Your Looks and Your Inbox

November 17th, 2009 by Christian Rudder

This week we will confront an unfortunate truth of online dating: no matter how much time you spend polishing your profile, honing your IM banter, and perfecting your message introductions, it’s your picture that matters most.

We’re going to look at how your photos affect both the messages you get and how successful your own outgoing messages are. We all know that beautiful people are more successful daters, but let’s quantify by exactly how much.

To illustrate the exact spectrum of looks we’re talking about here, and to put some human faces on our discussion, I want to introduce a few photos of real OkCupid users. Here are two women near the top of our range.

[show men instead]

And here are two rated in the middle.

[show men instead]

As for photos at the bottom of the curve, it didn’t feel right to write someone and say “can I use you to illustrate the concept of ugliness on my blog?” so you’ll just have to extrapolate.

The above featured users have graciously agreed to let me post their pictures, so please don’t make them regret it. Funnily enough, I had to write about a dozen beautiful female users before anyone would even get back to me. Life imitates blog!

Anyhow, I know attractiveness is far from a universal concept, but maybe keep these folks in mind as we go through the data.

. . .

We’ll start with a simple line chart. The information I’ll present in this post is not normalized because, as we’ll see, it’s interesting how men and women evaluate looks differently.

Our chart shows how men have rated women, on a scale from 0 to 5. The curve is symmetric and surprisingly charitable: a woman is as likely to be considered extremely ugly as extremely beautiful, and the majority of women have been rated about “medium.” The chart looks normalized, even though it’s just the unfiltered opinions of our male users.

Given the popular wisdom that Hollywood, the Internet, and Photoshop have created unrealistic expectations of how a woman should look, I found the fairness and, well, realism, of this gray arc kind of heartening.

Now let’s superimpose the distribution of actual messages guys have sent:

When it comes down to actually choosing targets, men choose the modelesque. Someone like roomtodance
2/3 of male messages go to the top 1/3 of women.
above gets nearly 5 times as many messages as a typical woman and 28 times as many messages as a woman at the low end of our curve. Site-wide, two-thirds of male messages go to the best-looking third of women. So basically, guys are fighting each other 2-for-1 for the absolute best-rated females, while plenty of potentially charming, even cute, girls go unwritten.

The medical term for this is male pattern madness.

. . .

The female equivalent of the above chart shows a different bias:

As you can see from the gray line, women rate an incredible 80% of guys as worse-looking than medium. Very harsh. On the other hand, when it comes to actual messaging, women shift their expectations only just slightly ahead of the curve, which is a healthier pattern than guys’ pursuing the all-but-unattainable. But with the basic ratings so out-of-whack, the two curves together suggest some strange possibilities for the female thought process, the most salient of which is that the average-looking woman has convinced herself that the vast majority of males aren’t good enough for her, but she then goes right out and messages them anyway.

Just to illustrate that women are operating on a very different scale, here are just a few of the many, many guys we here in the office think are totally decent-looking, but that women have rated, in their occult way, as significantly less attractive than so-called “medium”:

Females of OkCupid, we site founders say to you: ouch! Paradoxically, it seems it’s women, not men, who have unrealistic standards for the “average” member of the opposite sex.

Finally, I just want to combine the two charts to emphasize how much fuller the inboxes of good-looking people get. I have scaled this graph to show multiples of messages sent to the lowest-rated people. For instance, the most attractive guys get 11× the messages the lowest-rated do. The medium-rated get about 4×.

This graph also dramatically illustrates just how much more important a woman’s looks are than a guy’s.

. . .

Now let’s take a look at how senders’ and recipients’ attractivenesses affect reply rates, not just the number of messages sent.

As you’d expect, more attractive people get more replies. And since they themselves get so many more messages than everyone else, they write back much less frequently. Here’s the graph for female senders, plotted in evenly-spaced “attractiveness groups.”

And here’s the one for male senders.

One interesting thing seems to be going on here: when the best-looking men write the worst-looking women, taste the rainbow,
of self-esteem issues
their message success rate takes a big hit. The knee-jerk response would be to somehow chalk it up to hunky spammers, but we very carefully control for that in these articles, and in any event why would better-looking girls be drastically more susceptible to it? It seems to be some kind of self-confidence thing.

As we did before, I’m going to consolidate the line charts to show just how your attractiveness changes how often your messages get responses.

. . .

This post has been the preamble to the larger discussion of “what makes a good profile?” We’ve spent a lot of time on OkTrends looking at messages, and since your profile is the other important place you express yourself, we thought it deserved the same treatment.

