One thing I noticed is that incels tend to overrate other incels who have different facial flaws from their own.
Most incels view their specific facial flaws as being the "worst" to have, while arguing any facial flaw they don't have is not that big a deal.
If you're ugly in a low T way, you think high T ogres mog you even if they're 2/10. If you're ugly but don't have bad skin, then you think having bad skin isn't that big a deal, even if it's really bad.
Same thing goes with race and phenotypes, lots of people here argue that their race/pheno is the least desirable and will cherrypick to "prove" it. This is why you have slavs unironically claiming to have it worse than curries, and they'll spam the same 6 cherrypicked couples as "proof".
Also the same basic logic applies to the "truecel trait" threads where the "truecel trait" is a trait is always something that applies to the OP. OP likes Pepsi, so people who drink Coke are fakecels.
TL;DR: A lot of people believe they are the "truest truecel" and the more you deviate from them, the more "fakecel" you are (even if you're extremely ugly and are a truecel on paper). The reality is that just like there are different subcategories of good looking (eg. pretty boys and more textbook chads) there are different subcategories of ugly (eg. meek low T guys like blackops2cel and high T ogres like jsanza29)
