Sorry for the shit title.

This is going to be my last attempt to explain this. I realise it will be futile, I realise it will go into the memory hole. But maybe one person will learn what I learnt from being here.

Individual women assess individual men completely differently. Two different women's opinion of the same man's attractiveness can be wildly divergent.

While we can recognise traits that are broadly appealing, there is no guy who will ever have anything even remotely approaching universal appeal. Also, a man in possession of few, or even none, of these traits can be extremely attractive to some women.

Women themselves, regardless of their personal persuasion, will tell you quite consistently – and indeed say so quite consistently on PPD - that they can be attracted to guys that don't even remotely resemble each other, let alone are they only attracted to 'alphas' or 'Chads'.

Yet I see this routinely rejected, as if they are somehow engaged in an active conspiracy to mislead men. This makes absolutely no sense as it would be in women's interest to encourage men to develop the traits that they find attractive. But women simply aren't this straightforward, and can also be attracted to different men at different times for different reasons.

If you put any man in front of ten women, they will judge him completely differently. I pretty much proved this previously in this thread.

Guy 1 had marks ranging from 2-8.

Guy 2 had marks ranging from 2-8.

Guy 3 had marks ranging from 3-8.

Guy 4 had marks ranging from 2-9.

Guy 5 had marks ranging from 1-9.5.

Guy 6 had marks ranging from 2-7.

The reason there was this uniformly large range of marks is because women's attraction to men is very individualistic and specific to them, and also possibly because it is more complex than the base attraction that men feel.

Yet due to genuine ignorance, abject stupidity, or a ludicrous commitment to RP that borders on fanatical, or a combination of the three, people continue to reject this notion, and insist that women are lying when they themselves say this!

While it is true, I believe, that women have higher standards than men, we misinterpret data in this area. Using the average is a poor indicator of women's preferences because they are so divergent in taste.

I believe it is impossible for a woman to be put in front of men, and for them to rate her from 1 to 9.5, as was the case in the linked thread. Yet four of the guys in this experiment had similar ranges to this, being ranked at least from 2 to 8 in each scenario.

This is because when women state “I do not go for someone conventionally attractive”, or state that they have been with guys who are not conventionally attractive...incredibly, they are actually telling the truth!

When a man is considered really attractive, it means that he is really attractive to that woman in question, it does not mean that he is universally attractive because no man comes remotely close to this.

And when a woman does not find a man attractive, it does not mean that there is something fundamentally wrong with him, or that he has low SMV, it's because he just wasn't her type.

When you meet the woman who is into you, she will think that you're an 8, and when she introduces you to her friends they will all probably be completely nonplussed as to why she finds you attractive.

That doesn't mean that you shouldn't attempt to improve yourself. I personally had to do this to reach what I consider a base level of acceptability, and I bet I endured more than virtually anyone else on here.

However, what this does mean for so-called 'incels' is that if you have been unsuccessful in dating then you just need to keep plugging away until you meet the woman who digs you, and not take it personally when you get rejected.

Of course, this can be challenging if you are genetically unfortunate, but it's not impossible. But don't become consumed with trying to be an alpha or improving your SMV because different women will assess you completely differently regardless of what you do.

TL;DR: Please don't accuse me of not being willing to engage in self-improvement. Please see bolded section. Thanks.