You’re single because you’re ugly

[mgill]

written by a women about women and likely as satire but sadly it is an uncomfortable truth about unattractive men in real life-only for us it also applies by replacing ugly with short.

https://www.dailyuw.com/wellness/article_645a8ff2-7540-11e9-afb5-9395aad3e558.html

 

[ardour]

Apparently it's satire (a poor example of it since it's not clear what viewpoints are being made fun of).

 

[Finished]

^ I agree. It was almost about seeing if people would read the entire article or not.

 

[mgill]

Apparently it's satire (a poor example of it since it's not clear what viewpoints are being made fun of).

perhaps written as satire but it still contains much truth for many men for whom rather than being somehow humorous, it's just a sad fact of our everyday life.

 

[user 115627]

If you are deliberately ignoring satire just to reinforce your own opinions than I'm not sure you are even interested in a semblance of truth anymore. Considering the nature of the site, I think it's obvious what viewpoints are parodied.

 

[mgill]

If you are deliberately ignoring satire just to reinforce your own opinions than I'm not sure you are even interested in a semblance of truth anymore. Considering the nature of the site, I think it's obvious what viewpoints are parodied.

my point was that satire is not always untrue.  i think the idea that anyone who is unattractive would want to reinforce the opinion that looks are of paramount importance in life is incorrect.  the fact that some truths are quite uncomfortable does not make them any less vaild. countless studies along with my own personal experience has proven this is the case.  here is but one example of a study which the author of the supposed satire should have read before writing her article:

https://www.studyfinds.org/unattractive-men-dating-material-study/

 

[Nicolelt]

If you are deliberately ignoring satire just to reinforce your own opinions than I'm not sure you are even interested in a semblance of truth anymore. Considering the nature of the site, I think it's obvious what viewpoints are parodied.

my point was that satire is not always untrue.  i think the idea that anyone who is unattractive would want to reinforce the opinion that looks are of paramount importance in life is incorrect.  the fact that some truths are quite uncomfortable does not make them any less vaild. countless studies along with my own personal experience has proven this is the case.  here is but one example of a study which the author of the supposed satire should have read before writing her article:

https://www.studyfinds.org/unattractive-men-dating-material-study/

The thing that bothers me about this article is that they don't explain what is unattractive. I found it interesting that that mothers had lower standards in attraction for their daughters than their daughters do for themselves. I wonder why that is.

 

[TheRealCallie]

If you are deliberately ignoring satire just to reinforce your own opinions than I'm not sure you are even interested in a semblance of truth anymore. Considering the nature of the site, I think it's obvious what viewpoints are parodied.

my point was that satire is not always untrue.  i think the idea that anyone who is unattractive would want to reinforce the opinion that looks are of paramount importance in life is incorrect.  the fact that some truths are quite uncomfortable does not make them any less vaild. countless studies along with my own personal experience has proven this is the case.  here is but one example of a study which the author of the supposed satire should have read before writing her article:

https://www.studyfinds.org/unattractive-men-dating-material-study/

The thing that bothers me about this article is that they don't explain what is unattractive. I found it interesting that that mothers had lower standards in attraction for their daughters than their daughters do for themselves. I wonder why that is.

Not only that, but a study with 80 people is hardly that impressive or indicative of what the population wants.

 

[Nicolelt]

If you are deliberately ignoring satire just to reinforce your own opinions than I'm not sure you are even interested in a semblance of truth anymore. Considering the nature of the site, I think it's obvious what viewpoints are parodied.

my point was that satire is not always untrue.  i think the idea that anyone who is unattractive would want to reinforce the opinion that looks are of paramount importance in life is incorrect.  the fact that some truths are quite uncomfortable does not make them any less vaild. countless studies along with my own personal experience has proven this is the case.  here is but one example of a study which the author of the supposed satire should have read before writing her article:

https://www.studyfinds.org/unattractive-men-dating-material-study/

The thing that bothers me about this article is that they don't explain what is unattractive. I found it interesting that that mothers had lower standards in attraction for their daughters than their daughters do for themselves. I wonder why that is.

Not only that, but a study with 80 people is hardly that impressive or indicative of what the population wants.

True, I tried to get to the actual study, but hit with a paywall.

