Looksmaxxing Forum Logo

Join 75,000+ Looksmaxxing Members!

Register a FREE account today to become a member. Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox.

Register Log in
  • DISCLAIMER: DO NOT ATTEMPT TREATMENT WITHOUT LICENCED MEDICAL CONSULTATION AND SUPERVISION

    This is a public discussion forum. The owners, staff, and users of this website ARE NOT engaged in rendering professional services to the individual reader. DO NOT use the content of this website as an alternative to personal examination and advice from licenced healthcare providers. DO NOT begin, delay, or discontinue treatments and/or exercises without licenced medical supervision. Learn more

Hypothesis Hierarchy of Attraction

genio
genio

genio

tren and forget | 120131
VIP
Contributor ★★★
Reputable ★★★
Established ★★★
Joined
Apr 8, 2026
Messages
21,321
Solutions
69
Online time
1mo 6d
Reputation
51,739
Men:
0. STATUS!!!
1. Face
2. Neurotypicality
(Interchangeable w/ Face)
3. Height
4. Money
5. Frame/Physique
6. Voice
7. Charisma
8. Posture
9. Scent
10. Personality
11. Morals

Women:
1. Merely existing
2. Face (optional)
3. Personality (optional)
4. Morals (optional)

In MY humble opinion. Credit to @rem for the idea.
 
Register to hide this ad
genio said:
Men:
0. STATUS!!!
1. Face
2. Neurotypicality
(Interchangeable w/ Face)
3. Height
4. Money
5. Frame/Physique
6. Voice
7. Charisma
8. Posture
9. Scent
10. Personality
11. Morals

Women:
1. Merely existing
2. Face (optional)
3. Personality (optional)
4. Morals (optional)

In MY humble opinion. Credit to @rem for the idea.
Click to expand...
Hight is looking a little low on that list
 
genio said:
@Dandelions @icnone @junebug
Click to expand...
I have been summoned
genio said:
Men:
0. STATUS!!!
1. Face
2. Neurotypicality
(Interchangeable w/ Face)
3. Height
4. Money
5. Frame/Physique
6. Voice
7. Charisma
8. Posture
9. Scent
10. Personality
11. Morals

Women:
1. Merely existing
2. Face (optional)
3. Personality (optional)
4. Morals (optional)

In MY humble opinion. Credit to @rem for the idea.
Click to expand...
IMO the issue of creating a hierarchy of attraction is that it is different for all people, and it's nonlinear. For instance I would put personality and morals above face always, but depending on the exact situation personality might outweigh morals and vice versa.

genio said:
0. STATUS!!!
Click to expand...
Status is such a general term though, like it can encompass wealth, how many friends you have, what social "class" you fit into, etc

genio said:
1. Face
2. Neurotypicality
(Interchangeable w/ Face)
Click to expand...
Nah it's not really interchangeable. A chad with really bad social skills is going to be competing a few PSL tiers down.
genio said:
3. Height
4. Money
Click to expand...
Depends on the woman. Some may prioritize money as number 1, others may prioritize height more.
 
icnone said:
I have been summoned

IMO the issue of creating a hierarchy of attraction is that it is different for all people, and it's nonlinear. For instance I would put personality and morals above face always, but depending on the exact situation personality might outweigh morals and vice versa.


Status is such a general term though, like it can encompass wealth, how many friends you have, what social "class" you fit into, etc


Nah it's not really interchangeable. A chad with really bad social skills is going to be competing a few PSL tiers down.

