Hacker News Reader

Comment by Groxx | Hacker News Reader

Yeah, as a fan of cats: these results are exactly as I'd hope.

Cats rarely like being posed with. Neither of those pictures have happy-looking cats. If those are representative images, I'd be ranking less-date-able too, a possible inability to understand their pet is not a positive sign.

Pictures involving a cat willingly snuggling up to the subject may perform very differently. E.g. nearly all of these look good, and showcase very different cat-language: https://welovecatsandkittens.com/cat-pictures/12-adorable-ph...

View on HN

This reminds of the shirtless / not shirtless studies that use plainly artificial edited in muscles, no scenic background whatsoever (just a wall, not even a basic pool), and are just not generalizable to real (online) dating experiences.

Edit: This is the study. See the supplementary information section at the very bottom is you want to see the photos used.

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11199-022-01278-1

I found it via an article on theguardian.com, https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2022/may/25/keep-yo...

Oh wow those are bad, lol. Almost as bad as those 'shops where you can see the background bending around the inhumanly-shaped waist or butt.

I have to assume the conversation between authors went something like this:

> Muscles look like this, right? https://unbelievab.ly/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/photoshop.j...

> LGTM, ship it

lol yeah you can pretty much tell those authors hadn't ever gotten close to a girl or a gym

then some pop science blog writes about it and the average "i fucking love science" fan can feel good about being doughy and out of shape bc "haha science proves it" (if it sounds like im venting its because i am, i just hate pop science and this is the latest example why)

You're referring to Elizabeth, Morgan and JoAnne?

Also those images in that supplementary PDF are unredacted, with a separate oval superimposed over the face.

The paper seems to suggest that those are the only pairs of photos. Yes, they both sort of scream awkward photo at best, cat-prop at worst.

"We compared photos of two men looking fairly relaxed with photos of the same men in a different less open and relaxed pose holding an anxious cat which had never met them before. The results prove that women don't like men with pets."

Supposedly.

Exactly. It’s also pretty clear from their faces that those men are nervous to be holding the cat.

Well, the little tigers can be dangerous and hold pathogenic bacteria in their little claws. You'd be nervous too if that thing could claw at your eye at any moment. Plus they could carry toxoplasmosis and tons of infections picked up from street animals.

Also on those pictures, the guy has is back all hunched and is holding the cat like a doll or a baby. Is it really the cat that give a less attractive vibe or the dorky posture of the guy on the picture?

Would the results be different if cat and man were posed differently?

I suspect that a picture of some guy going hiking with his cat would be seen different from some guy playing dolls with his cat in his apartment.

My cat is a total lap cat. She would stay there 24/7 if I let her. I do think she likes it but also likes the heat as well lol. Not all cats are hands off. Some like to be around humans too much and can be annoying they are so clingy. I'm sure she wouldn't mind taking photos while doing it, as she doesn't know wtf a photo is.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com