I wanted to address physical attractiveness right at the start, because obviously it’s a huge factor in how successful your profile is. In the upcoming posts in this series, we’re going to control for attractiveness, so that we can deliver real and useful advice for all the non-models out there.

We’ll look at, among other things: what makes a good picture (is it taken outside? inside? is it full-body? a head-shot? with your pet snake? what?), what kinds of self-presentation will get you the most messages (jokey? flirty? all business?), and how much profile information is too much. Should be good.

556 Responses to “Your Looks and Your Inbox”

  1. misfitgirl19 says:

    uh yea i still havnt gotten any mails……. picky ppl bleh

  2. Bergie says:

    … the women who rated the four men in the photos as being “unattractive” up there, are morons. You’re all lovely, don’t let a bunch of self-indulgent little girls tell you otherwise. 😉

  3. Squeedle says:

    @Bergie: Yeah I don’t know wtf these ladies are on. They all range from “cute” to “dollface”.

  4. ataraxic jess says:

    This is surprisingly through and quantifiable.
    Most women are far more shallow than they want you to think. Look at all the smart guys who are kept as just friends because some girl wants mr Big from sex and the city to walk by and make her his carrie.

    Girls are barking up the wrong tree with that one. The smart guys are always the way to go.

  5. Anon says:

    I take it back, upon further google searching, that’s all four of the founders. well done guys…

  6. anon says:

    Of course, it’s also just possible that the female rating respondents have a different baseline that they’re operating off of.

    Personally, i always feel a little odd rating photos on sites like hotornot. For me, 10 is achievable only if you’re a diety (literally, not figuratively), and 9 requires a level of emotional connection that i can’t get from a lone picture. Similarly, 1 means i can barely look at the picture without gagging (literally, not figuratively), and 2 probably means that you’re suffering from some profound deformity. So within my rating system, 5 is almost average, 6 is good, and 8 is awesome but a rarity. I keep wishing there were a system programmed to correct for differences like that–or better yet, one that corrected for personal differences in perspective and allowed for decimals.

  7. chloe says:

    Your analysis does not include some factors which would significantly alter your conclusions had you accounted for them. You asked the women about the attractiveness of the four men in the photos, not whether they were good looking. Yes, good looking is a factor in attractiveness, but by no means the only one or even the most important one. Your statistical analysis fails to acknowledge this.

    For instance, the first blond, definitely good looking, with out a doubt. However, the hand on his shoulder indicates that he always feels the wanted object of other women. I would go further and guess he enjoys feeling envious rivalry over him by multiple women. This may seem harsh, but my conclusion is reinforced by the fact that he posted this picture. He could have chosen to crop out the other person’s presence more carefully. His not doing so means he is deliberately saying something with that hand. He is intentionally looking for women who want to steal him away. Also, his styling, the hair in particular, while fashionable also indicates that he is what I call a “manboy” good for one roll in the hay, but even that will be unsatisfactory because guys who enjoy being the object of rivalry of multiple women need never learn how to please sexually. All a woman gets from this setup is that she can say she bedded a cute guy. So, good looking but not attractive. Lastly, manboys inevitably need taking care of and end up making their partners in some way or other their mommy and resent her for it at the same time. In other words, guys like this need to grow up to earn the attentions of a good woman.

    The second picture, I won’t go into the level of detail as with the first, but my rationale may be inferred from my above comments. This guy is all self involved teen angst gone a bit stale. Also probably likes to more wack off, alone or with others, than share good sex or mature intimacy. He too, is not ready for a good woman.

    The third is my favorite of the bunch, but based on this sole photo, um no. If there were other photos demonstrating a more emotionally developed self, I would consider him very interesting, attractive, even though his features do not have the symmetrical well proportioned conformation generally associated with a good looking face. His smile is natural and unselfconscious. He seems to address the camera directly, genuinely with happiness. I like this. I also, though I almost smell the sweaty jock smell of dirty socks, other men also sweaty–manly but not in a way I want to enjoy a nice sweaty man. I don’t know why, maybe it’s the green field behind him because he’s not even wearing sport clothes. I just have a strong wiff of jock. Like I said, though in combination with other supporting photos my head may be turned, but if those other photos show a partyer who lives in sports bars and talks almost exclusively of sports in the office–definitely not attractive.