Depends on the woman. Some may prioritize money as number 1, others may prioritize height more.
Click to expand...
Status pill most brootal js be in a good social group
Ok a chad with really bad social skills is still getting women like an ltn who’s neurotypical
 
TrueFakeCel said:
You think a sociable avrage hight guy has higher SMV that a tall average-talking guy
Click to expand...
Its not that being sociable is law
When i put neurotypicality i mean the absence of neurodivergence
Being neurodivergent is fucking death its definitely more important than height
 
genio said:
Status pill most brootal js be in a good social group
Click to expand...
Okay, I can agree with that. From my understanding, your social circle heavily impacts what kind of people you meet. If you have many friends, you can meet friends of their friends, and continue growing your social circle. Furthermore, you can meet potential partners that way (e.g. you might vibe with a sister of a friend). Meanwhile, if you don't go outside (zero social circle) you aren't finding a gf any time soon.

But I don't think social circle itself is an attractive factor, but rather a factor that can help you find a partner. If you were to plot social status vs romantic success, then yes, you'd find there is a positive correlation but correlation is not equal to causation.
 
icnone said:
Okay, I can agree with that. From my understanding, your social circle heavily impacts what kind of people you meet. If you have many friends, you can meet friends of their friends, and continue growing your social circle. Furthermore, you can meet potential partners that way (e.g. you might vibe with a sister of a friend). Meanwhile, if you don't go outside (zero social circle) you aren't finding a gf any time soon.

But I don't think social circle itself is an attractive factor, but rather a factor that can help you find a partner. If you were to plot social status vs romantic success, then yes, you'd find there is a positive correlation but correlation is not equal to causation.
Click to expand...
It is causation
Being well respected in a big friend group will easily get you a gf
Women are attracted to status whether that be large scale fame or respect within friend groups
Thats why celebrity mtns get treated like chadlites
 
genio said:
Men:
0. STATUS!!!
1. Face
2. Neurotypicality
(Interchangeable w/ Face)
3. Height
4. Money
5. Frame/Physique
6. Voice
7. Charisma
8. Posture
9. Scent
10. Personality
11. Morals

Women:
1. Merely existing
2. Face (optional)
3. Personality (optional)
4. Morals (optional)

In MY humble opinion. Credit to @rem for the idea.
Click to expand...
ok i have all of those ones
im going to go ouside and they shall all flock to me
 
genio said:
Men:
0. STATUS!!!
1. Face
2. Neurotypicality
(Interchangeable w/ Face)
3. Height
4. Money
5. Frame/Physique
6. Voice
7. Charisma
8. Posture
9. Scent
10. Personality
11. Morals

Women:
1. Merely existing
2. Face (optional)
3. Personality (optional)
4. Morals (optional)

In MY humble opinion. Credit to @rem for the idea.
Click to expand...
Dick size not even mentioned
 
genio said:
Replaces status bc dick is life
Click to expand...
IMG_0916.webp
 
genio said:
Men:
0. STATUS!!!
1. Face
2. Neurotypicality
(Interchangeable w/ Face)
3. Height
4. Money
5. Frame/Physique
6. Voice
7. Charisma
8. Posture
9. Scent
10. Personality
11. Morals

Women:
1. Merely existing
2. Face (optional)
3. Personality (optional)
4. Morals (optional)

In MY humble opinion. Credit to @rem for the idea.
Click to expand...
Putting status in its own zero tier is clever since its situational


Genghis khan had the highest smv because of status, but most of us are zero status bums regardless so it doesn’t matter for most
 
genio said:
There is exceptions to everything
Click to expand...
Well, the way I see it, preferences are a probability distribution, and this goes into the age old problem of how to describe a probability distribution as simply as possible. Yes, in almost every distribution there will be outliers, but what matters more here is how the majority of elements are distributed. Your original statement was:
genio said:
Women are attracted to status whether that be large scale fame or respect within friend groups
Click to expand...
How will you quantify and prove that?
 
icnone said:
Well, the way I see it, preferences are a probability distribution, and this goes into the age old problem of how to describe a probability distribution as simply as possible. Yes, in almost every distribution there will be outliers, but what matters more here is how the majority of elements are distributed. Your original statement was:

How will you quantify and prove that?
Click to expand...
Idk prob studies
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (Looksmaxxers: 0, Guests: 1)
Back
Top