https://techcrunch.com/2009/11/18/okcupid-inbox-attractive/
A survey found that women find 80% of men unattractive . Thoughts?
https://techcrunch.com/2009/11/18/okcupid-inbox-attractive/
First, this isn't an academic study. OKCupid compiled data from their website and made some comments about what it might mean.
Here are a few things to consider about the data:
1. OKCupid users may not be representative sample of people as a whole. Online dating may attract certain types of people and not others. Further, OKCupid users are not even representative of people who engage in online dating, since different websites may attract different types of people (OKCupid may attract different types of people from say, Match. com or PlentyOfFish).
2. Within OKCupid, not all users rate other user's pictures. There may be a difference between people who rate and people who don't.
3. I'm not sure if it's changed, but if you rated someone a 4 or 5 on OKCupid, it would send that person a notification that you rated them high. It's possible that women are more shy or insecure when it comes to letting other people know they think they're attractive, and so even if they found someone attractive, they would rate them lower.
4. Some people may just use that feature to browse pictures, and so they don't rate in a way that reflects their views (either choosing the same rating for everyone, or choosing random ratings).
Basically, I don't think "Women find 80% of men unattractive" is accurate.
What's more, is for some reason, whenever guys talk about this "study", they conveniently ignore the rest of the findings. For example:
2/3 of male messages go to the top 1/3 of women.
cdn.okcimg.com/.../Male-Messaging-Curve.png
Whereas women are far more likely to message average or even below average guys:
cdn.okcimg.com/.../Female-Messaging-Curve.png
If you want to make a generalization, it's that men care far more about physical appearance than women do, and thus, it isn't hopeless for "unattractive" men.
"First, this isn't an academic study."
Yes, but so what? Business enterprises are able to tease out data just as accurately, and often more so, than universities.
"1. OKCupid users may not be representative sample of people as a whole"
Yes, but in his book, Dataclysm, Rudder points out that when you cull data from other dating websites (Match. com, Plentyoffish, Tinder) where women rate men, you get the same results. Women tended to rate men below average. Rudder then goes on to say that in studies done from non dating websites (Facebook and Twitter), when you show a random selection of profile pics to a random selection of women, they STILL tend to rate them below average. According to Rudder, you get the same out of kilter bell curve when a random selection of women rate a random selection of men's profile pics, no matter the website, and the same normal bell curve when a random selection of men rate a random selection of women's profile pics.
It's interesting because Rudder then goes on to compare these bell curves to weather data. He says as far as men and how they view women's looks, men are like the weather in New York. You've got a few completely sunny days and a few completely overcast days and most days fall somewhere in between. When thinking about how women view men's looks, women are like the weather in Seattle. Many overcast days, a few partly cloudy days, and very few completely clear days. Personally, I find that both funny and very good news for men. If she thinks you're unattractive, don't worry too much. If you're unattractive, you're average.
"2. Within OKCupid, not all users rate other user's pictures. There may be a difference between people who rate and people who don't."
Well, the same data shows up when you use non-OKcupid and even non-dating sites
"3. I'm not sure if it's changed, but if you rated someone a 4 or 5 on OKCupid..."
OK cupid only sent a notification if the other person liked you in return. By the way, OKcupid no longer publishes data since it was bought by Match. com. A pity, because it was about the only internet dating site that did so. Most internet dating sites go to great lengths to hide the fact that men greatly outnumber women. I think when Match. com bought OKcupid, they ended publishing a lot of their (very interesting) studies about their data. A pity, because it was fascinating.
"Basically, I don't think "Women find 80% of men unattractive" is accurate."
I tend to think it is. Or rather, I would word it "Women find 80% of men not particularly physically attractive until they get to know them more."
"If you want to make a generalization, it's that men care far more about physical appearance than women do, and thus, it isn't hopeless for "unattractive" men."
Whereas I wish men cared less about physical appearance, I can't deny they do. I'm in complete agreement with you here.
