Tinder 10/10 Male Experiment

[F2005]

I think what Shookwun is trying to say in the last sentence of his last post is that in order to get your foot in the door with a woman, you have to have good outer looks. Nobody is going to approach some one at a bar or on a dating website based on their great personality or their kindness. Sure, these things become important as a relationship progresses, but if the initial physical attraction is not there, then a man really does not stand much of a chance in scoring a decent-looking woman. In my experience, I've never been with a woman who hasn't been attracted to my outer looks. For instance, one of my X's who recently got married cold-approached me at a bar because she said I looked like her favorite musician. I shudder to think who she thought I would've looked like as a baldie.

I remember Shookwun posted something a while back like: physical attraction = temporary hookup, physical attraction + personality = relationship, and personality alone = platonic friend. I agree with that for the most part although I've unfortunately seen plenty of women stay with great-looking men with terrible personalities just because they look great and they wanted to show them off to their friends. Some of these men I even know personally.

And this is not just about women either. As a self-respecting man, I take great pride in the way that I look and present myself to the world. Even if I could attract women looking like George Costanza (which I could not) and having a great personality, I still would not be happy, because I do take great pride in how I look and the reflection that stares back at me in the mirror. And unfortunately I believe that baldness can erode a man's appearance the way other minor things like big ears or a bit of excessive weight cannot.

 

[Rudiger]

I agree completely with all of that pretty much, and very well put.

However if that is what shooks is trying to say, he is absolutely awful at expressing himself, and has been time and time again.

Game is irrelevant. This is 2016, get real.

...

Nobody cares about what's within the book context unless the cover speaks volumes of attraction.

I'm just confused, because in one instance he's saying it's completely irrelevant, and in the next, he's saying that it does matter, as long as there is some level of attraction. Fred has been more extreme in the past, and I am lumping shookwun in with Fred in this because I believe this is what he's saying; personality has literally no bearing whatsoever, a woman is either attracted to you or not, anything you can say, as long as it's not bat**** crazy, is irrelevant, basic and boring conversation will get you laid just as much as trying to work on being extroverted and funny.

And actually saying "as long as it's not bat**** crazy" is giving Fred too much credit, he did say it wouldn't matter if a hot guy called a woman pregnant- if she fancies him he's still getting it.

Anyway, maybe shookwun can clear this up, maybe the use of the term "game" is getting us all confused, I only use it as a substitute for basically saying "personality" and I try to avoid using it, but it is pretty universal. But yes, I agree if shooks is saying that looks can ruin your chances, I disagree if he's saying there are no variables if she is remotely attracted to you, hell even if she is completely attracted to you, your personality can **** it up. I've known too many good looking awkward guys who can attest to this, and you can bet they work on their "game" relentlessly and still end up mumbling in front of women, going red, and getting nowhere.

But hey let's turn the sarcastic joke on it's head- it's all about looks brah am I right?!

****ing hilarious. I just want to make that joke over and over.

 

[swingline747]

I agree completely with all of that pretty much, and very well put.

However if that is what shooks is trying to say, he is absolutely awful at expressing himself, and has been time and time again.



I'm just confused, because in one instance he's saying it's completely irrelevant, and in the next, he's saying that it does matter, as long as there is some level of attraction. Fred has been more extreme in the past, and I am lumping shookwun in with Fred in this because I believe this is what he's saying; personality has literally no bearing whatsoever, a woman is either attracted to you or not, anything you can say, as long as it's not bat**** crazy, is irrelevant, basic and boring conversation will get you laid just as much as trying to work on being extroverted and funny.

what hes saying there makes perfect sense and are completely two different things.
He saying game, which would be your abilities to pick up women and act a part aside your appearance, is irrelevant. Game is your talking, actions, and overall charm/con abilities. Portions of your personality.

Looks are looks. Two separate entities. He saying no one wants to bother reading the books interior if the binding is falling apart and it smells like a basement box. Looks are more important than personality to initiate a relationship/hookup.

 

[Rudiger]

Well only Shooks can clear it up but fair enough.

