Consider the following 2 rows of images ...
... and now try to think of something :
If you answered the first question with ...
... you're right. (If you asnwered "all white" then you're a low iq racist subhuman who should probably ky..stop reading this article asap.)
The second question is a bit harder to answer ...
The distinction between the 2 rows is that while both consist of unquestionably good looking men, the men in row 2 are sexier - they are more likely to be lusted after women for their looks alone.
To clarify, I'm not saying the guys in row 1 aren't sexy or won't be lusted after for their looks, just that if we were to (autistically) compare 2 sets of extremely good looking men, you could still somewhat say one set is "sexier" than the other.
If that sounds vague - try to imagine which of these groups are you more likely to pick a guy to star in a "Slayer"/womanizer role in a film, and which one you'd pick a guy from to play a more well rounded protagonist who isn't all about sex.
Bear in mind, we are working off pictures so a lot of this difference could just be expression and pose - but if you've seen enough people in your life you'd realize most good looking people on average be fit into these 2 brackets.
This looks dichotomy may have started to sound familiar by now ... did this idiot really just describe high vs low trust faces?
Sort of, I just didn't want to use those buzzwords as the thicker members of he looksmaxxing community often misinterpret them.
Low trust is commonly associated with "dark triad" features and while there might be some overlap, do you really think the pinnacle of dark looks, ricardo ramirez fits into the second row of men?
Didn't think so.
It's because actual "dark triad" looks such as those that correlate strongly with shit like psychopathy, and contrary to popular belief is a failo past a certain threshold.
The reason dark triad models are so adored is because they have the bone/other facets of looks in proportion to compensate for looking "low trust".
A person with average bones will have far more appeal if he were medium trust instead of low or high trust.
There is a goldilocks zone within which most good looking people reside.
The GL (Good looking/goldilocks) zone is only the area of maximum probability of good looking people occuring.
Imagine each point on the spectrum has a Y axis representing something like "facial aesthetics/bones" - the goldilocks zone is where this requirement is at a minimum.
Looking at the diagram you might be able to draw another inference about where the most good looking people of all time reside - right in the middle of that goldilocks zone.
The best looking people are invariably at the point where you would both judge them trustworthy and responsible, and aggressive and strong enough to get their way in situations.
Well, most good looking people fit this description given their position on the Triad Spectrum of looks, but the most good looking would just fit it a little bit better.
[For context, someone like Ricardo Ramirez would lie well outside the goldilocks zone to the right, but his Y-value would be high enough to sneak him into good looking territory.]
... and now try to think of something :
- all these guys have in common
- each row has in common that is distinct from the other row.
If you answered the first question with ...
"all good looking", "all chad" or something to that effect
The second question is a bit harder to answer ...
The distinction between the 2 rows is that while both consist of unquestionably good looking men, the men in row 2 are sexier - they are more likely to be lusted after women for their looks alone.
To clarify, I'm not saying the guys in row 1 aren't sexy or won't be lusted after for their looks, just that if we were to (autistically) compare 2 sets of extremely good looking men, you could still somewhat say one set is "sexier" than the other.
If that sounds vague - try to imagine which of these groups are you more likely to pick a guy to star in a "Slayer"/womanizer role in a film, and which one you'd pick a guy from to play a more well rounded protagonist who isn't all about sex.
Bear in mind, we are working off pictures so a lot of this difference could just be expression and pose - but if you've seen enough people in your life you'd realize most good looking people on average be fit into these 2 brackets.
This looks dichotomy may have started to sound familiar by now ... did this idiot really just describe high vs low trust faces?
Sort of, I just didn't want to use those buzzwords as the thicker members of he looksmaxxing community often misinterpret them.
Low trust is commonly associated with "dark triad" features and while there might be some overlap, do you really think the pinnacle of dark looks, ricardo ramirez fits into the second row of men?
Didn't think so.
It's because actual "dark triad" looks such as those that correlate strongly with shit like psychopathy, and contrary to popular belief is a failo past a certain threshold.
The reason dark triad models are so adored is because they have the bone/other facets of looks in proportion to compensate for looking "low trust".
A person with average bones will have far more appeal if he were medium trust instead of low or high trust.
There is a goldilocks zone within which most good looking people reside.
The GL (Good looking/goldilocks) zone is only the area of maximum probability of good looking people occuring.
Imagine each point on the spectrum has a Y axis representing something like "facial aesthetics/bones" - the goldilocks zone is where this requirement is at a minimum.
Looking at the diagram you might be able to draw another inference about where the most good looking people of all time reside - right in the middle of that goldilocks zone.
The best looking people are invariably at the point where you would both judge them trustworthy and responsible, and aggressive and strong enough to get their way in situations.
Well, most good looking people fit this description given their position on the Triad Spectrum of looks, but the most good looking would just fit it a little bit better.
[For context, someone like Ricardo Ramirez would lie well outside the goldilocks zone to the right, but his Y-value would be high enough to sneak him into good looking territory.]
Last edited:
