Trusted, Automoderated users
574
edits
Heightpill: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
→Brooke Jenkins study
(→Research studies: summary TBa haven't read yet) |
|||
| Line 99: | Line 99: | ||
This creates a selection bias where the minority of short men who DO respond to the study are the outliers who get an unusually higher amount of sex due to other factors in their favor, such as face/wealth/etc. | This creates a selection bias where the minority of short men who DO respond to the study are the outliers who get an unusually higher amount of sex due to other factors in their favor, such as face/wealth/etc. | ||
It would be selection bias against the "omega" men (short AND ugly) who are too dead/depressed to bother with surveys. | |||
It would also not be something an "alpha" male (tall AND handsome) would take, since he's be too busy fucking to bother. | |||
It inherently caters to beta males (tall and ugly, short and handsome, or medium+medium) because they're in the sweet spot where they can actually get just enough scraps to hold onto idealistic hopes and swim inside the blue pill of leftist liberalism where you have faith in MSM and science. | |||
The poll was held anonymously by MSNBC and alphas/omegas wouldn't be taking shit like that, therefore they are ignored in this sampling. | |||
This is why the curve is not as steep in these results as it would be IRL. | |||
==Videos on height and dating== | ==Videos on height and dating== | ||