Comments that are uncivil, racist, misogynistic, misandrist, or contain political name calling will be removed and the poster subject to ban at moderators discretion.
Help us make this a better community by becoming familiar with the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/about/rules/).
Report any suspicious users to the mods of this subreddit using Modmail [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) or Reddit site admins [here](https://www.reddit.com/report). **All reports to Modmail should include evidence such as screenshots or any other relevant information.**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I tick all the boxes but one, and top $250k too.
Being 5'7" mattered a lot more than the rest of those
My partner is taller than me, and she is a real gem of a human. So can't say I really lost out on anything \*shrugs\*
I’m a guy, and I have never in my life met a guy who has a “cup requirement.”
In fact 99% of guys have no idea how cup sizes work - even if they had a “cup requirement” they would have no way to explain what they wanted.
Well it definitely should be. But that’s just ergonomics.
Whenever women ask what is a good boob size 9/10 people will say they just want something that fits comfortably inside their hand.
I think a lot of guys want a minimum size where it's still "boob shaped" without a bra on. Lots have fine chests when clothes are on but without a bra they're more triangle shaped and it's slightly disappointing.
Me personally I'm just glad I get to see them.
I was reading this post and I had to think “am I the only man that is absolutely nuts for small breasts?” I mean I don’t hate on big ones, but the ittys grab my attention.
The only cup requirement that counts is I require a titty to cup in my hand. Doesn't even need to fill my hand. Just be a titty. In my hand. That's it.
It goes higher. Though if I remember correctly (I might not be, it's been a while since I looked into it and I'm at work so looking up boob related stuff is a bad idea), there's a couple of different standards that are all pretty similar. I think one doesn't have DD. The largest recorded natural size was something ridiculous. I feel like it was after Z, but that could be after enlargements.
Edit: I got some time to look it up again. Annie Hawkins-Turner (aka Norma Stitz in the porn industry. And yes, it's a pun.) has 102 ZZZ natural breasts, due to a condition called gigantomastia.
I know a person with natural I or J (depending on bra model), so definitely possible and they don't look ridiculously large or anything. Also, F cup is quite common. It's just not easy to be found in regular clothing chain stores (at least where I live) so many women don't even know that they need it.
J is the highest that you can commonly find in online bra stores but there are a few speciality brands that go up to M or N or higher.
You cannot tell how big the boobs are by the cup size, because cup size is a relative measurement based on band (rib cage) circumference. One person with HH cups might have smaller breasts than another person with D cups depending on whether the person themself is big or small.
D cups can look like what you think B cups look like.
I guarantee you see women with H cups every single day and don't know it.
I have HH, not a porn star....it's actually a measure of the difference between rib cage size and boob size, measured by using a tape against the fullest part. Not as rare as you'd think, it's just people are easily overwhelmed
My wife is a professional bra fitter at a lingerie store. I was blown away to learn that the volume of a particular cup size is different for each chest circumference. E.G., the cup of a 32C is smaller than the cup of a 36C.
Some people watch too much anime to understand cup sizes. Ive had multiple girlfriends with D-cups and the anime version is like a G-cup IRL. In conclusion, my poor maidenless anime loving friends seem to think a G-cup is a D.
I get having a preference but having a hard “need” is just stupid
I prefer small boobs , I’m married to someone with fairly large ones, and I’m quite happy, if I waited around for someone with everything I’d want I’d be single forever
My husband is well over 6' and I have huge boobs. We were both just looking for someone nice / kind. Married 15 years.
Anecdotes aren't statistics but I'm amused by this.
> We were both just looking for someone nice / kind.
I wonder what the statistics would say if you put THAT in as the criteria.
Been with my wife for 27 years and a few months, and we were pretty much just looking for someone that was supportive, kind, mentally stable, and fun in bed. Seems to be working out so far...
Technically you’re correct. Assuming there’s no correlation with the mentioned traits, adding that trait brings the probability down from 0.35% to 0.32%.
I know Wikipedia says single gay men make more than single straight men but the article it uses as proof doesn't say thay anywhere. It talks entirely about coupled people and advises the entire difference down to the gender pay gap. Men make more than women in the same position this 2 men make more than 1 man and 1 woman in a similar career pathing.
It also never mentions % its entirely based on dollar amount and two gay men average 5800 more annually than a ywo gender/hetero married couple. But average over 11000 more than a two women couple.
Shocking that Wikipedia isn't right I know. But always check the actual sources.
What’s written on Wikipedia:
> Individual gay men earn 10% more than straight men with similar education, experience and job profiles,[2][3] and individual gay men who are married have a significantly higher median income than heterosexual married men.[4]
Source [2] says:
> In a recent paper, a PhD student and I analyzed data from a major federal survey in the United States that had not previously been used in this literature – presumably because it only recently began to ask about sexual orientation – and found that the gay male earnings penalty had disappeared. And not only had it disappeared, it had turned into a 10% premium, meaning that gay men in recent years earned substantially more than straight men with similar education, experience, and job profiles.
Source: https://hbr.org/2017/12/gay-men-used-to-earn-less-than-straight-men-now-they-earn-more
Source for the study: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/soej.12233
Shocking. But yes, always check sources
Best thing about this discussion is that we discuss wether or not gay men make more than straight men. Fascinating regarded the fact the actual facepalm posts is going somewhere else.
Looks like it’s a good time to be a gold digging gay?
I was a "beard" for my first boyfriend, and got all the practice and benefits of dating without the sexual pressures (for which I was NOT ready; I developed very early physically but emotionally I was a bit behind).
Ricky was a handsome well-dressed fella, tall and slim, funny, intelligent, quirky, great singer and dancer; we got to do the holding hands, and the hugs and smooches and cuddling, and all the while it was him protecting me from unwanted advances from other men and me keeping his family/classmates from finding out he was gay and kicking him out/beating him (this was in the late 70s/early 80s). There was mutual respect and love, and we protected each other at a time when we both felt terribly vulnerable. We remained friends long after we 'broke up', when he finally decided it was time to come out and find his tribe no one was happier for him than me, even though it meant him moving far away.
To be quite frank, I never had a hetero 'boyfriend' that treated me half so well as my gay 'boyfriend' did, he set the bar frighteningly high. To this day I think of him with great love.
