Theory Aesthetics vs. Dominance: Which Matters More?

[Snhook]

I've seen some taller incels here have been accused of being fakecels because their heights are too tall for their faces to matter. Usually, it's bitter shortcel manlets that make these claims. To address this, I think it's important to dissect attractiveness into it's two core components; Aesthetics and Dominance.

Aesthetics are features that appear visually pleasing. The aesthetic appeal usually involves facial symmetry and good proportionality among the features of the face such as having the right sized nose and eyes and having the nose be the right distance away from the philtrum and the eyes being the right distance apart from another.

Dominance can sometimes be visual such as height but it can also be behavioral such as dark-triad traits. Dominant men give off to others the impression that they are strong, confident, viril and in control. But dominant men also instill in others a sense of intimidation and submissiveness.

These two components explain the visual and emotional aspects of attractiveness.


Below I've attempted to construct an oversimplified spectrum outlining the general relationship between facial attractiveness (the aesthetic aspect) and height (the dominance aspect). The point in laying it out this way is to get a better understanding of whether height or facial attractiveness is more important and thus whether women care more about a man's aesthetic appearance or his dominant aura.

I've presented the relationship between the two characteristics as an inverse relationship where height increases as facial attractiveness decreases and vice versa. The idea is to display incels on opposite sides of the spectrum depending on their -cel type.

My understanding is this:

[Face rating below this point indicative of genetic abnormality]
UGLYCELS:
(Face overshadows height)
6'5 and 1/10
6'4 and 1.5/10
6'3 and 2/10
6'2 and 2.5/10
6'1 and 3/10
6' and 3.5/10

NORMIES:
(This category assumes other factors remain average such as NT, decent hairline, good BMI, etc.)
5'11 and 4/10
5'10 and 4.5/10
5'9 and 5/10 = (Absolute Normie)
5'8 and 5.5/10
5'7 and 6/10
5'6 and 6.5/10
5'5 and 7/10

SHORTCELS:
(Height overshadows face)
5'4 and 7.5/10
5'3 and 8/10
5'2 and 8.5/10
5'1 and 9/10
5' and 9.5/10
4'11 and 10/10
[Height below this point indicative of genetic abnormality]

This is just my hunch but from what I can tell, aesthetics and dominance, or more specifically, height and face seem to be of equal SMV significance therefore the plight of tall incels is indeed valid because their face overshadows their height and they may also possess other -cel types such as being fat or non-NT which further takes a toll on their SMV.

 

[PLA1092]

I actually think the standard for face overshadowing height can be lower, depending on frame and non-NTness; if you're 6'0 with a 4/10 face, have a weak frame and shit muscle building ability, and are obviously autistic I think it's reasonable for you to be considered an incel...

Below a 3 you just start looking deformed, that's not really appealing to any foid regardless of height; if someone told me at 6'3 their face was a 2.5 and they couldn't ascend, I'd believe them.

 

[PastillaNegra]

6'5 and 1/10
6'4 and 1.5/10
6'3 and 2/10
6'2 and 2.5/10
6'1 and 3/10
6' and 3.5/10

 

[Fancy Alcoholic]

Both. Foids don't espcially like abstract aesthtics or conceptual attributes of dominance. They want a good looking man who could technically get away with everything in life and "protect" its offspring on a very physical and animal level. That's why some retarded criminal who aren't that good looking somehow slay a lot of foids, while ok looking middle class cucks with only a stable situation can't expect a lot of female attention.

 

[PastillaNegra]

Don't forget if you are a framecel having sloped shoulders and a long neck. I will tell you not even 6'2 will save that.

I’ve seen twig tallfags with shit shoulders with girls all the time they had an avg face

 

[Fancy Alcoholic]

Plus height is a fake problem. Hitler was very small and yet had a wife.

 

[ADHD_cel]

It depends on whether you’re dealing with foids or other men

 

[currycel⁰]

6'2 and 2.5/10

 

[PastillaNegra]

Plus height is a fake problem. Hitler was very small and yet had a wife.

Just be the leader of Nazi Germany bro , he was statusmaxxed he is incel tier in looks

 

[PastillaNegra]

Also if you are in a 6' avg area (which the area is larger than you think) it will only help if you are 6'5.

Insecure tallfag detected

 

[Fancy Alcoholic]

Just be the leader of Nazi Germany bro , he was statusmaxxed he is incel tier in looks

I mean there are ways to vercome height. You can get away with it more easily than if you were deformed

 

[Fancy Alcoholic]

There's no such thing as "insecure" because you ARE in DANGER.

Aliens are all over the place already and replacing people by wearing human skin.

 

[Crawford]

I've seen some taller incels here have been accused of being fakecels because their heights are too tall for their faces to matter. Usually, it's bitter shortcel manlets that make these claims. To address this, I think it's important to dissect attractiveness into it's two core components; Aesthetics and Dominance.

