Truecel: Difference between revisions

Jump to navigation Jump to search
34 bytes added ,  3 June 2021
no edit summary
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 3: Line 3:
A stronger predictor of sexlessness than looks is, however, neurodivergence, especially odd, introverted, shy, highly inhibited, anxious and [[autism|autistic]] behavior (especially for males), as well as lack of dating skills and lack of cultural [[marriage]] norms (see [[causes of inceldom]]).
A stronger predictor of sexlessness than looks is, however, neurodivergence, especially odd, introverted, shy, highly inhibited, anxious and [[autism|autistic]] behavior (especially for males), as well as lack of dating skills and lack of cultural [[marriage]] norms (see [[causes of inceldom]]).


While it is true that below average attractiveness predicts about a twice as high chance of remaining virgin in early adulthood, in one study, all of the 26 very unattractive men and 33 of the 38 very unattractive women did have sex by about age 28.<ref>Haydon, A. A., Cheng, M. M., Herring, A. H., McRee, A.-L., & Halpern, C. T. (2013). Prevalence and Predictors of Sexual Inexperience in Adulthood. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 43(2), 221–230. doi:10.1007/s10508-013-0164-3</ref> This means that if severe physical ugliness does indeed have a drastic effect on mating performance as claimed, as sometimes claimed, this must be limited to only the 1% least attractive (likely even less). This is also evidenced by physical attractiveness only weakly predicting the number of past sex partners, despite looks playing a large role in initial romantic interest (see also [[beauty]]).
While it is true that below average attractiveness predicts about a chance of remaining virgin in early adulthood twice as high than the above-average attractive, in one study, all of the 26 very unattractive men and 33 of the 38 very unattractive women did have sex by about age 28.<ref>Haydon, A. A., Cheng, M. M., Herring, A. H., McRee, A.-L., & Halpern, C. T. (2013). Prevalence and Predictors of Sexual Inexperience in Adulthood. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 43(2), 221–230. doi:10.1007/s10508-013-0164-3</ref> This means that if severe physical ugliness does indeed have a drastic effect on mating performance as claimed, as sometimes claimed, this must be limited to only the 1% least attractive (likely even less). This is also evidenced by physical attractiveness only weakly predicting the number of past sex partners, despite looks playing a large role in initial romantic interest (see also [[beauty]]).


The average truecel is argued to be so oxytocin-starved, even a brief touching of fingers whilst exchanging cash with a female store clerk who looks like Whoopi Goldberg or Rosie O'Donnell can send truecels over the moon in a frenzy of euphoria.  
The average truecel is argued to be so oxytocin-starved, even a brief touching of fingers whilst exchanging cash with a female store clerk who looks like Whoopi Goldberg or Rosie O'Donnell can send truecels over the moon in a frenzy of euphoria.  
17,538

edits

Navigation menu