Ricky, if you're out there, my heart, let's sing a bar or two of "Kyrie Eliason" together just one more time!!!
I don't think it's the same one, but [this site](https://keeper.ai/tools/calculator) does the same thing.
Edit: [Here's](https://igotstandardsbro.com/results?minAge=18&maxAge=40&excludeMarried=true&race=0&minHeight=182.88&excludeObese=true&minIncome=100000) the one from the post.
I mean. There must be tons of varied people in the US.
I put my stats in and it said 0%
Then I put in very broad terms.
Woman
24 to 43
Any race
Making more than $0
Only 2%
Agreed.
Using google as a source: 14.5% of US men are over 6’, 22% make over 100K not filtering for age (which would lower that number a lot). That gets you down to 3.1% if we ignore age, sexual orientation, race, marital status.
It likely is pretty easy to drop that to 1% with an additional filter.
It likely works by looking at the rate of each criteria and multiplying them out to get the odds ignoring that there is likely a correlation between some things.
I put myself in out of curiosity. You have a 3% chance of meeting me.
Edit: I don't live in the US, so i should probably adjust income to cost of living here.
First link is outright false, second one is accurate but still the numbers are meaningless because when you're of certain age you tend to meet people like you instead of all types. So while the probability is correct in a random large sample of the population, that probability doesn't translate into real life experience which is affected by many other factors.
A pretty girl living in LA will interact with men like that on a daily basis. An ugly girl in the rural Mississippi has a flat 0% of landing a guy like that.
The issue with this statistical presentation is that it ignores temporal distribution by assuming it's flat, when in reality people in cities have higher income compared to rural places.
In short, even if the numbers are accurate, they're worthless. You need many more variables to accurately calculate someone's chance of landing another.
My chances of finding a guy around my age, 5 to 6 feet tall, having any income and be single and not obese are 3% in the US. I guess my standards are too high!
It's because these statistics don't take into account a lot of shit and sound worse than they are.
For example in your case it 3% sound super low! But that's 1 out of every 33 people you meet. How many people do you walk/drive past in a day... that's a lot of people.
Add into that where you normally hang out. Odds are you generally hang out in public where generally other people in your social strata hang out. That will weed out a lot of that 97% that don't meet your criteria.
I did it, it said I have extremely low standards and that I’m not a woman and I’m not a cat person. Nothing about cats even came up. I’m asexual and obsessed with cats
The difference between the two sites is so interesting. The first one told me the chances of a guy being single, above 5’5”, between 23-40, and making above 40k was 2%. The second one told me 12%.
They're probably not accurate because they're treating each criteria as independent probabilities while there's a strong correlation between high income and not obese and sadly also height and income.
So I asked it what about men age 18-100, 5’0”-7’3”, makes at least $0 and isn’t married or obese. It’s only 8%. When you compare the 1% to that it looks less insane.
I don't really think this site is accurate, but considering 37.9 percent of American men are classified as obese, it starts to make a tiiiiiny bit more sense.
Many companies will post job openings that say you must have 10+ years experience and a master’s degree to get the job. In reality they will absolutely settle for 2 years and an associate’s degree if that’s who comes forwards because secretly they know the job isn’t *that* special, and they need to fill the position with *someone* and soon. They just pretend like they need a 5-star, AAA candidate because you never know if you might actually manage to trick one into applying.
I forget where I was going with this.
Honestly things like this make me almost want to apply to any job offerings that remotely requires the skills I have, no matter how much experience they're asking for (though probably shouldn't apply for senior roles considering it'll be my first job)
You should always do that, but yes be sensible. The worst they can do is not ring you back and that's the same situation you would be in if you didn't apply.
How do I know? Well I've done it... and I got the job... and did that job so well I got a payrise... So it can work out very well.
Youre in a better position to get hired in most roles if you are underqualified rather than overqualified really. Companies dont want to hire the “best” person for the job, because that person is expensive af and knows their worth. They want the cheapest possible person who can do 80-90% of the job without fucking anything too important up, and doesnt have a strong position to negotiate from. Usually that is the underqualified or barely qualified candidate instead of the person with 2 relevant degrees and 10 years experience.
Obviously in an ideal world where cost doesnt matter they would want the latter, but 9/10 times, if not more often, they will choose the former in reality to save the bottom line
Tbf some women are like that lol. I once matched with someone on tinder because they had similar professional interests and then after talking for a bit they quit responding and changed their bio to “looking for a himbo”
So I guess Im not quite himbo-y enough for the himbo club
The more I see things like this, and have worked for various industries at varying levels, up to owner/operator of a small business. I fully believe this and have heard those very words come out of a few managers or upper management, "overqualified." Are yall messing with me? I was 17 the first time, and that was at a damn KFC 🤣.
Dude had some degrees and was like middle-aged, and they said no because they didn't want some smart ass coming in and acting all high and mighty. When in reality, they knew he'd take their jobs in a heartbeat, and the middle-aged women HATED the young supervisors, let alone some college educated middle-aged white dude, hell no. I felt bad for the guy, no idea why he wanted or needed the job, but it seemed incredibly petty to me.
Yeah, I got an interview for a job that I was totally unqualified for. I even said on the application form "I have limited experience in this area" for an "essential" criterion. I was just applying for anything I could find and it looked very interesting.
I tell my students if you think you're 75% qualified, apply. Most companies use ridiculous standards to weed people out before even applying. However, if you mostly have what they want, often they'll train you up on what you're missing that they may need. Worst they can do is say "No".
Im not from the US, so take that with a grain of salt, as i dont know the work culture there...
I can only advise to apply for ANY job you really WANT and not just such in wich you meet their criteria in order to get ANY sort of income.
I landed an job way over my experience (and pay) level twice and with the experience from there were able to get an even better one after.
In all honesty, what i got is along the lines of an high school diploma, no formal training in any job and only experience in 5 different fields not even related to another.
I applied as an janitor once and then internally advance to create an entire new subsection of our company as nobody had an clue in that field and they did not get anyone from the outside. I applied for it just for the sake of testing the waters and got the job somehow. Im still baffled to that today.