Aesthetics are features that appear visually pleasing. The aesthetic appeal usually involves facial symmetry and good proportionality among the features of the face such as having the right sized nose and eyes and having the nose be the right distance away from the philtrum and the eyes being the right distance apart from another.

Dominance can sometimes be visual such as height but it can also be behavioral such as dark-triad traits. Dominant men give off to others the impression that they are strong, confident, viril and in control. But dominant men also instill in others a sense of intimidation and submissiveness.

These two components explain the visual and emotional aspects of attractiveness.


Below I've attempted to construct an oversimplified spectrum outlining the general relationship between facial attractiveness (the aesthetic aspect) and height (the dominance aspect). The point in laying it out this way is to get a better understanding of whether height or facial attractiveness is more important and thus whether women care more about a man's aesthetic appearance or his dominant aura.

I've presented the relationship between the two characteristics as an inverse relationship where height increases as facial attractiveness decreases and vice versa. The idea is to display incels on opposite sides of the spectrum depending on their -cel type.

My understanding is this:

[Face rating below this point indicative of genetic abnormality]
UGLYCELS:
(Face overshadows height)
6'5 and 1/10
6'4 and 1.5/10
6'3 and 2/10
6'2 and 2.5/10
6'1 and 3/10
6' and 3.5/10

NORMIES:
(This category assumes other factors remain average such as NT, decent hairline, good BMI, etc.)
5'11 and 4/10
5'10 and 4.5/10
5'9 and 5/10 = (Absolute Normie)
5'8 and 5.5/10
5'7 and 6/10
5'6 and 6.5/10
5'5 and 7/10

SHORTCELS:
(Height overshadows face)
5'4 and 7.5/10
5'3 and 8/10
5'2 and 8.5/10
5'1 and 9/10
5' and 9.5/10
4'11 and 10/10
[Height below this point indicative of genetic abnormality]

This is just my hunch but from what I can tell, aesthetics and dominance, or more specifically, height and face seem to be of equal SMV significance therefore the plight of tall incels is indeed valid because their face overshadows their height and they may also possess other -cel types such as being fat or non-NT which further takes a toll on their SMV.

I actually think the standard for face overshadowing height can be lower, depending on frame and non-NTness; if you're 6'0 with a 4/10 face, have a weak frame and shit muscle building ability, and are obviously autistic I think it's reasonable for you to be considered an incel...

Below a 3 you just start looking deformed, that's not really appealing to any foid regardless of height; if someone told me at 6'3 their face was a 2.5 and they couldn't ascend, I'd believe them.

The issue with this thread is the normie bit, if you’re 5’7 6/10 then you are usually incel, same with 5’6 6.5/10 and 5’5 7/10

 

[PLA1092]

if you’re 5’7 6/10

You can ascend with those stats.

 

[Crawford]

You can ascend with those stats.

Just be an outlier theory

 

[IngsocSimp]

I've seen some taller incels here have been accused of being fakecels because their heights are too tall for their faces to matter. Usually, it's bitter shortcel manlets that make these claims. To address this, I think it's important to dissect attractiveness into it's two core components; Aesthetics and Dominance.

Aesthetics are features that appear visually pleasing. The aesthetic appeal usually involves facial symmetry and good proportionality among the features of the face such as having the right sized nose and eyes and having the nose be the right distance away from the philtrum and the eyes being the right distance apart from another.

Dominance can sometimes be visual such as height but it can also be behavioral such as dark-triad traits. Dominant men give off to others the impression that they are strong, confident, viril and in control. But dominant men also instill in others a sense of intimidation and submissiveness.

These two components explain the visual and emotional aspects of attractiveness.


Below I've attempted to construct an oversimplified spectrum outlining the general relationship between facial attractiveness (the aesthetic aspect) and height (the dominance aspect). The point in laying it out this way is to get a better understanding of whether height or facial attractiveness is more important and thus whether women care more about a man's aesthetic appearance or his dominant aura.

I've presented the relationship between the two characteristics as an inverse relationship where height increases as facial attractiveness decreases and vice versa. The idea is to display incels on opposite sides of the spectrum depending on their -cel type.

My understanding is this:

[Face rating below this point indicative of genetic abnormality]
UGLYCELS:
(Face overshadows height)
6'5 and 1/10
6'4 and 1.5/10
6'3 and 2/10
6'2 and 2.5/10
6'1 and 3/10
6' and 3.5/10

NORMIES:
(This category assumes other factors remain average such as NT, decent hairline, good BMI, etc.)
5'11 and 4/10
5'10 and 4.5/10
5'9 and 5/10 = (Absolute Normie)
5'8 and 5.5/10
5'7 and 6/10
5'6 and 6.5/10
5'5 and 7/10

SHORTCELS:
(Height overshadows face)
5'4 and 7.5/10
5'3 and 8/10
5'2 and 8.5/10
5'1 and 9/10
5' and 9.5/10
4'11 and 10/10
[Height below this point indicative of genetic abnormality]

This is just my hunch but from what I can tell, aesthetics and dominance, or more specifically, height and face seem to be of equal SMV significance therefore the plight of tall incels is indeed valid because their face overshadows their height and they may also possess other -cel types such as being fat or non-NT which further takes a toll on their SMV.