    The last guy, I don’t like his smile. It seems to be a genuine (eye engagement) but it’s a smile like in third grade where the photographer has a few reliably effective jokes to get to the next kid–or someone cut the cheese, hand in armpit style. The angle of his head, the way his collar stiffly frames him like he his clothes wear him not him wearing the clothes all show a lack of articulate development. Maybe this guy is still in high school, at least he looks like it. Either way, he too, is not yet ready for a real woman.

    You did not give information on the women assigning attractiveness or not. I am most likely a bit older than your largest population by age, but I know these are the factors for most women at most ages used to say these guys are not attractive. I will say that as I have gotten older, good looking is less important, but attraction is more important than ever. I find that well intended, mature, and pulled together show in obvious and subtle ways and these generally do not correlate with “good looking”. In fact, like women, even more than in than is the case for women, good looking is almost a detractor. Good looking men have not had to work on their other attributes like a less good looking man, and that less good looking man is all the more attractive for it. My last word on the subject is that if men want to enjoy the company of an interesting, mature woman who can give to them sexually, emotionally, then they are going to have to show that in a manly way, their physical look should give some indication that they are interesting, mature and can give sexually and emotionally. These days, when women don’t want to but can survive without a man, men need to understand that we look at them with the same maybe harsh scrutiny that men look at us (yeah we already know about the top one third women getting two thirds of men’s overtures) but in many ways, we are more open to possibilities they don’t contemplate at all because they are thinking with their dicks mostly. (Sorry about the graphic language but it is effective short hand for the truth.)

  8. Chris says:

    What about measuring how women reply to taller vs shorter men? I think by not accounting for height in this mathematical examination, you’re missing a HUGE part of the picture. Women clearly message taller men and reply to taller men more than shorter men. Even short women. I suggest you track users’ height in regards to message reply rates, etc.

  9. ramonaandries says:

    Who is that sweet guy from the last picture ( first from the right)? I want him.

  10. Scotty says:

    This data is very enlightening and rather accurate from my experiences.
    I have come to realize that women only look at the pictures. They state that they want smart, a sense of humor, honesty, conversationalist, or a good person who is educated. My pictures range in date from Feb of 08 to Oct. of 09. They aren’t the best pictures in the world, but they are what I have. I don’t take pictures of myself, and don’t necessarily have a picture hungry friend. I have lost approximately 25 pounds, since the latest picture was taken, but I have left these images up to see what kind of feedback I get when I message someone. I don’t get many responses at all. It can make it hard to be assertive and message someone. If I do get a flirt or message that someone else initiated, I always respond. It is called manners, and being a good person.
    My profile shows my wit, my smarts, my ability to be a good person, my employment, and I rarely get responses to e-mails that I send. Women in general have the tendency to ignore who they don’t think is worthy, instead of responding in a nice way and being kind. They would rather ignore the person’s genuine interest in them, since he isn’t a model or meat head. I personally take being ignored, as more of an insult than a response of not interested. My e-mails follow the guidlines you say to use and are not demeaning or disrespectful. I have lost most of my faith in women, because of the shallow judgemental way I feel I have been treated. I think it borderlines on cruel. Luckily, I have enough self confidence and respect for myself that these attitudes no longer hurt my feelings. I just tell myself, that person told me early on that they weren’t worth my effort.
    I work in a female dominated world(nursing), and quiz my co-workers on a regular basis on what they look for in a guy, I seem to be very dateable, and have been approached many times by different people. So, I know I have what it takes. Personally, I don’t date co-workers, and joined this site to meet someone because I don’t like going out to the bar scene or feeling like a predator at the grocery store. I have met a couple of people, but it seems like they are long distances or their profile is copy and pasted from someone else’s.

  11. Jenny says:

    Well… I think one thing that is not considered is the average ability to present oneself by gender.

    I have gone through a bunch of profiles of both men and women near my age. I am straight – but the average wonan IS much more attractive. Let me explain. Woman are use to being judged by their looks. That is probably why in a ladies room at a restaurant there are always women fixing their makeup or touching up their hair, or seeing if their blouse is properly tucked in. Men are less use to being judged by looks. SO – when I go through men’s profiles I am much more likely to see a man scowling at the camera and wearing an old tee shirt. Even an “unattractive” woman tends to try to put on something she thinks complements her coloring or figure, does her hair, and smiles or looks at least non-violent (very imporant to women).

    I think a future experiment would be to have men judge other men’s profiles on a scale of 1 to 5 based on things like “does this guy look sane?”, “did he wash or brush his hair before this picture was taken?” “does he look like he does not live in his parent’s basement?” “Is the expression on his face pleasant?” Then, show the men a cross-section of women’s profiles and ask the same questions – not asking about attractivess per se – but presentation. I bet women would generally be presenting themselves (regardless of inate attractiveness) better.

  12. phyllis says:

    I have a bone to pick with okcupid, my fiance-i’ll give our screen names-darksumatra got one of this messages, While I, wontongirl_ haven’t. He still shows up on my matches but I don’t on his.
    We are an 80% match. Thank god he thinks of me more highly then the okc staff. We met through okc too! I’m laughing over this practice. It’s just pretty damn stupid. One how can you decide who someone finds attractive? What if you should him someone with freckles and he thought freckles were disturbing? hmmmmm.

  13. cowbells says:

    I agree with Chris. I’d love to see what the statistics look like when height is taken into consideration.

  14. Paragon19 says:

    Is there any chance you can create a tool so us users can see our rates of replies, messages, views, etc? I like knowing where I stand.

  15. p90x workout says:

    Hudrends of people will agree with your opinion whoever many other’s will not agree,but I appreciate your work here.

  16. daniil_basov says:

    I want to quote your post in my blog. It can?
    And you et an account on Twitter?

  17. evergreenstater says:

    I have a bit of a quirky picture on my okcupid profile. I like it very much. In my humble opinion, it captures a playful, happier side of me, as I rarely smile. In fact, I like all of the pictures I have on okcupid. The question is will someone else like them and how will that person respond to it. My pictures do not consist of me with my shirt off or something else of that nature. Recently, I have wondered if my pictures are part of the reason many people don’t respond to me. I like them the way they are. Finding someone else who doesn’t mind is another problem

  18. al2061 says:

    I wrote the staff robot and didn’t get a response. Is that because the staff robot is the hottest beast on the planet and I don’t rate? Or because the staff robot was experiencing self-confidence issues and didn’t want to write back? Or maybe it’s a sexual orientation thing and staffrobot doesn’t write to guys – if so, I’m crushed.

  19. Doodlebug says:

    If guys could take a clear picture that would be a great help. I have to say that pictures use the bathroom mirroror the at home cell phone pictures reveal more about a guy than even they want known. For example: is the room neat ordoes it have that more casual look. May I suggest you use a digital camera with a timer on it? It may take a few shots but a nice clear pictures would give your profile some nice nice attention. :-)

  20. axisofignorance says:

    If those gentlemen above are below average then the polling females are in some kind of dreamworld. A world where Brad Pitt delivers their mail and Johnny Depp is their Barista.

    Excuse me, Zooey Deschanel is at the door with my pizza.

  21. Chris says:

    I’ve got one gripe: why are all the candidates white? A sample from all races, build ect should have be studied. This effectively insinuates ‘if you don’t resemble these gals/guys you are the bottom of the barrel we didn’t want to include.’ There is no diversity in race, no noticable variation in body-type, etc. Poorly done guys. Be more inclusive next time.

  22. james says:

    We all know initial female-attractiveness depends 99% on her look/looks, and assume it matters as much to initial male-attractiveness. It doesn’t. Women judge men by a totally different scale, and the lower ratings reflect that.

    I think the most interesting bit here is that women rate men so low, but then go for the low-rated men too. Could it be she doesn’t feel like she deserves any better, or is it that she knows there’s a lot more to a man than his look/looks? Could it be she thinks the hottest guys are all “players” and get turned off by that before they know anything else about him?

    I say that’s what it is, judging by the experiences related to me by “professional bachelors”.

  23. somer says:

    I must be ugly, because I have yet to get any messages on here yet..I guess is shows how shallow men can be.

  24. Ben says:

    @chloe i hope every woman is not like this, for starters that hand in the first photo is clearly that of a male, and you seem to think people have photos taken with the specific intention of displaying a set criteria of information about themselves and everything in it is controlled. im sorry but i have photos up where my only thought on the matter is “how does my face look in this and do i look too skinny” the end. if someone like you came along i hate to think of all the ridiculously outlandish presumptive crap id be subjected to in your mind.

    @scotty you havent stated the people youre going for. you assume its their problem and not your own, how do we know you arent also superficial? are you messaging intelligent but less attractive people yourself? you better be or your comment holds no water.

    @chris get over it, you whingy bitch. its a randomised sample, youll find the word random implies they dont have to search for different ethnicities. besides, from what was said they took whoever responded to their messages, and how do you know they only messaged white people. and how do you know it was only white people who worked on this data. yeah, move on.

