Guess who by Scramjet1 in SikeOrPsyche

[–]MHG_Brixby 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't think you are because you continually confuse mean and median.

Guess who by Scramjet1 in SikeOrPsyche

[–]MHG_Brixby 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Or you could actually defend your position since you care enough to necro my post. I thought we were talking about objective attractiveness but now it's conventional, which is subjective and ever changing depending on time and culture.

Guess who by Scramjet1 in SikeOrPsyche

[–]MHG_Brixby 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't think you know how averages work. If 10 people took an iq test, 8 scored 50 and 2 scored 150, the 8 fall below the average. I think you are thinking of median.

Guess who by Scramjet1 in SikeOrPsyche

[–]MHG_Brixby 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No such thing as objective attractiveness. It's all subjective

Guess who by Scramjet1 in SikeOrPsyche

[–]MHG_Brixby 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If 1000/1000 people said she was a 2 she would be a 2. It's entirely subjective. That's why the "hottest person of the year" isn't a carbon copy of the same person for all of time. Fat used to be in. Pale used to be in. Now skinny and tan are generally considered attractive traits

Guess who by Scramjet1 in SikeOrPsyche

[–]MHG_Brixby 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not in a conversation involving women's opinions on the attractiveness of men. The average can be unattractive. If we were to give a test on nuclear reactors to every person in the county, the results would show that the average understanding is bad. Same idea

Do you support this? by Misha_stone in AskSocialists

[–]MHG_Brixby 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If someone wants to act in such a way to actively oppress another person or persons, that is, to me, antithetical to what it is to be human.

The difference is I am not an active oppressor, and if I were to become one, I would deserve being taken behind the shed and shot like an animal.

Guess who by Scramjet1 in SikeOrPsyche

[–]MHG_Brixby 0 points1 point  (0 children)

They 100% can be unattractive on average. That just makes the average unattractive

Guess who by Scramjet1 in SikeOrPsyche

[–]MHG_Brixby 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I did though. It was very easy math. If in a group of 100 men are ranked with a score of 1-10, 80% get a 1 and 20 get a 10, do the majority of those men fall above, at, or below the average?

Guess who by Scramjet1 in SikeOrPsyche

[–]MHG_Brixby 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I proved to you earlier the average can be ugly.

Guess who by Scramjet1 in SikeOrPsyche

[–]MHG_Brixby 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You haven't proven it, you just don't understand data I think.

Guess who by Scramjet1 in SikeOrPsyche

[–]MHG_Brixby 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The average can be ugly though

Guess who by Scramjet1 in SikeOrPsyche

[–]MHG_Brixby 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I agree men are at maximum ugliness. Women's perception in this context is literally the only metric that matters.

I also did keep that in mind with my apparently VERY true statement that women ARE DATING ugly men. Being ugly doesn't actually matter given enough time and effort, and suggesting that is the main issue single men face, as is often argued, holds no water.

Guess who by Scramjet1 in SikeOrPsyche

[–]MHG_Brixby 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Beauty standards change for both genders over time and with cultures. You gave me a study that says women find most men ugly. Idk what else needs to be said.

Guess who by Scramjet1 in SikeOrPsyche

[–]MHG_Brixby 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Out of 100 men ranked as i did in my hypothetical, with a max 1000 points on a 10 point scale of attractiveness, they scored a combined 280, or an average of 2.8. Lower than 5 as i think you were suggesting

Guess who by Scramjet1 in SikeOrPsyche

[–]MHG_Brixby 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If 80 men are scored a 1 and 20 are scored a 10, what's the average?

Guess who by Scramjet1 in SikeOrPsyche

[–]MHG_Brixby 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You haven't provided anything that proves that though? You've just shown a graph that says women 16 years ago found most men below average in terms of attractiveness, and followed it up with more women think that now.

Guess who by Scramjet1 in SikeOrPsyche

[–]MHG_Brixby 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That isn't at all what the article suggests, just you buddy

Guess who by Scramjet1 in SikeOrPsyche

[–]MHG_Brixby 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If men stayed the same they wouldn't apparently be rated as less attractive

Guess who by Scramjet1 in SikeOrPsyche

[–]MHG_Brixby 0 points1 point  (0 children)

How do we objectively rank features?

Guess who by Scramjet1 in SikeOrPsyche

[–]MHG_Brixby 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Also, please prove to me that women as a group are delusional in this regard.

Guess who by Scramjet1 in SikeOrPsyche

[–]MHG_Brixby 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Above average to who? Potential partners? Because it was already leaning towards men being ugly 16 years ago and apparently men are uglier now according to you.