met, the personality matters more after the 6-24 month mark on average. i might have explained this badly at first, but i have explained it better after like the 3rd message of mine.


that doesn’t disprove anything, it still supports what i said.
if she’s settling down and losing interest sexually, that’s literally the decline i was talking about. it doesn’t matter whether it’s because of habituation, looks, or settling, the end result is the same -- decreased attraction and interest over time which is literally the decline of the halo effect & the decline of the relationship if a good personality is not present.

and if people are lying or sugarcoating their answers in surveys while the data still shows decline, that only means the real decline is probably worse.

bringing up oofy doofy just shifts why the decline happens, not whether it does. whether she’s with a chad, a chud, or an average guy, the consistent finding across studies is that sexual frequency, novelty response, and attraction drop over time

so all you did was rename the mechanism, the biological reality stays the same

--

also i have no clue what happened to my PC it's no longer turning on so responses will be on my laptop from now on. you should expect longer response times

okay?

so in that case what do you define as personality and what do you define as the halo effect

 

[topology]

so in that case what do you define as personality and what do you define as the halo effect

good question,

personality is a stable internal construct. it's a set of consistent traits that define how someone thinks, feels, and acts. psychologists measure it through frameworks like the big five (openness, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness, neuroticism). these are patterns that remain relatively constant across time and situations.

https://www.researchgate.net/public...ty_and_Its_Relevance_to_Personality_Disorders (the big 5)

the halo effect, on the other hand, is a perceptual bias, not a personality trait. it's when one noticeable positive feature (the biggest one being attractiveness) causes you to assume other positive traits (like kindness) without evidence.

the two are connected only superficially. the halo effect distorts your perception of someone's personality at first, but once familiarity sets in and the halo fades (which studies back up), you see their actual personality, which is usually for the worse.

since we were only speaking about the halo effect in the context of attractiveness, then it's a 1:1 correlation with an upper bound. since it's a 1:1 correlation, as attractiveness decreases, the halo effect also fades. i have proven across many different fields that this happens in 99% of relationships. in the large majority of cases, the halo effect fades, which makes personality matter more in the long run

--

sorry for the late response, i was rotting on my phone & only remembered this 10 minutes ago

 

[iblamexyz]

good question,

personality is a stable internal construct. it's a set of consistent traits that define how someone thinks, feels, and acts. psychologists measure it through frameworks like the big five (openness, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness, neuroticism). these are patterns that remain relatively constant across time and situations.

https://www.researchgate.net/public...ty_and_Its_Relevance_to_Personality_Disorders (the big 5)

the halo effect, on the other hand, is a perceptual bias, not a personality trait. it's when one noticeable positive feature (the biggest one being attractiveness) causes you to assume other positive traits (like kindness) without evidence.

the two are connected only superficially. the halo effect distorts your perception of someone's personality at first, but once familiarity sets in and the halo fades (which studies back up), you see their actual personality, which is usually for the worse.

since we were only speaking about the halo effect in the context of attractiveness, then it's a 1:1 correlation with an upper bound. since it's a 1:1 correlation, as attractiveness decreases, the halo effect also fades. i have proven across many different fields that this happens in 99% of relationships. in the large majority of cases, the halo effect fades, which makes personality matter more in the long run

--

sorry for the late response, i was rotting on my phone & only remembered this 10 minutes ago

this doesn't disprove my point JFL

you said meh halo effect

but that fact is, attractive people get included in social events ugly people don't

therefore attractive people building social skills a lot quicker than the ugly person

and attractive people are being able to articulate, something much better since they had time for people to correct them or error them in their speech

if a sub 5 man and hmtn said the same thing

the articulation would be completely different, thus the personality being different

due to the articulation

 

[topology]

but that fact is, attractive people get included in social events ugly people don't

therefore attractive people building social skills a lot quicker than the ugly person

once again, social skills ≠ personality development. i literally attached a study showing minimal difference in relationship status and overall satisfaction after a couple of years with unattractive vs. attractive males. you cannot claim this is aging, as the difference in years was not large enough for that to occur.

and attractive people are being able to articulate, something much better since they had time for people to correct them or error them in their speech

articulation is performance, not personality.

clearer speech or better phrasing is a social skill, not evidence of better personality. many narcissists, manipulators, and psychopaths are articulate, yet rate low on agreeableness and empathy. personality is about inner consistency, not verbal fluency.

the articulation would be completely different, thus the personality being different

i've literally described how the halo effect is a 1:1 link to attractiveness, and there's a very strong link to attractiveness dropping over time, which causes the halo effect to fade and causes you to see them for who they are.

can you please explain to me why there was minimal difference in attractive vs. non-attractive males in relationships after a few years, if this is not the case? the sample size was small, and it was generalizable. please debunk this along with the neuroscience to back up your claim.

