TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

  • Subreddits

      Popular

    • /r/askTRP
    • /r/TheRedPill
    • /r/MarriedRedPill
    • /r/MensRights
    • /r/MGTOW
    • /r/PurplePillDebate
    • /r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen
    • Other

    • /r/AllPillDebate
    • /r/AlreadyRed
    • /r/altTRP
    • /r/AntiFeminists
    • /r/askFDS
    • /r/askMRP
    • /r/askRPC
    • /r/becomeaman
    • /r/BlackPillScience
    • /r/Chadfish
    • /r/Divorce_Men
    • /r/EverydayMisandry
    • /r/ExRedPill
    • /r/FemaleDatingStrategy
    • /r/FeminismStopsWhen
    • /r/GEOTRP
    • /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
    • /r/MalePsychology
    • /r/Male_Studies
    • /r/MenSupportMen
    • /r/MGTOW2
    • /r/MuslimRedPill
    • /r/newTRP
    • /r/PussyPass
    • /r/PussyPassDenied
    • /r/RedPillBooks
    • /r/RedPillParenting
    • /r/RedPillWives
    • /r/RedPillWomen
    • /r/RedPillWorkplace
    • /r/RPChristians
    • /r/seduction
    • /r/ThankTRP
    • /r/TheRedPillStories
    • /r/trpGAME
    • /r/TRPOffTopic
    • /r/TrueBlackPillMGTOW
    • /r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre
  • Blogs

      Popular

    • Dalrock
    • Heartiste
    • Illimitable Men
    • Return of Kings
    • Rian Stone
    • The Rational Male
    • Woujo
    • Other

    • Artful Prudence
    • A Voice for Men
    • Alpha Game
    • Black Label Logic
    • Caleb Jones
    • Captain Capitalism
    • Corporate Machiavelli
    • Days of Game
    • Deep Strength
    • Dicipres
    • Donal Graeme
    • Female Misogynist
    • Free Northerner
    • Gaming My Wife
    • Good Looking Loser
    • Hawaiian Libertarian
    • In Mala Fide
    • KillToParty
    • Kill Your Inner Loser
    • Krauser PUA
    • LaidNYC
    • Married Man Sex Life
    • NO MA'AM
    • Omega Virgin Revolt
    • Pook's Mill
    • Random Xpat Rantings
    • Red Pill Theory
    • Red Pill Wifery
    • RedPillDad
    • RedPillDoctor
    • Seasons of Tumult and Discord
    • Sigma Frame
    • The Feminine Woman
    • The Futurist
    • The Masculine Principle
    • The Modern Man
    • The New Modern Man
    • The Obsidian Files
    • The Power Moves
    • The Private Man
    • The Red Pill Room
    • The Red Quest
    • The Rules Revisited
    • The Spearhead
    • Troy Francis
    • Wintery Knight
    • Young Man Red Pill
  • Books
  • Dictionary
  • @TRParchive
  • Please help TheRedArchive stay alive

Is Beauty in the Face of the Beholder? Spoiler: Yes, people mostly like faces that are fairly similar to their own.

Ohyarlysmiles

November 11, 2021
65 upvotes
/r/BlackPillScience
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0068395
Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB
Share
Share Tweet Reddit Email
Post Information
Title Is Beauty in the Face of the Beholder? Spoiler: Yes, people mostly like faces that are fairly similar to their own.
Author

Ohyarlysmiles

Upvotes 65
Comments 30
Date November 11, 2021 7:15 PM UTC
(4 years ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/BlackPillScience
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/BlackPillScience/comments/qrsnri/is_beauty_in_the_face_of_the_beholder_spoiler_yes/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/BlackPillScience/is-beauty-in-the-face-of-the-beholder-spoiler-yes.1084628
https://theredarchive.com/post/1084628
Top posts by Ohyarlysmiles

Girls don't do things by accident

1143 upvotes
April 18, 2021
/r/seduction

How to cold approach correctly

1088 upvotes
May 18, 2021
/r/seduction

Update regarding "Are We Dating the Same Guy" Groups: You are FOR SURE being defamed

185 upvotes
May 30, 2023
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates

Starting to experience the effects of being posted in an "Are we dating the same guy?" FB group

182 upvotes
May 17, 2023
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates

The only way to date as a modern male is to screen hard

138 upvotes
April 28, 2022
/r/PurplePillDebate

Confidence exerts significant and independent effect on male attractiveness: its over boyos

87 upvotes
January 7, 2021
/r/BlackPillScience

Correlation between pretty much every superficial trait valued by the blackpill and mating success = .092 :)

80 upvotes
April 1, 2021
/r/BlackPillScience

Paradox of male dating you need experience to get the experience

78 upvotes
February 10, 2022
/r/PurplePillDebate

Comments

[–]sh0t 35 points36 points37 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

ugly people prefer hot people

[–][deleted] 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]AutoModerator[M] 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Sorry ExtremeAman, your submission has been removed from BlackPillScience because your account is new.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[–]Carkudo 16 points17 points18 points 4 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

Those studies showing that blind women are still only attracted conventionally attractive chads would like to have a word.

Of course, that's only if we go with your baseless assumption that preference equals attraction. If we don't then the post itself is off topic and not relevant to the black pill.

[–]Ohyarlysmiles[S] -1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

Attraction itself is a type of preference. Leave the semantics to me.

Which studies do you refer to? IIRC those were blind men preferring feminine bodies.

[–]Carkudo 11 points12 points13 points 4 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

The moment you're arguing semantics in a scientific debate, you've lost the debate.

[–]Ohyarlysmiles[S] 3 points4 points5 points 4 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Indeed, so why did you try to argue semantics? Glad you concede defeat. Way to dodge your other mistake regarding the blind studies.

[–]Carkudo 4 points5 points6 points 4 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Hint: take a look at how the variable in question is actually defined.

You probably don't understand why it's distinct from attraction, but it is and your appeal to dictionary definitions doesn't change that. Also, the hint isn't actually for you ;)

[–]Ohyarlysmiles[S] 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Hint: make your own argument clearly and concisely otherwise people will know you can't do so.

[–]Carkudo 2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I did. You replied with an appeal to semantics at which point the debate was over. Feel free to ignore me.

[–]Ohyarlysmiles[S] 2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Nope. Trying to demarcate preference vs attraction = semantics. Feel free to ignore reality. ✌

[–]sadomasochrist 41 points42 points43 points 4 years ago* (6 children) | Copy Link

This is a grossly innacurate framing of beauty. This is PREFERENCE, not beauty. Beauty is who the most people agree is attractive. God this stuff gets so me so irritated. Like how do these people spend so much time kvetching on this stuff and not just accepting reality and framing around it. Guess what they'd find if they calculated the face that "looks the most similar to the most number of people?" Facepalm.

Like who do you want to be, the person who is facially similar to an incel "beautiful" or mathematically almost average meaning the most number of people are similar to you and therefor actually beautiful?

Absolutely idiotic.

[–]Suitable-Law-6763 12 points13 points14 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

OP just cherrypicked a study to prove their biased view

[+]Ohyarlysmiles[S] -7 points-6 points-5 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

The reality of what, studies seeming to show that attractiveness appears malleable and centered mainly around phenotypic exposure? (Preferring the self would be consistent because that's the phenotype we are most exposed to).

[–]dannycake 15 points16 points17 points 4 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

Biologist here.

Yeah no, that's horseshit.

There exists a biological preference. Regardless of exposure, there are preferences built in to find attractiveness.

You don't even need to know what you look like, as in, barbarians have preferences. This is all without a mirror, or societal pressures.

If "self" is loosely defined as is the case with all these studies, then it would be racially biased in favor of your own race. Races have phenological facial differences and that will come up in preferences. This you can point to the fact that the faces look like "you" when it reality it'd be more likely to be an approximation of your races average face.

[–]Ohyarlysmiles[S] 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

There exists a biological preference. Regardless of exposure, there are preferences built in to find attractiveness.

Surely then a biologist would indicate the exact genomic mechanisms behind such universal hard-wired attractiveness --- both to recognize the phenotypes and evidence that the phenotypes themselves were universal.

The existence of preferences != anything hard wired about those preferences. Unless you can show me the foregoing.

And of course, a biologist would be able to explain away why these traits associated with attractiveness have high h^2, which cuts against sexual selection acting strongly on them.

Godspeed, "biologist."

If "self" is loosely defined as is the case with all these studies, then it would be racially biased in favor of your own race. Races have phenological facial differences and that will come up in preferences. This you can point to the fact that the faces look like "you" when it reality it'd be more likely to be an approximation of your races average face.