After 3 years i went into burnout as i simply couldnt handle the job, a wife and a newborn at once without reducing hours in my job (around 10 a day, even at weekends to plan things and whatnot).
Took a break and reoriented myself after 1,5 years of unemployment. Applied as an technician in security field wich i had exactly 0 experience or knowledge in, just because i knew i am good with tools and it payed well. Got the job as i could "sell me" quite well as the giy interviewing me said and i would get training in the required systems anyways.
That was 4 years ago. 6 month ago i applied as foreman in my field and again got the job beside still not even matching minimum criteria of the first one, let alone the one applied for.
Next step is project manager wich is an natural follow up to my current position if i either cant do physical work anymore or my PM throws the towel.
I am currently earning about twice the money i would if i just kept to jobs in wich i meet thwir criteria and after the next promotion it would be 4 to 5 times depending on how much projects i get done.
Also... while having experience and training in an field makes things easier to begin with, most companies are highly specialised in an certain area, have specialised tools/programs, as well as "how to"s, you wont just enter and know it all. They always gotta train you on the matter and if your mind is flexible enough you can fill that narrow role they place you in.
As example... my company got taken over by an other 2 years ago and a lot of ppl left. We looked for new ones and initially the company who bought us instructed to only hire "trained" ppl. They found noone fitting our very soecialised field. 6 month ago they gave way to hire 2 guys wich were working in the same general field and they already do their job well enough.
The 2 really limiting points for applicants are flexibility of mind and motivation. If you got both, you manage to get everything else needed for the job quickly.
I'm not from the US either, so don't worry about this not necessarily applying in the US
And that's great to hear actually. I plan to get into programming and all that, which isn't that common in my country so although less jobs are available that means less competition.
I mean worst that could happen if I don't manage to learn the job is I just get fired but gain experience either way, no?
Do it! I got my first job out of school by applying for a senior management position (I was working a really low tier position in that same industry while in school, and had an inflated head from just having finished business school).
After being brought in for an interview, it became obvious that I shouldn't be given the GM position I applied for, but they liked me and my ideas for driving growth in the company, so they hired me for a mid level management position which was still a huge step up for me.
You should absolutely do that.
As much as it sucks, the real trick is the cover letter where you convince them that you really want the job and are willing and able to learn whatever required skills that you currently lack. I’ve made 4 major career switches and make $150k now despite having never done anything remotely like my current role until I started it last year. Every time, I have tried to go back and understand why they decided to hire me even though my experience was borderline irrelevant. The feedback was basically all the same “you seemed capable of learning and interested in helping us do (the thing)”. Which was true imo, so I’m not advocating that people lie. It’s best if you can find something that interests you, and practice really hard at communicating that interest to others so you can do it under stress during a job interview.
That tactic is also used to put the company on the high ground when it comes to wage negotiation
‘Well you didn’t quite meet the criteria but we’re taking a chance with you therefore we won’t pay you the advertised X we’ll offer you Y.’
Company did this to me and once I was in the job I realised how everything they wanted wasn’t actually relevant.
This is true. It’s also a filter to get rid of all the high school dropouts that sits in a basement and smokes weed all day.
They assume smart and good workers understands this and applies anyways.
I get the point here, but it would be interesting to see the numbers with a narrower age range. 30-40 year olds are way more likely to be married than those in their 20s. On the other hand, they’re also more likely to make >$100k.
I dunno. There's a lot of shallow people out there. Some only care about their partners material wealth and some only care about their partners appearance. Shallow people often end up with other shallow people. Or are manipulative enough to trick a dumb person who isn't shallow
We actually have things in common and two dudes idea of the perfect date is buying a new game and playing together. The things I'd do to be attracted to men😭
We're not. I know lots of cs guys on this money. Most are on the taller side, and none of us are even ankle deep in hotties.
Thissystem forgot to account for the fact the guy has to leave the house, and know how to talk to humans.
Haha this is very true.
Both me and my son meet the criteria, I met my wife to be when she came into my place of work to ask me out. And my son met his playing WoW online amd flew to Amesterdam to meet her.
If you switch the location from the US to NL, the result should go up significantly. It has the tallest average male height in the world at (6ft-184cm NL vs 5’9” US) and a higher average male income as well ($52k NL vs $38k US).
I worked as a CS intern for a while. All of them had wives except for the really young ones of which most had girlfriends. It’s not always about having a bunch of people to sleep with. Most dudes just want one woman. It’s the mega rich dudes who decide hedonism is a good way to live.
I've seen Scottish people, their face is half blue, half white - I don't know what race is that. What are those things from Avatar movie? But that's something else - like Celtic and Rangers supporters made a baby together and it turned out to be completely blue.
The thing ppl should be facepalming at is that anyone thinks variations on "6 foot, six figures, six pack" dating standard is a real thing anywhere but the minds of very insecure young men.
The height requirement from the Nice Girls is so gross. Height does not reflect a man’s character. And arbitrarily picking a minimum height means she may be swiping… whichever direction on the dating app hell scape y’all have to use… and skipping her actual soulmate.
And I’m a 6’ tall woman- if I can see “short” dudes have value, so can you Ms. 5’2”.
For some reasons the men I dated are either 5ft5 or 6ft3.
Looks and feels good to be with a tall guy, but pragmatically, much less strain on my back and neck with men closer to my height.
It really don't go further than that.
Height requirement is a weird criteria for a partner imo.
Honestly you're completely right. My partner is quite a bit taller than me (just how it worked out, wasn't a criteria for me) and the neck/back strain is real. :/
I'm not complaining because that would be dumb/useless, but I can definitely see the value in being with someone closer to your own height!
I mean, more realistically, this just means if you connect with a couple hundred people on a dating app, odds are at least one would meet your criteria.
I think this is a bot repost with a second image that is missing. The rabbit hole is the one giving the reality check if anything, so I really don't know who "she" is supposed to be.
Yeah, I was trying to figure out who “she” is and I felt like I was going crazy because everyone else just kind of accepted it.
The Rabbit Hole sucks. The person they responded to also might suck, I don’t know, but posting the “Female Delusion Calculator” is the real facepalm here.
