IE in terms of making most of your situation when you're in the middle.
Obviously Chad could have the worst back and be a grumpy SOB and swim in girlfriends, while pain-free guys with ugly looks still won't get them, but in terms of mid-tier guys on the cusp, how much of a difference does this make?
Before we say "pain causes grumpy causes people avoid you", it's important to first acknowledge the input of correlation here.
Chad is inherently inoculated against shit like back pain and shoulder impingement because he's a symmetrical perfection, that's basically what beauty/handsomeness is, the approximation of functionality. So before we say "he gets girls because he's happy because he's pain-free" another explanation is simply because he has a body that doesn't look like it would put him in pain.
Assymetrical ugly people will be discriminated against inherently based on those looks even if they have great attitudes (or pain meds) which cause them not to suffer and lash out as a result of physical pain.
That said, it clearly can make a difference in whether you suffer your days with a repulsive sickly malaise or an attractive healthy optimism.
I think part of "lookism" or "ableism" isn't just about the direct discrimination against those things, but also the indirect discrimination against the mental and emotional problems that come from suffering from those things.
In a way that's more insidious because it's harder to combat, and it means the people discriminating against you can more easily deny (and even honestly be in denial about) those things.
IE a woman who doesn't date a one-armed man can say it's because he's an angry grump with a bad attitude, and maybe she actually thinks that, but she's really only hating the effects his handicap have had on him. A guy who is his equal would be less angry/grumpy if he had two hands.
Thus even if things were even like a 10/10 gigachad competing against a 10/10 gigachad with equal personalities, one gigachad losing his hand reduces him to a 8/10 chadlite because he is unable to fully manifest his gigachadness: he becomes depressed about reduced ability to do things, takes longer to bathe/groom and thus does it less often or less completely, loses confidence, etc.
I know it's hard to empathize with that because he'd still mog us to hell and swim in pussy (just slightly lower-tier pussy than he'd have with 2 hands) but it basically helps to illustrate how this principal could effect men of any decile ranking, and could make the difference between yes-GF or no-GF when it comes to guys on the borderline of happiness.
The 5/10 guy who might've landed a 1/10 gf, due to his chronic shoulder/back pain instead presents as a 3/10 due to his personality (sad) and aesthetic (less grooming, stooped pained posture, etc) and is doomed. It didn't "never begin" for him because at one point he had a slight chance and maybe 'began' a couple times to no success, got a taste of happiness only to have it ripped away from him.
Obviously Chad could have the worst back and be a grumpy SOB and swim in girlfriends, while pain-free guys with ugly looks still won't get them, but in terms of mid-tier guys on the cusp, how much of a difference does this make?
Before we say "pain causes grumpy causes people avoid you", it's important to first acknowledge the input of correlation here.
Chad is inherently inoculated against shit like back pain and shoulder impingement because he's a symmetrical perfection, that's basically what beauty/handsomeness is, the approximation of functionality. So before we say "he gets girls because he's happy because he's pain-free" another explanation is simply because he has a body that doesn't look like it would put him in pain.
Assymetrical ugly people will be discriminated against inherently based on those looks even if they have great attitudes (or pain meds) which cause them not to suffer and lash out as a result of physical pain.
That said, it clearly can make a difference in whether you suffer your days with a repulsive sickly malaise or an attractive healthy optimism.
I think part of "lookism" or "ableism" isn't just about the direct discrimination against those things, but also the indirect discrimination against the mental and emotional problems that come from suffering from those things.
In a way that's more insidious because it's harder to combat, and it means the people discriminating against you can more easily deny (and even honestly be in denial about) those things.
IE a woman who doesn't date a one-armed man can say it's because he's an angry grump with a bad attitude, and maybe she actually thinks that, but she's really only hating the effects his handicap have had on him. A guy who is his equal would be less angry/grumpy if he had two hands.
Thus even if things were even like a 10/10 gigachad competing against a 10/10 gigachad with equal personalities, one gigachad losing his hand reduces him to a 8/10 chadlite because he is unable to fully manifest his gigachadness: he becomes depressed about reduced ability to do things, takes longer to bathe/groom and thus does it less often or less completely, loses confidence, etc.
I know it's hard to empathize with that because he'd still mog us to hell and swim in pussy (just slightly lower-tier pussy than he'd have with 2 hands) but it basically helps to illustrate how this principal could effect men of any decile ranking, and could make the difference between yes-GF or no-GF when it comes to guys on the borderline of happiness.
The 5/10 guy who might've landed a 1/10 gf, due to his chronic shoulder/back pain instead presents as a 3/10 due to his personality (sad) and aesthetic (less grooming, stooped pained posture, etc) and is doomed. It didn't "never begin" for him because at one point he had a slight chance and maybe 'began' a couple times to no success, got a taste of happiness only to have it ripped away from him.