Except the prototypical face is delimited by one's own phenotypic exposure, therefore what one views as an "average face" is merely the averaged out phenotypic features one encounters, i.e. it's a learned phenomenon. It would explain why even babies respond to attractive faces as well --- the faces are still an average of what even the newborn has encountered.

[–]shreddedgrinch 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Isn’t the question we really want to answer ‘how much agreement in facial preference is there between subjects?’

[–]sadomasochrist 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Significant. Hence the celebrity. If it wasn't typical there'd be no way to agree and form a consensus on beauty.

[–]PumpForce 9 points10 points11 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

If this would be the case, asian american females wouldn't have an obsession towards white men and a hatred in sexual preference for their own kind

[–]Ohyarlysmiles[S] 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Lol yes it would be....

If they were immersed in white culture

[–]y33tasaurus-rex 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Except when white people visit SEA, they completely dominate the SM

[–]Ohyarlysmiles[S] 4 points5 points6 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

"Lovers clearly prefer their partners' faces to resemble their own over having their partners' faces look “more attractive” or more similar to the average face of their sex. Thus, these findings based on attractiveness of face manipulation of partners support the existence of a robust but context-dependent mating strategy that promotes positive assortment for facial resemblance based on Self’s phenotype."

...

"Attractiveness judgments of morphs of the observer’s face with faces of opposite-sex partners were clearly modulated by similarity to the observer. Different doses of resemblance to ‘self’ caused changes in attractiveness judgments of the morphs, resulting in the Self 22% morph being preferred to all of the others."

...

"We used an “objective test” of consciousness [67] and found no evidence that Self morphs could be distinguished from other morphs, since our participants could not detect better than chance that an image of the partner had been blended with Self from either an image of the partner blended with ‘Other’ (i.e., a stranger) or from the original (‘Mirror’) face.
We reasoned that humans may prefer an optimal balance between outbreeding and inbreeding and that an “incest taboo” avoids extreme inbreeding at a conscious level [35]. By showing that our participants were unaware of the presence of Self’s face in the present morph stimuli strengthens the conclusion that self-referential effects can be revealed at levels of similarity between an observer and the opposite-sex face that remain unconscious."

...

"The present study shows that, at least at an unconscious level, individuals of both sexes do love their partners as they are but also like themselves to such an extent that they prefer a photographic version of their partner’s face that contains a small amount of their own facial traits. Specifically, a self-referential morph was preferred over the morph of the partner’s face with the latter’s same-sex prototype. Crucially, in the experiments, other individuals (i.e., member of the other participating couples) consistently ranked as most attractive the morphs of the partner’s face with the latter’s same-sex prototype whereas the morph of the same face with the partner’s face was ranked by these control judges as the least attractive. Thus, when given the opportunity, romantic partners may prefer that their partners’ faces resemble their own over having their partners' faces “objectively” look more attractive. In this respect, the present findings bring some support to the “matching hypothesis” originally proposed by some social psychologists [42], [71], [72] [73] that men and women of similar attractiveness are drawn to one another as romantic partners as a reflection of direct biases rather than simply as an indirect (side) effect of each individual’s ability to attract and compete with other (available) individuals within the “biological market” [74], [75]."

[–]Red_Lancia_Stratos 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Hello is that Philippe Rushton calling? You better answer…

[–][deleted] 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]AutoModerator[M] 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Sorry HarmfulLoss, your submission has been removed from BlackPillScience because your account is new.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[–][deleted] 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]AutoModerator[M] 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Sorry VictorVonDood2, your submission has been removed from BlackPillScience because your account is new.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[–]JijoViale 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Evolution by gene selefti at its best. We feel more attracted to people who shares the most genes with us.

[–]soggy_midnight_0712 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

No!!! People find those faces beautiful that don't have their insecurities. I'm a sout asian and here fair skin, good jawline and fit body is the ultimate standard for beauty. I have a fair skin but lack a jawline. A guy who crushes on me has a bomb jawline but is slightly darker. I'm crazy for his jawline and he is crazy for my skin tone.

[–]JoshNippleton 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I feel happy for you but the at the same time I also cringe. Achievement Unlocked! New feeling acquired.

Browse all authors
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter