>>21252292You can make the same criticism about study in the OP
>>21252293OP is also volunteer selected and has an age range bias. You fit it just because it fits with your blackpilled priors. Anything to avoid going outside and actually socializing with people.
>>21252295>It’s far less biased than the study you’re shilling, which contradict each other. No it doesn't, what are you even talking about? It fits with the study in OP which you accepted.
>The fact that you’re still in denial about the girl power feminist shitGirl power feminist shit doesn't effect literal identical resume studies. Why would "girl power feminist shit" suddenly make both men and women assess women as being more attractive? Is that what "girl power feminism" is? Promoting women as sexy and attractive? You sure? Or are you just coping cuz you are ugly as shit?
Also are men ranking women higher than other men because "girl power feminist shit" or because they are "college babes"? Pick a line and stick with it.
>>21252296Women are wonderful effect is less pronounced with more girl power feminism. As women gain more power in society they are less likely to be associated with sunshine and rainbows. (Men still get associated with violence and aggression almost as if men are more violent than women on average)
And even then--this has nothing to do with attractiveness. Women are still ranked lower than men in real world identical resume scenarios.
