Michael Cera is a PSL God!

[hatetobemale]

Calling Michael Cera "Ugly" is Pure Copium!

Here is the Void Pill that the Black Pill community desperately tries to deny. Neotenic/Feminine beauty is universaly and objectively superior to any form of masculine beauty. the only reason the looksmaxxing community labels Michael Cera as "ugly" or, at best, a "Sub-5," is strictly because he is neotenic/feminine. It is pure, unadulterated copium. In reality, Michael Cera is the ultimate PSL God.

Whether he is attractive to women or not is a separate debate, primarily because "attractiveness" and "beauty" are not necessarily 100% synonymous, especially when it comes to women.countless studies and the women themselves confirm what the "Normie " Red Pillers got right: female attraction is context-dependent, factoring in behavior, status, subculture, contrast, success, and being a "doer"

Even if physical appearance were their central consideration, you cannot conclude that a preference for a dimorphic man over a neotenic/feminine man translates to "masculinity is more beautiful." It simply means women are looking for things beyond beauty, such as dominance, power, and security. women’s attraction to men is less about the man as an end in himself and more about the man as a means to an end. It id about how he makes her feel and what he can provide for her.

The bitter truth is that 80% of female attraction to men is narcissistic. A woman’s sense of value and her own feeling of femininity are amplified through the man she is with. therefore,even though men like Michael Cera are objectively more beautiful than most masculine men, many women will not choose to date him because it it makes them feel less beautiful and less feminine by comparison, not because he is "lesser", in beauty.

Despite this narcissistic drive to be "the beautiful one" in the relationship, there is still a massive demand for Pretty Boys and Femboys. This is the realit.y. an androgynous male has a much easier time acquiring sex than the average man., The fact that a vast number of women are effectively bisexual is living proof that while they may be evolutionarily wired to be attracted to men, feminine/neotenic beauty is objectively and universally superior,. even women, despite their wiring for dimorphism, will give another woman sex unconditionally, while most men must perform and exert immense effort to earn sex from women

The looksmaxxing community knows this subconsciously. It is why they recognize that a man can be a "Chad" even with low dimorphism. It’s also why even "Rugged Chads" must be balanced and not reach extreme levels of dimorphism. otherwise, the community itself would rate them lower. They simply refuse to connect the dots. If being "too masculine" is unattractive even for a man, while being "refined" can still be attractive, it is conclusi8ve proof that no matter how beautiful you are as a man, you are still just a man. The most beautiful woman will always be more beautiful than the most beautiful man, just as the strongest man will always be stronger than the strongest woman.

I find the cognitive dissonance of the looksmaxxing community highly ironic. On one hand, they believe in universal and objective beauty. On the other, as a coping mechanism, they contradict themselves by maintaining two different scales for men and women—as if they are "apples and oranges" that cannot be compared. even if you are in the top 1% of men, you are still "less" than an average woman, simply because the neotenic/feminine look is superior. period.

The mere use of the title "'Handsome" to describe a man's beauty,, as opposed to "Beautiful" for a woman, should have been a red flag for everyone long ago. If you think this gendered language is no big deal,that it's just two equal types of beauty described differently,you are dead wrong. The word "Beautiful" isn't just for women. It is a generic, universal term used to describe beauty in its purest form.beautiful objects, beautiful animals, a "beautiful mind," a beautiful world, or a beautiful soul. "Beautiful" is the default for everything truly aesthetic. only for men did they invent the insulting, tailored word "Handsome" to send a very clear message: You are the most aesthetically tolerable Ape, but know your place,you are still an Ape. "Handsome" is derived from the word Handy, meaning useful. It is a derogatory ssubtle hint that a man’s aesthetics are a utilitarian tool, a "utility" rather than a work of art.

The next logical step is to conclude that if society judges people based on their looks, then by the mere fact of being a man,even an above average one, humanity will inhernetly love you less and alienate you more simply because you lack the neotenic beauty found in women and children. your situation might be better relative to other "slaves" but you are still a slave. Men are disposable because of Lookism. Misandry is a byproduct of Lookism.



The only ones who have truly escaped the "Matrix" are, iroincally, trans women. except they are also still in the Matrix, because they refuse to accept that currently, there is no technology that can undo the skeletal deformation that occurs after the completion of male puberty.

the cognitive dissonance is real. We worship "Objective Beauty" but judge men by a separate, lower standard. Michael Cera is not a sub-5. He is the mirror that that shows you how far the male form has drifted from aesthetic perfection. Acceptance of the Void Pill means realizing that in a world ruled by looks, to be "Male" is to be inherently disadvantaged.

 

[Azrael1]