JFL Elliot Rodgers *was* the living proof that looks and money didn’t matter

[Lv99_BixNood]

View: https://old.reddit.com/r/IncelTears/comments/1icfbye/elliot_rodgers_was_the_living_proof_that_looks/


ER was a sub-5 hapacel, these niggers need to get their eyes checked

 

[KillNiggers]

Maybe for IT standards he was a mogger.

 

[SuperPerfectCel]

Elliot is just a NTpill, being average-ish looking and having money can't compensate for autism.

Dunno why they're bringing up Musk, a tall rich famous guy with multiple kids. He literally debunks their argument, being a weird misogynist who still gets to reproduce due to superficial traits. PeRsOnAlITy.

 

[High Tier Aryan]

View: https://www.reddit.com/r/IncelTears/comments/1icfbye/comment/m9qafey/

here we go with the personality bull

 

[GermanManlet]

He wasn’t that rich hence his location
More like low, middle class
Maybe he could mog in some albanian slum city with his bmw 3 and armani glasses, but not in chadifornia.

 

[Lazyandtalentless]

IT logic:

IT when they see studies analyzing that the attractiveness of good-looking men can be explained through evolutionary biology, where traits like facial symmetry, strong jawlines, and broad shoulders signal genetic health, high testosterone levels, and physical fitness, all of which are desirable for reproductive success. Symmetrical faces indicate developmental stability and genetic fitness, while masculine features such as pronounced brow ridges and jawlines suggest dominance and fertility, qualities linked to successful mate selection. A high shoulder-to-hip ratio (SHR) signals strength, stamina, and the ability to protect and provide, enhancing a male’s appeal as a potential mate. Grip strength, a proxy for overall muscle strength, further reinforces health and vitality, key markers of good genes. Additionally, sexual experience correlates with social status and sexual competence, further enhancing attractiveness due to mate value and the ability to attract mates. These traits collectively align with the good genes hypothesis, where individuals with these features are preferred for their ability to ensure healthy offspring, making them more attractive from an evolutionary standpoint: Oh who cares about those big words anyways?!?!

IT when they see anecdotes: Yep! Anecdotes aren’t flawed at all!

 

[Grodd]

He was like 5'8 LTN in looks but also non NT so IT isn't proving anything here, this is pathetic

 

[Lazyandtalentless]

IT when they see studies analyzing that the attractiveness of good-looking men can be explained through evolutionary biology, where traits like facial symmetry, strong jawlines, and broad shoulders signal genetic health, high testosterone levels, and physical fitness, all of which are desirable for reproductive success. Symmetrical faces indicate developmental stability and genetic fitness, while masculine features such as pronounced brow ridges and jawlines suggest dominance and fertility, qualities linked to successful mate selection. A high shoulder-to-hip ratio (SHR) signals strength, stamina, and the ability to protect and provide, enhancing a male’s appeal as a potential mate. Grip strength, a proxy for overall muscle strength, further reinforces health and vitality, key markers of good genes. Additionally, sexual experience correlates with social status and sexual competence, further enhancing attractiveness due to mate value and the ability to attract mates. These traits collectively align with the good genes hypothesis, where individuals with these features are preferred for their ability to ensure healthy offspring, making them more attractive from an evolutionary standpoint

One of the many studies I am referring to: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/147470490800600311?utm_source=chatgpt.com

The study you provided explores the relationship between men's facial attractiveness and various indicators of individual fitness, including body morphology (specifically shoulder-to-hip ratio or SHR), grip strength, sexual behavior, and the number of sexual partners. Below is a more specific breakdown of the research with additional detail about the various aspects mentioned.

Abstract​

The study investigates whether certain physical cues in men's faces correlate with other measures of individual fitness. These measures include their shoulder-to-hip ratio (SHR), which indicates a person's body shape, grip strength, and sexual behavior (specifically sexual history). The facial photographs of male college students were rated for attractiveness by female college students. A significant relationship was found between the ratings of facial attractiveness and various physical characteristics. Notably, males with attractive faces tended to have more masculine body types, indicated by wedge-shaped, masculine SHR. They also scored higher on grip strength and had a greater number of sexual partners, supporting the idea that facial features can provide clues to a man's overall fitness and hormonal status.

Introduction​

This section connects the evolution of primates to human perceptions of faces, highlighting how visual cues, especially faces, play a critical role in mate selection. Primates developed a reliance on their sense of vision, and humans have evolved specialized mechanisms for facial recognition. Studies show that we tend to find faces with bilateral symmetrymore attractive, which is considered a sign of genetic fitness, health, and fertility. This preference for symmetrical faces may be evolutionary, as such faces correlate with better health, longevity, and a higher probability of successful reproduction.

Further research has shown that men with more symmetrical faces also tend to have better overall health (e.g., higher sperm motility and count), and females tend to rate masculine features (like broad shoulders and narrow hips, which are indicated by SHR) as more attractive. Such body configurations are linked with higher levels of testosterone, a key driver of masculine traits.

