[HasanH]

So I got 3 pics, one of them gets a lot of replies on OKCupid, like around 40-50% which is quite high, when I use the other one it gets like 10-20%, the 3rd one gets like 25-30%

How come it flunctuates like this, its the same person, no myspace angles at all. No cheating to hide the body or anything, I really dont get this online dating thing.

[MtnMan]

hampsters

[TheMan]

*Hamsters.

To elaboirate a bit on what i assume mtnman was trying to say... In each picture—no matter how imperceptible to the unpracticed male eye—you are very likely doing/ wearing/ communicating different things. So in the eye of the female observer those pics are different people of varying attractiveness.

What are you doing in the 50% one? ...take more pictures like that.

And next time. Please pose questions this in the " how to get laid like a boss on okc" thread instead of making a new one.

[Days of Broken Arrows]

There was a survey on OKC that claimed women think 80 percent of the men on the site are "below average" in terms of attractiveness. (Link here).

This tells us a whole lot. Women are picky. Women respond to visuals less than men. The women on OKC are there because they're picky. Or something.

Whatever the case, if they're responding to something, just go with it and don't wonder why, because there is no logic to a breed of people who claim almost all men are "below average." Average means 50 percent of men would qualify as "above," but they don't on OKC.

It's also instructive to realize that women will find almost any man more attractive if he's famous. The same isn't the case for men.

[WestIndianArchie]

(04-21-2014 04:30 AM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  

There was a survey on OKC that claimed women think 80 percent of the men on the site are "below average" in terms of attractiveness.

This tells us a whole lot. Women are picky. Women respond to visuals less than men.

Not to get internet-y, but doesn't this tell us the opposite?

Women are extremely picky about looks when no one is judging them, from the comfort of their own ikea couches with Ben and Jerry's in hand?

Being visually objectified and ranked is what they rail against, but given the chance they'll do it...and we won't like the results.

Throw in the fact that guys are generally thirsty as fuck, and will bang pretty much anything within a certain range, guys changing their personalities and getting tongue tied around "10's"...

We should take new information and adapt strategies, or at least fit it into our workable models.

WIA

[Lucario]

(04-21-2014 04:30 AM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  

There was a survey on OKC that claimed women think 80 percent of the men on the site are "below average" in terms of attractiveness. (Link here).

This tells us a whole lot. Women are picky. Women respond to visuals less than men. The women on OKC are there because they're picky. Or something.

One must also realize that guys that most guys that use online dating are also take bad pictures + are generally unattractive guys so they would expand their respects to online dating with a few exceptions who are good looking and getting laid.

Women are essentially seeing the most unattractive men from the entire male population in their area.

Guys who get laid without online dating do not need online dating or bother with it.

[Parlay44]

Looks are important when considering a woman for a LTR. Nobody wants to fuck an ugly broad long term.

Money and status are important when considering a man for a LTR. No woman wants to marry a poor man.

As far as sex ...anything goes in the short term.