Theory Male Attractiveness (Face) is NOT Normally Distributed

What Distribution More Closely resembles the faces of People You seen?


  • Total voters
    77
Handsome Truecel

Handsome Truecel

Nordic Chad With Severe Facial Recession
Joined
Nov 26, 2021
Posts
662
Reputation
982
Freshkebab said:
beauty is eye of beholder.
Jfl :feelshaha::lul:

Maybe when it comes to different-looking chads and gl guys, women may have different tastes.
 
F

Freshkebab

Erudite
Joined
Jan 3, 2022
Posts
1,162
Reputation
989
Handsome Truecel said:
Jfl :feelshaha::lul:

Maybe when it comes to different-looking chads and gl guys, women may have different tastes.
There are people that rate guy an fucking ugly and yet he is thirsted by women. Make tons of sense.
 
StrangerDanger

StrangerDanger

Turanidpilled
Joined
Dec 2, 2020
Posts
12,091
Reputation
24,401
ForeverRecession @ForeverRecession why do you get banned every other day wtf
 
thecel

thecel

devout coomists coom 5 times a day
Joined
May 16, 2020
Posts
7,106
Reputation
18,926
ForeverRecession said:
Fair enough if your experience matches that.
Imo, I see far more people around 2-2.5 psl than 5.5-6.

PSL scale should be abandoned because at this point nearly everyone uses it wrong and also can’t rate for shit.
 
thecel

thecel

devout coomists coom 5 times a day
Joined
May 16, 2020
Posts
7,106
Reputation
18,926
ForeverRecession said:
Here is the true Distribution:


2 psl is 10th percentile
3psl is 30th percentile
4 psl is 50th percentile
4.5 is 75th percentile
5 is 85-90th percentile
5.5 is 95th percentile
5.75 is 98th
6 is 99.5th
6.5 is 99.99th
7 is 99.9999th

the fuck? someone explain this shit to me!
 
thecel

thecel

devout coomists coom 5 times a day
Joined
May 16, 2020
Posts
7,106
Reputation
18,926
ForeverRecession said:
Normal Distribution Implies You See Just as Many Ugly People as Good Looking Ones, which I don't agree with tbh.

I see more good-looking people than I see ugly people.
 
mulattomaxxer

mulattomaxxer

RESSURECTED IN SPRING
Joined
Mar 10, 2020
Posts
4,288
Reputation
7,542
forevergymcelling said:
Also lol at ranking Salludon in the same category as Maher and Sommerhalder :lul::lul::lul::lul:
Salludon is such a mogger. I am sure if he was famous everyone would rate him at the same lookslevel as other famous gigachads.
 
ForeverRecession

ForeverRecession

Looksmaxxing For Arranged Marriage
Joined
Jun 2, 2021
Posts
2,891
Reputation
7,706
thecel said:
the fuck? someone explain this shit to me!
Fuarkkkk thecel @thecel sama it’s an honour to have u on my humble thread. You pioneered the black pill knowledge years ago
 
mulattomaxxer

mulattomaxxer

RESSURECTED IN SPRING
Joined
Mar 10, 2020
Posts
4,288
Reputation
7,542
looksmaxxer234 said:
timothee chalamet and Ronaldo aren’t that gl. Many guys on their looks level outside.
Status halo. I agree with you these guys are overrated. Timothee is recognised as a "medium ugly" but ronaldo is just considered good looking. Ronaldo is about the same level as the good looking guys you see on a night out. I often see people at the same looks level as chalamet. They aren't ugly but I guarantee that if you gave a 4.5PSL+ looksmax user the same level of fame as these guys they would get fawned over. This just proves the importance of being facially average or not subhuman.

If these niggas weren't famous and posted on looksmax:

"Nice eyes and good body but your a recessed dog and a brown eyed mutt. Frame is meh but your look good gymmaxxed. Your a HTN. Bimax and light eye colour contacts should ascend you."


"Bug eyed UEE NCT small chinned cuck. Shit frame and your a skinnyfatcel. Its fucking over for you bro. Your a LTN at best. Hollow cheekbones halo your face. Your NW0 and eboymaxxed so you should seamaxx and run JBW game."


Despite this these guys SMV mog the forum. JFL at looksmax users tbh.
 
forevergymcelling

forevergymcelling

Professional
Joined
Jul 14, 2019
Posts
968
Reputation
3,835
mulattomaxxer said:
Status halo. I agree with you these guys are overrated. Timothee is recognised as a "medium ugly" but ronaldo is just considered good looking. Ronaldo is about the same level as the good looking guys you see on a night out. I often see people at the same looks level as chalamet. They aren't ugly but I guarantee that if you gave a 4.5PSL+ looksmax user the same level of fame as these guys they would get fawned over. This just proves the importance of being facially average or not subhuman.

