Jirh

For many things, but this is the highlight of insanity. No quality woman who respects herself will accept this.

@LordFall You're crazy.

@LordFall That's not mere acceptance. That's the jackpot in relationships. But you can keep playing. You can keep gambling. It's your life.

Messi officially broke Klose's record as top World Cup scorer of all time. He now has 17 goals, and more is yet to come. But Mbappe is not so far behind.

It's wise to quit gambling once you've won the jackpot.

Yeah, let's see. Though, to clarify, I think there are two points being discussed simultaneously: Objective attractiveness metrics across all cultures and people (with or without exceptions). Objective attractiveness metrics within cultures. The first discussion is just absurd. I won't even engage in it because it's just too silly to consider. I think the second discussion has some merit, but it's still largely flawed and clouded by layers of misunderstandings and ego. And like you highlighted, I think the media and culture (in addition to many other factors) shape and influence our unconscious minds in ways that we cannot fully understand. So even if we grant some culture some objective metrics, they're still the result of mass brainwashing, not a genuine expression of truth. Which keeps the discussion at stalemate.

Well, then. Good luck. Hope you don't get stuck in the eternal chasing loop.

@Natasha Tori Maru Honestly, and after some more contemplation, it's not only laughable, but also egoic and even delusional to think in a binary way about this topic. Having a "good taste" doesn't mean you like everything that's excellent, it just means you have a developed preference within a tradition. It's like saying I like all the best and tastiest foods in the world because I have a good taste. But even a chef (food expert) has a specialty in certain types of foods, not all foods. So they cannot claim a universal objective of taste. They can only point out deficiencies and shortcomings within a tradition. And that involves conscious judgment, unlike involuntary reflexes like attraction. And it's fairly obvious that every group of people (culture) has preferences that are different to others. So, if someone claims that he feels attracted towards the top, most objectively "hot" women of every single culture, this can mean one of two things: Either he is selecting unconsciously and filtering for the most desired ideals within a culture. Or he is genuinely, authentically attracted to an impossibly wide range of human features that have almost nothing in common. In both cases, the word "hot" is doing no real work, and his claim of having "good taste" is just a way of saying "I like whoever is on top, wherever I am". Then he's not a connoisseur of beauty, but a chaser of consensus, mistaking the crowd's murmur for his own voice, every single time. And even that is a generous assessment, because it could be just a strong personal preference for variety, and it's unlikely to like all the best dishes from all different cuisines, even if they are "the best" objectively.

Truth is ugly. Beautiful truth is crazy. Sane beautiful truth is impossible.

Finally, "HOT!" in a true meaningful way. Or maybe it's just my subjective opinion

You know, the word "hot" is kinda interesting. This forum has this feature where a thread is tagged "hot" temporarily when it gets flooded with comments. But that's a false metric system, because it only targets the number of comments within a period of time. It doesn't care about the quality of comments. Just the quantity. Even if it's spam, and that's mostly the case. I've seen so many low quality back and forth that the word "hot" lost all its meaning here. I think this kinda applies to dating too. Because a girl can get spammed with low quality attention, and even she will not consider herself hot (if she's high quality). So not only the quantity of attention that matters, but also the quality, and I think quality is much more important, and a much more trusted metric for determining value. But this gets regressive and complex.

Maybe to you. But it does matter immensely to other dudes, which I think is worth contemplating. I think you're underestimating how much ego goes into this, probably because you don't have much ego yourself. Your initial claim was that girls with so many options will have little interest in low status guys. But now we have all the hottest girls in one single room. (Miss World on a larger scale, for example) Who will get the most attention? That's the question. Because attention is the currency that determines a woman's worth and her pool of options. It's not possible that all the hot girls will get equal amounts of attention. Some guys will prefer to spend their attention on a specific girl or group of girls. Then a hierarchy will be created again, and there's a new hottest girl in the room, and she will choose the most suitable guy for her. And the rest will compete for the next hottest girl, and so on. Until the least hottest girl will have to choose the lowest status guy. It's much more complex than this in practice, but just to illustrate the point. There's also the element of confidence (and personality in general) that factors into a girl's hotness, but most guys will deny that and say it's just her physique.

After some contemplation, I think the idea of a universally hot woman/man is laughable. There is no way you can make everyone agree that someone is attractive. Not even a minority will agree on a universally shared preference. Let alone a majority, or everyone. People of all populations disagree on this topic all the time. Culture and upbringing influence attraction. People of different ethnicities have wildly different preferences. And within each one ethnicity, people still have different preferences. People of different ages have different preferences. What used to be hot in ancient Egypt is probably not hot in the Amazon forests and is probably not hot by modern standards. That doesn't mean Amazon standards and modern standards are the same. What is hot on IG is not hot on TikTok lol. Personally, I don't find the same girl at the same level of attractiveness at all times. Not because she's changed per se, but because my mood has. It's just too complex and contextual.

@Leo Gura What happens if you combine all the hottest girls from all the rooms in one single room? Which girl is the hottest?

But there's a possible cognitive dissonance in this line of thinking. A "hot" girl is either someone you find attractive regardless of what other males think. (She's subjectively hot to you) Or she's someone who gets lots of male attention, which makes her typically "hot". (She's objectively hot, not necessarily to you) Or she's someone that matches both criteria. But I don't think that's what you're saying. You're saying that a hot girl needs just to be subjectively hot to you. But then you are also saying that hot girls are necessarily getting a lot of male attention and options. That implies that your subjective preferences always match the objective preferences of other males. So either you are creating a self-fulfilling prophecy where the girls you find hot are the ones who get male attention, because that attention is part of what signals "hot" to you. Or you're claiming that your purely personal taste just happens to align with mass male consensus every single time, which is statistically implausible. The first option means your attraction isn't as purely physical as you think. The second is possible but worth questioning, especially since you've already acknowledged fame is what gets you these girls. The fame didn't change your taste, but it might be revealing that your taste was never as independent from social proof as it felt.

I'm not talking about you personally. Just what you said and the logic that follows. Anyway, that's not the same statement you said earlier. You said that hot girls have so many options. That statement is contracted and limited around only girls who get lots of male attention. The latter statement allows more possibilities. And it means you're not really attracted to typically "hot" girls. So they're not necessarily hot to you. Why do you think they're hot, though?

Sounds like the male version of pre-selection. I think it depends on who you consider a hot girl. If you think hot girls are the ones who get a lot of male attention, then you are playing that specific ego game. Think about it, why do you desire a girl who catches everyone's attention? It's probably because it makes you feel successful and socially approved to get her. So it's kind of a self-fulfilling prophecy that one is telling himself. You want the success, so you chase the girl who makes you want to be successful.

How can you hate AI?

I think it's a question of how much status is required for attraction to occur. And I don't think it's a directly proportional relationship. I think it depends on the woman's social status too. But it can get too delusional sometimes. It's mostly an ego game.

The missing keyword here is ego. So glad I'm not interested in these silly games. Equal partnership is where it's at.

Well then, it's fair to point out that many women also get horny for men without status. I think the deeper insight for me here is that the ego is not separate from sexuality. But I will keep my position that raw attraction is far stronger and more permanent than ego induced attraction. And yeah, I love the curve 😈🥵

For many women, sure. But not all. Attraction is different for everyone. And there are many factors besides status that matter.

Raw attraction is like when you see your favourite food and start yearning for it and drooling over it. You just can't help it. It could be the most toxic food. It could be the most frowned-upon food by society. That doesn't matter. What matters is the horny/emotional state it puts you in. Then you become weak and on your knees for it.

I'm more worried about what they would do with a sharpener 😂🤫