Fred I did expect you to get back to me on this. It was a long post, but to sum up, if you're also a fun guy to be around and girls have not just an OK time with you, but a GREAT time, as in you have natural "game" (hate using that word) then how do you assume that it's all down to your looks?

I mean at the very least, being reasonable here, you can't definitely say one way or the other, and neither can I. What are you going to tell me, she played with her hair when she first saw you or some ****? Conclusive AF

OK well, how do you possibly know if a girl likes you because she's attracted to you, or because of your personality? Or a mixture of both?

...

So let me get this straight, you thought physically she was out of your league, you went on a date with her, chatted with her etc. and now to your surprise she's interested in a second date?

You just said they always have a great time with you, so she had a great time as well, and for absolutely no reason, you just assume she likes you because of how you look? Do you think there's a chance you just like being good looking and value that over having a good personality?

 

[Rudiger]

I'll try again, sorry if it's repeating myself.

Let's take a physical example like this tinder girl, you thought she had no interest, she's out of your league, and she wants a second date, and without anything to go by, you sarcastically jumped to the conclusion it "must be your amazing personality". If she had a great time with you, on what basis are you assuming that it's completely down to your looks?

And from how you've described your success with women you know you are more than about average looking. Guys who are around average looking are desperate to get the best looking girlfriend they can settle for and then hold on to it, they can't survive in the single world as they wouldn't get laid for months at a time, you've said plenty of times that you still had no problem getting laid because height, looks, head shape whatever. And now you're suddenly a 5.5/10? It just never makes sense with you.

But the main point is, you act so conclusively that looks are the ONLY thing that matter, and now with this revelation that you're actually very good at chatting with women, it's demonstrating that you have no idea how to gauge whether it's looks or personality that does the trick. I at least admit that looks are very important, before you repeat such vague strawman arguments like how I apparently think supermodels can be picked up with "game", but all I'm saying is that personality is definitely a factor, initially it's not the most important thing, but it makes a difference.

You have no way of knowing that it makes no difference. And by insisting that it's the only factor, and consistently peddling only situations where looks were everything while completely blanking out the idea of a man's personality making a difference, your opinion to me is simply extreme for the sake of it, biased and unreliable.

 

[Rudiger]

Yeah I mean I'm repeating myself and still not getting an answer here. I still don't get why you jump to the conclusion that she's seeing you again purely because of your looks, I don't know on what basis you can sarcastically assume this as fact. You went on a date with her and had a good time, so at the very least you can't know either way whether it was looks or personality, and I think by jumping to the conclusion of your own persistent theory, for no reason, this proves a lot of bias there.

I think your logic is relying more on wishful thinking than reality, which is ironic, but you want to believe personality has absolutely no bearing on dating because it's a comfort that it can't be your fault when it comes to rejection, it's just nature etc.

Haha I like how one of your first thoughts when it comes to having a better personality is being able to "lie more easily". Possibly because your dating life started so late, but you seem to be constantly cynical towards females and practically view them as like an "enemy". This attitude will eventually seep through, you can only hide such cynicism for so long, and it could be doing you serious damage with regards to inter-personal relationships.

Keep telling yourself and others that women are exclusively un-worthy of trust or emotional involvement, keep using your little examples of some girl acting like a stupid wh*** and apply those situations to every female, and keep letting this all screw everything up for you, fine.

 

[EvilLocks]

How many girls have you had sex with, Fred? (I'm sure you have the stats) It surely sounds like it's a lot! - Not judging!

 

[Rudiger]

Fred you still didn't answer the one thing I've asked about 4 times now, just admit it- you have no way of knowing whether she invited you for a 2nd date because of either your looks or personality. There is no verifiable way of knowing this which means anything, you just initially applied it to your own "theory" that it must be looks, and you based it on absolutely nothing.

I mean maybe it doesn't matter that I don't trust your viewpoints, but can even you trust your own viewpoints? What's the point of even having opinions when your knee-jerk reaction is to apply everything to how you want to see it? I definitely wouldn't like it.

And just to clarify, you have definitely applied this situation to how you want to see it, by sarcastically assuming she must only want you because of how you look, and then not being able to back this up with anything (which you now realise you can't) you've just viewed this situation in a way that conveniently matches up with your own pre-disposition and "confirms" what you want to be true.

