Discussion The Problem With Rating Male Attractiveness | Why The 'PSL Scale' Is Flawed

Selinity

Selinity

Arcanologist
Joined
Jan 26, 2021
Posts
1,786
Reputation
4,260
Time online
36d 20h 0m
The 'PSL system' is the widely used rating system on looksmaxxing forums in appraising male attractiveness. This model of rating beauty is based on the 'population distribution model,' which if you haven't seen before, looks something like this:
This model of appraising attractiveness--although better than the standard '1-10 scale,' still has it's own flaws, and there are a few criticisms to be made about it. Everyone's PSL ratings seem to have some inconsistencies, but I will be using the model with tincelw @tincelw sent me.

psl 2 = 2% truecel
psl 3 = 14% incel
psl 4 = 50% average
psl 5 = 84% chadlite
psl 6 = 97% chad
psl 7 = 99% chad
psl 8 = 99.9% chad

**I beleive '%' refers to percentile, not percnetage**
In this post we will be going over these inconsistencies and flaws in the psl system as well as some other, better, ways of rating attractiveness.

The Method 🔢

The method the psl system uses to quantify male aesthetics is the 'population distribution model.' This is the main issue with the psl system--it's flawed at it's core. According to this system, attractiveness is distributed like a bell-curve with the highest most represented group being psl 4, or 'average looking,'

The problem with this is that that is not how attractiveness is distributed. in fact, if PSL wants to use the distribution model, it has to make it's ratings even more harsh than they already are!


This is the real model for distribution of attractiveness:

As we can see, the average for static faces sits at 40/100, or a preverbial '4/10,' on an IRL rating scale, which according to you guys is the equivalent of a 2.75 PSL. I did not make this conversion model myself, but it's you guys who said PSL scale is 1.25 points harsher than IRL, not me.

According to this, the psl scale needs to be even more harsh than it already is, because it uses a model of distribution which does not exist.

A solution to this problem of course would be 're-calibrating' the psl system to be inline with today's research. Under a 're calibrated' psl system an average '4 PSL' would be the equivalent of a '3/10'

The reason it would work this way is because supposedly the psl system is based on the distribution of attractiveness, not actual ratings themselve.

Bill McDonald, a marketing researcher said quote, "It is not gaussian (a bell curve), unless you force it to be." when talking about the distribution of attracitveness.

And this idea is supported not only by the professionals and the study which I pulled the image from (sources at the end), but by research done by others such as okCupid

James Taranto said quote, "The average male is unsightly"

You can not say try and defend the psl-system and say that 'women are just being too harsh, bro,' when this is how they rate men. It doesn't matter if you think it's too harsh because at the end of the day, the average women thinks the average man is a sub-human and will not fuck an average man.

I am not someone who points out flaws without solutions though, like I said before, if you want to keep using the psl-scale then you need to re-calibrate it to be inline with the data and make a 4/8 PSL = a 3/10 IRL.

Rating 🧠

The next issue with PSL is that when people rate using the psl system, they don't rate using the psl system. I know you are special and the exception to the rule, and 'most people can't rate for shit' but you, blah, blah blah.

But the reality is that most people don't even think through rating in psl using the population distribution model, they look at a man's face, and the the first number which jumps at them they type (using irl) and then they convert the rating to PSL by being harsher or deducting more points, etc.

The problem with this is a) it completely abandons the use of the 'population distribution model,' thus making most PSL ratings on this site not actual PSl rating by definition, and b) the conversion from PSL to IRL does not work.

You can not transfer a rating over to IRL with a proper conversion method, it simply does not work.

The reason why is simple: You can't quantify a population distribution system outside of it's system. The PSL and IRL scales are essentially incompatible, not to mention the IRL rating system is grounded in *nothing* but someone's quick impression (it lacks objectivity).

And this is not the fault of the raters--most people can't think of a distribution model when rating, they just want to quickly be done with it and more on. That is one of the other faults of the PSL system--it's not fast enough.

Objectivity :yes::no:

The 'PSL scale' as much as you may want it to be, is not objective. The reason why is simple. Not only does it use a flawed distribution model and is thought through in irl but there is no set criteria for each level on the scale.

