TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

149

Meta-analysis: physical attractiveness predicts romantic evaluations for both men and women. (doi.org)

submitted by NubhumanSigger


[–]NubhumanSigger 1 points [recovered]  (11 children) | Copy Link

Guys, this is pretty much the ultimate blackpill.

Our conceptual dependent variable is encompassed by the term romantic evaluation. We use this term to refer to any positive or negative attitude about a romantic partner or romantic relationship, such as romantic desire for a potential partner, relationship satisfaction with a current partner, or any of the myriad, correlated evaluative constructs that permeate the relationships literature (e.g., passion, love, commitment, trust; Fletcher, Simpson, & Thomas, 2000b).

In other words, the dependent variable of romantic evaluation essentially constitutes the degree to which the participant loves his/her partner (dating, married), or desires his/her target (crush, speed dating encounter, etc).

A meta-analysis indicated that participants’ romantic evaluations of a partner whom they had (at least) met face to face tended to be more positive to the extent that the partner was physically attractive (N 29,414) and had good earning prospects (N 50,113). Importantly, however, these associations did not significantly differ by participant sex; that is, physical attractiveness tended to inspire positive romantic evaluations about equally for men (r .43) and women (r .40)...

As demonstrated over a large sample of nearly 30,000, the more physically attractive you are, the more your partner will love you. Similarly, the more physically attractive you are, the more an unattached target of the opposite gender will desire you. This profound effect of physical attractiveness on romantic evaluation is unmoderated by gender. Eastwick and friends are truly and brutally based.

[–]cybertruth3 1 points [recovered]  (6 children) | Copy Link

IMO this needs to be pinned... This biggest and blackest fucking pill I've ever encountered. Absolutely massive sample size proving what we already know, that humans are just a bunch of animals playing dress up. As much as society tries to hide it, we're inherently incapable as a species of ignoring our evolutionary urges. Being beautiful is literally everything when it comes to romantic interaction, and a big fucking deal in all other aspects of life. What a mad world.

[–]Penislover300024 points25 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

And to those that argue against physical appearance and even dare compare with status or money are just ignorant, which speaking of status, looks freely grant you high social status anyway just for being known as the “hot guy” of the building that everyone talks about and analyzes. It really isn't just how easy you get women, it's also how you're accepted, and constantly validated by those around you ever since you were born, positive reinforcement, etc...

Very often leading to natural, charismatic personalities with an overall ideal frontal lobe development.

Even in jobs and careers you'll have an easier time, you just cannot lose when you've got good looks, you'd legitimately have to TRY to fail at life. This, I believe is the one underrated aspect about looks that's frequently forgotten and left out when discussed about which plays a big role in life quality as a whole.

[–]HarshTruth692 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I'm at a point where [contradictory I know] Intelligence -- true intelligence can attract me to a female but if she is not physically attractive to me I won't be sexually attracted... however I deep down know that women have a hive mind and no women seems to be truly intelligent... to the point where if I consider a relationship she has to be genuinely very good looking without fake up AKA make up and other manipulative dishonest beauty enhancements which the majority of girls don't fit the bill.... the majority of girls are physically unattractive when removing manipulative dishonest "enhancements" but also the majority of girls are also hive minded and un intelligent and un creative

​

This basically gives me almost 0 options plus she then needs to be attracted to me sexually/physically and considering I'm not in the best physical shape like I was in the past [overweight but not obese ] and my sub race is unique and minority... and my face at it's best is handsome but not what most black pillers/incels/etc would call "Chad" This makes a difficult obstacle

And sapiosexual women don't exist --- it is very clear when being honest and looking into it intensely that women do not find intelligence or personality attractive.. it's purely physical/sexual attraction and after that it's utility attraction

[–]MongooseMoney1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Yes

[–]sh0t20 points21 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Welcome to the Jungle!

[–]OfficialTechLead2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

just be happy you found it.

now the decision to whiten your teeth, lift weights, get a hair transplant etc. are a no brainer.

[–]BumblingBeta0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

How does this play out for men vs women? There are fewer beautiful men than women in society (due to women using makeup + higher standards for male beauty). Does this mean most men have little to no romantic success?

[–]ColonParentheses7 points8 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

How did they establish direction of effect from physical attractiveness to romantic evaluation? In other words, how did they rule out the possibility that greater romantic evaluation caused greater physical attractiveness in the eyes of the participant? It wouldn't be unreasonable to suspect that people would perceive their crushes as more physically attractive simply because they have a crush on them.

Also, did they discuss how to validate this construct of Romantic Evaluation better? From the first passage you cited it seems that it encompasses a lot of different factors, and is split into two main factor groups: feelings towards current partners and feelings towards potential partners.

If there is a way to get past the paywall please inform me and I'll read the paper myself, but if there isn't then it would be most helpful for you to fill me in!

[–]48151_623421 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Great study. Thanks for posting.

[–]TotesMessenger2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I'm a bot, bleep, bloop. Someone has linked to this thread from another place on reddit:

 If you follow any of the above links, please respect the rules of reddit and don't vote in the other threads. (Info / Contact)

[–]SchizoSocialClub 1 points [recovered]  (1 child) | Copy Link

Judging by title the link is not to the correct study.

You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2024. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter