JFL

Chad opens girl on Tinder with
"hello, yes, my hobbies are arguing online, porn, and gambling"
and still gets laid
i am part of geomax.me looksmax.org and pornhub.net i love gambling
 
Height > hobbies

I do the top 4 and still an incel

a true enigma in our little geomaxia society. To be on campaigns for the past 10 years and still in my predicament!
U got the tism son. If u were 6'2 nothing would be any different, Maybe 6'4 and up but that's anybody
 
^^^ Eggzacklee. Hobbies don’t really matter when it comes to initial attraction.
I actually think they do matter, just not that much. The effect on attraction is minimal but there (status associations). More important is that your hobbies can allow you to connect with a girl more quickly and easily. It's why my HelloTalk guide says to focus on the big five: food, travel, fashion, entertainment, relationships. Although these aren't really hobbies, the hobbies you portray should align with these things that girls can latch onto.

The ones at the top of the list in the OP seem to check out. Except for "Reading". That's retarded. I also wouldn't go with "Hiking" but your mileage may vary on that.
 
These studies aren't that informative or even accurate. People who conduct and subscribe to them don't understand women.

When women are shown information like this and asked to think about it they aren't geared to do it. Women have to be shown what they like and what they don't like. They're not like men who can look at hypothetical interpersonal scenarios involving themselves through the lenses of pure logic.

There was an interesting study done in the 90's centered around actions that turned women on. It asked all kinds of women in all walks of life about what kind of activity seeing a man do turned them on the most. Washing the dishes is the activity that was easily most popular. There was another part of this study though. Men who were in domestic relationships were also being surveyed about their activities and how much sex they have. It found that men in domestic relationships who never did the dishes, or did them very rarely, had way more sex within their relationships than men who regularly washed the dishes and did other domestic chores.
 
These studies aren't that informative or even accurate. People who conduct and subscribe to them don't understand women.

When women are shown information like this and asked to think about it they aren't geared to do it. Women have to be shown what they like and what they don't like. They're not like men who can look at hypothetical interpersonal scenarios involving themselves through the lenses of pure logic.

There was an interesting study done in the 90's centered around actions that turned women on. It asked all kinds of women in all walks of life about what kind of activity seeing a man do turned them on the most. Washing the dishes is the activity that was easily most popular. There was another part of this study though. Men who were in domestic relationships were also being surveyed about their activities and how much sex they have. It found that men in domestic relationships who never did the dishes, or did them very rarely, had way more sex within their relationships than men who regularly washed the dishes and did other domestic chores.
I of course agree that the study is flawed and doesn't account for women not understanding what drives their own attraction. But the dish washing example isn't really applicable here, and the conclusion is obviously different. Men who don't do the dishes are just more likely to be the "upper partner" who can refuse to do household chores, and who can command sex more easily. Men who frequently wash the dishes are more likely to be impotent, ugly, fragile, betabuxxers, or in a word, sexually undesirable. It's not like the act of scrubbing a plate or spoon makes a woman's pussy wet or dry.

If the sample studied had a bunch of men who, for some reason, were genuinely passionate about washing dishes, and did it in their free time? The results would be completely different
 
I of course agree that the study is flawed and doesn't account for women not understanding what drives their own attraction. But the dish washing example isn't really applicable here, and the conclusion is obviously different. Men who don't do the dishes are just more likely to be the "upper partner" who can refuse to do household chores, and who can command sex more easily. Men who frequently wash the dishes are more likely to be impotent, ugly, fragile, betabuxxers, or in a word, sexually undesirable. It's not like the act of scrubbing a plate or spoon makes a woman's pussy wet or dry.

If the sample studied had a bunch of men who, for some reason, were genuinely passionate about washing dishes, and did it in their free time? The results would be completely different
Lol, that's funny but excellently put.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top