OKCupid study shows women say 80% of men are "below average" looking

[Chirri]

Women (particularly in America) have their choice of men... we literally throw ourselves at their feet.

Basically, they can pick and choose any guy they want... men - OTOH - do not have such a choice.

What's the longest a woman here ever gone being single? 6 months? I've known guys (including myself) who have gone for decades without a single date.

Some cities actually have better odds for one sex or the other. What was it, Manhattan had an overabundance of women, so competition to get a man was higher for female residents. That means the men had their choice of women.

We're not spread evenly across the world, we average out.

I'd also ask whether it's a good or bad thing to be rated particularly highly by women - women are considered less likely to pursue men, generally speaking. If a woman thinks a man is scorching hot to look at, the odds of her being willing to pursue him (or even respond to him, if you read the article) drop significantly. It's never nice to hear that someone else thinks you're a total troll to look at, but generally speaking women don't want someone super eye catching (that means more women constantly working to take him away from her, more work to make themselves appear "worthy" of him, more work to ensure that he doesn't get lured in by below average looking women willing to do literally anything for a chance in the sack with him).

I wonder how the women of okcupid would judge one another?

[Thetruth1400]

Well, if that is the case, then I don't want to hear women bitching about the pressure to look good by men, because clearly they are as vapid and shallow as us.

More so by a vast majority based on those charts.

[starlord]

I wonder how the women of okcupid would judge one another

on a scale of
|trash|---------|fat|---------|skank|---------|slut|-----------|me|

---------- Post added 2012-11-14 at 11:13 PM ----------

More so by a vast majority based on those charts.

the charts showed that women were more likely to go for the ugly guys, though. men mostly went for the hottest girls.

[Laize]

But this isn't a study on all men everywhere, it's a study on all men on OKCupid. Saying 80% of all men on OKCupid are ugly (which, given the nature of dating sites, is an actual possibility) is not the same as saying 80% of all men are ugly.

The sample size on OKCupid is (and was, even at the time) well over 3 million members.

[Deleted]

They didn't use just 4 guys. They used samples of hundreds. The 4 they showed were just representative of their groups.

I don't mean to brag, but in that case I'm definitely not part of the 80% being below average.

Somehow I have the feeling that the guys on that site aren't a good representation of guys in real life. Or perhaps it's simply the American population that is drastically uglier than the rest of the world.

[Laize]

on a scale of
|trash|---------|fat|---------|skank|---------|slut|-----------|me|

It's been my continued (and undisputed) understanding through several women that this is, in fact, the case.

One put it pretty succinctly when she said "Women secretly hate almost all other women".

---------- Post added 2012-11-15 at 07:22 AM ----------

I don't mean to brag, but in that case I'm definitely not part of the 80% being below average.

Somehow I have the feeling that the guys on that site aren't a good representation of guys in real life. Or perhaps it's simply the American population that is drastically uglier than the rest of the world.

I have no reason to think the sample of guys would be any less accurate than the sample of girls.

[Deleted]

But this isn't a study on all men everywhere, it's a study on all men on OKCupid. Saying 80% of all men on OKCupid are ugly (which, given the nature of dating sites, is an actual possibility) is not the same as saying 80% of all men are ugly.

Exactly what I was trying to say. It's definitely possible that the guys using that website aren't representative.

[PizzaSHARK]

The sample size on OKCupid is (and was, even at the time) well over 3 million members.

Three million out of roughly three and a half billion.

[guff]

Easy to solve:

*80% of the men on OKCupid are below average looking (from the OKCupid stats)
*50% of all men are below average looking (the definition of average)
=> There exists a population without a profile on OKCupid that are above average looking. If they signed up on OKCupid, then the percentage in the first premise would drop (until either more above average looking men are signed up than below average, or the entire world is signed up to OKCupid).

Which is kind of obvious.

You are talking about the median, which is different.

Here is an example you can look at:
take the numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 50, 100. Calculate the average, and tell me how many percent of the numbers in the list are below average.


So, it just means that women (from that magazine's readers) think "above average" looks are just THAT much better.

[Laize]

Three million out of roughly three and a half billion.

....

I want you to consider what you've said there. Are you calling a sample drawn from a 3+ million member base "inaccurate"? I want you to think about that before we go down this road because I don't see an ending to such a conversation that includes you not looking like a fool.

[StationaryHawk]

So does that mean that the men who look below average are now the average? That's fine, I guess.

Three million out of roughly three and a half billion.

Statistics are not typically drawn using the entire population.

[Thefatness]

I met my wife on Ok Cupid 2 years ago. She is super hot, IMO, and when I messaged her I figured I would never even get a response, boy was I wrong. I think it's natural for there to be less attractive guys on the online dating sites. The confident good looking guys don't need to use the internet to find girlfriends.

[Gheld]

inb4 the whole "men are shallow too lulz".

Men are typically most judgmental about a woman's weight, which is something that the individual does in fact have at least some control over, even when that control is limited by certain genetic factors.

Moreover, a lot of men would still consider having a relationship with a woman they found to be overweight if she had other redeeming qualities.

Women on the other hand, are shallow about a man's height. Which is something coded directly into his DNA, and is 100% unchangeable, save for surgery so grievously awful that it wouldn't even be worth having (they have to break your legs, span them, with brackets, and then after the bone regrows into the space, the process has to be repeated). If a guy is not tall enough for a woman's taste, typically a woman won't even consider friend-zoning a guy, you are essentially a ghost at this point.

And moreover a woman's expectations of a guys height is usually above the average height for the local male population.

So I'm not even trolling here, (way) less than 50% of guys have a chance of getting with the beauty of their dreams. For over 50% of men, the only way to find a partner is to make below average women feel like they couldn't find anybody better.

All this I know because I get invited to a lot of 'girl talk'. due to my expansive insight (which bridges the gender barrier) into the game of courtship.

[MasterHamster]

How can 80% be "below average"?

[PizzaSHARK]

....

I want you to consider what you've said there. Are you calling a sample drawn from a 3+ million member base "inaccurate"? I want you to think about that before we go down this road because I don't see an ending to such a conversation that includes you not looking like a fool.

You're apparently trying to imply that the opinions of however many hundreds or thousands of people who responded to the poll, based solely off of a single website, is enough to apply to the entirety of the male half of the entire human population.

[Laize]

You're apparently trying to imply that the opinions of however many hundreds or thousands of people who responded to the poll, based solely off of a single website, is enough to apply to the entirety of the male half of the entire human population.

Not the entirety. It IS a psych study after all. But definitely enough to call it true for the huge majority. Probably at least 80% :P

[PizzaSHARK]

Not the entirety. It IS a psych study after all. But definitely enough to call it true for the huge majority. Probably at least 80% :P

Yeah, 3 million is a plenty large sample size for Western men, but all men everywhere? :P

[v2prwsmb45yhuq3wj23vpjk]

Yeah, 3 million is a plenty large sample size for Western men, but all men everywhere? :P

Yes, it is a large enough size. Whether it is applicable to men from other places due to factors like cultural perceptions is another thing.

[Gilian]

Apparently men are overall just butt ugly :P.

---------- Post added 2012-11-15 at 10:14 AM ----------

Exactly what I was trying to say. It's definitely possible that the guys using that website aren't representative.

So why doesn't that count for women?

[Powerogue]

It's all about who they compare people to. Including supermodels, actors and actresses throws it off dramatically, even if subconsciously. The average person is much uglier than they are.