Whenever people dispute eachother's ratings saying things like 'oh, he's a psl 5, not a 6 you coping faggot,' they don't have anything to back up their claims other than what they feel is correct (something which they thought throuigh in irl without any distribution model btw).

It's basically gotten to the point where everyone is basing their ratings off of their feelings because there's no set criteria for each looks-level.

I searched this site for a proper 'looks scale' using psl and couldnt find any, at least not any good ones with set requirements for each looks level, etc.
Then there is also the issue of things like harmony, etc, which make the whole manner of appraising faces with quantified numbers utter dog-shit.

gamma @gamma, in my previous thread you said that Sean O'pry was a 9.5/10, how did you reach that conclusion? Because I guantee you that there's a less attractive individual who meets those same specifications (whatever they may be)

Different levels on the looks scale can have basically the same features, there's no big distinguishing factors.

Alternatives 👌

There are other systems to use instead of PSL, one of which I beleive we should be using, the 1-3 scale. This scale was inspired by "Wheat Waffles" and is based on attention and treatment from women rather than a model which in practice does not work:

Chad
Characteristics: negatives seen as positives (or at least overlooked), easily able to obtain relationships with females
-shy becomes cute
-arrogance becomes confidence
-intimacy on demand
-bad jokes are voluntarily laughed at, etc



Normie
Characteristics: Gets 'soft rejections,' Women virtue signal
-negative traits seen for what they are
-Struggles to get relationships with females (sexual)
-Needs two of the following in order to be successful with a women: 6ft+, her type, gym body, talents, status, social circle, game, luck, common interests, hyper NT, etc



Sub-5
Characteristics: Gets 'Hard rejections,' Positives seen as Negatives
-Confidence is arrogance
-Intelligence is geeky/nerdy
-Gym body is over compensating (gymcel)


However, this is not the only alternative to the PSL scale which I have seen. On female equivelents to this site they use a 'tier system' in which every 'looks level' is represented by a tier, and within these tiers there are sub catagonries or declining attractiveness. The chart looks like this:

S tier (S1, S2, S3)
A tier (A1, A2, A3)
B tier (B1, B2, B3)
C tier (C1, C2, C3)
D tier (D1, D2, D3)
E tier (E1, E2, E3)


Personally, I do not like this chart, but I thought it would be nice to include it here since we are on the topic of rating systems.

Anyways, that's all for this post. Now would be a good time to try and dispute this in the replies or to leave a react if you appreciated this thread.


Previous Threads:
The Problem With Rating Male Attractiveness | Why the 1-10 'Looks Scale' Is Flawed

Future Threads:
A Look Into Female Looksmaxxing Forums
Fixing The PSL System (With Science)

sergeant blackpill @sergeant blackpill Philtrumcel @Philtrumcel AcneScars @AcneScars R @Rift678 Alexanderr @Alexanderr tyronelite @tyronelite Deleted member 12611 @BeautyIsEverything Spiral @Spiral wereqryan @wereqryan Lihito @Lihito wanttobeattractive @wanttobeattractive gamma @gamma tincelw @tincelw Preston @PrestonYnot Toska @Toska pizza @pizza kjsbdfiusdf @kjsbdfiusdf
 
Last edited:
ThrSlayerEternal111

ThrSlayerEternal111

Forum Chadpreet
Joined
Jan 29, 2021
Posts
1,401
Reputation
1,745
Time online
70d 18h 1m
Location
Purgatory
Good thread tbh, but even then there will be discreprencies in ratings and arguments like "muh D3" kinda thing tbh. But yeah inb4 didnt read memes lmao
 
Selinity

Selinity

Arcanologist
Joined
Jan 26, 2021
Posts
1,786
Reputation
4,260
Time online
36d 20h 0m
SayHeyHey said:
The first alternative is already worse tbh. It will be more subjective
In what ways? The criteria for each level is clearly defined and can easily be used.
 
