Do looks matter: My theory

Posted: October 14, 2012 in Uncategorized

It’s probably the number 1 debate in the PUA community, far more discussed than even the whole direct vs indirect direct debate. Do looks count when it comes to getting girls into bed?

Firstly I need to make one thing clear. When I talk about looks I mean the entire physical package a man presents to the world, not just his facial features. I’m including in this: facial features, grooming, hair style, fashion, physique and certainly height. What I’m not including is anything that could count as a behaviour rather than a property of appearance. As such, for my purposes things like vocal tonality and body language count as behaviours and not looks. This is an important point, as a 5’8″ guy with an attractive face may count the fact that a 6’2″ friend of his does better with women then him as proof looks don’t matter. Since height is a very big component of looks, the taller guy may well be considered more physically attractive than the shorter guy with the nicer face, thus nullifying shorties argument that looks don’t count.

When it comes to this, the king of all PUA debates there are multiple view points I’ve heard:

  • Looks are everything. As long as you can talk to women nothing matters more than looks when it comes to getting laid.
  • Looks are meaningless when it comes to getting laid.
  • Looks make it easier to get women into bed, or at least help you get the lay faster from interested girls.
  • Looks are a factor but only a small piece of the puzzle.
  • Looks are only good for the first few minutes, it’s game all the way after that. Ugly guys have to use game to buy themselves those first few minutes.

I agree with all points to varying degrees, apart from the first two. The first two are the two extreme sides of the debate, and I have personally seen too much evidence against both to give either of them credit.

I have seen men learn game and go on to regularly bang girls who are more attractive than them. I’ve seen naturals that aren’t very good looking bang hotter girls than them due to their charisma. In all honesty these men do seem to be closer to the exception than the rule. They all have something going for them, whether it be natural charisma, learned game, extreme wealth or extreme social status. Any of these things are very hard to develop for most guys, and so very few guys seem to regularly bang women hotter than themselves. Yet it happens frequently enough that the ‘looks are everything’ argument can safely be disregarded as invalid.

I think the other extreme is wrong too. Looks do seem to have a huge impact on a man’s success with women. I’ve seen guys with good game ignored as soon as a girl catches they eye of a much better looking man. You just have to look at most couples when out and about to see that people usually pair off with a partner who’s very close to them in terms of each other’s physical attractiveness. I’m yet to see guys who are truly hideous do well with women. Based on this I think saying that looks don’t play an factor in getting laid is invalid.

As you may have guessed by now, my views on whether or not looks matter is somewhere in-between the two extreme arguments. In very simple terms, I’d say looks matter somewhat and are a definite advantage. In more complicated terms I’d say how good looking you are defines the ease at which you can get certain girls. I’ll now be more specific by using the 1 – 10 points scale for looks.

It all comes down to how good looking you are comparative to the girl you want to get. The following guide is how possible it is for a guy to get girls based on the difference (shown here in terms of points on the 1 – 10 scale) in physical attractiveness between himself and the girl. The points refer to the number of points difference between her and him. So -2 for a guy who’s a 6 will refer to a girl who’s a HB4.

  • > -2 points: Really easy and virtual 0 effort to get her. The main barrier will be that she actually thinks the guy is just making fun of her rather than making serious sexual advances.
  • -2 points: Fairly easy to get these regularly. She won’t shit test, but will probably go through the motions of him having to ‘win her over’. Basically he has to not fuck up too much, but there’s certainly margin for error.
  • – 1 point: This takes some effort. She may through out the odd shit test, and won’t be that forgiving if he can’t take her through the courtship ritual smoothly. She’ll be willing to easily walk away if he fucks up.
  • 0 points: It’s tough to get girls like this regularly. He has to catch her at just the right time, when she’s very open to meeting a new guy. She will probably shit test noticeably and he has no margin for error. She’ll probably be actively comparing him in her mind to other potential suitors, so he needs to stack up well.
  • +1 or more points: Unlikely. He’ll have to get very lucky.

One caveat is that this assumes the following:

  • The guy can approach girls and hold a conversation / escalate without turning to jelly
  • The guy doesn’t have a really weird vibe
  • The guy is at least round about average in terms of life achievement, more or less (ie not living in a card board box).

Does this mean that I think guys can rarely get girls of the same level of looks as them, and never better than them? No. The listing I gave is for guys who are basically average in terms of achievements and personality. They aren’t superstars but aren’t losers either, and have basically only mastered one part of game, the ability to take girls smoothly through the courtship process. Guys who have got this far with game will consistently be able to get girls 1 – 2 point below them in terms of looks. If they are not able to do this regularly, they are either not going out regularly, have yet to learn how to properly take a girl through the meet -> lay process or over estimate their own physical attractiveness.

So what’s required to regularly get girls at or above your level of physical attractiveness? The answer here is higher value. You simply cannot be average. I know it sounds cold and mercenary, but you must offer the girl some excess value to make up for the higher looks value she is brining to the courtship.

In a future post I’m going to go into some detail about what guys can do to improve their looks, and I’m going to look at why the seduction community seems so intent on ignoring the part looks has to play and convincing guys not to increase their physical attractiveness.

Advertisements
Comments
  1. Jim Bacon says:

    Mark Manson used to have a rule on his blog/forum “You can’t complain about having bad looks until you have spent at least 6 months in the gym”.

    Regarding why the seduction community seems so intent on ignoring the part looks has to play and convincing guys not to increase their physical attractiveness… I say the broad reason for this is three-fold:

    1 ~ Improving your looks through getting a better body at the gym is not something that commercial PUAs can sell to guys as a service. The areas of pick up that can be taught are hitting on girls in the street and hitting on girls at night in bars. Hence they constantly sold, and anything else gets poo-pooed.

    2 ~ The guys who have bought daygame and bootcamp training are emotionally invested in it and don’t want to be told that they should have done something else.

    3 ~ A lot of guys are looking for a quick fix. A lot of guys like the idea of having a better body, but when it comes down to it are unwilling or unable to put the time and effort in. They don’t want better results with girls in 1 to 2 years time. They want it now.

  2. betatopua says:

    Yeah those are basically the points I’ll be covering in a future post. There is also a fourth one. It’s related to point 3, but slightly different. When guys first learn about game, they think they’ve found a ‘glitch in the matrix’. A set of words and behaviours that will give them the cheat codes they need to bang hot women, despite they themselves being unattractive. The kind of geeky guys that get into the community (and I used to be like this), really love this idea and buy into it emotionally. They think using their brains will let them get one over on all the jocks in high school who got all of the girls, and they love this thought.

    Also along these lines is that many of the guys who join the community are very cerebral types. They love the idea that learning some evo psych stuff and verbal dexterity is more important than looking good. To them just getting a great body is like a a less evolved retrograde step compared to using their brains. The irony is they then go after women based mainly on the woman’s physical attractiveness.

  3. Jim Bacon says:

    Yeah I’ll fully admit that when I first read about game, I thought “Great, although my life is fucked up by sickness, I don’t need to be a competent guy who is succeeding any more to get girls”. Although I was never attached to this idea as some guys seem to be.

    Let’s face it, although a majority of men who get into the pickup scene could do alright if they achieved some things that are actually pretty difficult to achieve… there are also some no-hopers (maybe I am in this group?). These guys can be pretty obstinate in refusing to give up on the dream that they can fake being an attractive man rather than just getting on with achieving that.

    I suppose a related question is – how much negative effect do these guys have on the guys who could actually do something?

  4. MikeG says:

    This post basically goes back to what you wrote earlier(I think you wrote this)….basically women do not fuck guys below them. This is probably one of the least thought out areas based on 2 facts

    1. Most guys can’t give an accurate assessment of where they are stand

    2. Most guys don’t want to face the reality that the hot women they want rarely fuck guys below them on these scales.

    I thought about what you wrote today and quickly wrote down a list of guys I know who have serious girlfriends or are married. The results are pretty much spot on from your list.

    My one friend is a 5 at best. All of his serious girlfriends are around a HB2 or 3. Basically fat girls from broken homes and he essentially treats these girls like shit. Thats always been his thing and he could obviously never get away with that from an HB5.

    Another friend is a 7.5. 6’2″, decent looking and in turn is married to a 6.5. Great girl but will shit test him a little and he could never get away with walking all over her like the above guy.

    Another friend is the interesting story because he was an 8(semi pro athlete at the time) and he dated a solid 5’8″ HB9 who did part time modeling. This was the first girl out all the girlfriends that owned him. She shit tested the hell out of him. All the rest of the girls he dated were at least a point below him and were much easier for him to deal with.

    Another guy I knew is the classic average joe who gets the girl a few points above him by sheer luck. He one of those guys where everyone says “How did he get her?”. Hes a 5 at best and she’s probably like a HB7.5 easily. How did he get her? Pure luck of happening to work at the same store when they were in high school. If he was born in any other town or work and other store he would statistically be married to a HB4 or HB3.

    As I went through guys in my head it was basically most guys are with girls that are 1 to 2 points below them. The guys who were 8s usually were with HB7s. The 6s were with HB5s or 4s. Everything was usually within 2 points. Then I went through my history and all of the woman who ended pursuing me through my social circles were all 2 to 3 points below me(i never dated any of them just one night stand things).

    • Rusty says:

      I don’t think it’s fair to use existing relationships as a measure of whether girls will fuck guys below them.

      I believe guys can fuck girls more attractive than them (usually only 1-2 points higher max), but to be in a relationship with a more attractive girl would be extremely hard work. Guys are just not prepared to put up with that (usually) and so the majority are going to ‘date down’.

      Add to that the inaccurate self assessment of most guys and I believe is probably more down to the men ‘willing’ to date down rather than women not being able to.

  5. Dosman says:

    This is one of honest post I read in a while, I’m glade Socialkenny shared this link. I once wrote on his blog: “looks are like catalyst.” See,they might not get you too far but they ignite that initial sparks.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s