Across speed‑dating labs and real‑style app tests, intelligence is detectable but adds little to sexual appeal compared with physical attractiveness. A 2025 study using verified IQ on synthetic profiles found attractiveness (~β=0.80) outweighed intelligence (~β=0.12) by roughly sevenfold, with similar patterns in face‑to‑face experiments. Population‑genetic data further link higher intelligence/education to greater sexlessness risk.
— This challenges widely held claims that intelligence is a decisive attractor, reshaping conversations about dating advice, status signaling, and the roots of sexlessness/incel trends.
@degenrolf
2026.01.10
60% relevant
Both the tweet and the existing idea concern empirical claims about human mating behaviour and which traits (here, sex‑linked desire; in the idea, attractiveness vs intelligence) drive partner selection. The tweet’s blanket assertion about higher male desire intersects with the same literatures (speed‑dating, app‑behaviour, sexual signalling) that underpin the 'Looks Trump IQ in Dating' idea, so research and policy framed by that idea are a natural place to test and contextualize this claim.
Kristen French
2026.01.08
74% relevant
Both the Nautilus article and the listed idea concern how observable facial or appearance cues shape interpersonal preferences and mate choice. The Nautilus study adds a mechanistic result—micro‑muscle mimicry (cheek‑raising, eyebrow changes) in listeners predicts which film summary they prefer—which connects directly to findings that visible traits (looks) dominate mating choices, expanding that literature from static appearance to dynamic, interactional facial signaling.
@degenrolf
2026.01.08
75% relevant
Both pieces study how social signals and traits affect mate choice; this tweet summarises experiments showing beliefs (conspiracy endorsement) act as a signal that reduces desirability, paralleling the existing idea that non‑physical traits (intelligence/beliefs) play measurable but smaller roles in dating outcomes.
msmash
2026.01.07
40% relevant
Both pieces center how physical appearance is systemically advantaged in social and economic life; this South Korea item shows the political and policy consequences of lookism (here, a president seeking state coverage for hair loss), connecting the social‑science finding about appearance’s outsized role in dating/selection to a governance response.
Aporia
2026.01.06
82% relevant
The article uses dating‑market statistics (match rates, sexlessness by cohort, male disadvantage on apps) to argue that physical‑market dynamics now drive mating outcomes — the same empirical domain that the existing idea analyzes (relative effects of looks vs traits on dating and sexual outcomes). The actor/measure overlap: dating apps’ match rates and cohort sexlessness figures connect directly to the empirical claims in the existing idea.
@degenrolf
2026.01.03
90% relevant
The tweet’s core claim — that high visual standards (especially among men) drive prolonged singlehood — is a direct instantiation of the existing idea that physical attractiveness dominates mate choice and helps explain sexlessness and declines in partnering; both connect an empirical behavioral claim about mating signals to population‑level outcomes.
Nikos Mohammadi
2026.01.03
36% relevant
The article centres physical appearance and 'maximizing looks' as a core organizing aim of a subculture; that maps to research showing attractiveness can dominate social signalling in mating markets and status hierarchies — a dynamic that looksmaxxing weaponizes into political identity and online mob behaviour.
Tove K
2026.01.01
62% relevant
The essay is about mating markets and how marketized dating platforms magnify short‑term, appearance‑driven choice; this ties to empirical findings that physical attractiveness dominates dating outcomes, which helps explain why a market alone won’t produce stable, pronatalist pairings.
Kristin McTiernan
2026.01.01
85% relevant
Both the article and the existing idea center on how physical attractiveness dominates mating outcomes; the essay’s anecdote and argument that men weaponize judgments about women’s weight to steer partner markets maps directly onto the empirical claim that attractiveness far outweighs other traits in sexual/mating selection.
Trenton
2025.12.31
55% relevant
The podcast’s repeated claim that physical attractiveness and simple fitness outperform other traits in the mating market echoes empirical claims about attractiveness dominating dating outcomes; the conversation helps normalize the specific behavioral claims summarized in that research idea.
Steve Stewart-Williams
2025.12.31
45% relevant
The piece reports research showing people notice and under‑react to attractiveness‑based discrimination, tying into the existing idea about how looks dominate social and mating outcomes and how aesthetic factors shape behavior and policy‑relevant perceptions.
Rod Dreher
2025.12.29
88% relevant
The article foregrounds 'looks' as the dominant metric for status and self‑worth among young men (Cavicular’s claim that 'Looks is just the most important metric'), directly echoing the empirical finding that physical attractiveness far outweighs intelligence in sexual/romantic appeal; it helps explain why an aesthetics‑based movement would gain traction.
@degenrolf
2025.12.29
72% relevant
Both the tweet and this existing idea center the social returns to physical appearance. The tweet’s earnings claim complements the existing research on attractiveness and dating by extending the discussion to economic outcomes — it fits the same research strand about how looks function as a social asset that shapes life trajectories.
Robin Hanson
2025.11.30
60% relevant
Both pieces analyze sexual‑market dynamics and what determines attractiveness; Hanson’s status‑coordination story offers a complementary mechanism to the empirical finding that physical attractiveness dominates intelligence as a mating signal, by explaining how male peer status can amplify or suppress those preferences.
John Carter
2025.11.29
60% relevant
The essay describes a winner‑take‑all dating marketplace in which a small set of highly attractive men capture most partners—this is the same empirical dynamic the existing idea summarizes about attractiveness dominating dating outcomes.
Davide Piffer
2025.10.01
100% relevant
Witmer, Rosenbusch & Meral (2025): verified IQ badges on profiles had a small positive effect on swipes but were dwarfed by looks; Driebe et al. (2021) speed‑dating showed intelligence perception didn’t boost appeal.