D

Deleted member 10913

Banned
Joined
Nov 22, 2020
Posts
9,134
Reputation
10,458
Time online
85d 3h 47m
Selinity said:
In what ways? The criteria for each level is clearly defined and can easily be used.
Shouldn't it be done according to facial measurements? If that makes sense. It also leaves htn, chadlite, lowtier normie and truecel out.
 
Selinity

Selinity

Arcanologist
Joined
Jan 26, 2021
Posts
1,786
Reputation
4,260
Time online
36d 20h 0m
SayHeyHey said:
Shouldn't it be done according to facial measurements? If that makes sense. It also leaves htn, chadlite, lowtier normie and truecel out.
Chadlite, Chad, Giga-chad >- Chad
HTN, Normie>- Normie
Sub 5 >- Sub 5
 
D

Deleted member 10913

Banned
Joined
Nov 22, 2020
Posts
9,134
Reputation
10,458
Time online
85d 3h 47m
Selinity said:
Chadlite, Chad, Giga-chad >- Chad
HTN, Normie>- Normie
Sub 5 >- Sub 5
How can their xp be the same? Will htn really have the same xp as a mid tier normie or low tier one?
Selinity said:
Characteristics: Gets 'soft rejections,' Women virtue signal
-negative traits seen for what they are
-Struggles to get relationships with females (sexual)
-Needs two of the following in order to be successful with a women: 6ft+, her type, gym body, talents, status, social circle, game, luck, common interests, hyper NT, etc
 
Selinity

Selinity

Arcanologist
Joined
Jan 26, 2021
Posts
1,786
Reputation
4,260
Time online
36d 20h 0m
SayHeyHey said:
How can their xp be the same? Will htn really have the same xp as a mid tier normie or low tier one?
Of course things will be a bit better at htn then ltn. naunces such as those will be elabortated on further when I update this chart and fix it up a bit to be more accurate.

But none-the-less, they all still get soft rejections and struggle a bit. They still require two of the things I mentioned to get women as well, so it all works out.
 
D

Deleted member 10913

Banned
Joined
Nov 22, 2020
Posts
9,134
Reputation
10,458
Time online
85d 3h 47m
Selinity said:
Of course things will be a bit better at htn then ltn. naunces such as those will be elabortated on further when I update this chart and fix it up a bit to be more accurate.

But none-the-less, they all still get soft rejections and struggle a bit. They still require two of the things I mentioned to get women as well, so it all works out.
What would 4.3 psl be in both then?
 
BOTB

BOTB

💯
Joined
May 18, 2020
Posts
10,876
Reputation
15,382
Time online
100d 0m
only accurate looksmax rating system would be how random girls you don't know treat you off first impression keeping all other variables like height and body constant

everything else will always be slightly flawed and inaccurate but for the most part PSL rating is good enough, no need to complicate shit tbh
 
Selinity

Selinity

Arcanologist
Joined
Jan 26, 2021
Posts
1,786
Reputation
4,260
Time online
36d 20h 0m
AcneScars said:
Good thread OP but reminder that BHC (Big Hindu Cock) mogs
where hav u been man?
 
AcneScars

AcneScars

Certified white person by @StrangerDanger
Joined
Dec 12, 2020
Posts
3,453
Reputation
7,362
Time online
122d 17h 54m
Location
Georgia
AcneScars

AcneScars

Certified white person by @StrangerDanger
Joined
Dec 12, 2020
Posts
3,453
Reputation
7,362
Time online
122d 17h 54m
Location
Georgia
Selinity said:
i haven't seen u online anywhere
Asked for a ban on .co about a month ago but other than that I don’t post on looksmax a lot cuz this site is filled with bragging normies
 
Selinity

Selinity

Arcanologist
Joined
Jan 26, 2021
Posts
1,786
Reputation
4,260
Time online
36d 20h 0m
Deleted member 12611

Deleted member 12611

Birth and Initial Environment Predetermine Success
Joined
Feb 21, 2021
Posts
775
Reputation
826
Time online
17d 2h 22m
I like the /3 rating and I find it very intuitive.

Here is another idea:
1. Go on yubo/swipr/another similar app
2. Upload 5-8 pictures of yourself
3. Find women
4. Message each of them asking them to rate how attractive you are /10
5. Store the rating
6. Repeat until you have 25 ratings
7. Add all the ratings up and divide them by 25, and that number is your score.

