The Bald Experiment - Bald guy uses old NW1 photos for his dates

[CliffLee]

So you game believers default response is basically: game exists because we say so. What? Evidence? It doesn't matter!

There has never been any evidence that game, or even the concept of seduction is real

Who gets laid more do you think?

- - - Updated - - -

Attached two pics of the same guy by accident. But anyway, who gets more girls, the ginger, bald dude, or the model?

For the record, I agree with you Fred (for the most part) that looks matter. But they are by no means the be and end all.

 

[rocklegends]

Goodness. All the vitriol and back and forth not only digresses from the original topic, but to go and bash fred is absolutely ridiculous. Quite honestly, the time wasted here as well as the time honing your "game" could be put to good use by going out and interacting with people. I get that woman is a huge deal, especially for those in their 20's, but a few are micronanalyzing, almost to a painful degree.

Here is my experience:

attraction is like a job interview: i know within the first 60 seconds whether I want to hire that person. Similarly, most women decide within that short time frame whether they will or won't want to hook up for the night (note that I mentioned hook up. impaired ability, whether physically from hair loss or otherwise, is still a major factor, but that's where the auxillary personality intricacies can help soften the distortion a tad bit).

I went out 7 times this month: each time I hooked up with someone. the connection was a very natural smooth flowing conversation. No, I didn't put my nonexistent PUA skills to the test. We ended up talking about a) peanut butter b) the new york mets and c) about racquetball. You tell me if there was PUA in action here.

Women are attracted to those they are attracted to. There is nothing you can do to change that. Instead of developing PUA skills that won't help you whatsoever (bandage on a gash wound), go out and improve yourself and be the best version of yourself. A version that will rid you of that negative persona. Whether that's picking up cooking, flying a kite, lifting weights, meeting other people, travelling, etc. Will it help you attract the opposite sex? no probably not. However, it will make you a productive member of society, to the point where that self loathing will dissipate.

Hair loss is debilitating, especially at the point of no return. I'm sure that fred spoke about this ad nauseum. Rather than attack him and other folks that try to give the hard dose of reality (he is blunt with his words, which one comes to respect).

 

[2bald2young]

So confidence and status matter more than looks? God I wish hellouser wasn't banned.

You realize what you're saying? You're saying that this guy:

Hellouser is banned?! Yet again the moderators surprise me... But then again I don't know the reason why they did it.

 

[rocklegends]

It's temporary, he will be back in a few weeks.



I know who Owen Cook is. He dedicated 10 years of is life or more to only get a few dozens of lays. He did only that, going out five times a week I think.

All his life revolves around women, and all of that for what? 50-75 lays. While he probably spent 10000 hours trying to convince women to sleep with him.

That's pathetic. If there is one thing I've learned about having sex with women, it's that besides the enjoyment of sex and the ego boost, you don't get much from it.

Rocklegends is right, it's way more rewarding to just go for the real deal: being social, taking up a hobby, going to social events, travelling etc.

Picking up women is not even a skill, so Owen Cook is not even better than he was when he started doing this social weirdo activity called PUA.

You think otherwise? Go out with the guy, show him five different women and tell him to get at least one of them.

Surely with his countless hours of practicing his mad PUA skills, he will get one, right? Hell he should even be able to get them all.

Wrong. There is 99% of chance that all the girls will reject them. Because seducing women is not a skill, it's 100% looks and random luck.

Owen Cook got laid because while doing his mass approaches, he found 1 woman out of 500 that liked him. How impressive!

Let's not even mention the concept of return on investment or effort to lay ratio. No, PUA's are too stupid to even think about it.

The male model most likely gets girls with little to no effort. I know he's not even begging women for affection on the street.

He probably even has a steady girlfriend. While Owen Cook takes pleasure in wasting all his time chasing girls and scamming people.

absolutely Fred. Not to mention that they aren't taking into consideration the following:

1) most women are not readily even single at the time of your approach. whether taken or married at the time, or worse yet, locked up with someone for the night, your odds are absolute zero irrespective of the game you concoct.