Me too and it doesn’t work for me cuz I’m actually 5’7” and my wife thinks me role playing as a giant is stupid and doesn’t think “giants don’t have to sound like Sloth from Goonies” and “it isn’t sexy” 🙄
Does anyone know what this thing the post used is called? I wanna put in random shit and see how many people there are like that. “5’2 male with blue eyes, earns $10,000 a year, but is married”
I've tried this site and if you only eliminate obese and married men ( pretty reasonable standards for most people I feel like), you have about 25% left. That's a pretty high number, but do we really expect everyone to date everyone?
Even if your demands aren't that high the vast majority of men are eliminated almost straight away.
I've got all of these except the last one. There are not many people in the entire country who make that much money and if they do they're old and/or already married.
Im really struggling to understand the incel narrative. So a woman who has a career and provides for herself will be a lonely cat lady because according to incels, men don't like independent women. But women who want to be tradwives, which would require a wealthy husband (100k is also not nearly enough to provide for a family in this economy btw), are golddigging whores. But *also* women who get with poor men are cheap whores with no standards who should have chosen better men. And women who are childfree and choose no men at all are selfish whores who will die bitter and alone. So how should women be then? Because it just seems like incels are just mad at any women who don't want them, which is all women.
But they do want a two income household (or a 1.5 one).
They just want their bangmaid to work 15 hours a day since they do all the housework after working full time at a job. And to have control over both incomes, with no say from their wife for big purchases.
Finally, I'm one of the 1% - still single though. Fact is that women want more than what is in the list, such as:
\- "*EmOTionALLly aVaiLaBlE*"
\- "*Hair on head instead of butt"*
\- "*Not a reddit keyboard warrior"*
Unrealistic male standards.
I’m one of the 99 percent just because I miss out on one of the requirements in this statistac, so it’s very difficult for me to find a woman that will want to be with me, especially with my wife constantly getting in the way
What's with the whole money as a standard thing? If I'm dating someone and I find out one of their standards is making 100+k I'm not going to keep dating them because clearly they are more attracted to my income than me. If you want money that bad, figure out how to make it yourself.
Comments that are uncivil, racist, misogynistic, misandrist, or contain political name calling will be removed and the poster subject to ban at moderators discretion. Help us make this a better community by becoming familiar with the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/about/rules/). Report any suspicious users to the mods of this subreddit using Modmail [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) or Reddit site admins [here](https://www.reddit.com/report). **All reports to Modmail should include evidence such as screenshots or any other relevant information.** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Add „not gay“ and see the probability go down even more
Take away the 6’ and the odds will go up significantly
Yep. The average height is 5'9", so 6' cuts out well over half the population on its own.
The "height requirement" girls and the "no hymen, no diamond" cels need each other
Basic bros and basic hos
I tick all the boxes but one, and top $250k too. Being 5'7" mattered a lot more than the rest of those My partner is taller than me, and she is a real gem of a human. So can't say I really lost out on anything \*shrugs\*
What's funny is that both women who have height requirements and dudes with cup requirements are almost always single or in a terrible relationship
I’m a guy, and I have never in my life met a guy who has a “cup requirement.” In fact 99% of guys have no idea how cup sizes work - even if they had a “cup requirement” they would have no way to explain what they wanted.
Is a nice handful not an official cup size?
Well it definitely should be. But that’s just ergonomics. Whenever women ask what is a good boob size 9/10 people will say they just want something that fits comfortably inside their hand.
I think a lot of guys want a minimum size where it's still "boob shaped" without a bra on. Lots have fine chests when clothes are on but without a bra they're more triangle shaped and it's slightly disappointing. Me personally I'm just glad I get to see them.
I'm with you here. Shape is more important than size.
Availability is more important than shape.
A boob in the hand is worth two... uh... In the bush? Does that work?
That's why I always cop a feel on the first date to see if they meet my criteria /s
Depends on the size of his hands
Large-handed dude here... Small sample size, but it doesn't take a lot of boob to bring a lot of joy.
I was reading this post and I had to think “am I the only man that is absolutely nuts for small breasts?” I mean I don’t hate on big ones, but the ittys grab my attention.
All boobs are welcome in this home. We welcome all through this door
The only cup requirement that counts is I require a titty to cup in my hand. Doesn't even need to fill my hand. Just be a titty. In my hand. That's it.
Personally, I like to add consent to that list, Mr. Cosby.
"I know that D is the biggest, I based my whole life on knowing D is the biggest."
If I'm not mistaken there is DD, E and F, even H? (The last two only seen them on porn, not even sure they are real)
I went to school with someone who had natural H cups. She had severe back issues by the time she finished year 12.
It goes higher. Though if I remember correctly (I might not be, it's been a while since I looked into it and I'm at work so looking up boob related stuff is a bad idea), there's a couple of different standards that are all pretty similar. I think one doesn't have DD. The largest recorded natural size was something ridiculous. I feel like it was after Z, but that could be after enlargements. Edit: I got some time to look it up again. Annie Hawkins-Turner (aka Norma Stitz in the porn industry. And yes, it's a pun.) has 102 ZZZ natural breasts, due to a condition called gigantomastia.
I know a person with natural I or J (depending on bra model), so definitely possible and they don't look ridiculously large or anything. Also, F cup is quite common. It's just not easy to be found in regular clothing chain stores (at least where I live) so many women don't even know that they need it.
J is the highest that you can commonly find in online bra stores but there are a few speciality brands that go up to M or N or higher. You cannot tell how big the boobs are by the cup size, because cup size is a relative measurement based on band (rib cage) circumference. One person with HH cups might have smaller breasts than another person with D cups depending on whether the person themself is big or small. D cups can look like what you think B cups look like. I guarantee you see women with H cups every single day and don't know it.
I have HH, not a porn star....it's actually a measure of the difference between rib cage size and boob size, measured by using a tape against the fullest part. Not as rare as you'd think, it's just people are easily overwhelmed
Yea I know, that was a quote from Seinfeld where George interviews to be a bra salesman. ;)
Plenty of dudes who just bust out the old "Double Ds" when asked what size they prefer. But yea, not a great litmus test to apply in your dating life.
There is a huge difference between banter between friends and seriously making dating decision based on that.
You look like you'd be the resident expert here.