  25. escorts brunette says:

    Rather nice site you’ve got here. Thank you for it. I like such topics and everything connected to them. I would like to read a bit more on that blog soon.

    Hilary Smith

  26. Desertphile says:

    Interesting how the most attractive women get less messages than slightly less attractive. I’m not clear on how attractiveness was measured, however.

  27. Ayisha says:

    All I can say is, Damn, I didn’t realize how good-looking the founders were!

    But to account for the low ratings: I think attractiveness plays a different role for women than it does for men. And from my own unscientific experience, what we think is attractive in a picture is not what’s attractive in person. If you show a picture of some guy next to, say, Brad Pitt, most women will probably be brutal. But SO many guys are much more attractive in person than in a picture – it’s in the way they smile, in the subtle scent of their body, and particularly in HOW THEY TALK TO YOU. Something that a woman might term “ugly” in a picture is just “goofy” in person, and may be making her knees weak. So if women are being harsh on okc, it’s just because they haven’t figured that out yet.

    A few months after I joined, I started looking at matches’ profiles in a different way. Instead of looking at faces in a “hm, empirically, is he attractive” way, I started imagining if this were actually one of my friends, what would I think? Guess what: the more “attractive” sometimes became repulsive, and the more unexceptional became cuter. In a general way, most of the beautifully-sculpted model-men I meet in real life have no common interests or ways of being to me, or are interested in themselves, whereas the ones who are more average, I can imagine having real conversations with. I could be silly and ridiculous with the latter; I’d never measure up to the former.

    I think most women won’t lie about whether they find a picture attractive, but then they get a touch of realism, and think, “Yeah, but chances are, I’d think these guys were plenty attractive enough if they made me feel valued.”

    A final note. If we are around a guy enough, (see his picture enough?) even if we don’t have sex w/ him, he becomes about ten times more attractive. It’s called oxytocin.

  28. liz says:

    i’ve been told i’m one of the more attractive ones. but i don’t get a lot of emails. you can check me out and see what’s what if you want. user name is usd2bwild.

  29. phemmf8al says:

    Let’s see, how about asking someone, or even requiring one to post how much psychological “therapy” they have had ?

    Many people post on this site totally ignorant of how one who has taken psychology evaluates pics and language used to describe what they are and what they are looking for.
    Many people do not know how we “psychologists” can see trouble coming at record speed. So, we people discount lots of rhetoric, it’s their denials and their “what they don’t tell you” , that is so very revealing.
    Especially ,when you first start to write each other or IM, you delve into the world of their “upbringing” , and it goes downhill from there. They tell you,” It was great!” or they say, “I had a horrible childhood.” Both are telling, but neither one is quite truthful.The mental health of people meeting online is dangerous if you take their words as true . in that is the way they perceive it.

    It is also, the last frontier they want to discuss. Sadly, our adult bodies and minds, dispel rumors that just because one “looks” normal, or typical, they can be very far from any form of it. Their lives are ones of fantasy, played online. You can see why people who deal with reality dislike online dating sites. No one has to live with them, or see how they exist in the real world.

    The jury is still out on if “online” meeting is really a genuine way to go. It holds way too many secrets, and lots of time is wasted typing. Few speak to each other by phones anymore. Even fewer meet you in “real person”.

  30. jle says:

    What I would like to know is the number of women that rate pictures v. th number of men that rate the pictures. Of the people who rate the pictures, what was the attractivness factor? Do “more attractive people” rate pictures more harshly than other groups? there may be a lot more to this story than what we are getting right now.

  31. GMF says:

    @Chloe You’re a great example of why men think women are all on crack. You’ve looked at a photo of 4 perfectly normal guys and decided a bunch of stuff about them without having any proof whatsoever. I’ve met women like you. Actually I’ve met a lot of women like you. They say women decide in the first 10 seconds whether they want to date a guy or not. Ten seconds? You know if he’s financially viable, has good morals and will be faithful in 10 seconds? Or maybe you’re making choices based on absolutely nothing.

    I messaged a woman that had an extremely high compatibility with me (according to OKC) and we had tons in common. She sent an email back saying that she thought we wouldn’t be a good match because I wasn’t smiling in my photo. No looking at my questions, profile or anything – just one photo. Apparently in her brain she thought that since I didn’t smile in that photo than I apparently have never smiled and am not worth getting to know. I nearly messaged her a response and then I realized she will probably be successful in finding her perfect match – a guy that presents himself as someone he’s not, lies about everything and smiles in his photos.