Example:

In my case I would be an 8.75/10.

This is fully objective (the score cannot be disagreed upon by people).
 
eduardkoopman

eduardkoopman

Zephir
Joined
Aug 29, 2019
Posts
13,046
Reputation
17,402
Time online
231d 21h 34m
Location
NATO
To add.

I seen, a woman use this rating scale on me.
It was funny, but cool.

1. Would not bang, and I can't see why anyone would want to bang you.
2. I would not bang, but I can see how some women would want to bang you.
3. I would bang, but I can see how some women would not want to bang you.
4. I would bang you, and I can't see any other woman not wanting to bang you.
 
eduardkoopman

eduardkoopman

Zephir
Joined
Aug 29, 2019
Posts
13,046
Reputation
17,402
Time online
231d 21h 34m
Location
NATO
Selinity said:
The 'PSL system' is the widely used rating system on looksmaxxing forums in appraising male attractiveness. This model of rating beauty is based on the 'population distribution model,' which if you haven't seen before, looks something like this:
This model of appraising attractiveness--although better than the standard '1-10 scale,' still has it's own flaws, and there are a few criticisms to be made about it. Everyone's PSL ratings seem to have some inconsistencies, but I will be using the model with tincelw @tincelw sent me.

psl 2 = 2% truecel
psl 3 = 14% incel
psl 4 = 50% average
psl 5 = 84% chadlite
psl 6 = 97% chad
psl 7 = 99% chad
psl 8 = 99.9% chad

**I beleive '%' refers to percentile, not percnetage**
In this post we will be going over these inconsistencies and flaws in the psl system as well as some other, better, ways of rating attractiveness.

The Method 🔢

The method the psl system uses to quantify male aesthetics is the 'population distribution model.' This is the main issue with the psl system--it's flawed at it's core. According to this system, attractiveness is distributed like a bell-curve with the highest most represented group being psl 4, or 'average looking,'

The problem with this is that that is not how attractiveness is distributed. in fact, if PSL wants to use the distribution model, it has to make it's ratings even more harsh than they already are!


This is the real model for distribution of attractiveness:

As we can see, the average for static faces sits at 40/100, or a preverbial '4/10,' on an IRL rating scale, which according to you guys is the equivalent of a 2.75 PSL. I did not make this conversion model myself, but it's you guys who said PSL scale is 1.25 points harsher than IRL, not me.

According to this, the psl scale needs to be even more harsh than it already is, because it uses a model of distribution which does not exist.

A solution to this problem of course would be 're-calibrating' the psl system to be inline with today's research. Under a 're calibrated' psl system an average '4 PSL' would be the equivalent of a '3/10'

The reason it would work this way is because supposedly the psl system is based on the distribution of attractiveness, not actual ratings themselve.

Bill McDonald, a marketing researcher said quote, "It is not gaussian (a bell curve), unless you force it to be." when talking about the distribution of attracitveness.

And this idea is supported not only by the professionals and the study which I pulled the image from (sources at the end), but by research done by others such as okCupid

James Taranto said quote, "The average male is unsightly"
You can not say try and defend the psl-system and say that 'women are just being too harsh, bro,' when this is how they rate men. It doesn't matter if you think it's too harsh because at the end of the day, the average women thinks the average man is a sub-human and will not fuck an average man.

I am not someone who points out flaws without solutions though, like I said before, if you want to keep using the psl-scale then you need to re-calibrate it to be inline with the data and make a 4/8 PSL = a 3/10 IRL.

Rating 🧠

The next issue with PSL is that when people rate using the psl system, they don't rate using the psl system. I know you are special and the exception to the rule, and 'most people can't rate for shit' but you, blah, blah blah.

But the reality is that most people don't even think through rating in psl using the population distribution model, they look at a man's face, and the the first number which jumps at them they type (using irl) and then they convert the rating to PSL by being harsher or deducting more points, etc.