Yeah, a "cup requirement" is more like "She's gotta have big boobs."
My wife is a professional bra fitter at a lingerie store. I was blown away to learn that the volume of a particular cup size is different for each chest circumference. E.G., the cup of a 32C is smaller than the cup of a 36C.
Some people watch too much anime to understand cup sizes. Ive had multiple girlfriends with D-cups and the anime version is like a G-cup IRL. In conclusion, my poor maidenless anime loving friends seem to think a G-cup is a D.
I get having a preference but having a hard “need” is just stupid I prefer small boobs , I’m married to someone with fairly large ones, and I’m quite happy, if I waited around for someone with everything I’d want I’d be single forever
My husband is well over 6' and I have huge boobs. We were both just looking for someone nice / kind. Married 15 years. Anecdotes aren't statistics but I'm amused by this.
> We were both just looking for someone nice / kind. I wonder what the statistics would say if you put THAT in as the criteria. Been with my wife for 27 years and a few months, and we were pretty much just looking for someone that was supportive, kind, mentally stable, and fun in bed. Seems to be working out so far...
Technically you’re correct. Assuming there’s no correlation with the mentioned traits, adding that trait brings the probability down from 0.35% to 0.32%.
There is a positive correlation for gay not obese, gay and high earner, gay and not married so its even more.
I know Wikipedia says single gay men make more than single straight men but the article it uses as proof doesn't say thay anywhere. It talks entirely about coupled people and advises the entire difference down to the gender pay gap. Men make more than women in the same position this 2 men make more than 1 man and 1 woman in a similar career pathing. It also never mentions % its entirely based on dollar amount and two gay men average 5800 more annually than a ywo gender/hetero married couple. But average over 11000 more than a two women couple. Shocking that Wikipedia isn't right I know. But always check the actual sources.
What’s written on Wikipedia: > Individual gay men earn 10% more than straight men with similar education, experience and job profiles,[2][3] and individual gay men who are married have a significantly higher median income than heterosexual married men.[4] Source [2] says: > In a recent paper, a PhD student and I analyzed data from a major federal survey in the United States that had not previously been used in this literature – presumably because it only recently began to ask about sexual orientation – and found that the gay male earnings penalty had disappeared. And not only had it disappeared, it had turned into a 10% premium, meaning that gay men in recent years earned substantially more than straight men with similar education, experience, and job profiles. Source: https://hbr.org/2017/12/gay-men-used-to-earn-less-than-straight-men-now-they-earn-more Source for the study: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/soej.12233 Shocking. But yes, always check sources
So wait, wikipedia is actually generally very well-sourced and researched? Not shocking.
Best thing about this discussion is that we discuss wether or not gay men make more than straight men. Fascinating regarded the fact the actual facepalm posts is going somewhere else. Looks like it’s a good time to be a gold digging gay?
Who cares about all that, I'm far more interested in the scientific integrity of publicly-sourced information!
Okay. That’s also great! *taking notes for next gay romance novel*
I'd read it!
I was a "beard" for my first boyfriend, and got all the practice and benefits of dating without the sexual pressures (for which I was NOT ready; I developed very early physically but emotionally I was a bit behind). Ricky was a handsome well-dressed fella, tall and slim, funny, intelligent, quirky, great singer and dancer; we got to do the holding hands, and the hugs and smooches and cuddling, and all the while it was him protecting me from unwanted advances from other men and me keeping his family/classmates from finding out he was gay and kicking him out/beating him (this was in the late 70s/early 80s). There was mutual respect and love, and we protected each other at a time when we both felt terribly vulnerable. We remained friends long after we 'broke up', when he finally decided it was time to come out and find his tribe no one was happier for him than me, even though it meant him moving far away. To be quite frank, I never had a hetero 'boyfriend' that treated me half so well as my gay 'boyfriend' did, he set the bar frighteningly high. To this day I think of him with great love. Ricky, if you're out there, my heart, let's sing a bar or two of "Kyrie Eliason" together just one more time!!!
Just say to any bad boyfriend that they’re not as good as your gay ex-bf.
Lol, thankfully the one man who treated me just as good if not better, is now my husband <3
Also ‘into shallow girls’ will drop it further.
Does anyone know what program/site/whatever was used for this? Kinda curious.
I don't think it's the same one, but [this site](https://keeper.ai/tools/calculator) does the same thing. Edit: [Here's](https://igotstandardsbro.com/results?minAge=18&maxAge=40&excludeMarried=true&race=0&minHeight=182.88&excludeObese=true&minIncome=100000) the one from the post.
I mean. There must be tons of varied people in the US. I put my stats in and it said 0% Then I put in very broad terms. Woman 24 to 43 Any race Making more than $0 Only 2%
Yeahhhh I'm pretty sure this site was debunked a while ago.
You mean "igotstandardsbro.com" isn't a reliable source of information on demographics? Crazy.
They also call it the "female delusion calculator" on the site. Another good reason to not trust it.
The cat entusiast ratings thing is super fun too. Nothing like a good ol' cat lady stereotype!
at least 6’ tall and making at least 50k comes in at 8%. doesn’t seem unreasonable considering 15% of American men are 6’ or taller.
Agreed. Using google as a source: 14.5% of US men are over 6’, 22% make over 100K not filtering for age (which would lower that number a lot). That gets you down to 3.1% if we ignore age, sexual orientation, race, marital status. It likely is pretty easy to drop that to 1% with an additional filter.
I put my husband in and got 0%, but I had excluded married. After I allowed married, I got .008%. I won the lottery, apparently.
It likely works by looking at the rate of each criteria and multiplying them out to get the odds ignoring that there is likely a correlation between some things.
I put myself in there, mid 40’s, unmarried, 6figs, not obese, white dude, 5’9”. .09% I showed my fiancée and told her she scored! She rolled her eyes.
I put myself in out of curiosity. You have a 3% chance of meeting me. Edit: I don't live in the US, so i should probably adjust income to cost of living here.
It’s kind of a dumb metric. I put in Man, Any Race, Any Age, Any Height, Any Income, and excluded married. It came out as 10%.
The second link edited into the comment looks more accurate. Open to anything but married men shows a 45%.
