What you guys think about this part of the truerateme guide? (Normie to chadlite)

D

Deleted member 16346

Always larping
Joined
Dec 5, 2021
Posts
4,569
Reputation
10,454
Everyone loves talking about the gigachad region but this part, the most relevant part to most of us, gets lost in the chico discussion.
0V5adBN
 
  • JFL
Reactions: Deleted member 15781
6.5 mogs 7
 
Imo darius jordan should be higher, adam saleh lower, penn badg96ley should be lower, jeremy lin is sub-5. Anthony Mackie should be a 5.5. Steven Yeun is a 5
 
  • +1
Reactions: Slob
Imo there should be a verson of this that considers pheno. Jan Uddin is GL but doesnt have chadlite appeal
 
The average man is fatter and older.
 
Also, the sub tries to include racial diversity in the tiers (in order to not get banned, obviously), which is objectively flawed.
 
  • +1
Reactions: Slob
Also, the sub tries to include racial diversity in the tiers (in order to not get banned, obviously), which is objectively flawed.
Objective beauty doesn’t exist.
 
All the guys in the last row except Taylor Caniff are below average. Mackie a bit higher. Dababy is not above average. Sanjay and Yeun have above averagish bones but their hairline fucks them. They should go a tier down. Adam saleh is also overrated.
 
  • +1
Reactions: Deleted member 14478
All the guys in the last row except Taylor Caniff are below average. Mackie a bit higher. Dababy is not above average. Sanjay and Yeun have above averagish bones but their hairline fucks them. They should go a tier down. Adam saleh is also overrated.
Mackie is tyronelit imo great eyebrows and eye area
 
  • +1
Reactions: Jason Voorhees
Btw @Preston where would you put me on trm guide
 
  • +1
Reactions: Deleted member 14478
its complete bullshit
 
and are just listening to what your gut tells you
It just so happens that there are vast similarities between what peoples' "guts tell them" based on evolution.
 
It just so happens that there are vast similarities between what peoples' "guts tell them" based on evolution.
Yeah but saying you van objectively evaluate beauty is wrong. Cuz you can’t. That would mean you could explain why someone is gl. But you can’t. You just listening what your gut tells you. And that is the YOUR opinion. Objective would b if you could measure It up. So it’s not biased. But it is and always will be. Because your gut feeling is different than others.

So unless you are basing your evaporator beauty completely on measurable and researchable numbers that aren’t just claims you dont have objective beauty
 
Yeah but saying you van objectively evaluate beauty is wrong. Cuz you can’t. That would mean you could explain why someone is gl. But you can’t. You just listening what your gut tells you. And that is the YOUR opinion. Objective would b if you could measure It up. So it’s not biased. But it is and always will be. Because your gut feeling is different than others.

So unless you are basing your evaporator beauty completely on measurable and researchable numbers that aren’t just claims you dont have objective beauty
Unless your basing your evaluation on beauty *
 
Yeah but saying you van objectively evaluate beauty is wrong. Cuz you can’t. That would mean you could explain why someone is gl. But you can’t. You just listening what your gut tells you. And that is the YOUR opinion. Objective would b if you could measure It up. So it’s not biased. But it is and always will be. Because your gut feeling is different than others.

So unless you are basing your evaporator beauty completely on measurable and researchable numbers that aren’t just claims you dont have objective beauty
ob·jec·tive

adjective

  1. 1.
    (of a person or their judgment) not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts.
    "historians try to be objective and impartial"
 
Yeah but saying you van objectively evaluate beauty is wrong. Cuz you can’t. That would mean you could explain why someone is gl. But you can’t. You just listening what your gut tells you. And that is the YOUR opinion. Objective would b if you could measure It up. So it’s not biased. But it is and always will be. Because your gut feeling is different than others.

So unless you are basing your evaporator beauty completely on measurable and researchable numbers that aren’t just claims you dont have objective beauty
 
ob·jec·tive

adjective

  1. 1.
    (of a person or their judgment) not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts.
    "historians try to be objective and impartial"
Exactly. You say you are keeping your personal feelings aside means that you can logically prove why x is better as y. But al you can say is „he has better cheekbones“. Ok now tell me why does he have better cheekbones. Show me the research that measured out the ideal cheekbones.

you don’t habe That. All you do is go by gut that says „ these are good cheekbones“. What if I say no? That aren’t good cheekbones. What do you say now ? In math we can subjectively solve problems since we know the rules. We don’t know the rules for beauty
 

Similar threads

gigell
Replies
6
Views
99
omnilegent
omnilegent
isis_Bleach
Replies
4
Views
137
distance decay
distance decay
ptg405
Replies
18
Views
1K
AustrianMogger
AustrianMogger
Seth Walsh
Replies
64
Views
1K
V1P3R
V1P3R
ObjectivityPILLED
Replies
27
Views
508
AustrianMogger
AustrianMogger

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top