OK,

Lately I’ve seen a lot of a certain type of logic/argument.

It goes like this. “Looks are everything/the most important thing, and you can’t change your looks. You just are as attractive as you are.” usually this is immediately followed by “So it’s hopeless for me. Wah!”.

When prodded and told “You can be much more attractive than you are now, look a lot better” they retreat to “but muh facial aesthetics/height. Can’t change those. How can you say I can improve those and they’re EVERYTHING”.

And I think this is a massive misunderstanding of what attractiveness to females is. And not even with intangible factors, this undersells immediately tangible and physical sexual attraction factors let alone the non-physical ones.

They’re playing a ball in a cup game with the word “looks” and the word “attractive” and “facial aesthetics/height”. And wherever in the argument they need the ball to be under each cup…it’s there! In the argument the terms go round and round. And whenever they want to talk of what women want the pea is under “attractiveness” but when pressed on improving this, this can’t be changed because Ta Da! the pea is in the “facial aesthetics” cup now.

This pea game is getting no-one anywhere.

Attractiveness

This term determines when a woman wants to sleep with you. (we’re going to stay focussed on this specifically here, what RP calls alpha).

For women attractiveness in men is composed of several things social and psychological factors are extremely important. But there is also a physical factor. We’ll call this physical factor “Looks”.

Attractiveness == “Looks+Psychological Factors+Social Factors”

Looks

What is “looks” made of ? Well it’s not just facial aesthetics/height. It’s…

Facial Aesthetics, Height, Fashion/Style in hair and clothes, Hygiene, Muscles, Ideal Weight, Posture.

Twin brothers, one of which had muscles, was ideal weight, had good hygiene, and dressed well, with good hair, good posture, perhaps with some nice tats, is going to be significantly better looking than his weedy, flabby, smelly, unfashionable, poorly groomed, hunched up brother.

And this is true no matter what their facial aesthetics are, or their height.

This Guy just got his fucking hair done! Thats all. The guy on the right is more attractive, and has better “looks” and his facial aesthetics haven’t changed.

This Guy just lost weight. No muscles. No fashion. And he’s not a picture, but the guy on the right is going to do way better.

This Guy changed his hair AND his clothes. The Madman!

This Guy got ripped AND got his hair done!

Even ugly guys seem to women to “look” much more attractive when they’re toned, and sleek, and well dressed, and well groomed. Each one of these guys looks significantly better on the right.

Facial Aesthetics and Height aren’t nothing. But they aren’t everything. And even 250lb+ guys with good facial aesthetics don’t get their benefit because you can’t see them under the flab.

You can improve your looks drastically even with bad facial aesthetics/height.

So….”Looks”!=“Facial Aesthetics+Height”.

“Looks”=="Facial Aesthetics+Height+Fashion+Style in hair and clothes+Hygiene+Muscles+Ideal Weight”

And thats “looks”… we haven’t even touched on the other factors that make guys attractive to women.

Psychological/Social factors

These are things that also compensate against the category of looks, and can add to or substitute for looks to still make men attractive even when they have bad looks.

The Psychological/Social factors like Status. (even short doctors with bad facial aesthetics do OK). Social Proof (ugly guys who play in bands do fine). Confidence and Game. Drugs and Motorbikes. Dominance.

That stuff honest to god matters too. It makes you more attractive too even though it doesn’t add to your “looks” it does add to your “attractiveness”. I’m sure Steve Buscemi does fine sexually. EVERY SINGLE ONE of his attractors is a “non-looks trait”. He scores a flat 0 on our combined looks. Maybe he’s got the clothes.

Women really do find social/psychological factors attractive… power is particularly attractive. CEOs. But other psychological/social signifiers too. Doctors (status+caring+money), Fireman (caring+risk taking+protection), Military (protection+risk taking+dominance+status[officers]), Police (dominance+risk taking+protection). Girls aren’t kidding when they say they find certain things hot, things that make otherwise ugly men seem attractive.

Those roles stand out as something I can put a pin in as they trigger several female social/psycho attractors in a reliable way. But the socio/psycho things are there on their own…. a guy who isn’t a solider…. but gives her Protection+Risk Taking+Dominance vibes is going to appear as hot to her as a soldier would. He’d just have to demonstrate them individually, rather than relying on the uniform to push all those attractors at once.

There are lots of ugly guys out there having sex right now because even though they’re ugly (and short!) they have developed lots of other attractors on the RP alpha traits list (which is usually about 18 or so items long…20 if I push it). Almost all of them are developable. About 75% of them, Maybe only about 66% of the “looks” traits.

So thats it.

Attractiveness/Alpha==

Looks(Facial Aesthetics+Height+Fashion+Style in hair and clothes+Hygiene+Muscles+Ideal Weight)

Social Factors(Status,Social Proof )

Psychological Factors (Intelligence, Confidence, Humour, Dominance, Game, Ambition, Competence, Linguistic Ability, Musicianship, Bias to Action, Risk Taking Behaviour)

So when incels say “But mah looks. And looks trump personality. So I’m doomed” thats just a obnoxiously simple and inaccurate view of what is going on. So when we reply “you can be more attractive, you can even improve your looks markedly” this is what we mean…. and retreating to “but my facial aesthetics” don’t save you. Because they’re just a slice of this wider pie.

If you’re a top 1% by genetics male human, you don’t need to try. Brad Pitt doesn’t need to try. The facts that all these things matter doesn’t mean that a man can’t be so phenomenally good looking that he doesn’t need to have anything but raw natural “looks” (although even brad pitt might have trouble at 300lb, and smelly, and unconfident, etc etc.)

But it does mean that much of the rest of the 99% have a lot of power to affect where in that 99% they are.

Pointing to Usain Bolt and muttering “but muh genetics” doesn’t mean you can’t be fast enough to beat “most of the other guys in the pub” despite your genetics.

But if you point to Usain Bolt and mutter “but, muh genetics” and don’t even try… that means that every single other guy in the pub beats you.

It’s not all your genetics. If you are a long time virgin you have other things wrong with you in addition to your genetics you have to fix those other things. Those other things COUNT. They make a difference. They are part of your total attractiveness, and some of them are even part of your “looks”. If your facial aesthetics improved (surgery!) you’d still have great difficulty getting laid if you’ve developed none of the rest.

Because none of those guys in the photo’s above got taller, or got better facial aesthetics…. but they all got way better looking than they were and out of the “incel” range and into the “can have a satisfying sex life” range…. and they didn’t change their facial aesthetics or height to do so.

TL;DR The Bold Bits.