The problem with this is a) it completely abandons the use of the 'population distribution model,' thus making most PSL ratings on this site not actual PSl rating by definition, and b) the conversion from PSL to IRL does not work.

You can not transfer a rating over to IRL with a proper conversion method, it simply does not work.

The reason why is simple: You can't quantify a population distribution system outside of it's system. The PSL and IRL scales are essentially incompatible, not to mention the IRL rating system is grounded in *nothing* but someone's quick impression (it lacks objectivity).

And this is not the fault of the raters--most people can't think of a distribution model when rating, they just want to quickly be done with it and more on. That is one of the other faults of the PSL system--it's not fast enough.

Objectivity :yes::no:

The 'PSL scale' as much as you may want it to be, is not objective. The reason why is simple. Not only does it use a flawed distribution model and is thought through in irl but there is no set criteria for each level on the scale.

Whenever people dispute eachother's ratings saying things like 'oh, he's a psl 5, not a 6 you coping faggot,' they don't have anything to back up their claims other than what they feel is correct (something which they thought throuigh in irl without any distribution model btw).

It's basically gotten to the point where everyone is basing their ratings off of their feelings because there's no set criteria for each looks-level.

I searched this site for a proper 'looks scale' using psl and couldnt find any, at least not any good ones with set requirements for each looks level, etc.
Then there is also the issue of things like harmony, etc, which make the whole manner of appraising faces with quantified numbers utter dog-shit.

gamma @gamma, in my previous thread you said that Sean O'pry was a 9.5/10, how did you reach that conclusion? Because I guantee you that there's a less attractive individual who meets those same specifications (whatever they may be)

Different levels on the looks scale can have basically the same features, there's no big distinguishing factors.

Alternatives 👌

There are other systems to use instead of PSL, one of which I beleive we should be using, the 1-3 scale. This scale was inspired by "Wheat Waffles" and is based on attention and treatment from women rather than a model which in practice does not work:

Chad
Characteristics: negatives seen as positives (or at least overlooked), easily able to obtain relationships with females
-shy becomes cute
-arrogance becomes confidence
-intimacy on demand
-bad jokes are voluntarily laughed at, etc



Normie
Characteristics: Gets 'soft rejections,' Women virtue signal
-negative traits seen for what they are
-Struggles to get relationships with females (sexual)
-Needs two of the following in order to be successful with a women: 6ft+, her type, gym body, talents, status, social circle, game, luck, common interests, hyper NT, etc



Sub-5
Characteristics: Gets 'Hard rejections,' Positives seen as Negatives
-Confidence is arrogance
-Intelligence is geeky/nerdy
-Gym body is over compensating (gymcel)


However, this is not the only alternative to the PSL scale which I have seen. On female equivelents to this site they use a 'tier system' in which every 'looks level' is represented by a tier, and within these tiers there are sub catagonries or declining attractiveness. The chart looks like this:

S tier (S1, S2, S3)
A tier (A1, A2, A3)
B tier (B1, B2, B3)
C tier (C1, C2, C3)
D tier (D1, D2, D3)
E tier (E1, E2, E3)


Personally, I do not like this chart, but I thought it would be nice to include it here since we are on the topic of rating systems.

Anyways, that's all for this post. Now would be a good time to try and dispute this in the replies or to leave a react if you appreciated this thread.


Previous Threads:
The Problem With Rating Male Attractiveness | Why the 1-10 'Looks Scale' Is Flawed

Future Threads:
A Look Into Female Looksmaxxing Forums
Fixing The PSL System (With Science)

sergeant blackpill @sergeant blackpill Philtrumcel @Philtrumcel AcneScars @AcneScars R @Rift678 Alexanderr @Alexanderr tyronelite @tyronelite Deleted member 12611 @BeautyIsEverything Spiral @Spiral wereqryan @wereqryan Lihito @Lihito wanttobeattractive @wanttobeattractive gamma @gamma tincelw @tincelw Preston @PrestonYnot Toska @Toska pizza @pizza kjsbdfiusdf @kjsbdfiusdf
Misconception.

If women rate the average man. 4/10.
Than percentile standard deviation, makes that the 4/10 man, is the new 5/10 or 50 percentile man.