 

[mgill]

If you are deliberately ignoring satire just to reinforce your own opinions than I'm not sure you are even interested in a semblance of truth anymore. Considering the nature of the site, I think it's obvious what viewpoints are parodied.

my point was that satire is not always untrue.  i think the idea that anyone who is unattractive would want to reinforce the opinion that looks are of paramount importance in life is incorrect.  the fact that some truths are quite uncomfortable does not make them any less vaild. countless studies along with my own personal experience has proven this is the case.  here is but one example of a study which the author of the supposed satire should have read before writing her article:

https://www.studyfinds.org/unattractive-men-dating-material-study/

The thing that bothers me about this article is that they don't explain what is unattractive. I found it interesting that that mothers had lower standards in attraction for their daughters than their daughters do for themselves. I wonder why that is.

i think that certain features are universally considered attractive and others unattractive. this is why marketing works so well-show an attractive man or women doing something with a product and it sells.  the same thing with tv & movies. the movie "A Beautiful Mind" is a great example of this as the people in real life were not at all physically attractive yet the actors playing them were both physically stunning. there may be a wide range about what people think of those who are average looking but the vast majority agree about either end of the scale.

 

[Nicolelt]

If you are deliberately ignoring satire just to reinforce your own opinions than I'm not sure you are even interested in a semblance of truth anymore. Considering the nature of the site, I think it's obvious what viewpoints are parodied.

my point was that satire is not always untrue.  i think the idea that anyone who is unattractive would want to reinforce the opinion that looks are of paramount importance in life is incorrect.  the fact that some truths are quite uncomfortable does not make them any less vaild. countless studies along with my own personal experience has proven this is the case.  here is but one example of a study which the author of the supposed satire should have read before writing her article:

https://www.studyfinds.org/unattractive-men-dating-material-study/

The thing that bothers me about this article is that they don't explain what is unattractive. I found it interesting that that mothers had lower standards in attraction for their daughters than their daughters do for themselves. I wonder why that is.

i think that certain features are universally considered attractive and others unattractive. this is why marketing works so well-show an attractive man or women doing something with a product and it sells.  the same thing with tv & movies. the movie "A Beautiful Mind" is a great example of this as the people in real life were not at all physically attractive yet the actors playing them were both physically stunning. there may be a wide range about what people think of those who are average looking but the vast majority agree about either end of the scale.

Something that I have found interesting are cases like Gerard Butler. In the USA he is considered hot and very attractive. I personally think he is, but I have also heard in Scotland, he is seen as just another guy. I wonder what that has to do with it. Like being exotic...even though I wouldn't call Gerard Butler exotic lol.

 

[mgill]

"Not only that, but a study with 80 people is hardly that impressive or indicative of what the population wants. "

this is but one of many examples and a quick google search will provide many others. the book i recommeded has references to many studies, all of which show the same result. you can also look at cases like Jeremy Meeks, Ted Bundy and Richard Rameriez to see how much physical appearence can make.

a big part of the problem is that most people are not even aware of how influenced they are by the physical appearence of others. they may claim it's due to other characteristics but do not find these other charateristics attractive in people who are not as good looking.

https://explorable.com/halo-effect

---

If you are deliberately ignoring satire just to reinforce your own opinions than I'm not sure you are even interested in a semblance of truth anymore. Considering the nature of the site, I think it's obvious what viewpoints are parodied.

my point was that satire is not always untrue.  i think the idea that anyone who is unattractive would want to reinforce the opinion that looks are of paramount importance in life is incorrect.  the fact that some truths are quite uncomfortable does not make them any less vaild. countless studies along with my own personal experience has proven this is the case.  here is but one example of a study which the author of the supposed satire should have read before writing her article:

https://www.studyfinds.org/unattractive-men-dating-material-study/

The thing that bothers me about this article is that they don't explain what is unattractive. I found it interesting that that mothers had lower standards in attraction for their daughters than their daughters do for themselves. I wonder why that is.

i think that certain features are universally considered attractive and others unattractive. this is why marketing works so well-show an attractive man or women doing something with a product and it sells.  the same thing with tv & movies. the movie "A Beautiful Mind" is a great example of this as the people in real life were not at all physically attractive yet the actors playing them were both physically stunning. there may be a wide range about what people think of those who are average looking but the vast majority agree about either end of the scale.

Something that I have found interesting are cases like Gerard Butler. In the USA he is considered hot and very attractive. I personally think he is, but I have also heard in Scotland, he is seen as just another guy. I wonder what that has to do with it. Like being exotic...even though I wouldn't call Gerard Butler exotic lol.

i have never heard of him but i expect he is a tall, facially above average man with good hair.  these are the qualities which are considered as universally attractive in men.

 

[TheRealCallie]

Yeah, well there are also many studies that say other things, so it's very telling when a person ONLY posts insignificant ones that only reinforce what he wants to believe.
If you want the TRUTH, like you claim to have, you need to look at every side, not just the one that benefits you.
And no, I won't be searching for those studies, do it yourself if you are honestly interested in the truth.

---

And while you're at it, why don't you look up how many people who think they are ugly actually are ugly. And perhaps you might want to check into BDD.

 

[user 115627]

my point was that satire is not always untrue.  i think the idea that anyone who is unattractive would want to reinforce the opinion that looks are of paramount importance in life is incorrect.  the fact that some truths are quite uncomfortable does not make them any less vaild. countless studies along with my own personal experience has proven this is the case.  here is but one example of a study which the author of the supposed satire should have read before writing her article:

https://www.studyfinds.org/unattractive-men-dating-material-study/

That's a moot point...what are you talking about? The point is not whether satire is true or untrue, but which perspectives it satirizes and which perspective the audience holds. If you just throw all that out the window then you make not just satire but any given text interpretable any way you like. You didn't even need the satire to make your original point.

I have no idea why you even throw a study into my face. The quality of the study aside, I have never even disputed unattractiveness or universally attractive features being a real thing, but I guess you barely even read the posts of people that actually agree on some points?

 

[mgill]

my point was that satire is not always untrue.  i think the idea that anyone who is unattractive would want to reinforce the opinion that looks are of paramount importance in life is incorrect.  the fact that some truths are quite uncomfortable does not make them any less vaild. countless studies along with my own personal experience has proven this is the case.  here is but one example of a study which the author of the supposed satire should have read before writing her article:

https://www.studyfinds.org/unattractive-men-dating-material-study/

That's a moot point...what are you talking about? The point is not whether satire is true or untrue, but which perspectives it satirizes and which perspective the audience holds. If you just throw all that out the window then you make not just satire but any given text interpretable any way you like. You didn't even need the satire to make your original point.

I have no idea why you even throw a study into my face. The quality of the study aside, I have never even disputed unattractiveness or universally attractive features being a real thing, but I guess you barely even read the posts of people that actually agree on some points?

guess i just do not understand your point then.  i think the perspective of the audience will be based on their level of attractiveness-the same with the authors perspective.

you also seem to be a little defensive if you consider siting a relevant study as throwing it in your face.  it could be that my reading skills are lacking but it's also possible that your writing skills leave something to be desired too.

 

[Nicolelt]

my point was that satire is not always untrue.  i think the idea that anyone who is unattractive would want to reinforce the opinion that looks are of paramount importance in life is incorrect.  the fact that some truths are quite uncomfortable does not make them any less vaild. countless studies along with my own personal experience has proven this is the case.  here is but one example of a study which the author of the supposed satire should have read before writing her article:

https://www.studyfinds.org/unattractive-men-dating-material-study/

That's a moot point...what are you talking about? The point is not whether satire is true or untrue, but which perspectives it satirizes and which perspective the audience holds. If you just throw all that out the window then you make not just satire but any given text interpretable any way you like. You didn't even need the satire to make your original point.

I have no idea why you even throw a study into my face. The quality of the study aside, I have never even disputed unattractiveness or universally attractive features being a real thing, but I guess you barely even read the posts of people that actually agree on some points?

guess i just do not understand your point then.  i think the perspective of the audience will be based on their level of attractiveness-the same with the authors perspective.

you also seem to be a little defensive if you consider siting a relevant study as throwing it in your face.  it could be that my reading skills are lacking but it's also possible that your writing skills leave something to be desired too.

I think what Rodent is telling you is the fact you started this thread with satire, not facts. It kinda discredits your cause.

 

[mgill]

"Yeah, well there are also many studies that say other things, so it's very telling when a person ONLY posts insignificant ones that only reinforce what he wants to believe.
If you want the TRUTH, like you claim to have, you need to look at every side, not just the one that benefits you.
And no, I won't be searching for those studies, do it yourself if you are honestly interested in the truth."

i have already done so and not found any which conlcude that physical attractiveness is not a primary factor. i'm not sure how you think that as a short, bald, ugly man myself i would gain any benefit from studies which show the critical importance of looks (and for men, height & hair) when it comes to attracting the opposite ***. i wish more than anything that this was not the case but have seen little to no evidence, both personal & otherwise, that this is not the way the world works.

there would certainly be no need for dating coaches or OLD if looks were not of paramount importance. maybe it's a question of you being out of the dating scene for so long that you are simply not aware of the current state of things in this regard?