Confirmation bias.

There are a lot of tropes to the way you write, for example your ex admitting that women are ruled by emotion, you have this tendency to always write "don't take it from me! they admit it themselves" which I see regularly. Every person admits that emotion rules them, your ex with whatever she said, probably didn't realise she was definitively summing up her personality, and her entire gender's personality as a whole, with an off the cuff comment which "confirms" everything you want to believe.

After two days on Tinder, I completely agree with this (see my other thread). Personality and conversation skills do matter, certainly in the bracket that is +-1 standard deviation from the mean.

And this is Tinder, which is as close to a human meat market as you can possibly get.

Really though, most people who do online dating are as superficial as you can get, because they're still in that market and used to the conveyor belt of men in front of them for their choosing. But even then, personality is still somewhat of a factor, it still comes into play.

How much does it come into play? Well it's complicated, it depends on the other person, it depends on a lot of things, so I have guessed in the past before like a percentage of how important looks are, but it is all just guesswork. The point is that both looks and personality are significant, I still always admit that looks are more important, but personality can make up for a LOT if it hits the right note.

 

[Rudiger]

Don't worry, I'm not judging you either after your stories in the other thread .

20 civilians and 5 escorts. Starting at age 21 and two years with no dates at all since.

Reasonable, I think.

I just wanna smack my head off the keyboard.

Yes, reasonable enough, that's a fine and healthy love life, so why do you insist on being the love guru? You humbly say you've had many experiences with women, dating, sex, relationships, and only had 20 actual partners? You have always made it sound like way more.

You simply don't have enough experience to talk in the fact-based way you try to, I thought your dozens of experiences with women were just you focussing on the bad ones, or being incredibly unlucky, but no, you just haven't had that many. 20 women leaves you in no position to define an entire gender.

 

[EvilLocks]

Don't worry, I'm not judging you either after your stories in the other thread .

20 civilians and 5 escorts. Starting at age 21 and two years with no dates at all since.

Reasonable, I think.

LOL, happy to her you're not judging either I think it's perfectly normal to experiment with sex and different partners when you're young. And I don't think anyone should be judged for it; as long as they don't force themselves on someone or have sex with STD's and don't tell their partner about it. Be kind and wild!

And 25 partners isn't too bad (not that any number is). It's not a lot, but not few either. Something in between. I know guys who's had way more partners than that and guys who's had way less.

 

[Marky]

Fred is making good points as usual. The options thing is spot on, there is no mystery here, it's best in the room syndrome, then if something better comes along then they're willing to jump ship.

I've seen woman march as far as engagement and marriage with someone, although even at those points if something else catches her eye she will walk - assuming of course that the something else also accepts or has mutual "feelings" for her. Always complicated and risky stuff.

- - - Updated - - -

And yes woman seem to be more swayed by emotion then men, however I don't find that excuse reason to be immoral.

 

[buckthorn]

And 25 partners isn't too bad (not that any number is).

I don't know about this part Evillocks. I am not judgemental about this at all, but if I started dating a girl and she told me she has slept with 50 men, I would consider this. Not solely because she is some "sl*t", but more so that I believe this shows a sign of insecurity in MOST people, not all. There is also a point where it becomes simply irresponsible. This is just my opinion of course, and I would never judge them as a human being for it, rather a factor in being a partner.

 

[swingline747]

I don't know about this part Evillocks. I am not judgemental about this at all, but if I started dating a girl and she told me she has slept with 50 men, I would consider this. Not solely because she is some "sl*t", but more so that I believe this shows a sign of insecurity in MOST people, not all. There is also a point where it becomes simply irresponsible. This is just my opinion of course, and I would never judge them as a human being for it, rather a factor in being a partner.

Heres the test in that situation.
"are you into 3rd input?"
"no never"
........................"later ho" (j/k)

scenario 2

"are you into 3rd input?"
"sure"
.................with this ring I thee wed

 

[EvilLocks]

I don't know about this part Evillocks. I am not judgemental about this at all, but if I started dating a girl and she told me she has slept with 50 men, I would consider this. Not solely because she is some "sl*t", but more so that I believe this shows a sign of insecurity in MOST people, not all. There is also a point where it becomes simply irresponsible. This is just my opinion of course, and I would never judge them as a human being for it, rather a factor in being a partner.