Results​

The study revealed several strong correlations between facial attractiveness and physical fitness markers:

1. Body Morphology (SHR):
   • Males with high shoulder-to-hip ratios (SHRs)—characterized by broad shoulders and narrow hips, a common indicator of masculine body type—were rated as more attractive by females. Attractivenesscorrelated significantly with higher SHR (r = .512, p <.01).
   • SHR was also positively correlated with grip strength (r = .381, p <.02), suggesting that a more masculine body shape is linked to higher physical strength.
2. Grip Strength:
   • Grip strength was used as an objective measure of physical fitness, as it is associated with overall healthand vitality. Males with stronger grip strength were rated as more attractive by the females (r = .323, p <.05).
   • Moreover, higher grip strength correlated with more sexual partners (r = .317, p <.05), suggesting that men who are physically stronger are likely to have more sexual experience.
3. Sexual Behavior:
   • The number of sexual partners also correlated positively with facial attractiveness (r = .360, p <.03). Men who had more sexual partners were considered more attractive by the female raters.
   • A regression analysis showed that facial attractiveness could predict around 26% of the variance in shoulder-to-hip ratio (SHR) and 10% of the variance in grip strength, reinforcing the connection between physical appearance and indicators of fitness.

Discussion​

• The study's findings strongly suggest that female facial ratings of male attractiveness reflect significant aspects of masculinity, such as body morphology, strength, and sexual behavior. This highlights the notion that facial features are not only important for interpersonal attraction, but also serve as a signal of underlying fitness.
• The study found that facial attractiveness accounted for a substantial proportion of the variance in body configuration (SHR) and grip strength, suggesting that the face serves as a reliable indicator of genetic qualityand fitness.
• The findings are consistent with the hypothesis that facial features are reliable indicators of health and sexual vitality, which may have been selected for in evolutionary history to increase reproductive success.

 

[JewProducER]

He was like 5'8 LTN in looks but also non NT so IT isn't proving anything here, this is pathetic

he was 5'6-5'7 tops, he would larp as 5'9 but his dad was 5'9 and height mogged him to hell and back

 

[HailReich]

I think ER wasnt actually rich nor was he 5foot9(shorter I think), but my main problem with these posts is that it really is easy to make a opposite one where you say "jeremy meeks is living proof that personality doesnt matter. He was a criminal and ended up getting more attention from women than the vast majority will get through their lifes simply because he was attractive" So, what is it? do looks matter or do they not?? to answer this we the pull up the studies, and we all know what they say, but IT will deny as always

 

[Todd Thundercock]

he was 5'6-5'7 tops, he would larp as 5'9 but his dad was 5'9 and height mogged him to hell and back

Agreed. In pics at that movie premiere thing, he was about the same height as Soumaya who is 5'6, and half a head shorter than Peter who is 6'1. Therefore, I'd estimate Elliot was like 5'7.

 

[JKlancecaster069]

View: https://www.reddit.com/r/IncelTears/comments/1icfbye/comment/m9qafey/

here we go with the personality bull

Elliot was extremely quiet and usually didn't express his entitlement in public. Not that it really matters as an openly entitled Chad will still slay.

 

[Lazyandtalentless]

View: https://www.reddit.com/r/IncelTears/s/F3YfbSSspD


What’s up with this guy spamming YT videos?

I wish he would send actual studies like the one I posted here instead of YT videos.

 

[Grodd]

he was 5'6-5'7 tops, he would larp as 5'9 but his dad was 5'9 and height mogged him to hell and back

Good point

 

[fullofchagrin]

Elliot is just a NTpill, being average-ish looking and having money can't compensate for autism.

Some people here disagree with that statement though.

This might be the only time I agree with a post on IT.

 

[fullofchagrin]

I think ER wasnt actually rich nor was he 5foot9(shorter I think), but my main problem with these posts is that it really is easy to make a opposite one where you say "jeremy meeks is living proof that personality doesnt matter. He was a criminal and ended up getting more attention from women than the vast majority will get through their lifes simply because he was attractive" So, what is it? do looks matter or do they not?? to answer this we the pull up the studies, and we all know what they say, but IT will deny as always

Good point, upvoted

 

[Hoodpreet]

How can he prove it doesn’t matter when he had neither?

 

[ForcedMarriageNow]

IT is so delusional that apparently being 5'9" is "having the looks"

 

[JewProducER]

Agreed. In pics at that movie premiere thing, he was about the same height as Soumaya who is 5'6, and half a head shorter than Peter who is 6'1. Therefore, I'd estimate Elliot was like 5'7.

Peter pretty sure was/is 5'9 maybe 5'10

 

[blackpillednigga]

Maybe for IT standards he was a mogger.

yeah they intentionally lower the bar by a lot to prove their point when if the context of inceldom wasn't brought out they would view people like ER as ugly and subhuman

 

[Todd Thundercock]

Peter pretty sure was/is 5'9 maybe 5'10

IMDB lists Peter as 6'1, which is probably a lie, but it's all I got.

 

[tehgymcel420]

sub-5 hapacel

sub 0

 

[JewProducER]

IMDB lists Peter as 6'1, which is probably a lie, but it's all I got.

Rehab room stated in a vid he was 5'9, never trust imdb only ones like reddit or celebheights

 

[Misogynist Vegeta]

ER was an average looking dude with a severe case of autism. He was the very definition of a mentalcel, He was also probably a fakecel because he was quite literally Stacy only.