If these niggas weren't famous and posted on looksmax:

"Nice eyes and good body but your a recessed dog and a brown eyed mutt. Frame is meh but your look good gymmaxxed. Your a HTN. Bimax and light eye colour contacts should ascend you."
View attachment 1483998 View attachment 1484006 View attachment 1484008 View attachment 1484015

"Bug eyed UEE NCT small chinned cuck. Shit frame and your a skinnyfatcel. Its fucking over for you bro. Your a LTN at best. Hollow cheekbones halo your face. Your NW0 and eboymaxxed so you should seamaxx and run JBW game."
View attachment 1484002 View attachment 1484009 View attachment 1484010 View attachment 1484012

Despite this these guys SMV mog the forum. JFL at looksmax users tbh.
Lol if you think any looksmax user is gonna look the same in a candid vs their frauded photoshopped basement selfies
 
mulattomaxxer

mulattomaxxer

RESSURECTED IN SPRING
Joined
Mar 10, 2020
Posts
4,288
Reputation
7,542
I DONT THINK LOOKS SHOULD BE VIEWED AS A DISTRIBUTION. ITS AN UNSUITABLE METHOD TO VIEW LOOKS. WHETHER YOU LIKE IT OR NOT, LOOKS ARE SOMEWHAT SUBJECTIVE. VIEWING A NON NUMERICAL VARIABLE THROUGH A NUMERICAL DISTRIBUTION IS INCORRECT.

With looks all good looking people will share simillar traits, but ignoring the subjective elements to looks is incorrect. Somebodies 6/10 is somebody else's 8/10. Its like going to a gallery and rating all the paintings on a distribution scale. What makes a one painting an 8/10 and another one a 4/10. Its subjective. Sure if one looks like an OC deviant art and the other is done by a proffesional there will be a clear difference but eventually it will come down to personal preference. Viewing data as a distribution is suitable for things such as height or weight. Looks should be viewed as categorical data.

Lets say you go to mumbai and take 100,000 people. You can view their height and weight as a distribution but what about their looks? The average indian isn't aesthetic. Especially if you view them though a eurocentric lens.

In reality there should only be 3 ways to rate looks. Ugly, Average and Attractive. If I were to develop this further I would make 5 catergories.

>Model - Attractive and Unique.
>Attractive - Attractive but not exceptional. Popular kids at school level of good looking.
>Average - Ordinary person. I would say this is the last catergory where you would be considered attractive. Being neutral is not bad, your just not going to be the "hot person" in your social circle. Your personality matters most here because your looks aren't going to halo you or fail you.
>Unattractive -
These people aren't hideous but they usually look different. Maybe they don't take good care of themselves. Will have a few glaring flaws (fat, ance, balding, short, strange facial feature etc). You see people like this in relationships but they will struggle more in comparison to the average normie.
>Subhuman - Ugly as fuck. They may be hard to look at. Will get hard rejected by love interests. Most commonly deformed or morbidly obese (or both).

This is how I would rate people.
 
chadsmith

chadsmith

Fractalpilled
Joined
Oct 12, 2021
Posts
103
Reputation
138
I was thinking about this the other day, and I think the amount of positive skew must be a function of exposure to online dating, social media. As exposure increases the skew increases. I think this has foundations in how action potentials in neurons work, wherein there must be a threshold level of excitatory actions so higher exposure will increase this threshold. This leads to an all or nothing pareto type distribution of attractiveness. Without the confounding variable of increased online exposure I think it's just a slight positive skew, which can be attributed to balding, being overweight.
 
TrestIsBest

TrestIsBest

Enthusiast
Joined
Jul 31, 2021
Posts
497
Reputation
496
mulattomaxxer said:
I DONT THINK LOOKS SHOULD BE VIEWED AS A DISTRIBUTION. ITS AN UNSUITABLE METHOD TO VIEW LOOKS. WHETHER YOU LIKE IT OR NOT, LOOKS ARE SOMEWHAT SUBJECTIVE. VIEWING A NON NUMERICAL VARIABLE THROUGH A NUMERICAL DISTRIBUTION IS INCORRECT.