"What's more, is for some reason, whenever guys talk about this "study", they conveniently ignore the rest of the findings."
Well, THIS guy doesn't ignore the rest of the findings. I completely agree with you here. I find that women are more willing to message men they don't find attractive right away whereas men are much less willing to do the same very interesting.
Women care about looks just as much.
@Floyd790 @ManuelMarquez
To be clear, I'm not making the claim that women don't care about looks as much as guys do. I'm saying that you could interpret the data the QA posted that way, since 2/3 of male messages go to the top 1/3 of women, whereas women are much more likely to message guys that they find average or below average.
Alright, but still most women only respond to good looking guys on dating sites. It has been proven with many dating sites doing experiments of photos they put up on a profile. Most women regardless how they look like only respond back to good looking men. And you are saying that women care about looks less. Look at what you said at the end of your post. Also, look at my post I just did about dating sites.
@ManuelMarquez
I'm describing the data that OKCupid released about their website. Look at the two graphs I posted in my original comment. The top graph shows that men mostly message the most attractive women, the bottom graph shows that women have a more equal distribution of messaging, with most of their messages going to "medium" attractive guys.
You don't get what I am saying!!! I am not saying if women message average or below average looking guys more, I am saying out of the messages in women's in boxes that they receive from guys most only respond to good looking guys. Understand? Read the question I posted.
@ManuelMarquez
You're right, I don't understand what you are saying. I read your question, and it is nothing but an unsubstantiated claim. You mention "experiments done by dating sites", yet fail to post any links to these experiments. Meanwhile, you are completely ignoring the data that this question is discussing, which shows that men mostly message the most attractive women, whereas women are more likely to message average, or even below average men.
Ok pay attention. There are women that message average or below average looking guys first than guys messaging average or below average looking women BUT when women log on the dating website they are member on, and they have a bunch of messages in their inbox, most of the time they only respond to good looking guys. You are talking about when women decide to message a guy first, I am not talking about that, I am talking about when women have a bunch of messages in their inbox, who they decide to respond to. They have more options so logically speaking they would only respond to the good looking guy. Understand?
Does the truth hurt you or are you still confused? What is so hard to understand? More women are ok with messaging average looking guys than the opposite, you are right about that, but when it comes to women RECEIVING A BUNCH OF MESSAGES in her INBOX most of them only respond to good looking guys. Understand? POF have done an experiment putting a pic of an average looking guy, then sending tons of messages to like 1000 women.700 women read and looked at the guys profile but only 2 of those that read it and looked at the profile responded. Now switching it to the pic of a good looking guy. Once again messages were sent to 1000 women. Of those 1000 women 860 read it and looked at the profile.200 out of those 860 that read and checked out the profile responded. See the difference? And the messages were sent to average, below average, and good looking women. Also my friends that use dating sites have done their own experiments and there were similar results.
@ManuelMarquez
Wow dude, calm down. There's no need to be condescending. Just because you aren't very good at explaining yourself and refuse to provide any sources for what you're talking about does not mean that I'm an idiot. I'm also not sure why what you're saying would "hurt" me. It doesn't affect me at all.
@selfishstars well what do you think about the POF experiment I proved to you?
@ManuelMarquez
You didn't provide a link to it so that I can look at it myself.
Oh geez, let me go find it.
@Bluemax A little late to the party here but the reason women are more likely to respond to me they deem unattractive in this study is because the attention they get. It's a common practice, very well known as "friend zoning." They talk to the guy, they know right off the bat that they won't have any physical relationship with the guy but don't explicitly come out and say that because they enjoy the attention these men give women when they presume a woman will give them a shot. These men are described as orbiters, it's very common for a woman to have at least a dozen orbiter; moreso with the advent of social media like Instagram or sites like only fans, even if she's average to unattractive because as pointed out in this survey, men are more likely to find a woman attractive than vice versa. This is how women monkey branch from one relationship to another within days or weeks of ending the previous one.
