Mark Zuckerberg uses a hairstyle to completely sway public opinion on him

[shizuku11111]

Imagine looking like a bum wearing baggy clothes when you can look like this
View attachment 3204455

just compare your subhuman self to 1 in 1000000 model, debil ebaniy

 

[Eblan]

just compare your subhuman self to 1 in 1000000 model, debil ebaniy

Ugly or not youll get more respect from people wearing this than baggy

 

[sub5pslathlete]

View attachment 3202667View attachment 3202668View attachment 3202670


Fluffy hair + chains + baggy at 40. And it... worked????

Look online and you'll see no one is calling him weird or creepy anymore.

View attachment 3202678View attachment 3202681



DISCUSS BELOW

Gymcelcopers welcome
PSL autists welcome
Genetics are everything cels welcome
"x inches of bone" copers you are also welcome.


Try to refute fluffy+chains+baggy

Softmaxxing is law

 

[Seth Walsh]

Ugly or not youll get more respect from people wearing this than baggy

Bruh you don't always have to wear baggy.

You can wear what you want as a Chad or as anyone, because you have the freedom to do what you want.

I'm just giving a framework for MTNs to ascend with fluffy+chains+baggy but people like you continue to cope.

Consider "fluffy+chains+baggy" as something like skincare, taking care of your teeth, managing your weight. If you want to ignore it, that's fine. But you can't dispute its effectiveness.

 

[Seth Walsh]

if he had bone he could have smeared shit on his face and still not have to settle w a gook ltb

keep coping

Stop the cope. I coined the phrase "femalegazemaxxing" over 2 years and it caught on. Time for you to accept fluffy+chains+baggy.

 

[Roninotrolling]

View attachment 3204536View attachment 3204539


Stop the cope. I coined the phrase "femalegazemaxxing" over 2 years and it caught on. Time for you to accept fluffy+chains+baggy.

he should shave it off completely and stop cheeksucking

 

[Seth Walsh]

he should shave it off completely and stop cheeksucking

So was there bones for his hair?

He has good bones.

 

[Roninotrolling]

So was there bones for his hair?

He has good bones.

those arent good bones these are

 

[Always Stay You]

Ugly or not youll get more respect from people wearing this than baggy

Not even remotely true. Also, people who aren't wearing baggy aren't wearing designer perfectly coordinated runway outfits like that (which also happens to be on the baggy side haha), theyre wearing shitty unfashionable sexless "HI I AM SOCIALLY EXCLUDED" fits.

And baggy doesn't mean EXTREMELY baggy like a 2000s rapper either (although this is still better/more fashionable than what most sexless dudes wear)

Baggy means fashionably fitted and proportioned which currently means a bit oversized

Basically EVERY LTN+ I see with a girl dresses like this its law bro face it

 

[Seth Walsh]

Not even remotely true. Also, people who aren't wearing baggy aren't wearing designer perfectly coordinated runway outfits like that (which also happens to be on the baggy side haha), theyre wearing shitty unfashionable sexless "HI I AM SOCIALLY EXCLUDED" fits.

And baggy doesn't mean EXTREMELY baggy like a 2000s rapper either (although this is still better/more fashionable than what most sexless dudes wear)

View attachment 3204703

Baggy means fashionably fitted and proportioned which currently means a bit oversized

View attachment 3204713 View attachment 3204716

Basically EVERY LTN+ I see with a girl dresses like this its law bro face it

Fucking based.

 

[chadison]

I am giving in to the fluffy+chains+baggy theory. It is one of the few things I have seen that is mentioned on PSL that correspond with real life and what I see in school or the mall etc.

When we say only 30 percent of young men are having sex nowadays, it is not the absolute dimorphic elite like people on this site cope with saying, it is mostly TRENDY, STYLISH, HEALTHY, NEUROTYPICAL YOUNG MEN > with these traits being represented by their choice of baggy clothes, accessories and stylish hair.

I observe it at school and if I go the shopping - young girls (who are always stylish and trendy by default) want a guy who is equally fashionable because to them that is how NORMAL people present themselves and so it shows that the guy is a CERTIFIED MEMBER OF THE TRIBE, NEUROTYPICAL and SOCIALLY ACCEPTED ALREADY.

I think for 14-24 LTN+ the most legit way to increase your chance of getting a girl is fluffy+chains+baggy. And when you combine this with classic lookism theory on the face etc. you are giving yourself the best chance possible at curing inceldom.

Alongside my gymcelling, softmaxxing and planned hardmaxxing next year, I am subscribing to fluffy+chains+baggy absolutely

This site used to have some good aspects to it, but at this point it’s just one big meme. Looks theory (ideal facial ratios) barely plays out in real life. In REAL life, its everything—soft features, charisma, money, muscles, ratios, height, clothes/fashion, environment….I could just keep going. Men here want to buy into the fantasy that if they looksmax then eventually hot women will just come to them, and they’ll have to not try at all. OR, they buy into the doomer “what’s the point, I have bad genes, I’ll never succeed.” Both are predicated on laziness and entitlement. If you are an EXTREME (bottom or top 1%) then the things this site says will probably apply to you. But if you’re within two standard deviations of the mean looks-wise, the stuff said here is mostly bullshit. Sure, if you’re <5’9 it will be harder. Sure, if you’re indian/asian trying to get white women it may be harder. BUT, there is so many moving parts to human social dynamics and sexual phenomena that to abstract it to some simple binary process (ITS OVER IF YOU’RE NOT 6’+ BRO, ITS OVER IF YOU DON’T LOOK LIKE YOUNG LEO DICAPRIO BRO) is foolish. This site now is mostly just a gravitational well of negativity, comprised mostly of edgy teens and men on the Autism-Spectrum disorder with no grounded perception of reality. If I could download the events of my brain the last four years and put them in a folder for people to see, I’d destroy the vast majority of users’ internal realities here. A lot of stuff on this site is cope for the pain bodies users here experience.

But oh well, it isn’t my duty (or desire) to do that. I’d just encourage each user to take the theories here and go see for themselves if they seem to describe their anecdotal reality. Taking them at face-value is quite dangerous, in my opinion.