With looks all good looking people will share simillar traits, but ignoring the subjective elements to looks is incorrect. Somebodies 6/10 is somebody else's 8/10. Its like going to a gallery and rating all the paintings on a distribution scale. What makes a one painting an 8/10 and another one a 4/10. Its subjective. Sure if one looks like an OC deviant art and the other is done by a proffesional there will be a clear difference but eventually it will come down to personal preference. Viewing data as a distribution is suitable for things such as height or weight. Looks should be viewed as categorical data.

Lets say you go to mumbai and take 100,000 people. You can view their height and weight as a distribution but what about their looks? The average indian isn't aesthetic. Especially if you view them though a eurocentric lens.

In reality there should only be 3 ways to rate looks. Ugly, Average and Attractive. If I were to develop this further I would make 5 catergories.

>Model - Attractive and Unique.
>Attractive - Attractive but not exceptional. Popular kids at school level of good looking.
>Average - Ordinary person. I would say this is the last catergory where you would be considered attractive. Being neutral is not bad, your just not going to be the "hot person" in your social circle. Your personality matters most here because your looks aren't going to halo you or fail you.
>Unattractive -
These people aren't hideous but they usually look different. Maybe they don't take good care of themselves. Will have a few glaring flaws (fat, ance, balding, short, strange facial feature etc). You see people like this in relationships but they will struggle more in comparison to the average normie.
>Subhuman - Ugly as fuck. They may be hard to look at. Will get hard rejected by love interests. Most commonly deformed or morbidly obese (or both).

This is how I would rate people.
Great stuff! A lot of people will consider this cope tho, as it goes somewhat against common Black Pill "wisdom"
 
mulattomaxxer

mulattomaxxer

RESSURECTED IN SPRING
Joined
Mar 10, 2020
Posts
4,288
Reputation
7,542
TrestIsBest said:
Great stuff! A lot of people will consider this cope tho, as it goes somewhat against common Black Pill "wisdom"
Blackpill is true but its so unbelievably overblown. I have seen far to many people that are LTN/Normie that get laid to believe all women are chadsexual. Combine this with the rarity of Chad and I begin to see an issue. Im still getting surgery for my lower third because I believe its worth it but its only over if your actually subhuman.
 
TrestIsBest

TrestIsBest

Enthusiast
Joined
Jul 31, 2021
Posts
497
Reputation
496
mulattomaxxer said:
Blackpill is true but its so unbelievably overblown. I have seen far to many people that are LTN/Normie that get laid to believe all women are chadsexual. Combine this with the rarity of Chad and I begin to see an issue. Im still getting surgery for my lower third because I believe its worth it but its only over if your actually subhuman.
Agreed.. I'm seeing a pretty lil Latina rn and she worships me like chad tbh
 
mulattomaxxer

mulattomaxxer

RESSURECTED IN SPRING
Joined
Mar 10, 2020
Posts
4,288
Reputation
7,542
TrestIsBest said:
Agreed.. I'm seeing a pretty lil Latina rn and she worships me like chad tbh
Fuark I am mirin. I literally could not imagine a woman giving me chad treatment. My last rejection was from a woman who wears size 24 clothing :lul::ogre::feelswhy:.
 
TrestIsBest

TrestIsBest

Enthusiast
Joined
Jul 31, 2021
Posts
497
Reputation
496
mulattomaxxer said:
Fuark I am mirin. I literally could not imagine a woman giving me chad treatment. My last rejection was from a woman who wears size 24 clothing :lul::ogre::feelswhy:.
Yeah it was a lucky incidence. She is not a native here (I'm in Germany) and I think I have my "arian" traits going for me (6"4 and blonde, although I have a jew nose :lul:) and a bit of status halo because I'm studying law and dress like it too.
 
ForeverRecession

ForeverRecession

Looksmaxxing For Arranged Marriage
Joined
Jun 2, 2021
Posts
2,891
Reputation
7,706
chadsmith said:
I was thinking about this the other day, and I think the amount of positive skew must be a function of exposure to online dating, social media. As exposure increases the skew increases. I think this has foundations in how action potentials in neurons work, wherein there must be a threshold level of excitatory actions so higher exposure will increase this threshold. This leads to an all or nothing pareto type distribution of attractiveness. Without the confounding variable of increased online exposure I think it's just a slight positive skew, which can be attributed to balding, being overweight.
fuark intergalactic iq bro, you should post more. No doubt. looks standards on this forum influenced me hard too.
 
D

Deleted member 5061

Zephir
Joined
Feb 2, 2020
Posts
3,071
Reputation
3,891
I was just thinking the other day how "average" looks is actually not even a 5/10, but more like 4.5 out of 10 or even 4/10.