PSL
Standard deviation.
Rates what percentile you are.
How many men you might and how many men mogg you.
It doesn't incorporate that women rate men lower than their actual percentile level.

Good post by the way. I agree on your points
 
Blackgymmax

Blackgymmax

its over
Joined
Jul 23, 2020
Posts
6,814
Reputation
13,403
Time online
65d 15h 23m
BeautyIsEverything said:
I like the /3 rating and I find it very intuitive.

Here is another idea:
1. Go on yubo/swipr/another similar app
2. Upload 5-8 pictures of yourself
3. Find women
4. Message each of them asking them to rate how attractive you are /10
5. Store the rating
6. Repeat until you have 25 ratings
7. Add all the ratings up and divide them by 25, and that number is your score.

Example:
View attachment 1090274
In my case I would be an 8.75/10.

This is fully objective (the score cannot be disagreed upon by people).
Asking women to rate you is a meme. Going on tinder and looking at your match ratio is far more objective
 
Selinity

Selinity

Arcanologist
Joined
Jan 26, 2021
Posts
1,786
Reputation
4,260
Time online
36d 20h 0m
BeautyIsEverything said:
I like the /3 rating and I find it very intuitive.

Here is another idea:
1. Go on yubo/swipr/another similar app
2. Upload 5-8 pictures of yourself
3. Find women
4. Message each of them asking them to rate how attractive you are /10
5. Store the rating
6. Repeat until you have 25 ratings
7. Add all the ratings up and divide them by 25, and that number is your score.

Example:
View attachment 1090274
In my case I would be an 8.75/10.

This is fully objective (the score cannot be disagreed upon by people).
The methodology is still a bit shakey though because it relies on 100% participant honesty, which is not possible.
This is why I prefer the model of 'how do women treat you' instead because it's as objective as it gets--there's no lies there.

If that's really what they gave you though then congrats on being a Chad, bro, if you devlopped your 'mask' a bit more you could slay.
 
Deleted member 12611

Deleted member 12611

Birth and Initial Environment Predetermine Success
Joined
Feb 21, 2021
Posts
775
Reputation
826
Time online
17d 2h 22m
Blackgymmax said:
Asking women to rate you is a meme. Going on tinder and looking at your match ratio is far more objective
The problem with tinder is it relies too much on other factors in your pics such as body, height, type of pic (NT/aspie), etc. So it is hard to see how the matches you get correspond to purely facial attractiveness and not a deficiency or surplus of one of the other selected for qualities.
 
Blackgymmax

Blackgymmax

its over
Joined
Jul 23, 2020
Posts
6,814
Reputation
13,403
Time online
65d 15h 23m
BeautyIsEverything said:
The problem with tinder is it relies too much on other factors in your pics such as body, height, type of pic (NT/aspie), etc. So it is hard to see how the matches you get correspond to purely facial attractiveness and not a deficiency or surplus of one of the other selected for qualities.
Nt/aspie pics are cope lol. You can slay off face alone with a bad camera angle bc women can can evaluate your whole face from shit angles for whatever reason. A chad with a bad selfie will still get 99+ in a few hrs
 
Blackgymmax

Blackgymmax

its over
Joined
Jul 23, 2020
Posts
6,814
Reputation
13,403
Time online
65d 15h 23m
BeautyIsEverything said:
The problem with tinder is it relies too much on other factors in your pics such as body, height, type of pic (NT/aspie), etc. So it is hard to see how the matches you get correspond to purely facial attractiveness and not a deficiency or surplus of one of the other selected for qualities.
The only real flaw is race pill guys like rambocel @rambocel have smv of like 6psl ethnics bc coloring which is hilarious
 
Selinity

Selinity

Arcanologist
Joined
Jan 26, 2021
Posts
1,786
Reputation
4,260
Time online
36d 20h 0m
Blackgymmax said:
women can can evaluate your whole face from shit angles for whatever reason.
bro, studies show that women rate you after 3 miliseconds of seeing your face jfl. These women are nutty fr
 
Blackgymmax

Blackgymmax

its over
Joined
Jul 23, 2020
Posts
6,814
Reputation
13,403
Time online
65d 15h 23m
Selinity said:
bro, studies show that women rate you after 3 miliseconds of seeing your face jfl. These women are nutty fr
Well yea. Anyone can. Look at a girl and if you dont feel anything shes unattractive
 
Deleted member 12611

Deleted member 12611

Birth and Initial Environment Predetermine Success
Joined
Feb 21, 2021
Posts
775
Reputation
826
Time online
17d 2h 22m
Blackgymmax said:
The only real flaw is race pill guys like rambocel @rambocel have smv of like 6psl ethnics bc coloring which is hilarious
and heightpill... and bodypill... and NTpill (aspie pics of chad arent used in chad tinder experiments, plus I have direct experience that this is the case with NT vs aspie pics)
 
Deleted member 12611

Deleted member 12611

Birth and Initial Environment Predetermine Success
Joined
Feb 21, 2021
Posts
775
Reputation
826
Time online
17d 2h 22m
Selinity said:
This is why I prefer the model of 'how do women treat you' instead because it's as objective as it gets--there's no lies there.
You don't know how status is influencing womens reactions to you though.
 
Selinity

Selinity

Arcanologist
Joined
Jan 26, 2021
Posts
1,786
Reputation
4,260
Time online
36d 20h 0m
Blackgymmax said:
Well yea. Anyone can. Look at a girl and if you dont feel anything shes unattractive
I have seen women who are Stacies who don't make me feel anything
 
Selinity

Selinity

Arcanologist
Joined
Jan 26, 2021
Posts
1,786
Reputation
4,260
Time online
36d 20h 0m
BeautyIsEverything said:
You don't know how status is influencing womens reactions to you though.
In my first post on this topic I did mention how many things are going on in th abackground as a reason why ratings don't work to well.
 
Deleted member 12611

Deleted member 12611

Birth and Initial Environment Predetermine Success
Joined
Feb 21, 2021
Posts
775
Reputation
826
Time online
17d 2h 22m
Selinity said:
If that's really what they gave you though then congrats on being a Chad, bro, if you devlopped your 'mask' a bit more you could slay.
Elab
 
Wallenberg

Wallenberg

Zephir
Joined
Jan 9, 2021
Posts
9,365
Reputation
14,365
Time online
99d 18h 16m
Location
935 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
I have never been into PSL ranking.

I use a 3-tiered ranking: good-looking, normie/average, subhuman. I don't see the need to debate whether a guy is chadlite or chad.

GL guys get attention because of their looks. There are different levels of GL guys: 7/10 "everyday GL guys" and 10/10 gigachads, but all of them get some attention because of their good looks.

Normies have to jestermaxx etc. Most guys are normies/average.

Subhumans have a very hard time with women.
 
Selinity

Selinity

Arcanologist
Joined
Jan 26, 2021
Posts
1,786
Reputation
4,260
Time online
36d 20h 0m
Wallenberg said:
I have never been into PSL ranking.

I use a 3-tiered ranking: good-looking, normie/average, subhuman. I don't see the need to debate whether a guy is chadlite or chad.

GL guys get attention because of their looks. There are different levels of GL guys: 7/10 "everyday GL guys" and 10/10 gigachads, but all of them get some attention because of their good looks.

Normies have to jestermaxx etc. Most guys are normies/average.

Subhumans have a very hard time with women.
Exactly. If at the end of the day you either get pussy, struggle to or don't, what's the point of using all of these flawed units of measure to evaluate the most straight forward thing ever--are you attractive or not?
 
Blackgymmax

Blackgymmax

its over
Joined
Jul 23, 2020
Posts
6,814
Reputation
13,403
Time online
65d 15h 23m
BeautyIsEverything said:
and heightpill... and bodypill... and NTpill (aspie pics of chad arent used in chad tinder experiments, plus I have direct experience that this is the case with NT vs aspie pics)
NT is a meme, rambo doesnt look tall in his pictures and hes fat.
Selinity said:
I have seen women who are Stacies who don't make me feel anything
me too, you arent going to like every girl. I dont really find lima attractive
 
Blackgymmax

Blackgymmax

its over
Joined
Jul 23, 2020
Posts
6,814
Reputation
13,403
Time online
65d 15h 23m
BeautyIsEverything said:
and heightpill... and bodypill... and NTpill (aspie pics of chad arent used in chad tinder experiments, plus I have direct experience that this is the case with NT vs aspie pics)
if you dont want being NT to be a factor, then just post a shit bathroom selfie with only your face. 6pslers still slay with pictures like that bruh
 
Selinity

Selinity

Arcanologist
Joined
Jan 26, 2021
Posts
1,786
Reputation
4,260
Time online
36d 20h 0m
Blackgymmax said:
NT is a meme, rambo doesnt look tall in his pictures and hes fat.

me too, you arent going to like every girl. I dont really find lima attractive
Who's lima?

**This also plays into the point about preference, your individual tastes will alter how you rate people
 
Wallenberg

Wallenberg

Zephir
Joined
Jan 9, 2021
Posts
9,365
Reputation
14,365
Time online
99d 18h 16m
Location
935 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Selinity said:
Exactly. If at the end of the day you either get pussy, struggle to or don't, what's the point of using all of these flawed units of measure to evaluate the most straight forward thing ever--are you attractive or not?
Basically:

When you go to new places, do you notice that some girls get attracted to you simply because of your looks? You are good-looking if that happens regularly.

Do girls feel disgusted because of your looks? You are subhuman.

If the answer is no to both questions, you are average/normie.
 
Blackgymmax

Blackgymmax

its over
Joined
Jul 23, 2020
Posts
6,814
Reputation
13,403
Time online
65d 15h 23m
Selinity said:
Who's lima?

**This also plays into the point about preference, your individual tastes will alter how you rate people
adriana lima
 
Selinity

Selinity

Arcanologist
Joined
Jan 26, 2021
Posts
1,786
Reputation
4,260
Time online
36d 20h 0m
Blackgymmax said:
adriana lima
I can see that she's attractive but i don't feel anything, ye.
Post your best girls/your type
 
Deleted member 12611

Deleted member 12611

Birth and Initial Environment Predetermine Success
Joined
Feb 21, 2021
Posts
775
Reputation
826
Time online
17d 2h 22m
Selinity said:
In my first post on this topic I did mention how many things are going on in th abackground as a reason why ratings don't work to well.
The main problem with my strategy/method is sympathy for you and fear of rejection skewing her score. What if we tried to lessen those two things as much as possible?

When are women most honest about who they like? WITH OTHER WOMEN!

Set up an account, match with people, and then ask them to rate a guy (you choose on how you introduce them, this can be formalized later). This way:
1. Only the person's face is available for them to rate attractiveness, and not status, money, height, body, or NT/aspie pics
2. Her sympathy is partially removed by her being farther seperation from the person they are rating
3. Fear of rejection is lessened because women wont get as defensive and aggressive as the person being rated themselves or someone close to them.

It is an idea, and has potential.
 
Deleted member 12611

Deleted member 12611

Birth and Initial Environment Predetermine Success
Joined
Feb 21, 2021
Posts
775
Reputation
826
Time online
17d 2h 22m
Blackgymmax said:
if you dont want being NT to be a factor, then just post a shit bathroom selfie with only your face. 6pslers still slay with pictures like that bruh
True
 
Deleted member 12611

Deleted member 12611

Birth and Initial Environment Predetermine Success
Joined
Feb 21, 2021
Posts
775
Reputation
826
Time online
17d 2h 22m
Blackgymmax said:
NT is a meme, rambo doesnt look tall in his pictures and hes fat.
It's not a meme. On tinder it is just a display of status/popularity which normies and HTN do to boost their matches. It's just that some people don't need that boost because they are attractive enough without it.
 
Wallenberg

Wallenberg

Zephir
Joined
Jan 9, 2021
Posts
9,365
Reputation
14,365
Time online
99d 18h 16m
Location
935 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
NT probably matters the most when you are normie looking for LTR. It might signal that you have interesting life which is good for LTR.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

  • Top