It actually makes sense because our idea of beauty is about symmetry and form, and covering 70% of the symmetrical indicators on your face has a much higher chance of making you seem more attractive than less when you're an ugly soyboy beta cuck.
Of course if you have a mask on you're signaling that you're an ugly soyboy beta cuck, so there's that.
You're putting way too much thought into this. They asked 43 women, probably their friends and classmates, to provide their preconceived results. This is a serious scientific study about as much as a facebook "What harry potter character are you" quiz.
I'm not saying the study was done well, I'm saying it has a basis in logic. We know what makes one "attractive". Masking those indicators will generally have a positive effect vs a negative effect.
Look at the hijab and burqa. You dunno what those women look like except the eyes. You could get a supermodel or a butt ugly goat. But we tend to build positive outcomes in our head because we desire positive outcomes.
The study, which began in February 2021, asked 43 women to rate images of men based on attractiveness.
Tiny sample size and the odd number (why 43?) tells me one thing: This study was conducted on campus, probably in the psychology department, and the sample set is "any woman walking by who was bored enough to take part and/or friends of the researchers."
[ + ] ButtToucha9000
[ - ] ButtToucha9000 2 points 2.3 yearsJan 14, 2022 06:29:41 ago (+2/-0)
Of course if you have a mask on you're signaling that you're an ugly soyboy beta cuck, so there's that.
[ + ] Broc_Liath
[ - ] Broc_Liath 2 points 2.3 yearsJan 14, 2022 09:22:19 ago (+2/-0)
[ + ] ButtToucha9000
[ - ] ButtToucha9000 0 points 2.3 yearsJan 15, 2022 16:00:43 ago (+0/-0)
Look at the hijab and burqa. You dunno what those women look like except the eyes. You could get a supermodel or a butt ugly goat. But we tend to build positive outcomes in our head because we desire positive outcomes.
[ + ] Broc_Liath
[ - ] Broc_Liath 1 point 2.3 yearsJan 14, 2022 09:20:27 ago (+1/-0)
Tiny sample size and the odd number (why 43?) tells me one thing: This study was conducted on campus, probably in the psychology department, and the sample set is "any woman walking by who was bored enough to take part and/or friends of the researchers."
[ + ] goat777
[ - ] goat777 0 points 2.3 yearsJan 14, 2022 18:05:07 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] nc22
[ - ] nc22 0 points 2.3 yearsJan 14, 2022 13:04:21 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] FalseRealityCheck
[ - ] FalseRealityCheck 0 points 2.3 yearsJan 14, 2022 11:36:15 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] enormousatom
[ - ] enormousatom 0 points 2.3 yearsJan 14, 2022 09:08:46 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] thebearfromstartrack4
[ - ] thebearfromstartrack4 -1 points 2.3 yearsJan 14, 2022 12:45:12 ago (+0/-1)