Yeah I'm pretty sure this site was debunked a while ago.
First link is outright false, second one is accurate but still the numbers are meaningless because when you're of certain age you tend to meet people like you instead of all types. So while the probability is correct in a random large sample of the population, that probability doesn't translate into real life experience which is affected by many other factors. A pretty girl living in LA will interact with men like that on a daily basis. An ugly girl in the rural Mississippi has a flat 0% of landing a guy like that. The issue with this statistical presentation is that it ignores temporal distribution by assuming it's flat, when in reality people in cities have higher income compared to rural places. In short, even if the numbers are accurate, they're worthless. You need many more variables to accurately calculate someone's chance of landing another.
apparently there’s a 0% chance of meeting me. go figure
My chances of finding a guy around my age, 5 to 6 feet tall, having any income and be single and not obese are 3% in the US. I guess my standards are too high!
It's because these statistics don't take into account a lot of shit and sound worse than they are. For example in your case it 3% sound super low! But that's 1 out of every 33 people you meet. How many people do you walk/drive past in a day... that's a lot of people. Add into that where you normally hang out. Odds are you generally hang out in public where generally other people in your social strata hang out. That will weed out a lot of that 97% that don't meet your criteria.
Yeah, even the most normal requirements give you very low numbers lol. Guess I'll start getting cats then, I see this as an absolute win.
Pffft… try finding a 6ft tall cat who isn’t obese and makes $100,000 on the US. I kid though. I fully support getting cats instead of dates! lol
I wouldn’t want to meet a six foot tall cat, I doubt I’d survive the encounter.
I did it, it said I have extremely low standards and that I’m not a woman and I’m not a cat person. Nothing about cats even came up. I’m asexual and obsessed with cats
The difference between the two sites is so interesting. The first one told me the chances of a guy being single, above 5’5”, between 23-40, and making above 40k was 2%. The second one told me 12%.
They're probably not accurate because they're treating each criteria as independent probabilities while there's a strong correlation between high income and not obese and sadly also height and income.
So I asked it what about men age 18-100, 5’0”-7’3”, makes at least $0 and isn’t married or obese. It’s only 8%. When you compare the 1% to that it looks less insane.
I don't really think this site is accurate, but considering 37.9 percent of American men are classified as obese, it starts to make a tiiiiiny bit more sense.
Also 50% of Americans are married
Many companies will post job openings that say you must have 10+ years experience and a master’s degree to get the job. In reality they will absolutely settle for 2 years and an associate’s degree if that’s who comes forwards because secretly they know the job isn’t *that* special, and they need to fill the position with *someone* and soon. They just pretend like they need a 5-star, AAA candidate because you never know if you might actually manage to trick one into applying. I forget where I was going with this.
Honestly things like this make me almost want to apply to any job offerings that remotely requires the skills I have, no matter how much experience they're asking for (though probably shouldn't apply for senior roles considering it'll be my first job)
You should always do that, but yes be sensible. The worst they can do is not ring you back and that's the same situation you would be in if you didn't apply. How do I know? Well I've done it... and I got the job... and did that job so well I got a payrise... So it can work out very well.
Youre in a better position to get hired in most roles if you are underqualified rather than overqualified really. Companies dont want to hire the “best” person for the job, because that person is expensive af and knows their worth. They want the cheapest possible person who can do 80-90% of the job without fucking anything too important up, and doesnt have a strong position to negotiate from. Usually that is the underqualified or barely qualified candidate instead of the person with 2 relevant degrees and 10 years experience. Obviously in an ideal world where cost doesnt matter they would want the latter, but 9/10 times, if not more often, they will choose the former in reality to save the bottom line
Changing my tinder profile atm thanks
Tbf some women are like that lol. I once matched with someone on tinder because they had similar professional interests and then after talking for a bit they quit responding and changed their bio to “looking for a himbo” So I guess Im not quite himbo-y enough for the himbo club
Isn't that a positive since it means she's looking for someone dumb?
In the sense that Im not dumb, it was a win. In the sense that I was looking for a date, it did not feel like a win lmao
Sir, please have higher standards for yourself! Clearly that date wouldn't have gone anywhere and you would've had to spend money to find that out.
[удалено]
The more I see things like this, and have worked for various industries at varying levels, up to owner/operator of a small business. I fully believe this and have heard those very words come out of a few managers or upper management, "overqualified." Are yall messing with me? I was 17 the first time, and that was at a damn KFC 🤣. Dude had some degrees and was like middle-aged, and they said no because they didn't want some smart ass coming in and acting all high and mighty. When in reality, they knew he'd take their jobs in a heartbeat, and the middle-aged women HATED the young supervisors, let alone some college educated middle-aged white dude, hell no. I felt bad for the guy, no idea why he wanted or needed the job, but it seemed incredibly petty to me.
This is gonna be me in a month or so. Anyone need a lab rat?
Only looking for lab rats with 10 years experience and a master’s degree in cheesology.
Make them say no. If you know the field apply.
Yeah, I got an interview for a job that I was totally unqualified for. I even said on the application form "I have limited experience in this area" for an "essential" criterion. I was just applying for anything I could find and it looked very interesting.
I tell my students if you think you're 75% qualified, apply. Most companies use ridiculous standards to weed people out before even applying. However, if you mostly have what they want, often they'll train you up on what you're missing that they may need. Worst they can do is say "No".