--

you have yet to prove how more attractive people have better personalities past the halo effect. you claiming they get invited more or that their word carries more weight has no impact on the argument. the argument is whether the halo effect fades or not.

the NEO-PI-R and NEO-PI-3 are the official, standardized tests used to measure the Big Five personality traits. they both account for the halo effect, social desirability bias, and other distortions. they were literally designed to minimize these phenomena.

--

respond doing the following to debunk me:

a) prove how the halo effect does not fade
b) prove how good looking people have good personalities strictly due to their looks & it not being a byproduct of the halo effect
c) attach studies for everything you claim
d) debunk my studies

 

[iblamexyz]

once again, social skills ≠ personality development. i literally attached a study showing minimal difference in relationship status and overall satisfaction after a couple of years with unattractive vs. attractive males. you cannot claim this is aging, as the difference in years was not large enough for that to occur.



articulation is performance, not personality.

clearer speech or better phrasing is a social skill, not evidence of better personality. many narcissists, manipulators, and psychopaths are articulate, yet rate low on agreeableness and empathy. personality is about inner consistency, not verbal fluency.


i've literally described how the halo effect is a 1:1 link to attractiveness, and there's a very strong link to attractiveness dropping over time, which causes the halo effect to fade and causes you to see them for who they are.

can you please explain to me why there was minimal difference in attractive vs. non-attractive males in relationships after a few years, if this is not the case? the sample size was small, and it was generalizable. please debunk this along with the neuroscience to back up your claim.

--

you have yet to prove how more attractive people have better personalities past the halo effect. you claiming they get invited more or that their word carries more weight has no impact on the argument. the argument is whether the halo effect fades or not.

the NEO-PI-R and NEO-PI-3 are the official, standardized tests used to measure the Big Five personality traits. they both account for the halo effect, social desirability bias, and other distortions. they were literally designed to minimize these phenomena.

--

respond doing the following to debunk me:

a) prove how the halo effect does not fade
b) prove how good looking people have good personalities strictly due to their looks & it not being a byproduct of the halo effect
c) attach studies for everything you claim
d) debunk my studies

your using studio statistics

and your using big words to confuse the person your talking to

what is the difference between a personality and social skills

 

[topology]

your using studio statistics

and your using big words to confuse the person your talking to

i am using proven concepts & their actual names. big five, NEO-PI-R, habituation, etc are stablished psychological frameworks.

i cannot tell if this is bait or not at this point as you're literally saying that established frame works which can be searched up are said to confuse you

what is the difference between a personality and social skills

(mainly copy and pasted from before as i've already said this) personality is who you are inside -- your consistent traits, emotions, and mindset that stay stable over time (e.g., kindness, discipline, curiosity, or anxiety). it’s mostly shaped by genetics and long-term experiences

social skills are what you do on the outside — how well you communicate, read people, or handle social situations. they’re learned behaviors that can improve with practice

narcissists, manipulators, and psychopaths are masters at communication, charm, and persuasion. yet, their personalities are objectively toxic. they often score low on agreeableness and empathy and high on narcissism or machiavellianism. if there was no difference, then narcissts would have the best personalities. studies indicate the opposite, though. marriages with narcissts decline faster:

source for my claim:

Narcissism and newlywed marriage: Partner characteristics and marital trajectories - PubMed

Despite narcissism's relation with interpersonal dysfunction, surprisingly little empirical research has been devoted to understanding narcissism's effect on intimate relationships in general or marital relationships in particular. The current study addressed this gap using longitudinal data...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

before you claim something like "oh but this proves personality doesn't matter," there was a large sample size here and in the control groups. the decline was much stronger in the narc study vs the control group & the difference was minimal between normal couples and attractive male couples like i've said before.

here's an example:

a person can be confident (a personality trait) but still bad at public speaking (a social skill).
another person can be shy (a personality trait) but very polite and considerate in conversation (strong social skills).

 

[iblamexyz]

a person can be confident (a personality trait) but still bad at public speaking (a social skill).
another person can be shy (a personality trait) but very polite and considerate in conversation (strong social skills).

but your completely ignoring the prefrontal cortex

Positive parenting predicts the development of adolescent brain structure: A longitudinal study - PMC

Positive parenting predicts development of adolescent amygdala and prefrontal cortex. Positive parenting has a unique influence on adolescent brain development. Positive and negative parenting are not opposite sides of a continuum. Parenting ...

