Black Pill Dating Theory?

[FrustratedFool]

From my limited exposure to BP ideas, it seems that once you strip away the self-pity and misogynic rhetoric, what you're left with is the idea that physically attractive people have a much easier time dating than physically unattractive people, and that beautiful people will be treated better in various ways than ugly people.

To me, that seems just a blindingly obvious truth. And yet I see many people argue against it saying that physical appearance doesn't matter, which to be seems an obvious lie.

Is it as simple as it appears to me?

[Ahriman]

I'm an ugly fat fuck and I never get laid at all, haven't had sex in years.

[FrustratedFool]

I'm an ugly fat fuck and I never get laid at all, haven't had sex in years.

Makes sense.

[zebo-the-fat]

For me, physical appearance is the initial attraction, but it's what ia between the ears that makes it last. I could never stay with a woman who is stupid and uneducated.

[Belacqua]

From my limited exposure to BP ideas, it seems that once you strip away the self-pity and misogynic rhetoric, what you're left with is the idea that physically attractive people have a much easier time dating than physically unattractive people, and that beautiful people will be treated better in various ways than ugly people.

To me, that seems just a blindingly obvious truth.  And yet I see many people argue against it saying that physical appearance doesn't matter, which to be seems an obvious lie.

Is it as simple as it appears to me?

I'm sure that visually appealing people are attractive to more people. 


However I don't think it's as simple as some people being born with good looks and some people not. A lot of what makes visual appeal has to do with style, with confidence, with behavior, etc. If someone makes an effort to be well put together, takes care of himself, and comes across as likable, then chances are he will be remembered as attractive-looking. 

Several times I've read biographies of people who are described as gorgeous and charming, and then when you find a photo of that person they look completely normal. For example Oscar Wilde's boyfriend, who got him into so much trouble. He's described by all his friends as being a Greek god, but in the photos he's about a 7 at best. 

Likewise the movie stars who seem preternaturally beautiful on screen, but if you see a candid shot taken on the street they're no better than the girl at the local supermarket. 

I think a lot of guys who come across as a 3 could probably get up to an 8 with the proper stylist, coaching, and counseling. 

Plus there are objectively ugly-looking men (Sartre, Stravinsky) who bedded many women who were out of their league looks-wise due to other kinds of appeal. Stravinsky had wonderful style in clothes and old-world manners, and of course talent is an aphrodisiac.

[FrustratedFool]

For me, physical appearance is the initial attraction, but it's what ia between the ears that makes it last. I could never stay with a woman who is stupid and un educated.

Makes sense. But as far as the OP goes, the key bits are the phrases 'initial attraction' and 'stay'.

[FrustratedFool]

@Belacqua

Yes, attractiveness is not 100% down to physical aspects. But I'd argue that a large proportion of it is. Consider how many of the things you listed are connected to physical body/face appearance: it is much easier to look good/stylish if you're tall, slim and pretty than if you're short and fat and ugly. There's a reason why most models and actors are the way they are. Confidence comes from being treated a certain way and from prior success; people bullied or rejected from childhood for being fat or ugly etc are far less likely to have confidence. Even grooming and hygiene can often be tied to mental health, and if someone has body image issues or depression through loneliness and bullying they're far less likely to groom adequately.

And, on top of all this, there's the halo effect, where positive personality traits are ascribed with bias based upon physicality - height is connected to authority and confidence, like a deep voice; creepiness or evil is connected to facial shape or disability; and so on. Sometimes when people think they're being attracted to someone's confidence they're mistakenly attributing their attraction away from the unconscious bias towards height, health, slimness, facial symmetry and the like.

As for people like Satre who was not exactly a looker to say the least, we are talking about outliers who overcompensated for their looks by being a world class talent and having unapproachable status, as well as likely unearthly charisma. And it was in a previous less image saturated age.

In short, I agree that looks aren't everything. But I do think they are vital in terms of a minimum threshold (no one dates someone they find physically repulsive), and they are far more influential than many suppose. Looks aren't the be all end all, but they are likely the single most determinant factor in someone's dating life, and likely important in life success in general (promotions, friendships, interpersonal judgements, opportunities, etc).

[Rev. Rye]

I've done a LOT of reading on incels, and the way FF is describing the blackpill is perhaps a bit steelmanned. That more attractive people will be treated better than less attractive people is pretty obvious. But that's not what they consider the blackpill. By the time it becomes the Blackpill, this fact goes from just a trivial fact of human nature to something more all-encompassing and bizarre.

Namely, that if you don't fit a certain level of attractiveness, there's zero chance of getting laid. Except maybe if the woman's reached a point where she's too old to just get sex with any hot guy she wants and needs someone to provide for (and possibly cheat on for whatever reason.) This is something they call the BetaBuxx theory.

And how do they react to this? Well, a healthy worldview would find some way around it. I can remember Randy Pausch's Last Lecture. At one point, he talked about how, when he was a kid, everyone wanted to be an astronaut. But he couldn't be one because he wore glasses, so he thought further on it and he decided he just wanted to float in zero gravity. So, he eventually decided he wanted to go on the Vomit Comet, which he did. And with my experience with Alison, I decided I wanted some romantic companionship, but not have to deal with other people, so I bought a Dakimakura and gave her the visage of the girl so beautiful she makes Time Stands Still from Big Fish. Incel communities, especially ones that identify as blackpilled, absolutely reject this approach. With the blackpill approach, Randy Pausch would ultimately just spend the rest of his life stewing in anger at NASA, perhaps eventually shooting up Cape Canaveral or Houston over this non-existent slight because he never got to go up into space and never even voiced a desire to do so to anyone who could make that happen, and if he did so, the communities he festered in would lionise him as a patron saint.

And further making it more confusing is I don't even know what exactly these communities want anymore. A companion, perhaps, but what kind? Sometimes they want any woman, some want an uber-hot woman, sometimes they want a tradwife, sometimes they want a child they can use as a rapeslave (and one post I found on Inceltear seemed to believe that it was reasonable for a NEET to expect a girlfriend between 12 and 18 who makes $300k per year), and sometimes, they've reached the point where they're so radicalised that they no longer even want a woman and get off on pure hate.

[Belacqua]

@Belacqua

Yes, attractiveness is not 100% down to physical aspects.  But I'd argue that a large proportion of it is. Consider how many of the things you listed are connected to physical body/face appearance: it is much easier to look good/stylish if you're tall, slim and pretty than if you're short and fat and ugly.  There's a reason why most models and actors are the way they are.  Confidence comes from being treated a certain way and from prior success; people bullied or rejected from childhood for being fat or ugly etc are far less likely to have confidence.  Even grooming and hygiene can often be tied to mental health, and if someone has body image issues or depression through loneliness and bullying they're far less likely to groom adequately.  

And, on top of all this, there's the halo effect, where positive personality traits are ascribed with bias based upon physicality - height is connected to authority and confidence, like a deep voice; creepiness or evil is connected to facial shape or disability; and so on.  Sometimes when people think they're being attracted to someone's confidence they're mistakenly attributing their attraction away from the unconscious bias towards height, health, slimness, facial symmetry and the like.

As for people like Satre who was not exactly a looker to say the least, we are talking about outliers who overcompensated for their looks by being a world class talent and having unapproachable status, as well as likely unearthly charisma.  And it was in a previous less image saturated age.  

In short, I agree that looks aren't everything.  But I do think they are vital in terms of a minimum threshold (no one dates someone they find physically repulsive), and they are far more influential than many suppose.  Looks aren't the be all end all, but they are likely the single most determinant factor in someone's dating life, and likely important in life success in general (promotions, friendships, interpersonal judgements, opportunities, etc).

Yes, I'm sure you're right. Raw looks aren't everything, but they go a long way. And it does make sense that unattractiveness can become a vicious circle -- a high school kid who gets teased for his appearance is likely to lose confidence and, in this way, become even less charming. 

I suppose that realistically, most guys look about average, and what comes across as ugliness is to some extent something they can work on. Like they can't be Brad Pitt but they can be presentable. The unpleasant-looking kid from high school could probably clean up pretty well if he doesn't give up.

A while back a young man from America came to visit me here in Japan, and it was clear that he was very interested in getting a Japanese girlfriend. He is not bad looking, but every day he wore the unofficial uniform of his college: cargo shorts and a T-shirt. Plus he slouched when he walked. People dress up more in Japan, though, so I did my best to give him a make-over to bring out his best look. But there were issues with his confidence, and he somehow felt that he deserved to dress down, or that it would be dishonest of him to put some thought into his hair style. 

I mean, it's shallow to judge by looks, but it makes some sense that a man who can't be bothered to take care of himself, or put in any effort at all, may have other issues that would scare away potential lovers. Even us plain guys can show the world that we haven't given up.

At my first university there was a brilliant grad student who got a lot of attention. She was tall and confident and dressed well back in the days when the rest of us wore mostly jeans and army surplus. In photos it's clear that she has quite a plain-looking face, but she made the impression of a stand-out. (It became a running joke that every famous person who came to campus to speak would make a pass at her.) She ended up marrying one of the richest men in America and currently lives across the street from the Metropolitan Museum, so she can walk to work when she's curating an exhibition. So people think of her as very attractive, but that to me is more about brain-power and aura, rather than raw good looks.

A lot of life is just style. The choices we make about how we present ourselves and how we greet the world do tell people a lot.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Boru