Saying from experience that height won't save you (not bragging, stfu). But dominance can absolutely win over a foid. Read The Killer Across The Table by retired FBI agent John Douglas (a pioneer of a type of psychoanalysis called profiling used to help identify violent criminals). The last killer he rights about in the book kidnapped a woman shortly before he was caught, threatened to kill her, and tied her up in a shipping container for like two months. He writes about how the woman basically falls madly in love with the killer, begs for stripping poles, vibrators, and blue hair dye, and basically wants to do nothing but provide him with sexual pleasure and service. Of course Mr. Douglas tries to explain it away as Stockholm syndrome and what not but the truth is obvious: This is a perfect example of what happens when a male has complete dominance over a female. The female likes it.

Still, females are disgusting. I wouldn't go near them.

 

[asocialcel]

6 footers are volcels unless they're swedishcels or something. I know obese 6 footers who get laid. Matter of fact I don't know a single 6 foot incel

 

[Snhook]

Saying from experience that height won't save you (not bragging, stfu). But dominance can absolutely win over a foid. Read The Killer Across The Table by retired FBI agent John Douglas (a pioneer of a type of psychoanalysis called profiling used to help identify violent criminals). The last killer he rights about in the book kidnapped a woman shortly before he was caught, threatened to kill her, and tied her up in a shipping container for like two months. He writes about how the woman basically falls madly in love with the killer, begs for stripping poles, vibrators, and blue hair dye, and basically wants to do nothing but provide him with sexual pleasure and service. Of course Mr. Douglas tries to explain it away as Stockholm syndrome and what not but the truth is obvious: This is a perfect example of what happens when a male has complete dominance over a female. The female likes it.

Still, females are disgusting. I wouldn't go near them.

Makes perfect sense. Submissiveness is inherent to foid psychology.

 

[wei#3959]

lol

 

[IngsocSimp]

Makes perfect sense. Submissiveness is inherent to foid psychology.

The more you think about the mind of a foid, the more repulsive they she becomes. It's a creature specifically hardwired to want to be dominated and take dicks like a faggot. They're literally just faggots that have a vagina and an X chromosome. Doesn't matter who's dick she wants, it's still disgusting. Sex is an evolutionary glitch that ought not exist.

 

[AlexDelarge]

I've seen some taller incels here have been accused of being fakecels because their heights are too tall for their faces to matter. Usually, it's bitter shortcel manlets that make these claims. To address this, I think it's important to dissect attractiveness into it's two core components; Aesthetics and Dominance.

Aesthetics are features that appear visually pleasing. The aesthetic appeal usually involves facial symmetry and good proportionality among the features of the face such as having the right sized nose and eyes and having the nose be the right distance away from the philtrum and the eyes being the right distance apart from another.

Dominance can sometimes be visual such as height but it can also be behavioral such as dark-triad traits. Dominant men give off to others the impression that they are strong, confident, viril and in control. But dominant men also instill in others a sense of intimidation and submissiveness.

These two components explain the visual and emotional aspects of attractiveness.


Below I've attempted to construct an oversimplified spectrum outlining the general relationship between facial attractiveness (the aesthetic aspect) and height (the dominance aspect). The point in laying it out this way is to get a better understanding of whether height or facial attractiveness is more important and thus whether women care more about a man's aesthetic appearance or his dominant aura.

I've presented the relationship between the two characteristics as an inverse relationship where height increases as facial attractiveness decreases and vice versa. The idea is to display incels on opposite sides of the spectrum depending on their -cel type.

My understanding is this:

[Face rating below this point indicative of genetic abnormality]
UGLYCELS:
(Face overshadows height)
6'5 and 1/10
6'4 and 1.5/10
6'3 and 2/10
6'2 and 2.5/10
6'1 and 3/10
6' and 3.5/10

NORMIES:
(This category assumes other factors remain average such as NT, decent hairline, good BMI, etc.)
5'11 and 4/10
5'10 and 4.5/10
5'9 and 5/10 = (Absolute Normie)
5'8 and 5.5/10
5'7 and 6/10
5'6 and 6.5/10
5'5 and 7/10

SHORTCELS:
(Height overshadows face)
5'4 and 7.5/10
5'3 and 8/10
5'2 and 8.5/10
5'1 and 9/10
5' and 9.5/10
4'11 and 10/10
[Height below this point indicative of genetic abnormality]

This is just my hunch but from what I can tell, aesthetics and dominance, or more specifically, height and face seem to be of equal SMV significance therefore the plight of tall incels is indeed valid because their face overshadows their height and they may also possess other -cel types such as being fat or non-NT which further takes a toll on their SMV.

Finally a high iq outlook on this topic.