 

[user 115627]

guess i just do not understand your point then.  i think the perspective of the audience will be based on their level of attractiveness-the same with the authors perspective.

you also seem to be a little defensive if you consider siting a relevant study as throwing it in your face.  it could be that my reading skills are lacking but it's also possible that your writing skills leave something to be desired too.

I think what Rodent is telling you is the fact you started this thread with satire, not facts. It kinda discredits your cause.

A satire that actually satirizes his point of view. I'm pretty sure the author has the exact opposite point of view and for all I know they could be an average or below-average looking person and they could *still* be satirizing the idea that it always comes down to looks in every conceivable situation just to make themselves feel better.

I said you are throwing the study in my face because you didn't do it as a response to anything I said. I didn't disagree with you on unattractiveness, I disagreed with your usage of someone's satire just to arrive at the same conclusions you end up at anyway.

I think it's your reading skills.

 

[mgill]

my point was that satire is not always untrue.  i think the idea that anyone who is unattractive would want to reinforce the opinion that looks are of paramount importance in life is incorrect.  the fact that some truths are quite uncomfortable does not make them any less vaild. countless studies along with my own personal experience has proven this is the case.  here is but one example of a study which the author of the supposed satire should have read before writing her article:

https://www.studyfinds.org/unattractive-men-dating-material-study/

That's a moot point...what are you talking about? The point is not whether satire is true or untrue, but which perspectives it satirizes and which perspective the audience holds. If you just throw all that out the window then you make not just satire but any given text interpretable any way you like. You didn't even need the satire to make your original point.

I have no idea why you even throw a study into my face. The quality of the study aside, I have never even disputed unattractiveness or universally attractive features being a real thing, but I guess you barely even read the posts of people that actually agree on some points?

guess i just do not understand your point then.  i think the perspective of the audience will be based on their level of attractiveness-the same with the authors perspective.

you also seem to be a little defensive if you consider siting a relevant study as throwing it in your face.  it could be that my reading skills are lacking but it's also possible that your writing skills leave something to be desired too.

I think what Rodent is telling you is the fact you started this thread with satire, not facts. It kinda discredits your cause.

now i think you may be misunderstanding.  i started this thread by saying that though the article was likely written as satire it contains many very accurate truths.  as someone with a partner i can understand how you may not be able to relate to this.

 

[Nicolelt]

i have already done so and not found any which conlcude that physical attractiveness is not a primary factor.  i'm not sure how you think that as a short, bald, ugly man myself i would gain any benefit from studies which show the critical importance of looks (and for men, height & hair) when it comes to attracting the opposite ***. i wish more than anything that this was not the case but have seen little to no evidence, both personal & otherwise, that this is not the way the world works.

And is doing all of this research helping you? Other than arguing with people on the internet that you have no hope for a relationship?

---

my point was that satire is not always untrue.  i think the idea that anyone who is unattractive would want to reinforce the opinion that looks are of paramount importance in life is incorrect.  the fact that some truths are quite uncomfortable does not make them any less vaild. countless studies along with my own personal experience has proven this is the case.  here is but one example of a study which the author of the supposed satire should have read before writing her article:

https://www.studyfinds.org/unattractive-men-dating-material-study/

That's a moot point...what are you talking about? The point is not whether satire is true or untrue, but which perspectives it satirizes and which perspective the audience holds. If you just throw all that out the window then you make not just satire but any given text interpretable any way you like. You didn't even need the satire to make your original point.

I have no idea why you even throw a study into my face. The quality of the study aside, I have never even disputed unattractiveness or universally attractive features being a real thing, but I guess you barely even read the posts of people that actually agree on some points?

guess i just do not understand your point then.  i think the perspective of the audience will be based on their level of attractiveness-the same with the authors perspective.

you also seem to be a little defensive if you consider siting a relevant study as throwing it in your face.  it could be that my reading skills are lacking but it's also possible that your writing skills leave something to be desired too.

I think what Rodent is telling you is the fact you started this thread with satire, not facts. It kinda discredits your cause.

now i think you may be misunderstanding.  i started this thread by saying that though the article was likely written as satire it contains many very accurate truths.  as someone with a partner i can understand how you may not be able to relate to this.

Yes, but satire is not the truth. I follow the onion, but it does not mean that I take it as the truth, only partial truth. I am not sure how me having a partner has made me not understand satire?