  32. D says:

    @Chloe – if you’re a “real woman,” I think you’ve singlehandedly explained the existence of misogyny! Seriously, though – how can you make tons of blanket assumptions based on nothing but a single picture? Perhaps you might be able to simply say “these men are more / less attractive physically,” but to speculate wildly like you have gives credence to the stereotype of women being, to put it mildly, ridiculously picky and prone to the most insane kinds of snap judgments.

  33. orange_cat says:

    Ugh…….the interpretation of this data is slanted….so much focus on how women are supposedly more shallow regarding looks and dating, when the reality is, the data shows women more likely to message someone they don’t rate highly. Men may be more forgiving with their rating, but not with their actual choice in who to date. All this shows is that women are pickier in handing out a number rating when it comes to looks, not in choosing a romantic partner.

  34. movie reviews says:

    Brilliant blog, I had not come across before in my searches!
    Carry on the good work!

  35. DS says:

    I find the stats presented here as interesting. Good Job on that.

    The conclusions reached from these numbers – they are very accurate and show a logical fallacy called equivocation. Judgements such as typical, average, modeleques are mixed up and don’t reflect the numbers they come from.

    Looking at the charts- the highest number of emails men sent go to the 3 to 4 range for women and drop off as the approach the 5 in women- women rated 5 get about the same traffic as the women rated 2.5 or average in the mens world. Men go for the above average not the models. I think that guys aren’t as unrealistic as the article paints them to be.

    Women rate 55% of guys a 0 or 1 so defacto men are 1’s as an average. Women write most to 2’s and threes which are the real above average guys despite the term. From the scales, a man would have to be a god to be rated 5 in the womens world.

    The whole rating thing is interesting and shows a really different mindset between the two genders and how they assign numbers to values. I would seems women are harsher judges on looks and only give credit to the really exdeptional.

    But when actually making contact- both genders go above average. I’ve seen comments made on other blogs which say in onine dating, everyone is trying to step up a notch. I guess it shows we’re all ambitious, but somehow this comes up against the hard reality of competition. This may show why people are online because they can’t find what they want in real life.

  36. A.C. says:

    Wow-as for what was considered “top” for the men-I forgot how in the “Jonas brothers” looks was-I blame Disney and Nickelodeon…maybe Twilight.

  37. Karl says:

    Okay, so far as the women at the top go: The bottom two are average, while the two above (particularly the one on the right) are notably above that. That fits the metric presented, IMO. I’m sorry that the women wandering around America aren’t up to the standard of the bottom two. Spend some time in Europe. That’s what average women in their age bracket looks like. Even then, this mostly U.S.-participation site still managed to pull out a bell curve for you ladies, so shut it.

    Now, as for the dudes go: I agree with the general consensus that women are just nuts in American society. Seriously, think “average”, ladies, think REALLY HARD about what that word means: Simply an alright looking, non-disfigured, dude who an “average” girl should want to go out with and get to know. That means MOST of you on the hump of the bell. The four dudes posted above are WELL within that bracket… SERIOUSLY, wake the hell up! The third dude from the left is probably closest to the median, the two on the left are downright good lookin’ dudes, and the one on the far right is above the bar… yet they all got rated “significantly” below average… and I highly doubt it was their profiles. C’mon. I’m fairly sure they’re not that poorly written, they all obviously have average or better jobs, and they likely aren’t littered with stories about their ten years in prison for killing children from their respective ice cream trucks. I’ve actually suspected this dreadful curve for a long time now. I’ve always been considered by my peers, girlfriends, and friends as quite good looking. “Striking” as some have put it. I’m educated, well spoken, have an interesting career and hobbies, so-on-and-so-forth, and I bombed so hard on this website, after numerous attempts, I just threw in the towel.

    And, I’m sorry, I don’t buy the whole evolutionary monkey DNA bullshit thing. DNA has no concept of money or how it will protect them, DNA has no concept of what clothing means, and DNA doesn’t read anything into dating websites. The primal drive in the brain just doesn’t work like that, it doesn’t make those connections. YOU fully consciously and intellectually do. “Man with big neck who can smash adversary and make fire”, maybe… but you’re all deluding yourselves using that cop-out. It’s pure, unadulterated superficiality, and probably preferential bigotry in most cases… mostly fed by the media, I can only assume.

