Are some ratios cope

[NuclearGeo20]

I'm starting to think the only features that matter are (adequate facial width, long ramus/jaw frontal angle, forehead height, and chin height) + good eye area. Midface ratio doesn't matter, we see a lot of phenotypes with a hyperlepthorinne nose and they still manage to be attractive. This makes me think that harmony doesnt really matter as long as you're in the average range for phenotypes. Is there truly an ideal, attractive face? But phenotypes arent universally attractive. Does that mean every phenotype has falios. Idk I think Im just a grey. Can somebody thats highiq explain.

 

[seizen]

I'm starting to think the only features that matter are (adequate facial width, long ramus/jaw frontal angle, forehead height, and chin height) + good eye area. Midface ratio doesn't matter, we see a lot of phenotypes with a hyperlepthorinne nose and they still manage to be attractive. This makes me think that harmony doesnt really matter as long as you're in the average range for phenotypes. Is there truly an ideal, attractive face? But phenotypes arent universally attractive. Does that mean every phenotype has falios. Idk I think Im just a grey. Can somebody thats highiq explain.

just drink water bro

 

[pfl]

Phenotypes only represent the average of a group of a certain race. The average of all phenotypes of a race is where you would get the ideal measurements probably
Ratios aren’t cope

 

[NuclearGeo20]

Phenotypes only represent the average of a group of a certain race. The average of all phenotypes of a race is where you would get the ideal measurements probably
Ratios aren’t cope

Thx for the reply. Can you explain your reasoning further; how do you know averaging the phenotypes would give you a more "ideal" face, within the racial group.

 

[pfl]

Thx for the reply. Can you explain your reasoning further; how do you know averaging the phenotypes would give you a more "ideal" face, within the racial group.

Because averageness is scientifically attractive, and all phenotypes combined theoretically would represent the average ratios of a race

 

[rrm_ss2]

I'm starting to think the only features that matter are (adequate facial width, long ramus/jaw frontal angle, forehead height, and chin height) + good eye area. Midface ratio doesn't matter, we see a lot of phenotypes with a hyperlepthorinne nose and they still manage to be attractive. This makes me think that harmony doesnt really matter as long as you're in the average range for phenotypes. Is there truly an ideal, attractive face? But phenotypes arent universally attractive. Does that mean every phenotype has falios. Idk I think Im just a grey. Can somebody thats highiq explain.

DNR+water+low iq+kys+nigger

 

[NuclearGeo20]

Because averageness is scientifically attractive, and all phenotypes combined theoretically would represent the average ratios of a race

yes but race is a term that classifies people by skin color. We now know due to phenotypic analysis that people of a race can demonstrate many different characteristics such as different noses, forehead, skull widths, etc. So how can we classify "a race". Nasal width? Eye spacing? Skin color?

 

[pfl]

yes but race is a term that classifies people by skin color. We now know due to phenotypic analysis that people of a race can demonstrate many different characteristics such as different noses, forehead, skull widths, etc. So how can we classify "a race". Nasal width? Eye spacing? Skin color?

Idk that was just my take

 

[fzris]

yes but race is a term that classifies people by skin color. We now know due to phenotypic analysis that people of a race can demonstrate many different characteristics such as different noses, forehead, skull widths, etc. So how can we classify "a race". Nasal width? Eye spacing? Skin color?

Some races have different features to others. Arabs having hooked noses and recessed chins, East Asians having flat maxilla’s, things like that. Is that what u mean by ur question?

 

[NuclearGeo20]

DNR+water+low iq+kys+nigger

so cool

 

[NuclearGeo20]

Idk that was just my take

alr, thx anyways

 

[NuclearGeo20]

Some races have different features to others. Arabs having hooked noses and recessed chins, East Asians having flat maxilla’s, things like that. Is that what u mean by ur question?

different phenos have different proportions due to their features. for example north atlantids have big foreheads and tall skulls. Dalofaelids look more squished for example. But we classify them all as "white" and average supermodels together in order to find the "ideal ratios". How do we know that averaging different phenotypes would give us a more ideal blue print for ratios.

