L
lurkingserpent
Iron
- Joined
- Dec 24, 2025
- Posts
- 56
- Reputation
- 45
This is a retarded first draft, I can't complete yet, and haven't edited, probably has like 70 mispellings and incoherence, but I have to go right now, so I'm just going to post this. Probably going to be insulted, but I'm anonymous so who cares.
I got into looksmaxxing a couple months ago. I've formed thoughts on the philosophy of it, and I'm desperately curious about your guys reaction to them.
I think absolutely no one in the media so far has given looksmaxxing the respect it deserves. They relentlessly strawman it, and I think their strawman is justified, because immaturity, and emotionality permeates this community i.e. Clav is a terrible role model for us, which we could boycott in my opinion. I think maybe I can give a hopefully somewhat original( probably not ), and fair accounting for the philosophy, and the culture of it.
The problems with our Culture:
-Diagnosing the problem - I think most of us are attempting to rectify a social deficiency. I think looksmaxxing is a potentially effective tool to do that. The question is what is that social deficiency really? I personally agree looks are an undeniable factor in social interaction. I think their is a strong intuitive biological superficial concern humans have. However, I think there is a serious deficit in our psychological map of human relationships. Look = everything is 1 dimensional, and stupid. I would ask you to defer to your reactions to film. Why are humans so compelled by movies? Wayyy more than fashion shows. They are compelled by character. In films, looks are a bias, but only a bias - a baseline for the actual content. That's the place I think looks should take in your head, not as the ultimate determinate of your life. Mainly I'd say, looks are the determinate of sexual opportunity, every else is a lot more variable, and looks are merely a bias e.g. If you look at creative domains like youtube, you wont find that every successful content creator is ultra beautiful, I'd actually say humour is probably a better predictor of success on youtube. If you compare that to something like high school, where individuality, and expression is constrained, and people are more emotional cause they are going through puberty, I think it makes sense that there is a larger bias towards the superficial, and I don't think it's the most accurate reflection of people in general, not that it's totally distorted. Even so if your genuinely evaluating the social heirarchy in highschool, I don't think you'd conclude looks are 1 to 1 with status, but just a strong correlation. I knew lots of high status people who weren't extremely gifted in terms of looks. I see areas like politics also bias the superficial, and leadership positions like ceo's of companys, but I think that's just humans simplifying complex problems they struggle to engage with rather than their true proclivity's being revealed. So I think in a lot of cases fixing your inhibition is even more fruitful than your looks. If your below average in looks, I think it's true that sexual opportunities will be limited. If your average, I'd say you can probably perform a lot better in that regard than you'd think, better than people on these forums would lead you to believe. I think inhibition as a concept is quite a reductive way to understand character though. I think most of us are isolated, because we were sensitized to social interaction as children, and it lead to patterns of extreme withdrawal, and filtering. It's like a psychiatric disorder, it's like the main problem with autism I think usually. Me personally, I can see my behaviour is mediated by fear of rejection, of being playful, of conflict, of displaying sexual interest, of superficial insufficiency. Then I'm left constrained to rational speech, and people loss interest in that fast, because that's not how people interact. Ideal human interactions isn't low inhib, the ideal is playfulness. Clav isn't playful, he's usually possessed by aggression, and emotionality, and it negates meaningful connection with anyone, probably because of the steroids btw, but I'll get onto that later. Low inhib can dampen the fear, but emotionality will still limit you if your entire character is built on it. Trying to lower your inhib without medication is like trying to cure severe depression by exercising more. But, we are neglecting the psychological aspect of our social deficiencys though. You can deliberately correct your own filtering, by being vigilant of it, and progressively exposing yourself. The truth is you need to become extremely honest, because your probably riddled with manipulative habits in interaction, like validation seeking - jestering. Beyond that you can increase your opporunities with improving your looks, and that's valid. I think ultimately your character will be more important in the end though. One thing I think it's fair to lie about
-Distorted frames of the social landscape - I think an emotional manifestation of developing a rational map of humans superficial concern is hypervigilance. It will make you totally insufferable. You need to actively subdue this form of thinking when in social situations. Stop rationally evaluating your relative looks level, and status when in social situations. This will make you super fragile. Stop allowing this to distort your sense of everyone's moral value. Your conscience should have no superficial bias. Stop looking at yourself to make sure your looking good in social interactions - your making yourself more self conscious, and emotional, leave the evaluation of looks at the door of your house. Also stop evaluating your own moral weight based on your looks. Your should have compassion for yourself, and being emotional is counter productive - watch the movie "The station agent", if you need help with that. There's a lot of mental illness associated with looksmaxxing which comes from this hypervigilance, and one dimensional thinking like anorexia, body dysmorphia, and narcissism. On youtube watch healthygamergg's new video on looksmaxxing, I wouldn't agree with all of it, but his general points are decent.