Then again there's also statistical data like the gss study that shows 5 to 7 women have sex for every 1 man and that as of 2018 30 percent of men aged 18 to 30 have never had sex at all compared to women's 17 percent, and the data from bumble that shows women selectively edit their profiles to exclude men under 5'11 the overwhelming majority of the time, so that they never even see a man who is 5'10 or shorter. Both of which appear to correlate with the findings across multiple dating sites that have found 80 percent of men are deemed unattractive. The reason that the latter half of survey isn't broadcasted is because it simply shows the other side of hypergamy that men already know. Women love having orbiters, it validates them.
I believe OKCupid is mostly used by Americans, so it wouldn't necessarily apply to other places...
God created Our Universe with Love and Free Will. Use your Free Will to Love!
In addition to this study not being reliable i also think it has to do with that many women are more attracted to personality. I may not find a guy physically attractive before talking to him, but if i find his personality attractive i might start noticing more physically that is attractive.
Sure looks are something that can cause initial attraction but as a female i know for fact that myself and other ladies are more attracted to personality, it has a bigger impact than looks.
If you're a guy don't tell me I'm wrong because you're obviously not girl, so you don't know.
When it comes to online dating. people's looks are taken more into account unfortunately. Most good looking women only want good looking guys online and offline but the huge majority of average and below average looking women only respond to good looking guys online whereas in person if a guy in their league in person was interested there is a huge chance she would actually give him a chance.
@Floyd790 Worldwide, men care more about looks, and women care more about a combination of other factors.
God created Our Universe with Love and Free Will. Use your Free Will to Love!
I never take an OK Cupid study seriously. Most women on dating sites are picky I'm sure they have their reasons but this does not represent all women especially in the real world. What is the point that you are trying to make.
Well there's too many guys out there who think the dating world is stacked against them. With so many guys saying that, there's got to be some truth to it. And its not just cupid. There's other studies out there and just because they aren't done by universities doesn't mean there just total B. S. Also women are super picky in real life also. I'm much more older than you and have more experience out here in this dating game and I know what Cupid is saying has a lot of truth to it.
Okay so what if its true? It's all our fault that guys are single?
Never said it 100% women's fault. What I'm saying is that there's got to be some truth to guys saying they can't get a woman because they are unattractive. It can't be lack of confidence, personality etc all the time like so many try to say is the main reason.
But that's the issue we say that and guys don't believe it so it doesn't go anywhere. What's attractive and what isn't is subjective any way and who is to say that other factors were the reasons why people reject each other. I find attractiveness in things beyond looks but I can't speak for anyone else.
Sure but looks get you in the door and that's the only thing that's going to give a guy a chance to present his case that's he's a good confident guy.
There is a lot of truth to it, but a lot of the reason the average guy isn't considered attractive from what I've noticed is that they don't dress well enough and they don't actively maintain their appearance. I barely put in an effort and the difference in reactions from women between a little effort and no effort is shocking. I never used to get noticed but now I have at least 5 women at work who I know have a crush on me. My advice is to visit the occasional thrift store to buy nice, stylish shirts on the cheap.
females are hypergamous and the older they get the worst they become in pickiness.
The data is interesting, but I think your conclusions about it aren't correct. Whereas the data does indicate that women, at first glance, tend to find men below average in the looks department, if you look at the data for women actually sending messages to men, you'll see that they tend to overlook or grow more comfortable in sending them messages.
You can find the whole story here:
blog.okcupid.com/.../
@Floyd790 Being tall is attractive to some people, not all.
God created Our Universe with Love and Free Will. Use your Free Will to Love!
Opinion
19Opinion
I don't care, honestly.
As others have said, okcupid isn't a great representation of males OR females.
Also, personal tastes do vary a decent amount from one person to the next. Even if the 20/100 thing were true, that 20 could be quite different from woman to woman.