But if a man sleeps with 50+ women, he's some kind of hero, right?

 

[blackg]

But if a man sleeps with 50+ women, he's some kind of hero, right?

Men are insecure, that's why they have to put women down for being a "sl*t."
It's another word invented by insecure, powerless men.

Men can't handle the fact that, in most cases, women are the gate keepers of sex.
Hence, the ridiculous titles thrown about, like "sl*t."

 

[swingline747]

You don't seem to realize how hard it is for a man to get sex.

I'm currently trying to get dates and it's excuse after excuse after excuse not to meet me.

Excuses they wouldn't have if I was better-looking. "We should talk more first!"

It's funny, in 64 first dates, I've never, ever met one woman who had pulled that "It's too early" card.

Like job hunting, it's tiring, but nothing falls on your lap when you're a man.

I have a Finnish female friend (she had to become a friend after she told me she had HPV I and II) who has slept with 70+ men.

She told me she makes a list for every night, a top of the guys she knows, and asks them to come over for sex. There's always a guy who comes.

That's how easy it is for women. I could ask all the women I know to have sex now, 100% of them would refuse if I'm that straightforward.

Sleeping with women as a man requires effort, a huge amount of effort, subtlety and tact. That's why a man who sleeps with a lot of women is impressive.

But there is a double standard Fred and you live it. Prostitution (I mean live it because its legal where you are). Why do you think women HATE the thought of prostitution. It because it takes that key to the fort away from them. Just like most guys will stigmatize a woman who is loose (not me though, I love me some loose women!) a woman will stigmatize a guy who has openly seen "escorts", why? Because without the sex the woman no longer has that carrot on a string for you.
Personally I think prostitution should be legal everywhere. Take a look one day at the women who REALLY fight legal prostitution. All homely, fat housewives who fear their husbands are seeing the women because the guys no longer want to touch them. Young hotter women are attractive older women could give a schit.

 

[xetudor]

But if a man sleeps with 50+ women, he's some kind of hero, right?

Not a hero but very impressive nonetheless. For a woman it's not that impressive, she could practically ask guys on the street if she really wanted some extra fun. As a guy, it's insanely difficult, even as a hot guy.

 

[buckthorn]

But if a man sleeps with 50+ women, he's some kind of hero, right?

where did i say that?

- - - Updated - - -

I have a very different definition of what makes a "hero"

- - - Updated - - -

She told me she makes a list for every night, a top of the guys she knows, and asks them to come over for sex. .

This is just insane. People that require sex that often are going to eventually run themselves into a frustrating, sad life.

 

[buckthorn]

I don't mean to sound like some righteous d*ck here, and it's none of my business, so I probably shouldn't say anything - but isn't there a deeper issue here than just "finding sex". Don't you feel like unless you work on this, then your problem is never going to resolve? A part of all of us needs to be filled with human intimacy and compassion. But to constantly need to fill that void with just sex is not a solution at all. To want and have sex is one thing. To need sex after a certain amount of time is one thing. To need sex with different people ALL the time is another thing. And, despite what anyone says, it's NOT healthy. I am saying this because I have seen it in my own family, my friends and well every where I turn and it leads no where. For some reason it never ends well.

 

[EvilLocks]

So yeah, right now I'm going on dates, but if after a few dates, I'm getting nowhere, I'll surely visit an escort again.

It's funny how different men and women are when it comes to their need for frequent sex. I've been on a few dates lately, but haven't had sex with any of them. In fact I've only been with 1 guy after me and my ex broke up a while ago, and I'm doing perfectly fine. On the other side we have men like you, who's been single for like 1 minute and are already desperate for sex. You are free to disagree with me on this; but I think most women can go for months without sex and do just fine. But a man needs to get laid or he's going to go crazy!

- - - Updated - - -

where did i say that?

You didn't say it, but I felt like you implyed it. Sorry if that's not what you meant.