Experiment: wealthy plain guy w/Ferrari vs. poor barmen

Post Reply New Topic

Good Looks are everything. Why can't women admit it?

The guy with the Ferrari isn't even bad looking yet he had little success with a fake online dating profile I created. I put him as 26, 5ft8, slim build and University Educated, Ferrari owner, earning good pay, travelled the world etc. Lots of interesting hobbies, tennis player and a good written profile.

Messages sent to women: 109.
Replies: 3 (all flaked even though I was polite and interesting in replies)
Women who contacted him first him over 8 weeks: 2 (both obese/unattractive women and were lower class)



---------------------------------------------------------

Then I created this guy. A 23yo good-looking barmen with just a high school education (left school at 16). 6'1, average build, autistic, smoker, lives with his mommie, poorly written profile. Hobbies were just rugby, gym and "going out with my mates". And no... he wasn't attracting "whitetrash" or ratchet females. The majority were attractive-enough to very attractive, college or university-educated women of predominantly middle class. Even a very attractive 28yo uppercrust businesswoman was getting quite pushy for a date and asking why I was "ignoring her".

Messages sent to women: 55.
Replies: 51
Women who contacted him first him over 8 weeks: 264

You should post screenshots of the two inboxes for proving credibility.

Sounds like you're just projecting your own shallowness onto the other sex. Also, "http://sluthate.com/uploads/imgur/wAQCGUZ.jpg"

Why are you browsing a website called "sluthate"?

An objective study is now "projecting"...so done lol

I'd go for the first purely as he wears glasses. Now if the bartender had glasses I'd probably have picked him

Was the study really objective? Was it even indeed done? Or just made up?
I would say, it is far from the rigour of scientific study.
But I also don't know the dating sites folks, never been there, never been looking for casual sex.
But the guy half visible from his car is simply far more suspicious than the all person clearly visible. It may matter more than the rest.

At first glance I'd actually have thought the guy with the Ferrari is better looking, but maybe that's just because I like his smile and I dislike the barman's hairstyle. But yes, at second glance the barman is more conventionally attractive.

If I'd be on that dating site my main reason to ignore the Ferrari owner would probably be that people who are almost in love with their car can be slightly tiring as I couldn't care less about cars (he might come across as obsessed with his car, but I don't really know as I've not seen the bio). Without knowing what exactly his bio said, I'd also guess from the short description you included here, that I'd be rather incompatible with a guy like him.
Not saying that this is the same reason why other women didn't like him or that the main reason can't be the looks, just that I liked his looks better than the barman's looks, at least at first glance.

If I was on a dating site looking for a long term relationship I'd probably also not be interested in people with very poorly written profiles.

Yawn...

If you need any "real scientific study", dating sites like tinder and okcupid have revealed their own statistics, which support the claim that women are way way pickier/shallow than men.

Yeah, this I read.

I don't think either guy is attractive to be honest.

All this proves is that women on dating sites have low standards.

Agreed. That feature alone could have biased the results. Also, to do it in a more scientific manner, he should have varied only one attribute at the time. Here we have two completely different scenarios and we really have no idea which parts of them are generating the different response patterns.

What does an attractive male look like to you?

Surely, you realize that your "study" / "research" / whatever, isn't conclusive----and, IMO, your personal conclusion is quite shallow, to say the least.

I'd probably go for the "poor barman"----BUT, if you put him in the Ferrari scenario, I probably WOULDN'T, cuz I'd figure he was a PUNK!! If you put the nerdy-looking guy in ANY scenario, I would NOT pick him, cuz I'm not attracted to nerdy guys----I'd take blue-collar ANY day of the week, and twice on Sundays, over a PhD, for instance. So, from where *I* stand, looks aren't much, at all----it's more about a person's essence.

Aren't you the same person who said you got alot of attention from women in Thailand----and, that that meant women in Thailand, were better? You don't seem very insightful, or you'd know that most women in Thailand are looking for ANYBODY that'll give 'em a free ticket to the West----so, maybe THAT'S why you're not getting a girl.

Wow, what a great idea. You have to be the first person to ever create fake profiles on a dating site to prove that women prefer attractive men as if that's a bad thing in order to validate some latent misogyny.

Why does owning a ferrari make one a punk?

I'd figure he was some kind of, like, Wall Street Hustler, or something similar----and, I wouldn't want anything to do with that type; cuz, IMO, if they're hustlin' THERE, they'd probably be hustlin' ME, as well!!