Looks are objective

[alanzexoo]

Attraction isn't purely subjective people just confuse personal "types" with actual attractiveness. Having a type, like preferring long blonde hair or blue eyes, is the subjective part. But within that preference, objective features like facial symmetry, bone structure, and harmony still dictate who is actually more attractive. If you take two people who fit the exact same type, the one with strong facial geometry and conventional harmony is always going to stand out. Preferences just set the category, but structure determines the standard.

 

[kgxwa]

aint this just common sense tho ?

 

[Excelatory]

omg really

 

[TimmyAshan1]

Attraction isn't purely subjective people just confuse personal "types" with actual attractiveness. Having a type, like preferring long blonde hair or blue eyes, is the subjective part. But within that preference, objective features like facial symmetry, bone structure, and harmony still dictate who is actually more attractive. If you take two people who fit the exact same type, the one with strong facial geometry and conventional harmony is always going to stand out. Preferences just set the category, but structure determines the standard.

Yeah, it's always so cope when bluepilelrs say "One person's 3 can be another's 8" or something.
Best case scenario, latent attraction can shift somebody up or down by 1 point MAX. This is also why you should always looksmax first, and nichemax afterwards. And even in the case of nichemaxxing, it usually boils down to getting a specific features that are universally attractive anyways.

For instance in my case, nichemaxxing towards hippie/boho girls: They value guys with dreadlocks or longer hair (AKA: "Have a good Norwood1 hairline"), expressive shamanic eyes (AKA: Positive canthal tilt and blue/green color), a physique that can survive in the wild (AKA: lean with muscle), commanding presence (AKA: Forward growth and good jawline). And of course there are subcultural markers like tattoos/piercings/scent/clothing/behaviour, but they are all secondary.

Similarly, gym girls do like a guy who's in proper shape. Club girls like a guy who's clean-cut with a sharp jawline and money. Frat girls like the jocks (surprise surprise, they have good jawline and abs). Preppy girls like the prettyboys (surprise surprise, neotony and dimorphism)

 

[cope677foidslaya]

Attraction isn't purely subjective people just confuse personal "types" with actual attractiveness. Having a type, like preferring long blonde hair or blue eyes, is the subjective part. But within that preference, objective features like facial symmetry, bone structure, and harmony still dictate who is actually more attractive. If you take two people who fit the exact same type, the one with strong facial geometry and conventional harmony is always going to stand out. Preferences just set the category, but structure determines the standard.

no shit lil nga everyone knows this

 

[Kylo]

It’s both.

Objective cases.
A portrait of a sunset is objectively more beautiful to look at than a portrait of shxt

Meeks is objectively more attractive than Jared Leno

Subjective cases.
A portrait of a sunset is subjectively more/less beautiful to look at than a portrait of another sunset

O’pry is subjectively more/less attractive than Meeks