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

positive reinforcement is what gives people confidence

rn your whole response is a larp

are you seriously telling me that kindness is a personality trait

 

[topology]

are you seriously telling me that kindness is a personality trait

yes. “kindness/compassion” is a core facet of agreeableness in the big five -- that’s standard textbook psych

positive reinforcement is what gives people confidence

reinforcement can raise confidence and fluency (social skills) without changing who you are (traits). personality traits are defined as relatively stable, enduring characteristics; they can shift slowly over years, but they aren’t the same as short-term performance gains from practice

sources:

APA Dictionary of Psychology

A trusted reference in the field of psychology, offering more than 25,000 clear and authoritative entries.

dictionary.apa.org

https://www.apa.org/topics/personality

Personality stability and change: A meta-analysis of longitudinal studies - PubMed

Past research syntheses provided evidence that personality traits are both stable and changeable throughout the life span. However, early meta-analytic estimates were constrained by a relatively small universe of longitudinal studies, many of which tracked personality traits in small samples...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

but your completely ignoring the prefrontal cortex

nope. the PFC governs self-control and social behavior, and it does improve with feedback/training -- that’s skill/performance, not core personality. reviews show PFC supports regulation and social cognition, but that’s different from stable trait levels

The role of prefrontal cortex in cognitive control and executive function - PMC

Concepts of cognitive control (CC) and executive function (EF) are defined in terms of their relationships with goal-directed behavior versus habits and controlled versus automatic processing, and related to the functions of the prefrontal cortex ...

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

--

i ask you to debunk why the study i attached showing attractive men vs. non-attractive men have minimal differences after being checked up on, in a time period where aging isn't the issue.


i ask you to debunk why narcissists aren't the best when it comes to personalities, i have attached studies for this.


i ask you to debunk why the neuroscience agrees with me.


i ask you to debunk why there's a decline no matter the relationship after years.


i ask you to debunk habituation.


i ask you to finally show how personality is not different from social skills with sources.

--

i have shown sources that personality is relatively stable and only shifts slowly over years. attractiveness has no actual link to personality, you're just demonstrating the halo effect once again

 

[iblamexyz]

yes. “kindness/compassion” is a core facet of agreeableness in the big five -- that’s standard textbook psych


reinforcement can raise confidence and fluency (social skills) without changing who you are (traits). personality traits are defined as relatively stable, enduring characteristics; they can shift slowly over years, but they aren’t the same as short-term performance gains from practice

sources:

APA Dictionary of Psychology

A trusted reference in the field of psychology, offering more than 25,000 clear and authoritative entries.

dictionary.apa.org

https://www.apa.org/topics/personality

Personality stability and change: A meta-analysis of longitudinal studies - PubMed

Past research syntheses provided evidence that personality traits are both stable and changeable throughout the life span. However, early meta-analytic estimates were constrained by a relatively small universe of longitudinal studies, many of which tracked personality traits in small samples...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

nope. the PFC governs self-control and social behavior, and it does improve with feedback/training -- that’s skill/performance, not core personality. reviews show PFC supports regulation and social cognition, but that’s different from stable trait levels

The role of prefrontal cortex in cognitive control and executive function - PMC

Concepts of cognitive control (CC) and executive function (EF) are defined in terms of their relationships with goal-directed behavior versus habits and controlled versus automatic processing, and related to the functions of the prefrontal cortex ...

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

--

i ask you to debunk why the study i attached showing attractive men vs. non-attractive men have minimal differences after being checked up on, in a time period where aging isn't the issue.


i ask you to debunk why narcissists aren't the best when it comes to personalities, i have attached studies for this.


i ask you to debunk why the neuroscience agrees with me.


i ask you to debunk why there's a decline no matter the relationship after years.


i ask you to debunk habituation.


i ask you to finally show how personality is not different from social skills with sources.

--

i have shown sources that personality is relatively stable and only shifts slowly over years. attractiveness has no actual link to personality, you're just demonstrating the halo effect once again

define the halo effect for me

 

[topology]

define the halo effect for me

the halo effect, on the other hand, is a perceptual bias, not a personality trait. it's when one noticeable positive feature (the biggest one being attractiveness) causes you to assume other positive traits (like kindness) without evidence.

copy and pasted from before as i've already done that

 

[iblamexyz]

the halo effect, on the other hand, is a perceptual bias, not a personality trait. it's when one noticeable positive feature (the biggest one being attractiveness) causes you to assume other positive traits (like kindness) without evidence.

copy and pasted from before as i've already done that

so your claim that halo effects fades after time but my claim even when the halo effect fades (if it even fades )

you would know the personality of the person by than odds are it'll be better than the ugly person due to you not even speaking to the ugly person

point being Looks will always over ride personality

your face is your personality

 

