[EDantes]

Truth is looks help, so does money - in the long run it's really behavior that makes the difference whether or not a woman will start wetting her panties at the sight of a guy (the exception would be if a guy is severely out-of-shape, obese, etc).

This is backed by evolutionary biology - things such as posture, game, etc that demonstrate a man is confident are what subconsciously trigger arousal in women; due to evolutionary reasons "looks" matter slightly less - in men they're higher priority since fertility is the primary evolutionary desirable trait and is associated with good looks, but in traditional societies men also had to hunt and fight to ensure survival of their progeny, hence dominant behavior was more important than looks alone.

Think about it - if it was just about "money" then Warren Buffet would be considered the sexiest man alive.

If it was just about "looks" then tween girls wouldn't be going gaga over guys like Usher, Drake, Justin Bieber, etc - they're good looking guys but not much better looking than plenty of guys you'd run into in real life. (Also notice how 'hot female' actresses and musicians don't have droves of guys following them around screaming and giggling)?

It has more to do with displays of dominant behavior (strength, courage, skill, etc) than it does about looks - this can include confident posture, courage and willigness to face danger, as well as skill at something (ex. a sport, a musical instrument, etc).


---

The "face" excuse is what I usually hear as a cop-out for guys who don't want to bother learning game or self-improvement. Hell even the "money" excuse is a cop-out too - as long as a guy isn't dead broke or unable to meet his basic needs then money alone is unimportant, unless the guy just wants a trophy wife who will cheat on him with the mailman.

(And most celebrities who are desired by women are desired because of their apparent status or charisma rather than just the "money itself"; this is why computer programmers who make $100K a year still don't get as much ass as guys like... some DJs for example).

[Moma]

Ed Dantes, you are absolutely on the money. I couldn't have said it any better.

[EDantes]

For that matter the above is true with women:

Women who are ugly or unattractive but responsible wives attract guys who just want someone who'll cook and clean, but they'll likely cheat on the side.

Women who are hot but have nasty personalities are the kind that guys will take home and fuck but never call again.

The ideal woman is the one who's hot and charming, but also a responsible provider as opposed to spoiled and entitled.

[EDantes]

(01-30-2016 03:05 PM)Moma Wrote:  

Ed Dantes, you are absolutely on the money. I couldn't have said it any better.

Thanks Moma

[Stratos]

In my experience, female instant attraction is based on a formula something like this:
SHOW OF ANY KIND OF AUTHORITY, COMMAND OR SUPERIORITY * NOT GIVING A FUCK (Spontaneity, non neediness, abundance mentality etc.)

For example I have instantly attracted women when giving a public speech. I have attracted women captaining an airplane. I have attracted women wearing a uniform. I have killed then that attraction on occasion after inadvertently any kind of neediness or overenthusiasm for their attraction or other beta tells.

Women want the highest value guy in their immediate vicinity (such as the biker captain or the toughest looking biker in the biker bar, or the ski instructor on the slopes) who (and this is very important) ALSO has the spontaneous, fun, and non needy personality, and can manage for a little while not putting out any beta signs.

Good looks fall into the first category (superiority) but the attraction is then yours to lose with a needy beta tell.

Guys, all you have to do is happen to rule the roost in some little way (win the spelling bee or whatever) and still be cool and easy going about it, and that's the formula I see. Get rid of what's bugging you in your life so you put out happiness. Girls just want to have fun.

[ComebackKid]

(01-29-2016 09:05 PM)Anabasis to Desta Wrote:  

Elliot Rodger was a pretty good looking dude but shot up a bunch of people because he got no pussy.



Whereas ugly D-list rapper Danny Brown gets blowjobs on stage and had bitches throwing themselves at him even before he got mini-famous according to friends.



Notice the two guys' facial expressions. A 10 year old can tell you who gets more girls despite their huge disparity in facial attractiveness. As a man the expression on your face which is a reflection of your inner state and confidence, is infinitely more important than your face itself. There are no ugly men. Just weak ones.

Unless they have an obvious genetic defect, i urge guys to stop using their face as an excuse

Elliot Rodger is definitely unattractive: he has ugly eyes, weird gay/fish lips and some sort of jaw deformity. I would say he's about 4. If you think Elliot is good looking, then it shows how credible your claim about you being good looking is. I've seen many deluded guys on Misc, where I'd spit out my drink when I would see their pictures given the shit they talked before.