 

[NuclearGeo20]

yyjhy

 

[fzris]

different phenos have different proportions due to their features. for example north atlantids have big foreheads and tall skulls. Dalofaelids look more squished for example. But we classify them all as "white" and average supermodels together in order to find the "ideal ratios". How do we know that averaging different phenotypes would give us a more ideal blue print for ratios.

I suppose dalofaelids and north atlantids are both seen as ‘white’ as their most glaring features (eye area and skin colour) are similar, which I believe isn’t ideal but it would get bothersome to constantly differentiate between phenotypes which at first glance seem similar. Referring to them both as the overarching ‘white’ makes it a lot less cumbersome to talk about, albeit at the cost of losing specificity and accuracy. This especially goes for those who are less educated on seperate phenos (which is a large majority of org users) and have no idea what they are, so it is simply easier for them to group them all as white.

On a seperate point talking about an ideal blueprint for ratios, It’s a weird take, but I think you can’t classify a single ideal ratio, and that prettyboys and masculines have seperate ideal ratios as well as different phenos having their respective ideal ratios to suit their features. Hope that answers ur question

 

[NuclearGeo20]

I suppose dalofaelids and north atlantids are both seen as ‘white’ as their most glaring features (eye area and skin colour) are similar, which I believe isn’t ideal but it would get bothersome to constantly differentiate between phenotypes which at first glance seem similar. Referring to them both as the overarching ‘white’ makes it a lot less cumbersome to talk about, albeit at the cost of losing specificity and accuracy. This especially goes for those who are less educated on seperate phenos (which is a large majority of org users) and have no idea what they are, so it is simply easier for them to group them all as white.

On a seperate point talking about an ideal blueprint for ratios, It’s a weird take, but I think you can’t classify a single ideal ratio, and that prettyboys and masculines have seperate ideal ratios as well as different phenos having their respective

This is actually such a high iq response but there's a couple things I still have questions about. Like you said there's ideal ratios for a pretty boy, but I actually disagree with that. Pretty boy ratios can never be ideal because being a pretty boy itself is unideal. When researchers wanted to find out what makes a face attractive they concluded dimorphism, symmetry, and averageness/proportion makes a face attractive. A pretty boy is low on the testosterone scale meaning it is unideal for female gaze due to low dimorphism. This means the ratios they have are unideal for female gaze. Also if looks are objective, doesn't that mean that there is one face and that every deviation from that face is more and more unattractive? Or is it more of a range of ratios you think.

ideal ratios to suit their features. Hope that answers ur question

 

[fzris]

Like you said there's ideal ratios for a pretty boy, but I actually disagree with that. Pretty boy ratios can never be ideal because being a pretty boy itself is unideal. When researchers wanted to find out what makes a face attractive they concluded dimorphism, symmetry, and averageness/proportion makes a face attractive. A pretty boy is low on the testosterone scale meaning it is unideal for female gaze due to low dimorphism. This means the ratios they have are unideal for female gaze. Also if looks are objective, doesn't that mean that there is one face and that every deviation from that face is more and more unattractive? Or is it more of a range of ratios you think.

I believe you’re forgetting one glaring factor, SMV, or sexual market value. A prettyboy might be scientifically unideal but some women still find them attractive due to it being their type. Take for example vinnie hacker. He gets an insane amount of female gaze even though he’s ‘unideal’. It’s because SMV matters a lot more than actual attractiveness imo. It’s the reason geomaxxing works. A 6’3 white LTN is gonna have more SMV then a 5’4 filipino HTN in the phillipines. Same way a prettyboy is gonna have more SMV than a hypermasculine for certain women. That’s why I think there’s ideal ratios for different archetypes.

On ur point about whether it’s a range or one face, I believe it’s a range. For example gandy’s nose should be a HUGE failo, but it isn’t because his ratios balance his face out. I believe it’s a set of ranges, and that’s how hexum and hernan are both PSL gods, even though they deviate from eachother slightly.