-Risk reward decision making - I think the healthiest looksmaxxing philosophy is that the most minimal action should be taken at a time as your progress e.g. take the lowest dose of baclofen that gets you comfortable enough to start interacting, and then push yourself psychologically. Do softmaxxing first. Soft soft maxing, stop doing retard DIY shit that has no evidence behind it like bonesmashing. Then be as conservative as possible if you actually need to hardmax. Hardmaxxing is probably a bad decision if your baseline is average or above. I would also say frauding isn't a bad thing. It is manipulative, but not neccesarily in a counter productive way unless it makes you too vigilant of yourself. People on here are trying to compensate too much, without doing any psychological work. Doing this will probably destroy your health, and yoru life. Your going to see all the of ruined botch jobs walking around in the future, and thank god that you didn't act on your extreme compensation. The merit of looksmaxxing lies in the specific strategy. Nobody would sound intelligent denigrating you for improving your skin quality, or your physique, or your body fat to a healthy level. Looksmaxxing has become embarrasing to associate with, a joke/ irony, because we have retards promoting bonesmashing with full confidence. I appreciate the innovative thinking, but we have to have higher standards, so no one gets hurt, especially considering this community is mainly constituted by teenagers. Bonesmasyhing almost never looks good. Sometimes the swelling can look like improved bone structure, but generally it just lowers your ipd, and makes you look retarded, and we don't actually have evidence of long term change with it, or safety. It's a bad strategy. You are a fool if you do it, it's very unpredictable. We have procedures with standard that have somewhat predictable, but even so risky standards, doing it yourself is a gauranteed way to ruin your life, most I'm willing to do is diy microneedling, most other complicated treatments I will resort to a professional, if your financially limited you shouldn't be doing the more complicated procedures anyway.
-Our stupidity - These forums have some of the most fucking stupid information of all time. We need to advance our scientific expertise, and make a maximized lifestyle optimisation philosophy also considering our long term health. 2 forum posts which got me into trouble were the shrooms to lower inhibition one, and diy microneedling. The second one was kind of my fault though, I accidentally put like 60mg of tetracaine on my face, and had to go to the er. I've seen anything from carnivore diets, to steroids on this platform. We need to fall inline with reasonable scientific consensus, and stop doing retarded shit.
The merit in our philosophy
-I think the institutions of society have neglected our social deficiencys, and our strategys target genuinely relevant aspects of it. I think it's fair to subvert prescriptions for drugs like baclofen, to import then illegally, because of that. Sometimes that the best you can do. It's still risky though. I think I have a sourcing guide in my posts on this account, can't remember right now.
I got into looksmaxxing a couple months ago. I've formed thoughts on the philosophy of it, and I'm desperately curious about your guys reaction to them.
I think absolutely no one in the media so far has given looksmaxxing the respect it deserves. They relentlessly strawman it, and I think their strawman is justified, because immaturity, and emotionality permeates this community i.e. Clav is a terrible role model for us, which we could boycott in my opinion. I think maybe I can give a hopefully somewhat original( probably not ), and fair accounting for the philosophy, and the culture of it.
The problems with our Culture:
-Diagnosing the problem - I think most of us are attempting to rectify a social deficiency. I think looksmaxxing is a potentially effective tool to do that. The question is what is that social deficiency really? I personally agree looks are an undeniable factor in social interaction. I think their is a strong intuitive biological superficial concern humans have. However, I think there is a serious deficit in our psychological map of human relationships. Look = everything is 1 dimensional, and stupid. I would ask you to defer to your reactions to film. Why are humans so compelled by movies? Wayyy more than fashion shows. They are compelled by character. In films, looks are a bias, but only a bias - a baseline for the actual content. That's the place I think looks should take in your head, not as the ultimate determinate of your life. Mainly I'd say, looks are the determinate of sexual opportunity, every else is a lot more variable, and looks are merely a bias e.g. If you look at creative domains like youtube, you wont find that every successful content creator is ultra beautiful, I'd actually say humour is probably a better predictor of success on youtube. If you compare that to something like high school, where individuality, and expression is constrained, and people are more emotional cause they are going through puberty, I think it makes sense that there is a larger bias towards the superficial, and I don't think it's the most accurate reflection of people in general, not that it's totally distorted. Even so if your genuinely evaluating the social heirarchy in highschool, I don't think you'd conclude looks are 1 to 1 with status, but just a strong correlation. I knew lots of high status people who weren't extremely gifted in terms of looks. I see areas like politics also bias the superficial, and leadership positions like ceo's of companys, but I think that's just humans simplifying complex problems they struggle to engage with rather than their true proclivity's being revealed. So I think in a lot of cases fixing your inhibition is even more fruitful than your looks. If your below average in looks, I think it's true that sexual opportunities will be limited. If your average, I'd say you can probably perform a lot better in that regard than you'd think, better than people on these forums would lead you to believe. I think inhibition as a concept is quite a reductive way to understand character though. I think most of us are isolated, because we were sensitized to social interaction as children, and it lead to patterns of extreme withdrawal, and filtering. It's like a psychiatric disorder, it's like the main problem with autism I think usually. Me personally, I can see my behaviour is mediated by fear of rejection, of being playful, of conflict, of displaying sexual interest, of superficial insufficiency. Then I'm left constrained to rational speech, and people loss interest in that fast, because that's not how people interact. Ideal human interactions isn't low inhib, the ideal is playfulness. Clav isn't playful, he's usually possessed by aggression, and emotionality, and it negates meaningful connection with anyone, probably because of the steroids btw, but I'll get onto that later. Low inhib can dampen the fear, but emotionality will still limit you if your entire character is built on it. Trying to lower your inhib without medication is like trying to cure severe depression by exercising more. But, we are neglecting the psychological aspect of our social deficiencys though. You can deliberately correct your own filtering, by being vigilant of it, and progressively exposing yourself. The truth is you need to become extremely honest, because your probably riddled with manipulative habits in interaction, like validation seeking - jestering. Beyond that you can increase your opporunities with improving your looks, and that's valid. I think ultimately your character will be more important in the end though. One thing I think it's fair to lie about
-Distorted frames of the social landscape - I think an emotional manifestation of developing a rational map of humans superficial concern is hypervigilance. It will make you totally insufferable. You need to actively subdue this form of thinking when in social situations. Stop rationally evaluating your relative looks level, and status when in social situations. This will make you super fragile. Stop allowing this to distort your sense of everyone's moral value. Your conscience should have no superficial bias. Stop looking at yourself to make sure your looking good in social interactions - your making yourself more self conscious, and emotional, leave the evaluation of looks at the door of your house. Also stop evaluating your own moral weight based on your looks. Your should have compassion for yourself, and being emotional is counter productive - watch the movie "The station agent", if you need help with that. There's a lot of mental illness associated with looksmaxxing which comes from this hypervigilance, and one dimensional thinking like anorexia, body dysmorphia, and narcissism. On youtube watch healthygamergg's new video on looksmaxxing, I wouldn't agree with all of it, but his general points are decent.
-Risk reward decision making - I think the healthiest looksmaxxing philosophy is that the most minimal action should be taken at a time as your progress e.g. take the lowest dose of baclofen that gets you comfortable enough to start interacting, and then push yourself psychologically. Do softmaxxing first. Soft soft maxing, stop doing retard DIY shit that has no evidence behind it like bonesmashing. Then be as conservative as possible if you actually need to hardmax. Hardmaxxing is probably a bad decision if your baseline is average or above. I would also say frauding isn't a bad thing. It is manipulative, but not neccesarily in a counter productive way unless it makes you too vigilant of yourself. People on here are trying to compensate too much, without doing any psychological work. Doing this will probably destroy your health, and yoru life. Your going to see all the of ruined botch jobs walking around in the future, and thank god that you didn't act on your extreme compensation. The merit of looksmaxxing lies in the specific strategy. Nobody would sound intelligent denigrating you for improving your skin quality, or your physique, or your body fat to a healthy level. Looksmaxxing has become embarrasing to associate with, a joke/ irony, because we have retards promoting bonesmashing with full confidence. I appreciate the innovative thinking, but we have to have higher standards, so no one gets hurt, especially considering this community is mainly constituted by teenagers. Bonesmasyhing almost never looks good. Sometimes the swelling can look like improved bone structure, but generally it just lowers your ipd, and makes you look retarded, and we don't actually have evidence of long term change with it, or safety. It's a bad strategy. You are a fool if you do it, it's very unpredictable. We have procedures with standard that have somewhat predictable, but even so risky standards, doing it yourself is a gauranteed way to ruin your life, most I'm willing to do is diy microneedling, most other complicated treatments I will resort to a professional, if your financially limited you shouldn't be doing the more complicated procedures anyway.
-Our stupidity - These forums have some of the most fucking stupid information of all time. We need to advance our scientific expertise, and make a maximized lifestyle optimisation philosophy also considering our long term health. 2 forum posts which got me into trouble were the shrooms to lower inhibition one, and diy microneedling. The second one was kind of my fault though, I accidentally put like 60mg of tetracaine on my face, and had to go to the er. I've seen anything from carnivore diets, to steroids on this platform. We need to fall inline with reasonable scientific consensus, and stop doing retarded shit.
The merit in our philosophy
-I think the institutions of society have neglected our social deficiencys, and our strategys target genuinely relevant aspects of it. I think it's fair to subvert prescriptions for drugs like baclofen, to import then illegally, because of that. Sometimes that the best you can do. It's still risky though. I think I have a sourcing guide in my posts on this account, can't remember right now.
