20, MMTN (AI), indian(tamil) origin, please rate me

comeonHabibii

comeonHabibii

Iron
Joined
Mar 28, 2026
Posts
8
Reputation
1
do i have hope or not ? what should i do to ascend
i feel like my gonial angle is exact 90 degrees
asked multiple ai and all rated me MMTN,
1.7m --- 5'7
81kg
tamil (if that helps)
more things about me if that helps to determine
what about the smv , i feel its high imo, coz good money, 6.3 inch dih, muslim so religious girl from india
this is what ai has told about me

Subject: Male, front-facing, neutral expressions across two images (one low-light, one natural light). Assessment based on visible structure only.


---

1. Facial Thirds

Upper third (hairline → brows): Appears average; hairline relatively full with no major recession.

Mid third (brows → base of nose): Slightly dominant compared to lower third.

Lower third (base of nose → chin): Mildly shorter relative to mid-third; chin height slightly limited.


Conclusion: Mild imbalance with mid-third slightly longer than ideal.


---

2. Symmetry

Overall symmetry is above average.

Minor asymmetries:

Slight variation in eyebrow height.

Subtle difference in eye openness between sides.


No major skeletal asymmetry visible.


Conclusion: Good bilateral balance with small soft-tissue asymmetries.


---

3. Bone Structure

Cheekbones: Moderately defined but not prominent; lateral projection is limited.

Brow ridge: Neutral, not overly pronounced.

Facial width: Balanced, slightly oval/rounded.


Conclusion: Average bone definition; lacks strong angularity.


---

4. Maxilla (midface projection)

Appears adequate but not pronounced.

Under-eye area shows slight flatness, indicating limited forward projection.

Nasolabial region is proportionate without deep folds.


Conclusion: Neutral to slightly recessed maxillary projection.


---

5. Mandible & Jawline

Jawline definition: Moderate; softened by facial fat and less angular bone structure.

Gonial angle: Likely slightly obtuse (less sharp).

Chin projection: Mildly under-projected relative to lips and nose.


Conclusion: Average mandible; lacks strong definition and forward projection.


---

6. Eye Area

Canthal tilt: Neutral to slightly positive.

Eye spacing: Approximately one eye-width apart (ideal range).

Eyelid exposure: Moderate upper eyelid show; no deep-set or hooded extremes.

Under-eye area: Mild fullness, slight lack of tightness.


Conclusion: Proportionate and balanced; no standout positive or negative traits.


---

7. Nose Harmony

Straight nasal bridge.

Width proportional to intercanthal distance.

Tip slightly rounded but not bulbous.


Conclusion: Harmonious and proportionate to face.


---

8. Lips

Upper-to-lower ratio: Balanced, slightly fuller lower lip.

Projection: Neutral.

Width: Aligned with facial proportions.


Conclusion: Within average male norms.


---

9. Cheekbones

Present but not highly projected.

Limited lateral flare reduces perceived facial sharpness.


Conclusion: Moderate; contributes to softer facial appearance.


---

10. Facial Fat Distribution

Even distribution.

Slight fullness in cheeks and submental area softens jawline visibility.


Conclusion: Slightly above lean baseline; reduces definition.


---

11. Overall Proportional Harmony

No major disproportions.

Balanced features but lacking strong sexual dimorphism (angularity, projection).

General appearance falls within typical population norms.



---

Final PSL Rating: MMTN (Mid-Mid Tier Normie)

Justification

Strengths:

Good overall symmetry

Proportionate nose and eye spacing

Balanced facial thirds (minor deviation only)

No major structural flaws


Limiting Factors:

Weak-to-average jawline definition

Slightly under-projected chin and maxilla

Limited cheekbone prominence

Soft tissue fullness reducing sharpness

Lack of strong angular features



---

Summary: Structurally balanced face with average male traits; absence of pronounced bone structure and projection limits advancement beyond mid-tier.
 

Attachments

  • WhatsApp Image 2026-04-24 at 22.02.18.jpeg
    WhatsApp Image 2026-04-24 at 22.02.18.jpeg
    378.1 KB · Views: 0
  • WhatsApp Image 2026-04-24 at 21.36.36.jpeg
    WhatsApp Image 2026-04-24 at 21.36.36.jpeg
    97.5 KB · Views: 0
  • WhatsApp Image 2026-04-24 at 21.36.35(1).jpeg
    WhatsApp Image 2026-04-24 at 21.36.35(1).jpeg
    90 KB · Views: 0
  • WhatsApp Image 2026-04-24 at 21.36.35.jpeg
    WhatsApp Image 2026-04-24 at 21.36.35.jpeg
    81.9 KB · Views: 0
  • WhatsApp Image 2026-04-24 at 21.36.34.jpeg
    WhatsApp Image 2026-04-24 at 21.36.34.jpeg
    194.8 KB · Views: 0
don’t listen to ai and don’t put your fucking dick size in here weirdo. ltn.
 
  • JFL
Reactions: hopelessness
MMTN where? Maybe in the slums of India
 
  • +1
Reactions: Rick_bozo and savage21
Mogs me.
 
