Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Three Six Mafia – Data about "6/6/6 dating" (2024)

divingintheshallowend.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 223 posts

Re: Three Six Mafia – Data about "6/6/6 dating" (2024)

#211

Post by BizarroLand »

maerF0x0 wrote: post #208

1. The issue with multiplying the probability/rarity of each is they are actually positively correlated -- Taller people have bigger parts (sorry I can't google to confirm on work laptop rn), and Taller people have higher salaries. 2. I've heard a variant of the "rule" (of thumb) that is six 6's . 6 pack abs, 6' tall, 6" below, 6 figures, 6 months (or more) single, 600+ HP car. This is sometimes pushed around by guys…

I haven't heard the 6 months single version. The one I heard was "6 or more friends" instead.

Re: Three Six Mafia – Data about "6/6/6 dating" (2024)

#212

Post by firmretention »

niemandhier wrote: post #186
joshdavham wrote: post #178

So I'm an actual "6/6/6"... and I also have a statistics degree. This was absolutely hilarious to read! I will say that I've seen multiple definitions of the 666 rule where the last 6 represents either penis length or a 6-pack. From personal experience, I will say that maintaining a 6 pack makes you much more desirable in the eyes of women than, uh, the other option. I'm also not much of a dater, but my friends alway…

For a well earning man with a white collar job, keeping a six pack requires a large amount of time away from work. So it probably is a good proxy measure for quite a few desirable character traits, such as diligence and discipline.

Not really. The exercise needed is minimal and the rest is just calorie management. Now having said that it's not easy - simple, and not particularly time consuming yes, but psychologically very difficult unless you naturally tend towards leanness.

Re: Three Six Mafia – Data about "6/6/6 dating" (2024)

#213

Post by zardo »

perpetuallunch wrote: post #65
tclancy wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What does weight affect? Breast size? Hair color? Cultures create an archetype of attractiveness and then everyone feels like they come up short. Tale as old as time.

There is nowhere in the known universe where the average woman is taller than the average man. Therefore, women will tend to select mates who are taller than themselves. It’s not a cultural phenomenon, it’s universal.

A gas station while a bus of women basketball players stops for snacks.

Re: Three Six Mafia – Data about "6/6/6 dating" (2024)

#214

Post by zardo »

hackyhacky wrote: post #62
vovavili wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>These days, a full-figure on a woman is considered attractive, but in the 1990s, being skinny was in vogue. This is usually based on a selective and wishful interpretation of historical data. The best argument I've found is here - https://www.jsanilac.com/dispelling-beauty-lies/

I was alive in the 1990s. "Heroic chic" was definitely a thing. I'm also alive now. It's not hard to find big butts being idolized. Your linked article is not very scientific. For example, it cites porn-store purchasing preference as evidence of actual male taste in partner selection.

I was alive in 1992, "Baby Got Back" hit number one on the charts.

Re: Three Six Mafia – Data about "6/6/6 dating" (2024)

#215

Post by rhrhfjfjjr44 »

hackyhacky wrote: post #176
rhrhfjfjjr44 wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> was as ran through as your typical young woman you'll find on the apps nowadays? I'm not saying you are one, but using this kind of language really makes you sound like a full on incel misogynist, who has sublimated his sexual frustration into antiquated paternalistic views of women's sexuality. But I'm sure that's not accurate.

I wonder if there is a word for this strategy of "he said a word I didn't like therefore I will hyper-fixate on this one word, completely ignoring his entire argument while adopting an outraged and righteous tone".

I could do the same for "antiquated paternalistic views of women's sexuality". Is that your way of shaming men for preferring virgins? You're fighting a losing battle there. It's innate. You can't change it. Morally weak and sexually desperate men will pretend it doesn't affect their perception of a woman but it does. It's in our DNA. The males who genuinely didn't care were killed off by natural selection.

Re: Three Six Mafia – Data about "6/6/6 dating" (2024)

#216

Post by rhrhfjfjjr44 »

hackyhacky wrote: post #177
rhrhfjfjjr44 wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> that would still make them a unicorn in the dating market nowadays. Are you having trouble in the dating market? Perhaps you're frustrated by frequently meeting women who are experienced enough to recognize your inadequacy. The solution is to improve yourself, not to shame women.

