GIO SCOTTI LITERALLY UNFOGGABLE IN HER NEWEST POSTS GTFIH

[DelonLover1999]

Eriksen mogs Hexum objectively due to less tangible failos and more striking halos.

Hexum’s way better averageness and slightly better mouth area beg to differ.

His profile is also better, Eriksen’s nasolabial angle is too feminine.

 

[cancercell]

Can't do the other two bc on phone rn.

despite all of this they all look close to 8 PSL, not "nowhere near"

 

[DelonLover1999]

despite all of this they all look close to 8 PSL, not "nowhere near"

agreed, except for delon’s and depoot’s morphs.

There’s a way better delon morph, just click in my profile and you’ll see it.

 

[cancercell]

agreed, except for delon’s and depoot’s morphs.

There’s a way better delon morph, just click in my profile and you’ll see it.

cool

i tried to edit out the weirdness. it's like 7.25-7.5 psl imo it has a couple minor flaws with the mouth and eyes though

 

[DelonLover1999]

cool

i tried to edit out the weirdness. it's like 7.25-7.5 psl imo it has a couple minor flaws with the mouth and eyes though

View attachment 2459693

regardless of the psl rating, it mogs that other one you posted quite comfortably imo. It had overpowering lips and too straight eyebrows.

 

[cancercell]

regardless of the psl rating, it mogs that other one you posted quite comfortably imo. It had overpowering lips and too straight eyebrows.

idk if it's much of an ascension. looks like dicaprio and delon

but yea the other morph does look kind of unusual with much less averageness

 

[DelonLover1999]

View attachment 2459713

idk if it's much of an ascension. looks like dicaprio and delon

but yea the other morph does look kind of unusual with much less averageness

When I first saw it, I debated with the guy who posted; arguing it doesn't even look like delon, and that the original photo would mog if it was morphed in the traditional way. I've since come around on it, and actually quite like it now.

 

[mecha72]

Zero sex appeal tranny

 

[rand anon]

Jutter frauder. View attachment 2459372

boneless foids>>>>>

 

[HarrierDuBois]

Hexum’s way better averageness and slightly better mouth area beg to differ.

His profile is also better, Eriksen’s nasolabial angle is too feminine.

Hexum and Eriksen both have chimp lips, Eriksen has a better cupids bow, not even debatable that Eriksens mouth mogs Hexums.

Eriksens side also mogs Hexums, Hexum legit has recessed as fuck infraorbitals which is a bigger failo that nasolabial angle.

 

[IMOGYOU]

FOGGED!
View attachment 2459360

peak female aesthetics

 

[DelonLover1999]

Hexum and Eriksen both have chimp lips, Eriksen has a better cupids bow, not even debatable that Eriksens mouth mogs Hexums.

Eriksens side also mogs Hexums, Hexum legit has recessed as fuck infraorbitals which is a bigger failo that nasolabial angle.

View attachment 2460190

Stil disagree on the mouth area. Eriksen's lips are too big imo. The ratio of his mouth area divided by total lower third area looks off to me, can't measure it and test to confirm rn, but maybe will do later. And yeah, they both have chimp lips to some extent, but Eriksen's are way more obvious and affect more angles. In this pic, for example, it fucks up the bottom part of the ogee curve.

Meanwhile Hexum on a similar angle

As for the profile, how are recessed infra's a bigger failo than nasolabial? They can be, if they create more problems like scleral show or huge eyebags, but that's not the case. In the pics you used, Hexum's gonion is more defined, and his browridge looks better. His ramus also appears to be better, from the front and from the side. This is due to masseter insertion more than bone, but it still makes a difference.

 

[khvirgin]

FOGGED!
View attachment 2459360

do people post this because they can't tell the difference between ultra edited picture or they just come up first on google

 

[HarrierDuBois]

Stil disagree on the mouth area. Eriksen's lips are too big imo. The ratio of his mouth area divided by total lower third area looks off to me, can't measure it and test to confirm rn, but maybe will do later. And yeah, they both have chimp lips to some extent, but Eriksen's are way more obvious and affect more angles. In this pic, for example, it fucks up the bottom part of the ogee curve.

View attachment 2460427

Meanwhile Hexum on a similar angle

View attachment 2460428

Still cupids bow mog is a very substantial one for mouth area, wide mouths generally are attractive as well.

