The Truth About Women

[Deleted member 3323]

Women. We all use to love them at one point or you probably still do. If you don't despise women then that usually means you don't know their true nature, Oh you sweet summer child. Read on if you dare, I don't meant to sound overly-dramatic but if you generally have a positive world-view on women prepare for that to get destroyed.

First and foremost, the foundation for this giga blackpill is this: Women don't actually love you for you, they cant, they're biologically wired to be superficial as shit. Back in the caveman days what do you think was valued most by women? A guy with a great personality or a muscular chad who can hunt and provide tons of meat? A good jaw meant a good bite, height meant dominance over others and more resources, this is what women actually love you for. Its the most basic blackpill truth about women, they don't care about you, they only care about the emotions you can make them feel, the excitement, the money, the gifts, the sex! This is why women love bad boys. I've had girls tell me "I like you, you're not like these beta soyboys." I kid you not, straight from the horse's mouth. They know they're superficial pieces of shit so they want a man who can put her in her place even if they don't out rightly admit this. That's another thing, don't believe what she says, they're wired to lie more than men for their own survival. You see, if women were actually truthful about their own nature, about their desire for a 6'8 gigachad to use her as hole society would fall apart.

To fall back on my previous point, back in the cavemen days women did not have power - They were frail, weak, so they must rely on their ability to manipulate those around them for resources. Now back to the main point, this is why women cant love men. How can you love someone you're trying to manipulate? Ever try to leave and she says all these things to you about how much she loves you - She just wants you to stay because you provide something. Whether it be comfortableness, sex, emotional support, companionship. YOU as a person means nothing to them, if you lack any of those qualities (looks, things of value) then she would've never bat a single EYE at you. You are nothing more than a tool in their eyes. That's how it goes, she provides pussy and you provide resources. Nature intended things to be this way unfortunately for our survival.

This might be a hard pill to swallow for some and its completely reasonable, our liking for women comes from the love we have for our mother and other female role models in our lives. Basic psychology.

This source basically saying Looks>Everything
MAJOR FINDINGS
MALE ATTRIBUTES THAT PREDICTED A WOMAN'S ROMANTIC INTEREST

1. Physical attractiveness (rs = 0.88, p<0.01)
2. Sport/Exercise involvement or interest (rs = 0.48, p<0.01)

THINGS THAT DIDN'T

1. Big Five Personality Traits
2. Affect
3. Attachment Style
4. Self-esteem
5. Political leanings
6. Values
7. Social interest
8. Similarity

Full comment on this finding by the authors:

It is remarkable that the strongest predictor of initial attraction in a speed-dating context was partner’s physical attractiveness, and, most importantly, men and women showed an extremely similar pattern. This finding was highly consistent with the results reported in several other speed-dating studies we mentioned earlier (Eastwick & Finkel, 2008; Fisman et al., 2006; Kurzban & Weeden, 2005, 2008; Todd et al., 2007). It therefore seems a very solid finding that men and women are equally strongly drawn to physically attractive partners. This finding, however, appears to be inconsistent with the widely accepted finding in evolutionary research indicating a fundamental sex difference in their preferences for long-term partners—whereas men prefer youth and physical attractiveness in their partners, women give more weight to partners’ earning potential and commitment to a relationship. Evolutionary research does suggest that these sex differences in mating preferences tend to diminish or even disappear when short-term mating contexts are primed (e.g., Li & Kenrick, 2006). One may argue that speed-dating fits better a short-term context rather than a long-term mating context. It is important to note that some of the published speed-dating studies (Kurzban & Weeden, 2005, 2008; Todd et al., 2007) were not based on college student samples but on community adult samples. These participants actually paid to participate in the commercial speed-dating service with the hope to find a life partner. This should be considered as more like a long-term context. Nevertheless, they yielded a similar pattern as found in the college student based samples in Eastwick and Finkel and the current research. Moreover, Eastwick and Finkel did an excellent job ruling out several potential alternative explanations for this finding. For example, even when explicitly asked to consider long-term partners, both sexes continued to favor physical attractiveness. Thus, the lack of sex difference on preference of Speed-Dating Attraction physical attractiveness does not seem to be due to differences in the mating strategy people are taking.
Then how do we reconcile these findings? We consider a fundamental difference between mating preference research and attraction research—whereas mate preference or ideal partner research focuses on conscious, rational cognitions about an ideal partner, attraction research studies less conscious and more spontaneous feelings and behaviors. The difference in findings from these two fields indicates that human beings’ rational, conscious mind can be independent from their behaviors in real-life encounters. In our particular case, it seems that women’s attraction feeling is dominated by partners’ physical attractiveness, just as their male counterparts, even though it is possible that when prompted to think about preferences for a potential mate, women would give priority considerations to characteristics like earning potential. Would that suggest that humans’ conscious, rational thoughts are more a product of evolutionary principles, whereas their actual behaviors can be irrational and not necessarily in their best interests (in terms of reproductive success)? This question warrants further examination.

