In my previous post in this sub, titled "Are Beauty Standards Universal? What Cultural Anthropologists and Psychologists Have to Say on the Matter," I called attention to the lack of reliable scientific evidence demonstrating that the attraction to facial symmetry, or what I call "symmetry fetishism," is biologically determined. As I said:

While, as O'Neil acknowledges, "some psychologists have suggested that in all societies the essence of beauty is a symmetrical face and body," this is mere evolutionary psychology claptrap. Though the untenability of evolutionary psychology is beyond the scope of this post, suffice it to say that, like all of its claims, this supposed "symmetry fetishism," while prima facie plausible, is pure conjecture unbacked by experimental, molecular genetics, or any other sort of solid evidence. Similarly to the common belief that beauty standards are universal, "objective," immutable, etc., this claim is, in a word, ideological.

In the comments, I also offered some elaboration:

It should be noted that, in addition to being founded on a bankrupt theoretical orientation, this "facial symmetry" claim, as an explanation for inequality vis-à-vis sexual fulfillment, is dubious even in its own right. Indeed, virtually everyone has a symmetrical face. Personally, excepting overtly disfigured individuals, I do not recall ever noticing asymmetries in people's faces. Even if we grant that attraction to facial symmetry is biodetermined, this cannot explain the significant differential sexual success observed in society.

Recently, I came across two r/VindictaRateCelebs posts (here and here) requesting attractiveness ratings for a celebrity I had not heard of, Maude Apatow, whose significant eye asymmetry—which I actually did not notice until it was mentioned in the comments—is evident in photos. Being among the first non-disfigured individuals with perceptible facial asymmetries I had seen, my immediate reaction after noticing her eyes was that they do not appreciably affect her attractiveness, which in my opinion is moderate. Photoshopping her eyes to be symmetrical, for instance, would not make a significant difference, certainly not enough to render her prettier than someone who "mogs" her natural appearance.

As far as I am concerned, this vindicates what I argued in my post: Facial asymmetry, which is often unnoticed even when significant, is not a major factor in attractiveness. It is not lost on me that drawing conclusions solely from personal anecdotes is unscientific, however, hence why I am making this post in order confirm whether others concur. What are you guys' thoughts?