As for the profile, how are recessed infra's a bigger failo than nasolabial? They can be, if they create more problems like scleral show or huge eyebags, but that's not the case. In the pics you used, Hexum's gonion is more defined, and his browridge looks better. His ramus also appears to be better, from the front and from the side. This is due to masseter insertion more than bone, but it still makes a difference.

Infraorbitals are a bigger issue than nasolabial angles because it's due to his infra recession he has NCT with no support to hold his lower lids and exocanthion tight.

 

[cytoplasm]

"x is ideal" is so stupid

View attachment 2459625View attachment 2459626View attachment 2459627View attachment 2459628View attachment 2459629View attachment 2459630View attachment 2459632

all of these faces are close to 8 PSL, and they have some overarching similarities sure, but they all look different to one another. completely different mouths, jaws, eyes, ratios, etc...

Meeks mogs any of these

 

[DelonLover1999]

Still cupids bow mog is a very substantial one for mouth area, wide mouths generally are attractive as well.

Wide mouths are attractive. Eriksen's is just over the top big, throwing off harmony. I will attempt to numerically show this when I can, but by the eye test you can clearly see they take up A LOT of space in the lower third area.

Infraorbitals are a bigger issue than nasolabial angles because it's due to his infra recession he has NCT with no support to hold his lower lids and exocanthion tight.

These consequences only show up on the front. You were comparing profiles, and in that angle under-eye support isn't as big a failo as nasolabial can be. From the front, Eriksen's eye area is objectively better than Hexum's, but the thing that seals it for me is averageness. In that dept Hexum blow his out of the water.

 

[DelonLover1999]

Meeks mogs any of these

there is no way in hell meeks mogs those last two morphs

 

[cytoplasm]

there is no way in hell meeks mogs those last two morphs

He does i think. Not a fan of morphs at all they dont look that good to me. They are aspie ideal which is lack of flaws and halos which we can describe and then apply in photoshop but looks are far too complex for that

 

[DelonLover1999]

View attachment 2460447View attachment 2460448

He does i think. Not a fan of morphs at all they dont look that good to me. They are aspie ideal which is lack of flaws and halos which we can describe and then apply in photoshop but looks are far too complex for that

I agree on the morph part, real pics look better. But what I'm saying is, if a human existed with those some features as the morph, but with the 'good' flaws (a bit more asymmetry and skin irregularity, and less luminance), he would mog Meeks. It's just a personal opinion at the end of the day, tho.

 

[khvirgin]

View attachment 2460447View attachment 2460448

He does i think. Not a fan of morphs at all they dont look that good to me. They are aspie ideal which is lack of flaws and halos which we can describe and then apply in photoshop but looks are far too complex for that

you singled out the only morph that was realistic and not autistic

 

[NewOneXY]

Not even top 10 women i have ever Seen

 

[cytoplasm]

you singled out the only morph that was realistic and not autistic

Cause @DelonLover1999 said that one "definietly mogs meeks" so i was responding to that

 

[HarrierDuBois]

Wide mouths are attractive. Eriksen's is just over the top big, throwing off harmony. I will attempt to numerically show this when I can, but by the eye test you can clearly see they take up A LOT of space in the lower third area.


These consequences only show up on the front. You were comparing profiles, and in that angle under-eye support isn't as big a failo as nasolabial can be. From the front, Eriksen's eye area is objectively better than Hexum's, but the thing that seals it for me is averageness. In that dept Hexum blow his out of the water.

How can Hexums eye area be better when Eriksens is objectively better?

 

[Deleted member 25534]

Only PFL is slightly distorted, unironically fogged by original Limas facial perfection, these pictures are peak homo sapiens:
View attachment 2459376View attachment 2459377

reminder to myself that .org is bunch os usbhuman overrating subhumans

 

[Enfant terrible]

Only PFL is slightly distorted, unironically fogged by original Limas facial perfection, these pictures are peak homo sapiens:
View attachment 2459376View attachment 2459377

 

[Deleted member 25534]

gio scotti is subhuman jfl , rightwing fetish moment

 

[DelonLover1999]

How can Hexums eye area be better when Eriksens is objectively better?

It's not better. He just looks better as a whole, because of averageness and other things that I've already stated.