2) you are wasting away valuable periods of your life over something that you cannot control nor reverse, and instead are just putting yourself through a vicious cycle of self deprecation. I sympathize with everyone no question, but it gets to the point where no one can save you seldom your self

3) .....nothing is worse than being the chaser. Value is spotted from a mile away, whether in talent, good looks, hair, etc. I highly doubt that world class footballers had to roam from team to team. those teams came directly to him. I realize that this entire attraction and socialization factor is just a microcosm of the world we live in: fundamentally distorted and random at the apex. Better to just go with the ride, not act rehearsed, and let life do it's bidding

I spoke to a few female colleagues regarding this. What most told me is not shocking: they play along, but it really does not do anything for them at all. Most of them are very mild mannered and courteous, so they won't say anything harsh and would just let them off easily. Others, however, aren't so nice about it.

I never got the chance to hear about your story in depth as I'm relatively new. Mind if I shot you a PM sometime later on?

 

[JTS]

Sorry, what was that about money and charm being useless? I think its telling that I'm the only one here posting actual scientific findings rather than applying conjecture through my own personal lens.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1375720/What-women-really-want--money-Research-finds-women-look-paid-job-partner.html

http://www.time.com/59786/how-to-flirt-backed-by-scientific-research/

EDIT: Having trouble getting the links to work but the studies are easily found

 

[winnyblues]

Poor fred

 

[rocklegends]

Sorry, what was that about money and charm being useless? I think its telling that I'm the only one here posting actual scientific findings rather than applying conjecture through my own personal lens.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1375720/What-women-really-want--money-Research-finds-women-look-paid-job-partner.html

http://www.time.com/59786/how-to-flirt-backed-by-scientific-research/

EDIT: Having trouble getting the links to work but the studies are easily found

but there is an overall disconnect when taking the stream from an evolutionary perspective even. there was no use of PUA back then. At the primal level, men are attracted to women, and vice versa. I know it isn't fun to hear, but this is honestly what my experiences have been. Most women for most of the time decide whether or not they like a guy within the first 60-120 seconds. Nothing you do after that point can alter that in a material fashion. Rather it would be preferable to use that good intention to a more productive endeavor. Doing this over the duration of your lifetime while pining for attraction from the opposite isn't the ideal way to operate. Women are really no different than men when the sex element is taken out of the scope (again, I'm drawing from Fred here ) They are easy to talk to, have great perspectives, and just give you another circle of friends. I find the entire PUA a bit shortchanging, and you are missing out on building some meaningful relationships. Instead of treating others as means to an end, why not treat them as ends in and of themselves?

You can always get sex if you want it bad enough. This is what tinder, dating sites, craigslist, and high end prostitution is for. No, the value here is not deteriorated despite public consensus. If your modus operandi is sex, and purely the end game of sex, why waste your time, effort, and energy on PUA? just pay 20 Euros and get the deed done.

 

[Notcoolanymore]

So confidence and status matter more than looks? God I wish hellouser wasn't banned.

I need to stop taking breaks from this place. I'm missing all the action. Now I have to research and find out why.

 

[JTS]

but there is an overall disconnect when taking the stream from an evolutionary perspective even. there was no use of PUA back then. At the primal level, men are attracted to women, and vice versa. I know it isn't fun to hear, but this is honestly what my experiences have been. Most women for most of the time decide whether or not they like a guy within the first 60-120 seconds. Nothing you do after that point can alter that in a material fashion. Rather it would be preferable to use that good intention to a more productive endeavor. Doing this over the duration of your lifetime while pining for attraction from the opposite isn't the ideal way to operate. Women are really no different than men when the sex element is taken out of the scope (again, I'm drawing from Fred here ) They are easy to talk to, have great perspectives, and just give you another circle of friends. I find the entire PUA a bit shortchanging, and you are missing out on building some meaningful relationships. Instead of treating others as means to an end, why not treat them as ends in and of themselves?

You can always get sex if you want it bad enough. This is what tinder, dating sites, craigslist, and high end prostitution is for. No, the value here is not deteriorated despite public consensus. If your modus operandi is sex, and purely the end game of sex, why waste your time, effort, and energy on PUA? just pay 20 Euros and get the deed done.

Where is this discussion about PUA's coming from? I've never once mentioned them, only that confidence is a more powerful factor than looks, which was proven by the study I posted. I'm speaking as someone with somewhat of an academic background in biological anthropology, not some c*** who watches videos on YouTube about seduction and bases his opinions on them.

