Incels deserve Stacy because they have inferior genetics. Say there is a 0/10 incel with a 10/10 female. Ten plus zero divided by two is 5. This math may not work out in reality, but if it does, their child will be a 5/10. Now, the same is true for a 10/10 male and a 0/10 female. Therefore Chads should reproduce with femcels instead of Stacy and let incels have Stacy because we don't want a 0/10 to couple with a 0/10 because the child of such a relationship will be a 0/10. Sure a 10/10 with a 10/10 will produce a 10/10 child, but this is a looksmatch system which means a 0/10 will be with a 0/10 and produce a 0/10. This is bad because a 5/10 will be more better off than a 0/10 than a 10/10 will be better off than a 5/10. Only 5/10s should get their looksmatch. 6/10s get 4/10s. 7/10s get 3/10s. And so on... An anti-looksmatch system may end inceldom and therefore may end much suffering. According to Google, "Negative Utilitarianism: This ethical framework prioritizes minimizing suffering above maximizing happiness." An anti-looksmatch system is negative utilitarianism. If this is enforced, everyone would be 5/10 and be equal. Sure, a 10/10 would enjoy life more than a 5/10, but a 0/10 would also exist and suffer more than what a 10/10 enjoys.
