Is really "attractive looking" an individualistic opinion?

Post Reply New Topic

A while ago I did a regional tinder experiment:
viewtopic.php?t=275336

and it was repeated later (I tried Meghreb and Europe), I got exactly the same results as ~4 months ago: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=283378&start=450.

Just to explain what's tinder to those who don't know: it's a kind of Hot or not app, you see a pic of someone of the opposite sex and you either tap like or not then you see the next guy/girl....etc, the person who likes you back will be a match and you can chat with her/him.

I get loads of matches in Meghreb and they often call me "beau gosse"; and same in most Asian countries; by loads of Matches I mean by 100+ in few days, you can see numbers in first link.

This is a screenshot when I faked my location as Morocco:



My results can be summed as:
-Insane number of matches in Meghreb (Morocco, Tunisia, Algeria); like 60+ out of 100 in second tryout in Morocco.
-Similarly insane number of matches in Asian countries.
-Horribly low number of matches in White-dominated countries, even some Zeros in countries like Germany and Ukraine although there's a high Tinder activity there (log histories on their profile show last x hours, last x minutes active...etc), got only few matches with Asian-looking and darkish girls.
-In mixed areas like the some states in US, I get only few matches with minorities of people of color, Blacks, Arabs and Persians in particular despite most profiles swiped weren't of those, the very few blondes I got matched with seem to have Italian fetish because they all thought I am Italian.

Imagine the impact difference: If I was in Meghreb or Asian country I would be have the choice to date someone I pick (out of the many matches who btw...always respond to messages) every weekend and I would have to filter through and that's from the Tinder app only, while if I was in Ukraine or Germany, I would be thankful with whatever Match I get there because virtually almost none is liking me back there.


However, this thread is not to discuss Tinder again, but:
My tinder experiments made me question the women's degree of individualism when it comes to what they find attractive (and what's not). (men are probably the same according to this okcupid experiment http://jonmillward.com/blog/attraction- ... xperiment/)

Doesn't this experiment expose that people are NOT that individualistic when it comes to their taste in the opposite sex? I mean how else can you explain that the same person is seen highly attractive by the majority of one community but totally not in another?
As if each community follow some bible of what's attractive and what's not they all collectively follow , it's so insane. As if the local culture and others' tastes is the biggest factor in this.

I mean, if t was like 10+ or few matches out 100 all across all the countries, then that may mean that opinions are individualist.

Imagine if one is born and living in an area where he's not seen conventionally attractive by the majority (often almost all according to this experiment, it's either all or none) then he might really end up alone.

So yeah, ladies, I really now doubt your individualism when it comes to what you call "my type" and "not my type"; according to this experiment, it should be phrased "You're (not) what_the_majority_of_women_here's type" or simply "You are (Not) OUR type" - Borg hive-mind style ....I really doubt how this "My" is really My.

I did a similar experiment in Aspie Quiz a while back, but with men. It turned out that men of all ages preferred women in their late teens, and that a few women received much higher scores than others. So I think this kind of proved that men's preferences are not individual either.

So I guess the whole claim that "women (and men) don't have a hive mind" , which is the most common argument used against someone talking some stereotype about a gender, is not entirely true.

And I wonder if this is limited to looks preference only.

This okc experiment kinda proves men's (and women's) preference aren't individual:

http://jonmillward.com/blog/attraction- ... xperiment/

They are all drawn to same one or two persons.

For me personality is number 1. But naturally looks also matter. When I responded to my bf profile it was because I liked his eyes and smile, but mostly because his profile information made me curious about him. For me when someone is nice I see them as more attractive and vice versa.

I don't know why it would be such a difference for you in the number of responses...
Sometimes you see people (couples) that look different from each other and sometimes you see couples were they look like they are brother and sister or father and daughter but that is a different topic...

I think that there is probably an ideal beauty in every country and it differs between countries. For instance if you ever looked at miss world or such crap then you notice that there is a difference in features, if you compare all the blondes against each other and then all the brunette against each other, there is a difference. I think like that for instance miss USA tends to look like a Barbie doll, kind of a boring beauty. I like more interesting beauty… if that makes sense. I think the same thing is true for men.

The first picture is miss USA and second miss Norway, both blondes, white teeth and so on but the first one seems so empty and boring to me. The second girl has a more interesting beauty. Or atleast I think so. I don't know if I'm making sense now. But is it now learned behaviour? Do I think that miss USA is boring because I'm not American and I have another preference of beauty, maybe an American will think that the first girl is more beautiful? Is it because of culture or does it really come from oneself? I think it is a question of many factors that determine what one perceives as beautiful/attractive. It can come from ones family, society, media, nature but you also have something of your own ideas , so it's a mix of all these things, or so I believe. But if I learned that one of the girls is a total ass, than I would see them as uglier than they are...

And attractivness changes, what is attractive today is not the same as 100 years ago.

I forgot to mention the image rating test I did back in 2007. It showed that neurotypical people would rate other neurotypical people higher than neurodiverse (Aspies) people would rate neurotypical people, but that there was no difference for how neurodiverse (Aspies) would get rated.

http://www.rdos.net/eng/aspeval/imgrate1.htm
http://www.rdos.net/eng/aspeval/imgrate2.htm

This seemed to point to NTs using looks (or possibly familiarity, facial expressions) more than Aspies.

I think beuty is like fashion it gets recycled...