  • So Sad
Reactions: comeonHabibii
don’t listen to ai and don’t put your fucking dick size in here weirdo. ltn.
sorry g , read the rules , didnt say anything about it and saw some other people discussing about it and thought it was fine, could you analyse in detail please ?
 
sorry g , read the rules , didnt say anything about it and saw some other people discussing about it and thought it was fine, could you analyse in detail please ?
i mean weird ass people make full dick posts and talk about it but putting your dick specs randomly in a rate section is kinda off
 
i mean weird ass people make full dick posts and talk about it but putting your dick specs randomly in a rate section is kinda off
understood , also i meant analyze the rating in detail please and tell me what i need to focus on to ascend
 
Mtn in Mumbai
do i have hope or not ? what should i do to ascend
i feel like my gonial angle is exact 90 degrees
asked multiple ai and all rated me MMTN,
1.7m --- 5'7
81kg
tamil (if that helps)
more things about me if that helps to determine
what about the smv , i feel its high imo, coz good money, 6.3 inch dih, muslim so religious girl from india
this is what ai has told about me

Subject: Male, front-facing, neutral expressions across two images (one low-light, one natural light). Assessment based on visible structure only.


---

1. Facial Thirds

Upper third (hairline → brows): Appears average; hairline relatively full with no major recession.

Mid third (brows → base of nose): Slightly dominant compared to lower third.

Lower third (base of nose → chin): Mildly shorter relative to mid-third; chin height slightly limited.


Conclusion: Mild imbalance with mid-third slightly longer than ideal.


---

2. Symmetry

Overall symmetry is above average.

Minor asymmetries:

Slight variation in eyebrow height.

Subtle difference in eye openness between sides.


No major skeletal asymmetry visible.


Conclusion: Good bilateral balance with small soft-tissue asymmetries.


---

3. Bone Structure

Cheekbones: Moderately defined but not prominent; lateral projection is limited.

Brow ridge: Neutral, not overly pronounced.

Facial width: Balanced, slightly oval/rounded.


Conclusion: Average bone definition; lacks strong angularity.


---

4. Maxilla (midface projection)

Appears adequate but not pronounced.

Under-eye area shows slight flatness, indicating limited forward projection.

Nasolabial region is proportionate without deep folds.


Conclusion: Neutral to slightly recessed maxillary projection.


---

5. Mandible & Jawline

Jawline definition: Moderate; softened by facial fat and less angular bone structure.

Gonial angle: Likely slightly obtuse (less sharp).

Chin projection: Mildly under-projected relative to lips and nose.


Conclusion: Average mandible; lacks strong definition and forward projection.


---

6. Eye Area

Canthal tilt: Neutral to slightly positive.

Eye spacing: Approximately one eye-width apart (ideal range).

Eyelid exposure: Moderate upper eyelid show; no deep-set or hooded extremes.

Under-eye area: Mild fullness, slight lack of tightness.


Conclusion: Proportionate and balanced; no standout positive or negative traits.


---

7. Nose Harmony

Straight nasal bridge.

Width proportional to intercanthal distance.

Tip slightly rounded but not bulbous.


Conclusion: Harmonious and proportionate to face.


---

8. Lips

Upper-to-lower ratio: Balanced, slightly fuller lower lip.

Projection: Neutral.

Width: Aligned with facial proportions.


Conclusion: Within average male norms.


---

9. Cheekbones

Present but not highly projected.

Limited lateral flare reduces perceived facial sharpness.


Conclusion: Moderate; contributes to softer facial appearance.


---

10. Facial Fat Distribution

Even distribution.

Slight fullness in cheeks and submental area softens jawline visibility.


Conclusion: Slightly above lean baseline; reduces definition.


---

11. Overall Proportional Harmony

No major disproportions.

Balanced features but lacking strong sexual dimorphism (angularity, projection).

General appearance falls within typical population norms.



---

Final PSL Rating: MMTN (Mid-Mid Tier Normie)

Justification

Strengths:

Good overall symmetry

Proportionate nose and eye spacing

Balanced facial thirds (minor deviation only)

No major structural flaws


Limiting Factors:

Weak-to-average jawline definition

Slightly under-projected chin and maxilla

Limited cheekbone prominence

Soft tissue fullness reducing sharpness

Lack of strong angular features



---

Summary: Structurally balanced face with average male traits; absence of pronounced bone structure and projection limits advancement beyond mid-tier.
I AM TALKING ABOUT IN INDIA, WHAT WOULD I BE IN INDIA, I CANT CHAGNE MY GENES , IM INDIAN GUYS, ILL BE RETURNING BACK TO INDIA
 
understood , also i meant analyze the rating in detail please and tell me what i need to focus on to ascend
weight. it’s really pointless to even ask for a rate if your visibly overweight
 
I AM TALKING ABOUT IN INDIA, WHAT WOULD I BE IN INDIA, I CANT CHAGNE MY GENES , IM INDIAN GUYS, ILL BE RETURNING BACK TO INDIA
Pls return to India, and not this site
 
Yes ltn but mostly because you’re Indian
agreed, what should i do then , what topics to focus on , ill do my research , what should i do to go from ltn to atleast mtn or if possible lhtn(hope)
 

Similar threads

M
Replies
6
Views
81
160cmcurry
160cmcurry
5ubhuman
Replies
19
Views
205
MLGS0LD1ERB0Y
MLGS0LD1ERB0Y
B
Replies
21
Views
220
Ins
Ins
A
Replies
13
Views
179
milhouse
milhouse
ibrohimovv
Replies
7
Views
157
160cmcurry
160cmcurry

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top