    It’s likely all media driven: Half of it is that the expectations of what a “good looking man” is are set way too high, and the other half is stereotype-driven judgment. Guy no. 1 is probably “ugly” because he’s got a suit on at an after work activity where his hair is disheveled so he’s probably “a douche”, guy no. 2 has a guitar so he’s “ugly” because he’s probably “a unemployed artsy slacker”, guy no. 3 has regular ass clothes on so he’s “ugly” because he’s probably “a regular jackoff working stiff”, and guy no. 4 has glasses and is in a computer environment so he’s “ugly” because he must be a “raging nerd”. The crux of the whole thing, is fucking women do this to EVERYONE. If they didn’t know who the crap Johnny Depp was, he’d get a crap rating because he looks like “a bohemian hipster than never leaves the coffee shop”, and Robert Pattinson would be “a mopey goth fag than lives in his parent’s basement”. This is how American women think, unfortunately… and why so many guys walk around like personality-devoid clones. Unless it’s the rare occasion where whatever the archetype is happens to fits her bag (i.e. “I heart geeky guys, oooooohhh”) you’re pretty much a 1 or a 2 outta 5… no matter how sexy your are. F’ing lay off it, women! Really, you’re opportunities would be expanded tenfold if you dropped that crap.

    Not that I’m a big fan of it either, but by comparison, the gruff man-system of ‘I’d hit that /I wouldn’t hit that’ doesn’t sound so bad… at least it fits the monkey bullshit. See, going back to the top four girls, I make no judgment whatsoever about their personalities, jobs, income, religions, likes, dislikes, etc. I’ve been a human long enough to know that shit goes flat almost every time. People just aren’t like that. They can just be attractive to me, and I leave it up to actually communicating like a human (or a monkey, if you want to look at it like that) to actually get to know them. What a concept! Go forth, mingle, interact, stop worrying about his taste in ties. My uncle, for instance, is loaded to the gills. You’d never know it looking at the way he dresses or what he drives. It’s all nice and kept care of, but there’s no barometer for you ladies to read there. You’re REALLY not as good at knowing this stuff as you purport to be, okay.

  38. ChairmanChan says:

    I have noticed that most men do NOT want to date a stunning women as they think she will be ‘stolen’ by other men or will find someone better. They DO want to sleep with her however. This happened when I showed stunning women to my male friends on dating sites.

    No wonder there is a fall-off for uber-babes. I personally experienced nothing but grief when I accompanied my stunning ex-wife to parties. Men physically pushed me out the way to talk to her. Don’t want to go there again.

  39. ChairmanChan says:

    This is prime documentary material. Interviews with women and men making assumptions about someone’s profile, and then we meet the person and find out if they’re anywhere near the mark. We all know the final conclusion…

  40. Shawn says:

    Is it possible that (and I know this is cynical) when women rate men, it is based on an archetypal or stereotypical ideal of male attractiveness, but when they interact with men they do it based on the type of needs they want met? What if, to a woman rating for attractiveness you’re either an alpha male or not but when the same woman is looking for a mate she looks for qualities outside of appearance/status? There is plenty of evidence that women are attracted to different kinds of men at different times in their ovulation cycle. What if dating for a woman is just about finding someone who can provide a reasonable quality of life whereas sexual attraction for a woman is just about who has the best genes?

  41. Shawn says:

    It’d also explain why the least attractive women don’t message back the most attractive men; They know there is no real chance that the most attractive men would be willing to provide for them so they label them as noise in their dating pool.

  42. HeavensCalyx says:

    Seriously guys, don’t bitch at the girls so much. There’ve been a number of studies that girls are much more aware of what is attractive to guys than what guys are aware of what is attractive to girls. Most girls posting this pictures are posting ones they critically think are nice and show a part of their personality, SO OF COURSE THEY’RE GOING TO EXPECT GUYS TO DO THE SAME.

    @Karl and @GMF, yeah, of course wild speculations is a little extreme, but the point is most girls already cull those sorts of photos out of their profile. Seriously, ask any female friend you have about how much influence she has of the photos that get put up of her. Whereas, the guy mentality is like @evergreenstater: “those are the ones I like”. Seriously, if you just want to stare at pictures of yourself, and don’t care what Real Girls think about your pictures …. what are you doing putting them up on a dating site?

    Apparently white American guys are just especially clueless about this. Guys of racial minorities and international guys seem to be much better at dressing and presenting themselves in a way that makes them more attractive to girls.

