Basically they looked at which girls on the site got the most messages from guys. Turns out being a prim & proper, traditionally beautiful girl won't get you hit on as much as being unkempt and tattooed.
See, hipster fashion is polarizing, even amongst hipster guys. Some dudes like bangs and vintage dresses, some like neon v-necks and hightops, and some like black leather and chunks of metal in a lady's face.
Girls with this effect on men — the ones some guys thought were really hot and others thought were too strange, the ones who got lots of 5's and 1's on a 5 star attractiveness rating system, received many more messages than mainstream girls who were consistently rated a cute 4 out of 5 stars by most men.
AKA hipster chicks that guys have a wide range of opinions on get more attention than sorority girls who everyone thinks are attractive.
The reason is that guys see kooky hipster girl and think, “I'm probably the only person who digs her. There's less competition so I have a better shot. I'll go talk to/message her.” Meanwhile, guys see a barbie doll and think, “She probably gets hit on non-stop. There's no way she'd like me more than the other guys. I'm better off not even trying.”
Yeah, there's a bunch of confounding variables including the fact that the beefcake pretty boys who would message sorority girls are too busy gym/tan/laundry'ing to use dating websites.
Still, this is a win for self-expression and alternative fashion. I've definitely been following this behavior pattern my whole life. Women should take this as free license to do whatever they damn well please with their appearance.
Will these findings usher in a migration of Marina girls to the Mission? Guys, have you always subconsciously gravitated towards “different” girls? Ladies, can you confirm this theory or call shenanigans on it? 'Cause I'm not seeing too many shenanigans.
[Note: This post is not meant to objectify women. I'm a respectful appreciator, so please don't grab your pitchforks and torches.]