blmratiopiggypoop
Iron
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2022
- Posts
- 98
- Reputation
- 183
TLDR: People dont understand what real hunter eyes actually are (Your favourite tiktok psl god probably doesn't have them..) and therefore get the misconception that hunter eyes are not ideal, when in reality they are because they achieve within the top 99% of each eye area measurement, including: hooding from low set straight and prominent brow ridge / bone structure alongside fat pad placement, vertically narrow from high PFL, positive canthal tilt, straight hooding from bone structure, deep set, long medial canthus, perfectly titled eyebrows, perfect IPD, etc etc.
I'll make this short but I would like to hear some peoples thoughts on my opinion. I see a lot of people say "Hunter eyes are cope" which, in my opinion, is a big misconception. Here's why I believe "Hunter Eyes" are really just perfect male eyes.
Let's take a look at people with very attractive eye areas, which some may FALSELY regard to have hunter eyes, but they do not.
Alain Delon: Attractive eyes? Yes, very. But to say he has anything close to hunter eyes is wrong. If we were to change his eye area to fit into the ideal as backed by science and this forum itself, what do you think it would look like? Closer to the narrow, high PFL hunter eyes you'll see below. He falls short in a few measurements, but ofc not by much most notibly eye width to height (PFL and orbital bone issue)
Malik: Again, very ideal eye area. But my argument is the same still; If we were to fix his minor flaws, they would only end up looking like hunter eyes. Increase his medial canthus and lower the gap between his eyebrows and upper eyelid will give him hunter eyes. Long downwards medial canthus and low set eyebrows are obviously ideal, its common sense on here is it not? So why would these people be an exception for some reason?
Now let's look at some people with ACTUAL Hunter eyes, not just people with hooded eyes.. or deep set eyes... or whatever people somehow mistake hunter eyes for.
Sean O'pry: Falls into the ideal in every category you can mention. Is it a coincidence he has the scientifically perfect eye region according to measurements and he is also the TOP male model? No, it's not. And before you say 'Hunter eyes are a modelling trait' please take a nice stroll of these comments of women absolutely praising Sean for his angelic eyes: https://twitter.com/seanopry55?lang=en
Side note: Hunter eyes aren't just 'scary' or 'intimidating' eyes either. Wow he sure looks real scary in these photos doesnt he.... Especially the one on the right..
Gandy: Worlds highest earning male model EVER. It just so happens he has hunter eyes! (I would actually argue he doesn't, if he didn't have good upper eyelid fat pads he wouldnt have them, but he still has the impression of ideal orbitals so I will use him for this arguement) He is also a major sex symbol and is still relevant to this day as an older man.
And my final argument is to look at these renditions of perfect faces scientifically based on the averages of thousands of womens opinions:
Hunter. Eyes.
Here is one with 100% perfect features in terms of measurements:
Ngl these don't look as much huntery as the rest. I could see an arguement here about somewhere in the middle of hunter eyes and pretty eyes is ideal? Let me know your thoughts
Now to wrap things up, I am making this thread to both disprove the cope behind hunter eyes (ppl who say that they aren't good dont understand what they really are) and to also hear some arguments for the other side. Thanks for reading!
I'll make this short but I would like to hear some peoples thoughts on my opinion. I see a lot of people say "Hunter eyes are cope" which, in my opinion, is a big misconception. Here's why I believe "Hunter Eyes" are really just perfect male eyes.
Let's take a look at people with very attractive eye areas, which some may FALSELY regard to have hunter eyes, but they do not.
Alain Delon: Attractive eyes? Yes, very. But to say he has anything close to hunter eyes is wrong. If we were to change his eye area to fit into the ideal as backed by science and this forum itself, what do you think it would look like? Closer to the narrow, high PFL hunter eyes you'll see below. He falls short in a few measurements, but ofc not by much most notibly eye width to height (PFL and orbital bone issue)
Malik: Again, very ideal eye area. But my argument is the same still; If we were to fix his minor flaws, they would only end up looking like hunter eyes. Increase his medial canthus and lower the gap between his eyebrows and upper eyelid will give him hunter eyes. Long downwards medial canthus and low set eyebrows are obviously ideal, its common sense on here is it not? So why would these people be an exception for some reason?
Now let's look at some people with ACTUAL Hunter eyes, not just people with hooded eyes.. or deep set eyes... or whatever people somehow mistake hunter eyes for.
Sean O'pry: Falls into the ideal in every category you can mention. Is it a coincidence he has the scientifically perfect eye region according to measurements and he is also the TOP male model? No, it's not. And before you say 'Hunter eyes are a modelling trait' please take a nice stroll of these comments of women absolutely praising Sean for his angelic eyes: https://twitter.com/seanopry55?lang=en
Side note: Hunter eyes aren't just 'scary' or 'intimidating' eyes either. Wow he sure looks real scary in these photos doesnt he.... Especially the one on the right..
And my final argument is to look at these renditions of perfect faces scientifically based on the averages of thousands of womens opinions:
Hunter. Eyes.
Here is one with 100% perfect features in terms of measurements:
Ngl these don't look as much huntery as the rest. I could see an arguement here about somewhere in the middle of hunter eyes and pretty eyes is ideal? Let me know your thoughts
Now to wrap things up, I am making this thread to both disprove the cope behind hunter eyes (ppl who say that they aren't good dont understand what they really are) and to also hear some arguments for the other side. Thanks for reading!