The reality is that confidence is a power marker and, due to the chaotic and violent conditions that humans evolved in, power and resources are seen as extremely desirable traits in men; after all, it's why size is a sexually dimorphic trait. There's a tremendous evolutionary precedent for the behaviors documented in both studies, to say that women are no different than men flies in the face of science and logic and is about as clear a case of projection as I can imagine.

 

[winnyblues]

Poor fred

 

[DPAMan]

He was obese in the first picture. Of course that is extremely unattractive. And I suspect he took something to look like that in the second picture or he has very good genetics, worked hard and did the photo during a pump.

Obese? Even in the before picture, he had muscle definition in his chest and shoulders, and arms to a lesser extent. Hell, even his stomach in the before looks like he could be pushing it out (a common trick in weight loss and fitness ads). I would have just assumed he was an off-season beginning bodybuilder. Regardless, there's a pretty large continuum between having a six pack and being "obese".

 

[JTS]

Do you even know what confidence is? It's something that is derived from positive experiences and positive reinforcement. Confidence can't be created out of thin air.

If you've never had positive feedback from women, you can't be confident around them just by acting in some way. What will you be confident about? That you will be rejected?

The studies you quoted are flawed. I've spoken to a lot of women in my life, and every single time, I just knew that they liked me 1 minute into the interaction. Rocklegends is right.

I told you before, my mother has refused advances from billionaires because she didn't find them to be their type. With you reasoning, she should have found them irresistible.

How is it so difficult to understand that women have types and that it is a stronger component for them than it is for us? Women decide what men reproduce and what men don't.

We would sleep with any woman if we had the chance granted we find her attractive. Women are much, much more selective, and in that sense, they are different.

Their attraction occurs at a biological level, but you think that you can cheat natural selection and evolution with material and sometimes immaterial things like money.

Biology, evolution and women don't care for your confidence and money. Would you care for an hairy ugly obese woman's confidence and resources?

That's what I thought. Why do you think women, or any female mammals is different? Females in nature reproduce with the males who have the most value.

And that value is brought by what they readily perceive in the male: appearance, size, robustness.

I'm kind of sick of that "confidence" BS really. I was having a discussion with a woman in her mid-30's yesterday.

I said something like "You'd have to be very good looking as a man to have sex with two different women per week."

And she replied "Or you'd have to be able to talk to girls well." How can she even believe her own words, when you can 100% sure that all the guys she's dated were tall, reasonably good looking and certainly not bald.

I guess they want to perpetuate the myth that women not are like men, that women can fall for a man's "confidence" (about what?) and accomplishment. Because women are more virtuous and less shallow.

Please, my whole life experience says otherwise. Some women have told me that this myth is a big problem for them, because their friends would see that they only date good looking men, and they will be shunned for that.

Studies, like the two I posted, seek to identify trends across populations, not the experiences of individuals. Anecdotes, on the other hand (all that you provide), have too small a sample size to be considered statistically significant.

Fred, I'm here posting peer reviewed academic studies and your denying their validity, not based on any objective flaw in the testing procedure (which, anyway, would have been identified before publishing), but because the findings don't fit your world view. That's incredibly ignorant considering that you have seem to have no background in sciences, especially enough of one to be considered an expert and educator like the very people your attempting to refute.

Also, despite your penchant for anecdotes you passively dismissed the opinion of that woman, once again because her opinion doesnt fit your world view. You yourself also said that type is more important for women than men (which is proven by science) but then gave a set criteria of what women only find attractive. Your a walking contradiction.

If being bald was a death sentence then Statham wouldn't ever be able to hook up with female celebrities, which he routinely does. The women have their pick of Hollywood NW1's and he still gets through all the same.

- - - Updated - - -

MOAR SCIENCE!!!!!! BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19134127

healthland.time.com/2012/09/28/shave-it-off-how-bald-men-can-look-more-manly-and-dominant/

You'll see how those two studies compliment eachother nicely. Yes, having hair may make you more attractive but shaving it off can make you appear more confident and dominant which, in turn, can also make you more attractive. That combined with the fact that women have a much broader definition of attractiveness than men bodes pretty ****ing well for people who have to go the bald route.