 

[HarrierDuBois]

Never liked her tbh, obviously insanely conventionally attractive but not competing for the number 1 spot, way too robotic.

 

[Krakowski]

"x is ideal" is so stupid

View attachment 2459625View attachment 2459626View attachment 2459627View attachment 2459628View attachment 2459629View attachment 2459630View attachment 2459632

all of these faces are close to 8 PSL, and they have some overarching similarities sure, but they all look different to one another. completely different mouths, jaws, eyes, ratios, etc...

 

[DelonLover1999]

fogged

 

[HarrierDuBois]

It's not better. He just looks better as a whole, because of averageness and other things that I've already stated.

Eriksen's eye area is objectively better than Hexum's

 

[DelonLover1999]

@HarrierDuBois It's not better = Hexum's eye area is not better

 

[Krakowski]

View attachment 2460471

@Xangsane

 

[Xangsane]

@Xangsane

Yes?

 

[Enfant terrible]

Never liked her tbh, obviously insanely conventionally attractive but not competing for the number 1 spot, way too robotic.

no she is objectivly the best and she is not my favourite i like barbara more

 

[DelonLover1999]

no she is objectivly the best and she is not my favourite i like barbara more

Soler face fogs Kroes in sex appeal to andromeda and back. Her body is a diff story tho...

 

[HarrierDuBois]

no she is objectivly the best and she is not my favourite i like barbara more

She is not that feminine looking tbh.

 

[Enfant terrible]

Soler face fogs Kroes in sex appeal to andromeda and back. Her body is a diff story tho...

View attachment 2460493

to many disharmonies to look better

 

[Zonar]

Adriana fogs so hard

 

[DelonLover1999]

to many disharmonies to look better

elab

 

[cytoplasm]

Soler face fogs Kroes in sex appeal to andromeda and back. Her body is a diff story tho...

View attachment 2460493

Kroes has way more sex appeal in the face ngl. I cant even imagine soler going up to seduce a guy, she doesnt have that femme fatale look

 

[FutureChadronelite]

View attachment 2459386
Fogged

*frogged

 

[FutureChadronelite]

pinocchio mogs anyone i ever saw besides pick blackgymax

 

[DelonLover1999]

Kroes has way more sex appeal in the face ngl. I cant even imagine soler going up to seduce a guy, she doesnt have that femme fatale look

"Doesn't have that femme fatale look"

The main bottleneck would be her body, obviously. If she had a Palvin tier body it would be too OP ngl.

 

[cytoplasm]

"Doesn't have that femme fatale look"

View attachment 2460581

The main bottleneck would be her body, obviously. If she had a Palvin tier body it would be too OP ngl.

Yeah she doesnt. Looks very hqnp, innocent, anassuming. Squintmaxxing cant save her from looking submissive as fuck

 

[DelonLover1999]

Yeah she doesnt. Looks very hqnp, innocent, anassuming. Squintmaxxing cant save her from looking submissive as fuck

Kroes looks 10x more innocent.

 

[DelonLover1999]

Yeah she doesnt. Looks very hqnp, innocent, anassuming. Squintmaxxing cant save her from looking submissive as fuck

Also looking somewhat submissive is key for sex appeal on women. Unless you're a BDSM addict who wants to be dominated by a 6'3 female wrestler.

 

[cytoplasm]

Kroes looks 10x more innocent.

She does not look innocent at all. She intidimates me

Also looking somewhat submissive is key for sex appeal on women. Unless you're a BDSM addict who wants to be dominated by a 6'3 female wrestler.

Well i prefer innocent look but thats lower sex appeal. Like megan fox sex appeal mogs taylor hill to another realm because she looks not innocent at all

 

[DelonLover1999]

She does not look innocent at all. She intidimates me


Well i prefer innocent look but thats lower sex appeal. Like megan fox sex appeal mogs taylor hill to another realm because she looks not innocent at all

she does look way more daunting in this video, I'll give you that. I still think Soler is on par (if not ahead) when doing similar facial expressions.

 

[LampPostPrime]

This debate, as fun as it is, won't go anywhere. We fundamentally disagree on descriptivism vs prescriptivism for aesthetics, as I'm sure you'll remember from a thread I did some time ago. When I look at that pic of Hexum, I intuitively identify it as being more ideal.

I'm in the rating business, not the failo checkbox marking business

What language are you speaking?