  43. Dr H says:

    Just as a wild guess, I’m going to say that perhaps the bottom-rated girls who are getting messages from the top-rated guys may not be getting the most flattering messages. As in, they may be getting ones that they interpret (rightly or wrongly) as: “I think you’ll sleep with me because I’m out of your league”. Perhaps the women declining to reply are simply being smart about risk/benefit analyses?

  44. 123456 says:

    I think it needs to be pointed out but based on looks it seems to me that the women used to demonstrate the “more attractive” user are in there early 20’s and the women used to demonstrate the “more average” user are in there late 20’s or early 30’s which makes the comparison unequal from the get go. On the other hand, it seems to me, again this is a visual assumption, that the 4 men used are all within a 3-5 age range of one another. I would like to see the same comparison made with people who are in the same age bracket, income level and education as there are to many variables impacting the results at this point.

  45. prtynp1nk says:

    I have to say that I see myself as average and I get my fair share of messages. I always email everyone back whether I find them attractive or not because you can never have too many friends. I appriciate anyone who’d take the time to email me not knowing if they’ll get a responce back.

  46. Andy says:

    It’s simple. If you don’t want to talk to someone or think they’re unattractive, say you’re not interested. Don’t be a fucking bitch.

    And LOVE IS BLIND! \O/

  47. Kiran says:

    Those guys up there are not ugly…all of them are Ok looking…the second one is handsome.

  48. IrodeKem says:

    Lots of large search engines provide a method to locate the amount of inlinks that a certain webpage has. You can search for backlinks to a website on Google by typing The results will show the number of websites pointing to Link Building Service get webpages many inward links. Although Google has a good way to see the backlinks to a website, Google certainly credits more incoming links than it shows. If you choose instead to use Yahoo to see the incoming links to a webpage, go to Yahoo and type This will show all of the links pointing to that page, including the links that Google does not list. With Yahoo, you may also type to view all inward links for all pages of the entire website.

  49. Chris says:

    ive been on this site for a long time now Ive sent messages to plenty of women and got zilch nada zero. the most messages i got back was from my cousin because i saw her on here and i sent her a message saying hi and all that.

    Now I Know I’m not an ugly guy. And my profile portrays my sense of humor and wit and discribes the type of guy I am in a somewhat humorous way, Yet I still get nothing no women reply to my messages. I myself am not very particular about looks I will message women who would delve into the “ugly” catagory and i have enough confidence to message women of the super model catagory. I dont choose solely on looks I actually read each and every profile before i send a message to a woman, even if it has her life story spead across the page. I get no responses. The only thing I am particular with is weight I dont like large women. I can and have been known to date curvy women. but a woman who is large or obese just tells me that she is lazy and not on my energetic level and doesnt take care of herself. Its not the fact that shes fat its the probable reasons as to why shes fat and continues to be so. Im not a small person myself but I eat healthy and i take care of myself and I excersize. I just like food lol. Anyway like another guy was saying as many messages as i put out even to less than average women I get no responses. I hate to be ignored and if you dont send me a message back even if its to tell me you dont like me, I take that as being ignored. If you dont want to talk to me at least have the decency and respect to respond to me and tell me accordingly. My feelings will not be hurt and all will be fine Ill move on with my life. I’m sick of reading on all these womens profile about how they want a nice sweet caring, and intelligent guy who will treat them right and respect them as a woman. but when one messages them they completely ignore them probably dont even read the message, all based on their picture. I know im a good looking guy i dont need anyone to tell me if i am or not.

    But for kicks and giggles if you want to stop by my profile Mitsuskitzo is my user name

  50. Another Chris says:


    Have you considered the fact that, unlike most women, maybe guys are not trying to create an unrealistic fantasy of themselves in their profiles? Maybe guys just want to show themselves as they are, just laid back, normal people with whatever interests they describe in their profiles. You can choose to post the best photos that hide your small boobs or your big ass, or play dress up, or whatever you want, but what happens when that guy actually meets you? He’s going to feel cheated, and even if he might have liked you otherwise, it’s going to seem like you misled him.

    Guys hate bullshit, and that’s why I think most of them post pretty straightforward pictures of themselves and mostly honest info in their profiles, even if some of it may be a turnoff to some women. Creating some version of yourself that you think is more attractive to the opposite sex may get you a few more messages or first dates, but in terms of finding someone who is going to really appreciate you day-in and day-out, being honest and realistic is probably a better approach. Unless you really are an ugly chick, in which case, this data says you are pretty much fucked. Sorry.