[flagged]

Re: Three Six Mafia – Data about "6/6/6 dating" (2024)

#217

Post by cindyllm »

rhrhfjfjjr44 wrote: post #215
hackyhacky wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> was as ran through as your typical young woman you'll find on the apps nowadays? I'm not saying you are one, but using this kind of language really makes you sound like a full on incel misogynist, who has sublimated his sexual frustration into antiquated paternalistic views of women's sexuality. But I'm sure that's not accurate.

I wonder if there is a word for this strategy of "he said a word I didn't like therefore I will hyper-fixate on this one word, completely ignoring his entire argument while adopting an outraged and righteous tone". I could do the same for "antiquated paternalistic views of women's sexuality". Is that your way of shaming men for preferring virgins? You're fighting a losing battle there. It's innate. You can't change i…

[dead]

Re: Three Six Mafia – Data about "6/6/6 dating" (2024)

#218

Post by hackyhacky »

rhrhfjfjjr44 wrote: post #216
hackyhacky wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> that would still make them a unicorn in the dating market nowadays. Are you having trouble in the dating market? Perhaps you're frustrated by frequently meeting women who are experienced enough to recognize your inadequacy. The solution is to improve yourself, not to shame women.

[flagged]

> There's no shortage of promiscuous young women, but there are so few wives nowadays that it all feels rather pointless.

Do you know the definition of "wife"? It's a married woman. There are plenty of women who are willing to be married, but one of two things is preventing that: (a) you are disqualifying them for silly and capricious reasons, or (b) they are disqualifying you because you're a misogynist who thinks you're entitled to dictate what women do with their bodies before they've even met you.

> Yes, everyone is.

Plainly false.

> I've had my fair share of women in the sack.

The more I listen to you, the more clear it is to me why you can't find a partner.

Re: Three Six Mafia – Data about "6/6/6 dating" (2024)

#219

Post by hackyhacky »

rhrhfjfjjr44 wrote: post #215
hackyhacky wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> was as ran through as your typical young woman you'll find on the apps nowadays? I'm not saying you are one, but using this kind of language really makes you sound like a full on incel misogynist, who has sublimated his sexual frustration into antiquated paternalistic views of women's sexuality. But I'm sure that's not accurate.

I wonder if there is a word for this strategy of "he said a word I didn't like therefore I will hyper-fixate on this one word, completely ignoring his entire argument while adopting an outraged and righteous tone". I could do the same for "antiquated paternalistic views of women's sexuality". Is that your way of shaming men for preferring virgins? You're fighting a losing battle there. It's innate. You can't change i…

> completely ignoring his entire argument

You didn't make an "argument." All I heard from you is whining about how you're upset that women have sex that doesn't involve you. You're allowed to be upset about that, but it's a silly thing to be upset about.

> Is that your way of shaming men for preferring virgins?

Yes, it is. Also for generally being misogynistic by holding women to a different standard that you hold yourself.

> It's in our DNA.

Lots of things in our DNA are not part of civilized society.

> The males who genuinely didn't care were killed off by natural selection.

Cool. I'll just go and have lots of children with a series of non-virgins, while you can cry yourself to sleep alone in an onanistic frenzy.

Re: Three Six Mafia – Data about "6/6/6 dating" (2024)

#220

Post by rhrhfjfjjr44 »

hackyhacky wrote: post #219
rhrhfjfjjr44 wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder if there is a word for this strategy of "he said a word I didn't like therefore I will hyper-fixate on this one word, completely ignoring his entire argument while adopting an outraged and righteous tone". I could do the same for "antiquated paternalistic views of women's sexuality". Is that your way of shaming men for preferring virgins? You're fighting a losing battle there. It's innate. You can't change i…

> completely ignoring his entire argument You didn't make an "argument." All I heard from you is whining about how you're upset that women have sex that doesn't involve you. You're allowed to be upset about that, but it's a silly thing to be upset about. > Is that your way of shaming men for preferring virgins? Yes, it is. Also for generally being misogynistic by holding women to a different standard that you hold yo…

>I'll just go and have lots of children with a series of non-virgins

God bless you. Taking one for the team. Maybe you'll get lucky and some of them will even be biologically yours (not that you would care).

Post reply on HN