From a standpoint of evolutionary psychology...

From a standpoint of evolutionary psychology, why do women value looks/aesthetics and strength/muscle mass more than creative problem solving?

To give you an example, a women will likely find more attractive and swipe right on a tall muscular person without proper career aspects than a not so muscular, not so tall guy who works as a programmer and actually made tinder(for example)

Surely problem solving was just as useful for the survival of kin as physical strength.

Other urls found in this thread:

arxiv.org/pdf/1607.01952v1.pdf
newsroom.ucla.edu/releases/Lift-More-Weights-Get-More-Mates-8069?RelNum=8069
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

It's pretty obvious.

>o give you an example, a women will likely find more attractive and swipe right on a tall muscular person without proper career aspects than a not so muscular, not so tall guy who works as a programmer and actually made tinder(for example)
Because alpha fucks and beta bucks.

And who would you prefer, a qt 3.14 gf who's sweet vs a 5'2 400 lbs girl?

Be honest man. We're all shallow.

roasties are disgusting sub human pea brained animals that should be genocided, that's why

Girls don't value strength nearly as much as they value pure facial attractiveness. And facial attractiveness correlates with high intelligence. So your argument relies on a false premise.

You'll notice that most successful programmers/"nerd" types are actually quite good looking.

Collectively I'd say they are average or slightly below average at best facially, but there are few truly "ugly" people in the mix.

But I also think being a DYEL lanklet is a huge turnoff.

That's just a few sociopathic women who manipulate two human beings at once and basically just use them to cover their needs without actually emotionally bonding with them.

>computer programmers create tinder which makes female access to chad easier than ever

lmao cucked by your own creation

My supremely anecdotal would agree with the lanklet aspect. Have a few lanky friends and I occasionally catch their girlfriends staring at my body when they are drunk (not even my face), I essentially have the brawny paper towels guy build where I'm burly but not lean enough for visible abs. I suppose it's like when I'm drunk around huge tits in a low cut shirt.

Hard to ignore preferences that signal health and wealth, whether culturally or biologically informed.

THEY CAN'T KEEP GETTING AWAY WITH IT

>To give you an example, a women will likely find more attractive and swipe right on a tall muscular person without proper career aspects than a not so muscular, not so tall guy who works as a programmer and actually made tinder(for example)

Prove it. Actual tinder data seems to show men are the shallow ones.

>Without bios, our male stock profiles received an average of 16 matches from women; this increases four-fold to 69 with a bio. The number of matches from men also increases, but far less substantially (by 58% on average)

>63% of messages sent by men occur within 5 minutes of the match taking place. This is only 18% for women

>The median message length sent by men is only 12 characters, compared to 122 from women. For men, 25% of message are under 6 characters (presumably “hello” or “hi”). Consequently, it is clear that little information is being imparted in opening conversations.

arxiv.org/pdf/1607.01952v1.pdf

I've noticed an influx of whiny permavirgin threads here lately. Why can't people keep their faggotry in R9K where it belongs?

Day of retribution is coming soon, roastie

Ignore them, this thread is productive.
No it isn't. I guess you can prove your strength easier than your wits, so it has an immediate effect.

How is it productive? The entire thread is based on a false premise you fucking clown. What data do you have that supports the notion that strength is more attractive to women then intelligence?

Coincides almost perfectly with the /pol/ spillover tides. Really makes you think.

You are delusional if you think otherwise.

p r o v e _ i t _ k i d d o

>/pol/ is full of sexually frustrated underemployed young white men

give this man a fields medal

Veeky Forums here, its a lot more to do with face, height and frame as well as a number of other mitigating factors. You can be Ronny Coleman but if your a 5,2 Manlet with a face only a mother could love then your shit out of luck. Muscles do help, but only a bit and more-so if your attractive in the aforementioned ways.

newsroom.ucla.edu/releases/Lift-More-Weights-Get-More-Mates-8069?RelNum=8069

>sad man who posts selfies for other sad men on the manliest sad man forum on the sad man site here

In my experience women care vastly more about your social status than your looks.

If you are well-liked by a lot of people, and have a prestigous job + make a lot of money, you can be average looking and still be successful with women.

They care to use you as a beta provider, for one night stands muscles are paramount.

So? Who gives a shit about one-night stands.

Maybe coz weak guys would get outcompeted by strong alphas anyway in intrasexual competition. Sexy son hypothesis maybe too. 2p from an a level in biology.

As opposed to men, who don't care about appearances at all, naturally.

What do I do if i look like Stallman but with shorter hair and no facial hair.

>you're a waitress at chilis
>23 yo
>you live in a shitty apartment that you can't pay for yourself
>you have a boyfriend
>hes not your type...unattractive/uninteresting/asshole
>if you dump him you'll be out on your ass or living with your parents
>which is slightly more acceptable at 24+ because your XX chromosomes but whatever shit sucks
its a survival instinct
i feel sorry for guys/girls who are stuck with their partner because of rent and/or have to crawl back to their ex to not be homeless or a loser

Shut your mouth you kike bastard, i-i-im very happy with my life! How much do you squat huh?!?!!

Women do value intelligence, but more to the "funny, reliable, and interesting" side than the "oh look I did good in school and know lots of stuff" kind. Ofcourse looks always comes first for anyone...or else i'd just buttfuck my male friends....but since im not physically attracted to them thats retarded

>You'll notice that most successful programmers/"nerd" types are actually quite good looking.
No, the FAMOUS ones are good looking.
When you look at high tier tech guys ( Gates, Jobs ) there is always a story about how they fucked over a friend who did the actual hard work.
Fuck your halo effect bullshit, you just don't pay attention to all the intelligent unattractive people. You mind is attracted to the attractive intelligent ones like a magnet giving you a confirmation bias.

Show me all the unattractive successful programmers for comparison. You can't, because THEY AREN'T THE ONES GETTING THEIR ATTRACTIVE FACES POSTED EVERYWHERE FOR MARKETING PURPOSES.

power > looks > money > strength > intelligence >>>>> muh above average intelligence