[topology]

so your claim that halo effects fades after time but my claim even when the halo effect fades (if it even fades )

i have proven it fades with neuroscience, psychology, and biology. it's not a claim anymore.

point being Looks will always over ride personality

only early on. once the halo/novelty fades, long-term outcomes track real traits (e.g., emotional stability, agreeableness, reliability), not looks. attraction opens the door; personality decides whether the relationship lasts

you’d have to debunk the sources i provided showing that attraction declines in nearly every relationship over time, regardless of circumstance, if you want to disprove my claim.

your face is your personality

category error. faces shape impressions (halo), not stable traits. facial cues have weak links to measured personality; plenty of highly articulate, attractive narcissists have poor underlying traits. personality = enduring patterns; face = a cue that biases first impressions

you would know the personality of the person by than odds are it'll be better than the ugly person due to you not even speaking to the ugly person

that’s selection and survivorship bias, not evidence. more exposure to attractive people ≠ better traits. you’re only judging the ones who “survived” social filtering (i.e., the people who get invited and included). that says nothing about the average personality of everyone else, it just reflects access and the halo effect, not actual agreeableness, conscientiousness, or empathy. not observing someone doesn’t make their personality worse

that’s like saying getting a phd raises your iq. it doesn’t, it just means people with higher iq are more likely to get phds. the degree doesn’t cause the intelligence, it’s a reflection of preexisting traits. the same logic applies here, being attractive doesn’t cause a better personality, it just gives you more opportunities to display whatever social skills you already had. you’re confusing correlation, exposure, and feedback with causation and actual personality change

also, i have already debunked the idea of "you wouldn't even speak to a sub 3 so they aren't even in the picture to begin with and therefore looks matter more" several times. that is not my argument. your argument only proves that looks matter more in the beginning, while i’m saying personality matters more in a long-term relationship.

the guy who claimed "idc about personality if it's a sl" has no weight in this discussion. he has never dated a sl to have any experience, and even if he did, it would have ended in a way that supports my point

----

reply debunking the studies or this conversation has gone in circles

debunk especially the one showing minimal difference between attractive and non-attractive males after a couple of years, the neuroscience one, and all the others showing that relationships fade with time

also, i'd like you to find any reputable theory that backs up your claim. big five, habituation, and every major psychological framework contradict what you're saying

i'm happy to relink the studies for you

 

[iblamexyz]

i have proven it fades with neuroscience, psychology, and biology. it's not a claim anymore.


only early on. once the halo/novelty fades, long-term outcomes track real traits (e.g., emotional stability, agreeableness, reliability), not looks. attraction opens the door; personality decides whether the relationship lasts

you’d have to debunk the sources i provided showing that attraction declines in nearly every relationship over time, regardless of circumstance, if you want to disprove my claim.


category error. faces shape impressions (halo), not stable traits. facial cues have weak links to measured personality; plenty of highly articulate, attractive narcissists have poor underlying traits. personality = enduring patterns; face = a cue that biases first impressions


that’s selection and survivorship bias, not evidence. more exposure to attractive people ≠ better traits. you’re only judging the ones who “survived” social filtering (i.e., the people who get invited and included). that says nothing about the average personality of everyone else, it just reflects access and the halo effect, not actual agreeableness, conscientiousness, or empathy. not observing someone doesn’t make their personality worse

that’s like saying getting a phd raises your iq. it doesn’t, it just means people with higher iq are more likely to get phds. the degree doesn’t cause the intelligence, it’s a reflection of preexisting traits. the same logic applies here, being attractive doesn’t cause a better personality, it just gives you more opportunities to display whatever social skills you already had. you’re confusing correlation, exposure, and feedback with causation and actual personality change

also, i have already debunked the idea of "you wouldn't even speak to a sub 3 so they aren't even in the picture to begin with and therefore looks matter more" several times. that is not my argument. your argument only proves that looks matter more in the beginning, while i’m saying personality matters more in a long-term relationship.

the guy who claimed "idc about personality if it's a sl" has no weight in this discussion. he has never dated a sl to have any experience, and even if he did, it would have ended in a way that supports my point

----

reply debunking the studies or this conversation has gone in circles

debunk especially the one showing minimal difference between attractive and non-attractive males after a couple of years, the neuroscience one, and all the others showing that relationships fade with time

also, i'd like you to find any reputable theory that backs up your claim. big five, habituation, and every major psychological framework contradict what you're saying

i'm happy to relink the studies for you

okay so explain the act of Love to me?