The other guy is playing musician/drug game. It's by far the best game to play for an ugly men.

"There are no ugly men. Just weak ones. " This is beyond ridiculous - there are attractive facial features and there are unattractive facial features. Good looking men will have combo of attractive features like high cheekbones, good jawline, striking eyes, etc and bad looking men will have combo of unattractive features.

[Moma]

Comeback, ultimately ask a lizard about whether Elliot is attractive. An 18 year old lizard at that.

[Anabasis to Desta]

(01-30-2016 03:46 PM)ComebackKid Wrote:  

Elliot Rodger is definitely unattractive: he has ugly eyes, weird gay/fish lips and some sort of jaw deformity. I would say he's about 4. If you think Elliot is good looking, then it shows how credible your claim about you being good looking is. I've seen many deluded guys on Misc, where I'd spit out my drink when I would see their pictures given the shit they talked before.

I didn't say he was attractive. I said he was good looking. A man can be attractive without being good looking & good looking without being attractive. I've heard girls say how "handsome" Liam Neeson and Daniel Craig are. They are considered very attractive while being quasi-ugly.

This kid is straight up repulsive to women (and men). But you can't deny he is good looking. Throw in a 4-day/ week gym regimen, some confidence , a couple friends and regular soical skills and it's not hard to how he'd have a certain niche of younger girls on lock down.

Quote:

If you think Elliot is good looking, then it shows how credible your claim about you being good looking is.

Here's a picture of me. Are you denying the fact that I'm a 10?



On a serious note, you need to spend less time on Bodybuilding.com Misc forums and go out in real life. Every one of you guys staunchly advocating for facial aesthetics sound young, inexperienced and seem to have constructed half your principles about life from whatever drivel in churned out on the Misc.

[Moma]

Anabasis, you are gorjus, sah! In my village, you can collect any babe oooo#HabeshasRock

[Vienna]

(01-30-2016 05:10 PM)Anabasis to Desta Wrote:  

Here's a picture of me. Are you denying the fact that I'm a 10?

Weak chin, mate. Grow a beard and you'll blossom into a 10er.

[Anabasis to Desta]

(01-30-2016 05:20 PM)Moma Wrote:  

Anabasis, you are gorjus, sah! In my village, you can collect any babe oooo#HabeshasRock

I'm listening bruh!

[Dusty]

Elliot Rodger looked like a ladyboy.

[Lechon]

One of the basic truths in life is men have little value for procreation, women have a lot. Eggs are expensive, sperm is cheap. Or, as Joe Rogan said it, men are willing to blow themselves up for the highly unlikely possibility of pussy in another dimension, dick is free. Game tries to alter this basic perception by saying look – I'm not like the swaths of desperate men out there trying to give away their low quality genes. In fact, my genetic quality is so high, you should be running after me, not the opposite.

Game works like a game of poker. First you need to know how to play the game. But it also really helps to be dealt good cards. Some of the best poker players will say after losing a game I got shitty cards, so there wasn't much I could do. The steepest rewards from game can be had by the guys who have good cards like looks, money or brains, but are clueless about how to play them. Guys can be smooth with women, but if they have no substance, no money, no intellect or looks, fat, old, most women are smart enough to call their bluff, even if women can be picked up by game alone once in a while. That fat old slob with those young hot women – guess what, he's rich and smart, so he has a lot of actual value, he's not some genius who found out how to pull girls with game alone. So to be successful with women you usually need a mix of game and actual hard assets to back it up.

A great looking face is one of those top hard assets that can make you successful with women in combination with game, but just having a great face (or money or body) alone doesn't guarantee anything. So that's why you have all these people who have great looks etc. and no success with women, because they don't have that minimum of game to make it worth something.

[WeekendCasanova]

All I see.

[Cobra]

(01-30-2016 03:46 PM)ComebackKid Wrote:  

(01-29-2016 09:05 PM)Anabasis to Desta Wrote:  

Elliot Rodger was a pretty good looking dude but shot up a bunch of people because he got no pussy.



Whereas ugly D-list rapper Danny Brown gets blowjobs on stage and had bitches throwing themselves at him even before he got mini-famous according to friends.