Average looks as in looking like the "vast majority" of men or women out there would indeed be closer to 4/10 than 5/10 which is getting into HTN territory almost.
 
L

leveruis

Trainee
Joined
Dec 21, 2021
Posts
78
Reputation
73
Here’s some more evidence. Women under 29 rate me almost completely average on photofeeler. However, when the algorithm incorporates how they usually rate I end up with a 7/10 on a normie scale.
 

Attachments

  • 90125459-2D61-45DA-AC6E-1479523A6944.jpeg
    90125459-2D61-45DA-AC6E-1479523A6944.jpeg
    451.3 KB · Views: 0
  • D5148632-0505-4F89-827E-303CD7B8ACED.jpeg
    D5148632-0505-4F89-827E-303CD7B8ACED.jpeg
    70.7 KB · Views: 0
AyyazWaseemJamshed

AyyazWaseemJamshed

Trainee
Joined
Jan 13, 2022
Posts
6
Reputation
2
This is hoq humanity was raped when caucasoids killed off the americoids. Ngl feel bad for women
 
antiantifa

antiantifa

Fuck you.
Joined
Jan 14, 2021
Posts
3,223
Reputation
3,712
legit thread
attractiveness isn't governed by free market rules
ur either attractive or ur not, there's nothing more to it
 
LooksOverAll

LooksOverAll

Zephir
Joined
Jun 8, 2020
Posts
11,102
Reputation
21,623
AscendingHero said:
Oubre is a giga uber mogger, i've been blackpilled on him several times. Knows the importance of hairstyle and proportions, mirin his ascencion ngl. Quoves studio also have an excellent video on him.

Insane frame, 6'5+, light eyes, lightbrown skin mogger.
View attachment 1479994 View attachment 1479996 View attachment 1479997 View attachment 1480006 View attachment 1480007 View attachment 1480008 View attachment 1480010 View attachment 1480013 View attachment 1480014 View attachment 1480015 View attachment 1480016 View attachment 1480017

JFL at how hard this foid is simping over him looksmaxxer234 @looksmaxxer234 fogdart @fogdart Frank Jack @Frank Jack Very nt pheno, excellent harmony, good nt hairstyle Prettyboy @Prettyboy , and good forward growth/coloring.

Oubrepilled so hard, i shake my head in astonishment at the amount of prime young stacies in his comments. SMV of a God looking like that in the NBA at that height.
His frame is not "insane". It's complete dogshit. 190 lbs at 6'7". Basically DYEL.

He's carried hard af by perfect coloring and pheno. Make him white or any other pheno and he'll be htn/Chadlite at best with his features.
 
Last edited:
ForeverRecession

ForeverRecession

Looksmaxxing For Arranged Marriage
Joined
Jun 2, 2021
Posts
2,891
Reputation
7,706
Amnesia @Amnesia yo bro since you work a bar in Cali I’m curious, how many guys do you see who would be rated as good looking by our standards
 
Amnesia

Amnesia

I Just Want To Be A Kid Again
Joined
Mar 28, 2019
Posts
10,275
Reputation
53,824
ForeverRecession said:
Amnesia @Amnesia yo bro since you work a bar in Cali I’m curious, how many guys do you see who would be rated as good looking by our standards
no one

I vividly remember whenever I see GL guys, and in the last month I cant think of any that I have seen at the club. I mean most guys are balding or chubby or whatever. Most men after college age are ugly as sin
 
Last edited:
C

cucumbersauce

Enthusiast
Joined
Aug 2, 2021
Posts
430
Reputation
658
I 100% agree, this is EXACTLY what I was talking about. People don’t understand how rare over 5 psl is let alone 6+ psl. Realistically in a 1000 person boy’s school there’s maybe 1 6+ psl person if there even is one, plus psl is rating the face. It’s even rarer to find someone who has a great face with a good height, good frame etc
 
Looksmax25

Looksmax25

IL DUCE
Joined
Oct 26, 2019
Posts
1,037
Reputation
1,171
antiantifa said:
legit thread
attractiveness isn't governed by free market rules
ur either attractive or ur not, there's nothing more to it

This is VERY true especially in our generation where women aren't forced to settle down. Back in the day being the best looking guy in the bar or at your job was enough... but now a woman can hop on a dating app and find a Gigachad who lives 2 hours away. Bottom line is when they see you they either get horny or not.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

  • autismusmaximus
  • Yolosweg
  • kalefartbomb
Top