I am not surprised if this figure is accurate looks on a guy aren't really important and most guys are well bros lol
We don't need looks we need success passion and confidence to attract a woman
On a physical level few men are beautiful and attractive to most females also females don't understand male aesthetic and the male body
This is kind of interesting, I've had girls say that most men are simply not physically attractive, and that they only become attracted to the majority of men after getting to know them. As in they are funny, confident, have money, they are smart, they have a good body.
The article pointed out that OKCupid used the terminology "most attractive" and "least attractive." Less attractive is a relative concept, it does not mean "not attractive."
The article also went on to show that women are significantly more willing than men to engage with people that ranked lower on the scale of attractiveness.
That said, you probably find the majority of women you meet on a random day unattractive to some degree. I know I do... I have standards, after all.
read this myTake, his interpretation is logical and unbiased.
www.girlsaskguys.com/.../a8397-do-women-only-find-20-of-men-attractive
Well I have tons of women who say otherwise and that's all the statistics I need lol.
And no offense to the OKCupid users but they are not really the best representation of society or people in general.
@Bluemax -shrugs- the statistics must not apply around here then, women seem to be attracted to guys just fine were I am. But I don't pay much heed to these studies and statistics, a lot of them are horsecrap anyway, and I have personally never had any trouble in the area that these "studies" are in.
even if this study is 100% accurate, it's nothing new in fact it's the same for guys. i personally find less than 10% of women attractive and would only date women who are part of than less than 10%. but not everyone can get people who are attractive to them so it's not like you're screwed when it comes to dating.
Realistic. I would like to see the faces they rated as unattractive though.
But I've observed this too. A lot of men don't take care of themselves, they wear unappealing clothes , etc.
Don't be so dense. The human race would die out dick head.
Actually are dying out, birth rates are in the gutter, no ones getting married and everyones complaining.
Actually, women are more tolerant in variation of appearance than men.
The author's first conclusion probably has some validity to it. It was my first thought too.
"My first guess was that there was an issue with self-selection here (i. e. unattractive men congregate on the site for whatever reason)."
Good looking guys with game don't need to go to dating websites.
I'm a sucker for a guy with game. If he's nice looking and has bomb social skills it's like ♡♡♡♡♡for me. Personality counts.
What is GaG's all prevailing obsession with Okcupid anyway? Think I should check it out?
It's true, but we still like them and fall in love. Nearly all my friends are in or have been in long relationships with guys they didn't like for their looks. They just get to know them then really like them.
@Floyd790 True. Most men want attractive women as their first priority. Most women want a guy whom they find appealing, which combines a bunch of different factors. I, personally, have seen a LOT of couples where I felt the girl was WAY more attractive than they guy... so much so that I was very surprised to see them together. I even met a guy who told me he was in another country, and had a LOT of girls wanting to be with him, until they found out he was NOT a pirate.
God created Our Universe with Love and Free Will. Use your Free Will to Love!
Really? Jeez women are picky...80% of men can't be THAT bad looking
Hmmm.. I would have to say that this is somewhat feasibly possible.
men are stupid so what do they expect
" 2/3 of all male messages going to the top 1/3 of women."
That doesn't mean nothing since most women use facebook instagram dating sites etc just to boost their sagging egos.
Even when most average and below average looking guys message women in their league or below their league most women, regardless how the woman looks like only responds back to good looking guys.
Looks are just cover of a book...
And every one knows this bloody quote...
"YOU can't A BOOK BY ITS COVER."
I find much less than 20% of guys attractive to be honest
So sounds legit
Yep that's why players exist... because they are in high demand and why not take advantage of that? Its funny how women will try to tell guys who know that its their looks that's keeping them dateless that its all about personality and confidence... It's only about that if a guy is physically appealing
Yes they find most of us "below average" but they date most of us anyway.
You can also add your opinion below!
Most Helpful Opinions