I
imdelusional
Professionally sub-1
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2025
- Posts
- 95
- Reputation
- 127
First and foremost if you feel the needto ask for ratings, it's over.
Well it's actually not but it either means:
- You're average, thus meaning that you don't get treated badly since you're not ugly but you don't get treated good either since you're not good looking, hence the confusion
- You're ugly, and need reassurance.
- You're good looking, but insecure, and need the reassurance.
Now, here's the thing. Askin tiktokcels makes no sense because they have no idea how to rate; asking orgcels also makes no sense because they are retarded, and for them the epithome of attractiveness is essentially an ogre, and asking neurotypical people also makes no sense because nobody will tell you that you're ugly, and, in fact, in most social settings the average drifts to 6-7, thus meaning, if you ask your friends to rate you in a scale of 1-10 and they say "Nah bro you good, I'd give you a solid 7 bro" that means you're between a 4.5-5 at most.
At the same time, that same 5 out of ten could go in org and get rated a sub five, and then go to tiktok to get rated a "ltn with chadlite potential". The only objective way to rate faces is to remember: harmony>symmetry>dymorphism>phenotype>colouring.
Most people don't rate this deeply, and just rate superficially.
If you want to know your rating, look around yourself and be honest to yourself.
How are you treated?
Are you treated as a Chad, as a MTN; as a LTN, as a HTN....?
There's people out there rating Alain Delon as chadlite, and others rating him as Adamlite.
The truth is, what makes you think that this site knows what they are talking about?
Org and tiktok incels are very good at assessing flaws, and compiling information, but they genuinely have no idea how the real world works. THey know this in theory, but, since they don't go outside, they have no idea how to apply this theory to practice.
No bro, you aren't sub-five just because you have a sub-optimal FHWR. You are sub-5 if people are repulsed by you when you've done nothing.
No bro, you aren't chadlite just because you have an ogre-like skull and got rated a chadlite. You are a chadlite if girls approach you, if you are treated well without doing a thing, etc.
Deep down most people know their rating. If you are ugly you'll know, if you are average you'll know and if you are good looking, you'll know. Beauty is not a quantitative quality, so any system of numerical rating is neccesarily going to be flawed.
It is true that beauty is objective and we can clasify different people in different levels of beauty (For example, Ben affleck and Matt Damon are good looking, but nowhere near James Marsden and Matt Boomer for example) but saying "Matt boomer is actually a 7.5/8 PSL" is bullshit.
Even in the Adam discussion, my opinion is that whenever we discover True Adam, it's not going to be a discussion. He's objectively going to be better looking than anybody we've ever seen.
Those are my two cents in regards of rating looks.
I've grown tired of this forum. I may use it for information but you are all retarded and have no idea about what you're talking about.
You guys are like gymcells, promoting a physical ideal of man that no woman actually finds appealing.
Well it's actually not but it either means:
- You're average, thus meaning that you don't get treated badly since you're not ugly but you don't get treated good either since you're not good looking, hence the confusion
- You're ugly, and need reassurance.
- You're good looking, but insecure, and need the reassurance.
Now, here's the thing. Askin tiktokcels makes no sense because they have no idea how to rate; asking orgcels also makes no sense because they are retarded, and for them the epithome of attractiveness is essentially an ogre, and asking neurotypical people also makes no sense because nobody will tell you that you're ugly, and, in fact, in most social settings the average drifts to 6-7, thus meaning, if you ask your friends to rate you in a scale of 1-10 and they say "Nah bro you good, I'd give you a solid 7 bro" that means you're between a 4.5-5 at most.
At the same time, that same 5 out of ten could go in org and get rated a sub five, and then go to tiktok to get rated a "ltn with chadlite potential". The only objective way to rate faces is to remember: harmony>symmetry>dymorphism>phenotype>colouring.
Most people don't rate this deeply, and just rate superficially.
If you want to know your rating, look around yourself and be honest to yourself.
How are you treated?
Are you treated as a Chad, as a MTN; as a LTN, as a HTN....?
There's people out there rating Alain Delon as chadlite, and others rating him as Adamlite.
The truth is, what makes you think that this site knows what they are talking about?
Org and tiktok incels are very good at assessing flaws, and compiling information, but they genuinely have no idea how the real world works. THey know this in theory, but, since they don't go outside, they have no idea how to apply this theory to practice.
No bro, you aren't sub-five just because you have a sub-optimal FHWR. You are sub-5 if people are repulsed by you when you've done nothing.
No bro, you aren't chadlite just because you have an ogre-like skull and got rated a chadlite. You are a chadlite if girls approach you, if you are treated well without doing a thing, etc.
Deep down most people know their rating. If you are ugly you'll know, if you are average you'll know and if you are good looking, you'll know. Beauty is not a quantitative quality, so any system of numerical rating is neccesarily going to be flawed.
It is true that beauty is objective and we can clasify different people in different levels of beauty (For example, Ben affleck and Matt Damon are good looking, but nowhere near James Marsden and Matt Boomer for example) but saying "Matt boomer is actually a 7.5/8 PSL" is bullshit.
Even in the Adam discussion, my opinion is that whenever we discover True Adam, it's not going to be a discussion. He's objectively going to be better looking than anybody we've ever seen.
Those are my two cents in regards of rating looks.
I've grown tired of this forum. I may use it for information but you are all retarded and have no idea about what you're talking about.
You guys are like gymcells, promoting a physical ideal of man that no woman actually finds appealing.