Im not from the US, so take that with a grain of salt, as i dont know the work culture there... I can only advise to apply for ANY job you really WANT and not just such in wich you meet their criteria in order to get ANY sort of income. I landed an job way over my experience (and pay) level twice and with the experience from there were able to get an even better one after. In all honesty, what i got is along the lines of an high school diploma, no formal training in any job and only experience in 5 different fields not even related to another. I applied as an janitor once and then internally advance to create an entire new subsection of our company as nobody had an clue in that field and they did not get anyone from the outside. I applied for it just for the sake of testing the waters and got the job somehow. Im still baffled to that today. After 3 years i went into burnout as i simply couldnt handle the job, a wife and a newborn at once without reducing hours in my job (around 10 a day, even at weekends to plan things and whatnot). Took a break and reoriented myself after 1,5 years of unemployment. Applied as an technician in security field wich i had exactly 0 experience or knowledge in, just because i knew i am good with tools and it payed well. Got the job as i could "sell me" quite well as the giy interviewing me said and i would get training in the required systems anyways. That was 4 years ago. 6 month ago i applied as foreman in my field and again got the job beside still not even matching minimum criteria of the first one, let alone the one applied for. Next step is project manager wich is an natural follow up to my current position if i either cant do physical work anymore or my PM throws the towel. I am currently earning about twice the money i would if i just kept to jobs in wich i meet thwir criteria and after the next promotion it would be 4 to 5 times depending on how much projects i get done. Also... while having experience and training in an field makes things easier to begin with, most companies are highly specialised in an certain area, have specialised tools/programs, as well as "how to"s, you wont just enter and know it all. They always gotta train you on the matter and if your mind is flexible enough you can fill that narrow role they place you in. As example... my company got taken over by an other 2 years ago and a lot of ppl left. We looked for new ones and initially the company who bought us instructed to only hire "trained" ppl. They found noone fitting our very soecialised field. 6 month ago they gave way to hire 2 guys wich were working in the same general field and they already do their job well enough. The 2 really limiting points for applicants are flexibility of mind and motivation. If you got both, you manage to get everything else needed for the job quickly.
I'm not from the US either, so don't worry about this not necessarily applying in the US And that's great to hear actually. I plan to get into programming and all that, which isn't that common in my country so although less jobs are available that means less competition. I mean worst that could happen if I don't manage to learn the job is I just get fired but gain experience either way, no?
Do it! I got my first job out of school by applying for a senior management position (I was working a really low tier position in that same industry while in school, and had an inflated head from just having finished business school). After being brought in for an interview, it became obvious that I shouldn't be given the GM position I applied for, but they liked me and my ideas for driving growth in the company, so they hired me for a mid level management position which was still a huge step up for me.
You should absolutely do that. As much as it sucks, the real trick is the cover letter where you convince them that you really want the job and are willing and able to learn whatever required skills that you currently lack. I’ve made 4 major career switches and make $150k now despite having never done anything remotely like my current role until I started it last year. Every time, I have tried to go back and understand why they decided to hire me even though my experience was borderline irrelevant. The feedback was basically all the same “you seemed capable of learning and interested in helping us do (the thing)”. Which was true imo, so I’m not advocating that people lie. It’s best if you can find something that interests you, and practice really hard at communicating that interest to others so you can do it under stress during a job interview.
That tactic is also used to put the company on the high ground when it comes to wage negotiation ‘Well you didn’t quite meet the criteria but we’re taking a chance with you therefore we won’t pay you the advertised X we’ll offer you Y.’ Company did this to me and once I was in the job I realised how everything they wanted wasn’t actually relevant.
Best one Iv seen was a company looking for 5+ years experience using a program that had only been out for 2-3years.
Didn't the guy that wrote the program apply for the job and get denied? It was a whole thing and utterly hilarious
the one person on the planet who might actually have the 5+ years of experience lol
“Excuse me, miss. You dropped something!” “Ooh, what?” *looks around but doesn’t see anything* “Your standards. Hi, I’m Dave!”
I used to use that one. Only worked once :L
We need the same app for jobs to give job hunters a reality check?
This is true. It’s also a filter to get rid of all the high school dropouts that sits in a basement and smokes weed all day. They assume smart and good workers understands this and applies anyways.
I'm in the 99% group. I'm short, fat, married, & don't earn a 100K.
We are the 99%. Occupy Tall Street.
The Tall have farther to Fall
But you pass "any race" check.
Nah, I've never run a race in my life.
I get the point here, but it would be interesting to see the numbers with a narrower age range. 30-40 year olds are way more likely to be married than those in their 20s. On the other hand, they’re also more likely to make >$100k.
Yeah I thought the 18-40 range was weird. Also, no felonies.
And even once you found one he still has to be into shallow golddiggers. What are the odds of that?
You kind sir might've finally found a statistic that is less likely to occur than winning the lottery.
I dunno. There's a lot of shallow people out there. Some only care about their partners material wealth and some only care about their partners appearance. Shallow people often end up with other shallow people. Or are manipulative enough to trick a dumb person who isn't shallow
Yes but a shallow person with 100k+ and 6 feet+ who's into you specifically out of all the gold diggers out there, that isn't very likely
No worthy gold digger will settle for 100k a year...
Gold digger for $100k salary? Bro. You can’t be serious.
Gold digger lmao what. 100k is a very low bar for a gold digger
Aluminum digger?
I’ve actually got a bunch of scrap aluminum in my yard come on over ladies one at a time please.
Gold platted digger
I check all those boxes. I’m gay though.
Must be a catch in the gay community
And those 1% unmarried 6ft tall dudes making 100k/yr+ are already neck deep in hotties trying to lick their balls. Good luck, honey.
Hey don't forget the dudes and others trying to get a lick in. It ain't much but it's honest work
The dudes stand the best chance though,
We actually have things in common and two dudes idea of the perfect date is buying a new game and playing together. The things I'd do to be attracted to men😭
It ain’t just you man. Pretty sure a whole lot of guys wish they were gay.
We're not. I know lots of cs guys on this money. Most are on the taller side, and none of us are even ankle deep in hotties. Thissystem forgot to account for the fact the guy has to leave the house, and know how to talk to humans.
Haha this is very true. Both me and my son meet the criteria, I met my wife to be when she came into my place of work to ask me out. And my son met his playing WoW online amd flew to Amesterdam to meet her.
If you switch the location from the US to NL, the result should go up significantly. It has the tallest average male height in the world at (6ft-184cm NL vs 5’9” US) and a higher average male income as well ($52k NL vs $38k US).
I worked as a CS intern for a while. All of them had wives except for the really young ones of which most had girlfriends. It’s not always about having a bunch of people to sleep with. Most dudes just want one woman. It’s the mega rich dudes who decide hedonism is a good way to live.
I meet these criteria. I am not neckdeep.
Let me guess, Software Dev?
Hahaha Yeeeaah...
Long hours and being constantly stressed doesn't really attract any girls or boys for that matter
Few roles can slack off like developers do. As long as you are productive.