SUMMARY OF METHODOLOGY AND CAVEATS
PARTICIPANTS

• N=108 college students; 54 men; 54 women
• Mean age = 19.5 (range 17 to 26)
• Ethnic breakdown not reported, but likely all white

PROCEDURE

• 6 speed-dating events; each 1 hr long; max 10 women and 10 men at each event (group)
• Each participant's photo was taken at the event and independently judged later for physical attractiveness (below)
• duration of each speed-date: 5 min
• men rotated; women stayed seated

Physical Attractiveness assessment

• Eight research collaborators independently rated each participant's photo on a 1-7 scale, with 1 being "very unattractive", 4 being "average", and 7 being "very attractive"
• interrater agreement was 0.86
• Mean rating for a participant = their final attractiveness score

Romantic interest questionnaire

• consisted of the following questions: "Would you be interested in seeing this partner again after the speed-date event?" (answer yes/no), "How much do you like this person as a potential date?" "How interested are you in getting to know this person better?" and "How comfortable do you feel being around this person?" (answer on a 5 pt scale)
• filled out by participants at the event then again after the event (after it was revealed whether their date partner had romantic interest in them based on the at-event questionnaire, this was to test reciprocity, which turned out to be significant)

Other questionnaires

• included a background questionnaire, inventories of political attitudes, personal values, interests, general personality, affectivity, attachment, and self-esteem
• administered pre-event

Obvious caveat

• This study only identifies predictors of initial romantic interest, and does not address which factors might predict a change in the magnitude and/or direction of romantic/sexual desirability over more prolonged or repeated interactions, via such processes as the propinquity effect and mere exposure effect (which would serve to increase romantic interest), or their antithesis, social allergy (which decreases romantic interest). Halo effects suggest physical attractiveness would probably hold primacy in predicting sexual/romantic receptiveness for a variable but limited period of time, after which, dyad-specific idiosyncrasies are likely to emerge (2). The salience of physical attractiveness in maintaining (as opposed to initiating) a long-term relationship, progression towards marriage, and subsequent marital satisfaction, may also differ.

What leads to romantic attraction: similarity, reciprocity, security, or beauty? Evidence from a speed-dating study - PubMed

Years of attraction research have established several "principles" of attraction with robust evidence. However, a major limitation of previous attraction studies is that they have almost exclusively relied on well-controlled experiments, which are often criticized for lacking ecological...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

There's so much more to talk about but this thread would be dragging on, this is just the basics boy-o.

The question: You might be thinking "Aw fuck, why even date then? Whats the point? I rather be lonely." This doesn't have to be the end, you can still just use them to smash lol.

 

[Deleted member 4612]

Water is wet

 

[MammothActuary]

This is Blackpill 101 that pretty much everyone knows

 

[Deleted member 2846]

did read. idk bro, i think they CAN love you (or what i think is love) but it’s all just a projection/facade to get you to do things for them. ofc some are whores (all are whores for the right man), but they if u have a ltr with them, in YOUR mind (without digging deep and tryna analyze it) it is “love”. but when u dig deeper, you’ll see that it’s all a manipulation and set up to care for them and protect them. men do it to, for sex, it’s natural.

imagine, in this day and age, wifing up some girl at 30 who has a N count of like 30-40 jfl. no wonder divorce rates are so high lol. the writing is on the wall but no one wants to fund these “misogynistic” studies and just blame it on men. what a great society bros

 

[toolateforme]

Just be chad theory

 

[maxmendietta]

fk u ( ))----------------D <- ur meal

 

[LookistWorld]

[Blackpill] The truth about this thread - WARNING: extreme suifuel

Spoiler

ion remember askin

 

[Pietrosiek]

Yes. Good thread read it all