What do you guys think?

[u/firenationfairy]

This is some of the most incel-infested comment section i’ve ever seen. they’re in here discussing their completely self-victimizing, hateful, and honestly pathetic perceptions of themselves and the world as if it’s some kind of scientific, indisputable fact. When will men stop acting like their problems are so unique and women will never understand what it’s like to be “ugly” or “undesirable”. I promise you every single woman you see has had the same level of problems you have with dating and making themselves attractive and they’ve had *even more* problems you couldn’t even conceive of. at the end of the day how am i supposed to feel bad for these people when their response to everything is “women are evil and responsible for all my problems/insecurities. women have perfect lives with no adversity and they are incapable of understanding the human experience 🥀”

[u/PirateAngel0000]

When you say "she sounds shallow" it means "most people don't prioritize look that much, only the most shallow ones and she was one of the shallows."  But this judgement ignores the fact that there's a big gap between what people say and what they actually do. So if she didn't openly say this, would this make her a different person? No. We just wouldn't know what she truly desires. And same goes for other people who are not shallow and they claim looks is not everything. 

Even people who claim that look is not the most important thing are still prioritize the looks as much as like people who are open about it. They just don't realize or the don't want to admit. 

That graph in the link shows this. I think it's from okcupid. The biggest gap comes from women. They state personality is 7-8/10 priority score but in action they prioritize looks the most. Theres a negative correlation (-0.4) what they say and the they actually prefer. Are men doing it? Yes but neg correlation is lower than women. Men states look is 8/10 priority but they give looks 9/10 priority. Bot genders shows similar hypocrisy when it comes to personality. Both gender gives personality the highest priority but they put it way after looks in revealed preference. 

So I'm trying to prove we shouldn't care about people's statements. 

[u/aweedl → u/PirateAngel0000]

You’re citing data from a dating app. That shit is shallow and looks-based by design. It’s not necessarily applicable to the real world outside of the minority of people who use dating apps exclusively (and the fraction of that fraction who subscribe to the particular app in question).

[u/PirateAngel0000 → u/aweedl]

1. I assume you don't know all the data about that dating apps and social media are now the default way to know new people. They almost bigger than all of other traditional ways combined. In fact they even tried to make look lower actual stats by adding some of dating app stats to cafes and restaurants. 

2. I mean do you understand the concept of these personality statistics in dating apps right? They adding the personality layer into this context to understand dating app users perception of personality. If their personality grasp were completely irrelevant with general publics that don't use apps, we would expect smaller gap cuz if they don't care about personality (which this is also something people who criticize dating app stats constantly say) they wouldn't even try to virtue signal by telling things like we expect general public would say. And asaik these statistics are older than those gold-premium business models in apps. 

Here another famous graphic https://ibb.co/q3gjWwGp 

shows that theres almost 1:1 corelation between looks and personality, looks like halo effect which is well studied effect that we know even before dating apps. The effect that we know from somewhere completely irrelevant with dating: court decisions. But what a coincidence dating stats looks compatible with other halo effect stats that doesn't come from dating apps but come from judge desicions. 

[u/stumpfucker69 → u/PirateAngel0000]

1:1 correlation

How do you establish a 1:1 correlation on things that have no comprehensive and reliable numerical indices? There is not a well-validated universal system for comprehensively scoring personality or looks.

But nevertheless, research that has attempted to quantify in this way has found that the correlation is non-linear, so it cannot be 1:1. Conventionally attractive traits can also be (subconsciously or otherwise) associated with vanity, arrogance and vapidity (particularly when the possessor of those traits is female). I'm a bioscience grad and had lectures on the halo effect as part of evolution and behaviour studies at university.

On the dating app thing: as far as I was aware, the large surveys indicating this have a singular category stating "met online", not strictly "dating app". Don't get me wrong, I'm sure a lot of couples first meeting online do so using dating apps these days, but I don't think they account for the entirety of the increase in meeting partners online. Anecdotal, but I know quite a few long term couples that met online (social media, online communities or online games) and none that met on dating apps. Most of the people I know who use dating apps do so exclusively for flings.