Notice the two guys' facial expressions. A 10 year old can tell you who gets more girls despite their huge disparity in facial attractiveness. As a man the expression on your face which is a reflection of your inner state and confidence, is infinitely more important than your face itself. There are no ugly men. Just weak ones.

Unless they have an obvious genetic defect, i urge guys to stop using their face as an excuse

Elliot Rodger is definitely unattractive: he has ugly eyes, weird gay/fish lips and some sort of jaw deformity. I would say he's about 4. If you think Elliot is good looking, then it shows how credible your claim about you being good looking is. I've seen many deluded guys on Misc, where I'd spit out my drink when I would see their pictures given the shit they talked before.

The other guy is playing musician/drug game. It's by far the best game to play for an ugly men.

"There are no ugly men. Just weak ones. " This is beyond ridiculous - there are attractive facial features and there are unattractive facial features. Good looking men will have combo of attractive features like high cheekbones, good jawline, striking eyes, etc and bad looking men will have combo of unattractive features.

You believe in this so much that you started another thread to poll people here: thread-53404.html

I know you are trying really hard to prove this but that probably wasn't necessary. Are you a woman or gay? Legit question. You're putting yourself on the radar with game denialism posts man because they come off feminine.

[Onto]

(01-30-2016 07:27 PM)Lechon Wrote:  

Game works like a game of poker. First you need to know how to play the game. But it also really helps to be dealt good cards. Some of the best poker players will say after losing a game I got shitty cards, so there wasn't much I could do. The steepest rewards from game can be had by the guys who have good cards like looks, money or brains, but are clueless about how to play them. Guys can be smooth with women, but if they have no substance, no money, no intellect or looks, fat, old, most women are smart enough to call their bluff, even if women can be picked up by game alone once in a while. That fat old slob with those young hot women – guess what, he's rich and smart, so he has a lot of actual value, he's not some genius who found out how to pull girls with game alone. So to be successful with women you usually need a mix of game and actual hard assets to back it up.

A great looking face is one of those top hard assets that can make you successful with women in combination with game, but just having a great face (or money or body) alone doesn't guarantee anything. So that's why you have all these people who have great looks etc. and no success with women, because they don't have that minimum of game to make it worth something.

Your poker analogy is a really good one. What you said here in bold is very much like a poker hand where you're dealt great cards, but it's worth no more than a little ante if you don't have the game enough to draw the other in to investing themselves to the pot.

[Pride male]

The looks versus game thread is one of those topic that will rage on until the end of time. The truth is somewhere in the middle.

[Kieran]

(01-30-2016 07:27 PM)Lechon Wrote:  

One of the basic truths in life is men have little value for procreation, women have a lot. Eggs are expensive, sperm is cheap. Or, as Joe Rogan said it, men are willing to blow themselves up for the highly unlikely possibility of pussy in another dimension, dick is free. Game tries to alter this basic perception by saying look – I'm not like the swaths of desperate men out there trying to give away their low quality genes. In fact, my genetic quality is so high, you should be running after me, not the opposite.

Game works like a game of poker. First you need to know how to play the game. But it also really helps to be dealt good cards. Some of the best poker players will say after losing a game I got shitty cards, so there wasn't much I could do. The steepest rewards from game can be had by the guys who have good cards like looks, money or brains, but are clueless about how to play them. Guys can be smooth with women, but if they have no substance, no money, no intellect or looks, fat, old, most women are smart enough to call their bluff, even if women can be picked up by game alone once in a while. That fat old slob with those young hot women – guess what, he's rich and smart, so he has a lot of actual value, he's not some genius who found out how to pull girls with game alone. So to be successful with women you usually need a mix of game and actual hard assets to back it up.

A great looking face is one of those top hard assets that can make you successful with women in combination with game, but just having a great face (or money or body) alone doesn't guarantee anything. So that's why you have all these people who have great looks etc. and no success with women, because they don't have that minimum of game to make it worth something.

I agree that looks and money obviously help, but the thing that your post misses is that game in and of itself is value to women. Most guys are boring, and even half the game aware men out there are doing lame high fives etc. A man that can really make girls laugh, tell great stories, flirt, and so on is rare, and girls want to be around it (assuming some bass line of looks).

