Is the male attractiveness distribution more spread out than the female distribution?

[thecel]

Variability hypothesis - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Variability hypothesis - Wikipedia

The variability hypothesis, also known as the greater male variability hypothesis, states that males display greater variability in traits than females do. It has often been discussed in relation to cognitive ability, where it has been observed that human males are more likely than females to have either very high or very low intelligence. The sex-difference in the variability of intelligence has been discussed since at least Charles Darwin.[1] Sex-differences in variability are present in many abilities and traits — including physical, psychological and genetic ones. It is not only found in humans but in other sexually dimorphic species as well.

It seems to me that there are more ugly guys and hot guys than their respective female counterparts without makeup. You see many incel-looking men out there, but women are rarely ever that ugly even with no makeup. You see quite a few Chads and Chadlites out there, but women not wearing makeup rarely ever are that high in facial aesthetics.

 

[Deleted member 6403]

pareto distribution for men

and bell curve for women

 

[thecel]

pareto distribution for men

No.

This cannot be the male distribution.

---

The male distribution and the makeup-free female distribution are both bell curves with the same mean (5/10), the male distribution having a bigger standard deviation (I don't know for sure; this is just based on my uneducated observations).

The female distribution with normal amounts of makeup has a higher mean (roughly 6–7/10).

 

[Deleted member 7725]

I'd say it's exactly the same without makeup.

 

[Deleted member 7725]

No.

View attachment 1029330

This cannot be the male distribution.

---

The male distribution and the makeup-free female distribution are both bell curves with the same mean (5/10), the male distribution having a higher standard deviation (I don't know for sure, but this is just based on my uneducated observations).

The female distribution with normal amounts of makeup has a higher mean (roughly 6–7/10).

In terms of having sex, it's definitely a pareto distribution for men.

 

[Deleted member 6403]

No.

View attachment 1029330

This cannot be the male distribution.

---

The male distribution and the makeup-free female distribution are both bell curves with the same mean (5/10), the male distribution having a bigger standard deviation (I don't know for sure; this is just based on my uneducated observations).

The female distribution with normal amounts of makeup has a higher mean (roughly 6–7/10).

95% of men are ugly according to women

and most women are average

 

[thecel]

95% of men are ugly according to women

and most women are average

Those wack-ass OkCupid womens' ratings of men are garbo. That info shows the brutality of the clown world, but it's not useful for the science of aesthetics.

I was referring to real legit ratings.

 

[Deleted member 7725]

95% of men are ugly according to women

and most women are average

When you can fuck a Chad on demand, obviously the standard of what's attractive is going the decrease. The same applies to guys who are incel, where the standard is at rock bottom. In terms of objective facial features, it's exactly the same.

 

[Deleted member 8244]

I think women have an optimal development in today’s estrogen rich society, thus why there are more beautiful women than ever, and we men are getting uglier and uglier or becoming feminized through the chemicals, It’s rare that I see a masc chad instead of a prettyboy

 

[Deleted member 2729]

I think the variation bell curve being more spread out in men then in women applies to every single trait you could assign to a human. It works with IQ, with looks, with height with everything that in sum makes you special. Women are just average sheep and it shows. It makes sense from a biological standpoint too

 

[volcelfatcel]

Makeup frauding, cosmetics are far far more developed for women. Average woman>average man in terms of looks and aesthetics. But top 1% of males such as opry, meeks, gandy mog the living shit out of any top 1% female to lucifer. A good looking man is the pinnacle of aesthetics, he has everything only halos and he looks good without makeup frauding. A Becky can become stacy and stacy lite with makeup frauding.

 

[volcelfatcel]

I think women have an optimal development in today’s estrogen rich society, thus why there are more beautiful women than ever, and we men are getting uglier and uglier or becoming feminized through the chemicals, It’s rare that I see a masc chad instead of a prettyboy

Yep that as well, men were far more robust before. The sedentary lifestyle only benefits women since their hormone is amplified, men are absolutely fucked since testosterone develops at its peak in a hunter gatherer environment or a very active environment in modern days. Even simple shit like fighting as a man increases testosterone, aggressive active hunter behaviour is the best environment for a male to develop in but technology has made it rarer and rarer to find properly developed males.

 

[Deleted member 6273]

Yeah I've noticed this too the best looking and worst looking people are primarily men in all races.

 

[Deleted member 6785]

I think women have an optimal development in today’s estrogen rich society, thus why there are more beautiful women than ever, and we men are getting uglier and uglier or becoming feminized through the chemicals, It’s rare that I see a masc chad instead of a prettyboy

high iq

 

[volcelfatcel]

Yeah I've noticed this too the best looking and worst looking people are primarily men in all races.

It's kinda like IQ distribution men can be dumber but they are also way smarter than women. There's less low IQ women but far less smart women. They are stuck in average.

 

[Deleted member 756]

Variability hypothesis - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

It seems to me that there are more ugly guys and hot guys than their respective female counterparts without makeup. You see many incel-looking men out there, but women are rarely ever that ugly even with no makeup. You see quite a few Chads and Chadlites out there, but women not wearing makeup rarely ever are that high in facial aesthetics.

Cope thread

 

[Deleted member 6273]

Cope thread

He's right tbh

 

[Deleted member 8244]

high iq

Thanks for the dopamine

 

[Deleted member 756]

He's right tbh

How so?

 

[SkinjobCatastrophe]

Its difficult to get real ratings from women, but all the available data would agree with men having more attractiveness variability. Men have greater variability in everything, facial size, ratios, proportions, muscle size, strength, height, intelligence, behavior, etc. As for the attractiveness distribution, I dont know how there could be any solid data on that because you would need womens ratings and of course womens ratings are garbage, like that okcupid data where like 80% of men are below average. Men do have greater variability in facial sizes and ratios and shit like that so I think that would necessarily lead to a greater variability/higher standard deviation for them with attractiveness.

 

[Deleted member 6273]

How so?

Women tend to have much less variation in terms of attractiveness when they aren't wearing makeup. There aren't that many hideously ugly women or strikingly attractive women, most usually tend towards the mean.

Whereas for men the variation is a lot more, there are more extremely ugly men than women but also more strikingly attractive men than women.

Men tend to have more prominent features which greatly influences facial attractiveness whether positively or negatively.

 

[volcelfatcel]

Its difficult to get real ratings from women, but all the available data would agree with men having more attractiveness variability. Men have greater variability in everything, facial size, ratios, proportions, muscle size, strength, height, intelligence, behavior, etc. As for the attractiveness distribution, I dont know how there could be any solid data on that because you would need womens ratings and of course womens ratings are garbage, like that okcupid data where like 80% of men are below average. Men do have greater variability in facial sizes and ratios and shit like that so I think that would necessarily lead to a greater variability/higher standard deviation for them with attractiveness.

The variation is very visible. The difference between chadlites and chads to gigachad. Opry literally looks like a morph there. Gandy makes the other two guys invisible