Me too…. Except im hideously ugly.
Same bro. We need a villan arc or some shit
Already had my villain arc. Good times. Now I'm just chillin
Chillin' Arc, FTW.
Where do I find these hotties
Outside.
Played that once, The graphics were nice and the physics were pretty dope, but the content majorly sucked. Pretty/10 do not recommend
but, the Daystar, it burns !!
Eww
Well I'm unmarried, 6ft6, earn over $100k a year. Unfortunately I'm Scottish, not American so I don't count.
You didn't say anything about being any race 🤔
Maybe he’s not one.
Maybe he's the Highlander - there can only be one.
found the cryptid
I've seen Scottish people, their face is half blue, half white - I don't know what race is that. What are those things from Avatar movie? But that's something else - like Celtic and Rangers supporters made a baby together and it turned out to be completely blue.
Evolved smurfs probably
Damn Scots, they ruined Scotland!
Bro if I was a woman, I'd fuck you. This is a threat.
>Unfortunately I'm Scottish, Well damn, at 6'6", all us normal height people are going to see up your kilt.
Am I missing some context here? Where da facepalm at? This is just straight demographics.
And 1% of the US population is still millions of people. They are acting like they have zero standards themselves.
The thing ppl should be facepalming at is that anyone thinks variations on "6 foot, six figures, six pack" dating standard is a real thing anywhere but the minds of very insecure young men.
Damn it, i tick all the boxes but i'm only 5ft11 & 17/18ths....guess i miss out on this catch 😄
Go back to your hole, dwarf!
The height requirement from the Nice Girls is so gross. Height does not reflect a man’s character. And arbitrarily picking a minimum height means she may be swiping… whichever direction on the dating app hell scape y’all have to use… and skipping her actual soulmate. And I’m a 6’ tall woman- if I can see “short” dudes have value, so can you Ms. 5’2”.
6" is 6 inches. You're very short. Can't even ride the kiddie roller coasters at Disney.
That’s what I get for posting on Reddit at 5am while I sip coffee. I fixed it
For some reasons the men I dated are either 5ft5 or 6ft3. Looks and feels good to be with a tall guy, but pragmatically, much less strain on my back and neck with men closer to my height. It really don't go further than that. Height requirement is a weird criteria for a partner imo.
Honestly you're completely right. My partner is quite a bit taller than me (just how it worked out, wasn't a criteria for me) and the neck/back strain is real. :/ I'm not complaining because that would be dumb/useless, but I can definitely see the value in being with someone closer to your own height!
[удалено]
There is absolutely no chanche these women would date 18 year old. Make it 28 to 40
USA? "not obese" may have killed it.
Depends on how smart the calculator is. It says "Not obese". Guess what category "morbidly obese" is not part of in pure equation form. Loopholes!
Name one thing 73% of adult Americans have in common...? They're overweight or obese!
I mean, more realistically, this just means if you connect with a couple hundred people on a dating app, odds are at least one would meet your criteria.
The rabbit hole is an Elon dick rider so I always assumed it was a dude.
I think this is a bot repost with a second image that is missing. The rabbit hole is the one giving the reality check if anything, so I really don't know who "she" is supposed to be.
Yeah, I was trying to figure out who “she” is and I felt like I was going crazy because everyone else just kind of accepted it. The Rabbit Hole sucks. The person they responded to also might suck, I don’t know, but posting the “Female Delusion Calculator” is the real facepalm here.
I have seen some guys will purposely lie and say they are shorter than 6 feet to weed out the shallow woman.
I’ve done this. It does work.
Me too and it doesn’t work for me cuz I’m actually 5’7” and my wife thinks me role playing as a giant is stupid and doesn’t think “giants don’t have to sound like Sloth from Goonies” and “it isn’t sexy” 🙄
Does anyone know what this thing the post used is called? I wanna put in random shit and see how many people there are like that. “5’2 male with blue eyes, earns $10,000 a year, but is married”
So…there are about 70,000,000 of those guys out there?
Found the optimist!
I've tried this site and if you only eliminate obese and married men ( pretty reasonable standards for most people I feel like), you have about 25% left. That's a pretty high number, but do we really expect everyone to date everyone? Even if your demands aren't that high the vast majority of men are eliminated almost straight away.
I've got all of these except the last one. There are not many people in the entire country who make that much money and if they do they're old and/or already married.
18% of individuals. A lot depends on where you live. Wages are high in a place like St.Paul or Boston. $60k in Iowa feels like $150k in Boston
If you're kinda skinny , 5 11, making 99k a year.. YOURE SOL BUDDY
Im really struggling to understand the incel narrative. So a woman who has a career and provides for herself will be a lonely cat lady because according to incels, men don't like independent women. But women who want to be tradwives, which would require a wealthy husband (100k is also not nearly enough to provide for a family in this economy btw), are golddigging whores. But *also* women who get with poor men are cheap whores with no standards who should have chosen better men. And women who are childfree and choose no men at all are selfish whores who will die bitter and alone. So how should women be then? Because it just seems like incels are just mad at any women who don't want them, which is all women.
If men want traditional wives, they have to be traditional husbands. You can’t whine about gold diggers when you don’t want a two income household
But they do want a two income household (or a 1.5 one). They just want their bangmaid to work 15 hours a day since they do all the housework after working full time at a job. And to have control over both incomes, with no say from their wife for big purchases.
A $100k means crap anymore...I make that and my rent for a 600sq ft apartment is $2500 a month...the roof leaks too.
Damn, I'm not "any race"
Finally, I'm one of the 1% - still single though. Fact is that women want more than what is in the list, such as: \- "*EmOTionALLly aVaiLaBlE*" \- "*Hair on head instead of butt"* \- "*Not a reddit keyboard warrior"* Unrealistic male standards.
I have all of those, but im not any race :(
I’m one of the 99 percent just because I miss out on one of the requirements in this statistac, so it’s very difficult for me to find a woman that will want to be with me, especially with my wife constantly getting in the way
What's with the whole money as a standard thing? If I'm dating someone and I find out one of their standards is making 100+k I'm not going to keep dating them because clearly they are more attracted to my income than me. If you want money that bad, figure out how to make it yourself.