[Moma]

Kieran, a lame guy has no game. The very virtue of game is to pique a lizard's interest.

[ComebackKid]

(01-30-2016 04:05 PM)Moma Wrote:  

Comeback, ultimately ask a lizard about whether Elliot is attractive. An 18 year old lizard at that.

I guess that you think so because he looks feminine. It's true that younger girls are more into feminine guys than older girls, but the problem is that he doesn't look good.

There is a way to settle this. Set up Tinder or other online dating account where success heavily depends on looks and see how they respond.

[PapayaTapper]

(01-31-2016 02:04 AM)Moma Wrote:  

Kieran, a lame guy has no game. The very virtue of game is to pique a lizard's interest.

There it is. True mastery is when the complexities are stripped away to the truth's essence...elegantly

[ComebackKid]

(01-30-2016 08:30 PM)Cobra Wrote:  

You believe in this so much that you started another thread to poll people here: thread-53404.html

I know you are trying really hard to prove this but that probably wasn't necessary. Are you a woman or gay? Legit question. You're putting yourself on the radar with game denialism posts man because they come off feminine.

I started that thread, because this one got completely derailed where people didn't even bother to read op and instead launched standard game vs looks debate.

Is it gay to be interested in to how to be more physically attractive to women in a forum where one of the primary purposes is to get pussy? I didn't see you yelling gay on a billion of threads on how body affects game.

On game vs looks my quick summary would be:

Good looks, little game (assuming non-autistics) = cute gf, maybe dating down by one point

Good looks, solid game = godmode. These are the only guys I know in real life who smash very good looking girls with high frequency. They're not the best looking, but they're solidly above average.

Bad looks, solid game = better suited for social circle game, able to date up by like 2 or even 3 points. I know a couple of guys like this who dated pretty much good looking girls exclusively, because they're very socially dominant and they run their social circle.

Bad looks, no game = loser of the sexual market.

[Lechon]

Elliot Rodger was symmetrical, but he had a typical oval face – large eyes and cheekbones, weaker jaw, which is ideal in women, but looks feminine in men. He also probably gave off a lot of weird vibes. So yeah, you could say he had good looks, but not the right kind of good. He had the gay, prettyboy kind. His incel vibes and lack of game and sociability and feminine appearance botched his good cards.

If he had any kind of decent mentoring they would say look, hit the weights like there's no tomorrow, even throw some steroids and HGH in there because you need it to alter your facial structure, try to socialize even if it's not really you, try to not creep/weird out chicks even if that's your instinct, approach even if you get rejected, develop a sense of humor and a good attitude, and find out how to act like a man and not a creepy incel. Not easy today, of course. If he did, he might have done pretty well with girls, and his face could have become an asset. If he had a jawline and a masculine personality, he would be a lot more attractive to girls.

[Hoo]

(01-31-2016 05:02 AM)Lechon Wrote:  

Elliot Rodger was symmetrical, but he had a typical oval face – large eyes and cheekbones, weaker jaw, which is ideal in women, but looks feminine in men. He also probably gave off a lot of weird vibes. So yeah, you could say he had good looks, but not the right kind of good. He had the gay, prettyboy kind. His incel vibes and lack of game and sociability and feminine appearance botched his good cards.

My girl who is usually generous with ratings, rated him 4 Add small height/frame and you can see why he felt fucked.

[masoud_akbari]

(01-31-2016 08:15 AM)Hoo Wrote:  

(01-31-2016 05:02 AM)Lechon Wrote:  

Elliot Rodger was symmetrical, but he had a typical oval face – large eyes and cheekbones, weaker jaw, which is ideal in women, but looks feminine in men. He also probably gave off a lot of weird vibes. So yeah, you could say he had good looks, but not the right kind of good. He had the gay, prettyboy kind. His incel vibes and lack of game and sociability and feminine appearance botched his good cards.

My girl who is usually generous with ratings, rated him 4 Add small height/frame and you can see why he felt fucked.

So? Ive been rated a 2 and a 3 at best. Whilst I feel screwed in terms of getting laid, it is no excuse for the killings he did (not saying that you are justifying his actions). Getting girls must feel good, but young men need to realise that there is more to life than women. Once they realise this, the "incel vibe and lack of sociability" will be gone.