 

[Isaac Newton]

good points JTS. fred you can't deny their reasoning sorry. I like you and all, and I relate to you a lot, but you put too much weight into anecdotes and such.

however JTS, that study IS flawed because if you read carefully they are looking at guys with SHAVED HEADS, aka BALD BY CHOICE. they still have frame to their face or hairline

 

[JTS]

good points JTS. fred you can't deny their reasoning sorry. I like you and all, and I relate to you a lot, but you put too much weight into anecdotes and such.

however JTS, that study IS flawed because if you read carefully they are looking at guys with SHAVED HEADS, aka BALD BY CHOICE. they still have frame to their face or hairline

While its possible that some were bald by choice, given the nature of the study and how it was about measuring how perceptions of men change given how much hair they have its almost certain that many, if not most, suffer from male pattern baldness but choose to shave the rest of their hair off rather than have a NW6-7.

 

[JTS]

JTS, I maintain that your studies are flawed. The article about flirting doesn't even mention looks.

We have to be sure we're talking about the same thing here: I'm only talking about raw sexual attraction, not romantic attraction.

Do you really think women are looking for money or confidence when they're on the hunt for a one night stand?

If you're talking about romantic attraction, or relationships, then I absolutely agree with everything you said.

In short: for short-term attraction, only looks will matter.

For long-term attraction, it is indeed possible to compensate for your lack of looks with money, status, confidence etc.

If it wasn't the case, I would not have been able to get girlfriend during the two years I was bald.

Fred, one of the first things the article said was "Signaling availability and interest trumps attractiveness". It also mentions that "Flirting which emphasizes attractiveness has little effect when males do it. The flirting that is most effective for men involves displays of social dominance".

 

[JTS]

If only that worked for me.

Fixed

 

[rocklegends]

Fixed

Both Fred and I detailed our thoughts on this, and came up with very similar results. As i mentioned earlier, signalling availability is for those who are looking to settle down and build a relationship. In this case, hair loss is a little less severe in terms of downgrading that otherwise. However, from a pure attraction standpoint, it is often times instantaneous and without any real reason to speak of. The fundamentals of entropy and disorder do indeed apply here.

Additionally, there is no way to conceptualize uniformity across diverse backgrounds. the individual with substantial hair loss who has chiseled features and is 6'2" has substantially more potential that one who is 5'2", bald, and socially awkward. I truly feel that these studies have the failure of survivorship bias as well the self fulfilling prophecy. Often times, it doesn't take into consideration those who fell out of the race altogether. Attractive folks would be attractive whether they were bald or not. It's just that they would be even more attractive had they had hair. Congeal many of these into a sample study, and it isn't as awful as once perceived.

However, that's not to say that I'm inflallible here. Hardly. You are more than welcome to attempt these methods for yourself. You might end up being right and I might end up looking foolish at the end. I just don't buy into this based on my experiences. These anecdotes are the only resources i can draw my opinion off of. The academic studies are great, but they only serve as a paperweight if I can't apply it to my own life. Sure, it may make us all feel better, but without the results to show for it, it's moot point.

it's sort of like the topic where someone asked whether "women liked buzz cuts". Even if they did or did not, will it even matter? would you go out there? or would you stay home because you resign yourself to what the consensus believes is the case? this is truly what i'm saying.

 

[CaptainForehead]

Do you even know what confidence is? It's something that is derived from positive experiences and positive reinforcement. Confidence can't be created out of thin air.

I was just watching a video clip of Roosh picking up women. Dude's got a decent face, good hair, and voice. Without these three things, confidence would have helped him squat.

On the other hand, if there are no disqualifiers (baldness, shortness etc), then I can believe lack of confidence being a dealbreaker.

 

[I.D WALKER]

No need for anyone to feel foolish so long as their argument(s) is/are is seated upon genuine intention to bring a benign contribution to the forum. Opportunities open as a conduit for broader insight even introspectively yet are so often mired and misplaced in the fight to be right or belong.

Honest convicted discourse has it's place and rarely produces serious offensive consequence so long as opposing bodies can acknowledge every position must eventually pivot on it's axis less it disrupts their very own essential equilibrium.

Misera esta servitus ubi jus
est aut incognitum aut vagum.

 

[xetudor]

I think all this "game" talk is like taking a hard interview at a tech company. You spend a lot of time, you learn all the tricks and you get the job but you hate it because you aren't really that smart and you hate always spending time to deal with much smarter people that make it sound easy. At least that was my experience. It's much easier to work for a decent company that doesn't require you to be a genius than to always feel like an impostor tricking to trick people.


Some things aren't worth the effort.