5 Reasons I Hate the 1-10 Looks Scale **As a Blackpiller** 

"Women break rules for chad" damn my third eye has opened

"Confidence perceived as arrogance" I felt that. My oneitis said that I was arrogant when I asked her out. It never began for me.

I think your three tier rating should be 4 tiers tbh. high tier normies/chadlites should have their own category. A 5/10 man lives in a vastly different world than a 7/10 man. 5/10 men will mostly match with landwhales on dating apps and will have to jestermax/simp to get laid; Whereas, 7/10 men will not experience any of that. The reality is that 8/10+ men are actually very scarce IRL and often taken; so Chadlites are more common frat boy slayers. Also, most women are smart enough to know that Chad will not settle with them and will make them insecure in a relationship so they prefer high tier normies or Chadlites for more security. Only 7+ women go for strictly chads. The rest will go for chadlites instead. Let me know what you think.

Since I became red pilled I thought it all depended on confidence. The more I watch your videos, the more I understand the reality of the game. Thanks

So, I have noticed one thing that is all the blackpill channels on youtube shows the professional photos taken of good-looking men and then selfies of average to below-average men. You know very well that selfies do slightly elongate your face right? Also, selfies cameras don't show the actual facial proportions. Why don't you include selfies of good-looking men then it will be a fair competition. Many men I see( not all) clearly drop in scale when we see their professional photos and then when we see their selfies or pictures taken by them or by some non-experienced person. A professional experienced photographer with good angles can make or break your face aesthetics.

If this guy applied his analysis skills to the stock market, he'd be a millionaire.

your powerpoint is top level, you should have a lot of experience in cubicle . Very good analysis as always !

I would say you're spot on for 1-4. 5 males are still invisible to women; with 10 numbers 5s cannot be the majority of men. 6s get positive reactions just based on looks. 6s are high-tier normies, probably in the hardest spot because they need more to seal the deal. I would say most people are unattractive. It's easier for faces to go wrong in a million possible ways than it is for everything to go right, featurewise. 6s are rare and 7s yet rarer. Women have said on online forums that they can go a whole day without seeing a really attractive guy, meaning the 8-10s are super rare.

Yeah, I’ve noticed most women will say you’re a 7 when rating guys to avoid backlash. 7 is like the happy medium

I agree, sub 5 is the same as zero. You are going to be rejected at that level. The only difference is how you are treated. Both a four and one are going to get rejected, but the one will be treated as a literal Shrek goblin animal.

All of those 1-3 guys mog me into oblivion, what the heck am I then sub zero? it´s over for subzerocels...

You should do a topic on aging and how some men's peak reside in different areas of their life depending on their cheek fat/wrinkles or even race. Many men give up young when really they are just babyfacecel while some dudes look like grown men in HS, college though later they are bald and past their primes.

I remember being a new hire at Raytheon back in the 90s and we had these classes on sexual harassment in the workplace given by HR. I remember we were hanging out at the coffee station, all the guys were discussing all these different scenarios that were sexually harassing. So this other guy who had worked there for a couple of years outside of college came by and said……Guys, guys - you only have to remember one thing, women only consider it sexual harassment if she thinks you’re unattractive. Of course some of the nerds spoke up to disagree. But he was right, he was like this loner engineer not fitting with any group, and he was already black pilled back in the 90s.

Photo feeler is a bunch of bullshit, they basically judge how good your picture is instead of how good looking you are. I have gotten a 9.1/10 and a 9.4/10 on two pictures which were voted only by girls under 24 (im 21) and each picture had around 70 votes (so quite accurate). My other pictures had ratings like 8.5, 8.0. I am not ugly but no near those 9/10 scores. More like a 6-6.5/10. So do NOT trust photo feeler. Otherwise interesting video.

My man's IQ is off charts we are witnessing the biggest saint atm. Keep going on your works, big appreciated.

Dude as a man that has RP knowledge for a long time now your analysis and brake down of things are impressive and more accurate than what you would find in any RP channel. Is like a polished version of general RP information. Great F.... job, I find your information updating my existing RP software because your facts are 100% on point.

Lookin' good, Susan!

Proofs that 80% of this "community" are failed normies

Proportions are only a small part of what we've broadly termed "looks." I propose that physical attractiveness can be further divided and represented as distinct components, each having completely independent sets of effects and degrees of significance. - Proportionality, and symmetry as a subset of proportionality - Approachability: A default (resting) expression that is between neutral and inviting - Health markers: Luster of skin and hair, limbal rings, white sclera, white teeth, defined cheek hollows, visible muscle definition, taut skin, etc. - Dimorphism: Supraorbital ridge and chin as indicators of biological sex - Composite average: Scientific papers have demonstrated that faces that are a composite average are the most attractive. Others have demonstrated that faces most like one's own are found to be more attractive by that person than those that aren't. - Phenotype and similarity to self: I hypothesize that disproportionate exposure to, for example, faces of a given phenotype "primes" that person to favor traits of that phenotype. I suspect that such "priming" occurs during a specific developmental window (e.g. possibly during which the Westermarck effect occurs) and possibly to a far less extent throughout the remainder of life. I think that we frequently neglect to acknowledge that the elements of a person's physical appearance affect attractiveness extremely disproportionately to one another. For example, eyebrows typically have the same thickness along their length to the arch, while the tail is tapered. Some eyebrows feature an increasing thickness, forming a peak at the arch. (Cartoon characters that are demonic or are otherwise representative of evil typically have their eyebrows drawn in this manner.) This seemingly imperceptible feature is a very strong expression of hostility, regardless of the character, personality, or mood of that individual. *It's disproportionately more likely to lead to rejection than a comparatively similar degree of imperfection in other areas.* Another feature is the corners of the lips. Closed lips generally meet in such a way that they have a slightly negative tilt on both sides, and the tilt may become more neutral approaching the corners. Some are increasingly angled downward at the corners, which contributes to what is commonly known as "bitchy resting face." Quite obviously, an individual who has this trait may be completely unaware of the degree to which it is affecting their everyday social interaction. I think that we must be more meticulous in conclusively identifying the root causes of repeated rejection, especially given that many of them may be problems as easily solvable as the aforementioned. Doing so would provide a great deal of value to the community, as well as compete against the misleading infotainment more effectively for market share of attention.

You are totally wrong on the silver fox man being a 3 and "old" in his 40's. Plenty of younger women like a handsome older man if he is still fit, has style, charisma and status. If you were experienced with women, you would know this. At 40 my g/f was a hot 22 and throughout my 40's I had a string of attractive, much younger lovers. I have no doubt this guy is also still successful with the ladies. You're definitely correct about the single mothers, though ...

I wholly agree with your first point: I've noticed that incels rate looks in resemblance to an iq bell curve, (where 50 percent of people fall between 4 and 6), instead of just distributing the scale evenly according to percentile. Secondly, I think we should have a more holistic SMV rating system. Face should account for about 50% of total looks, height accounting for 30%, and physique accounting for 20%. A 6'1 male with a 5/10 face and an ideal physique equates to a 7 imo. It goes without saying that a 5'2 male would pay a penalty in the height category and receive negative points, just like a facial subhuman would.

11:50 "because they don't want to appear heartless" I think that's incorrect. They want to avoid conflict because, evolutionary seen, women had to avoid conflict to survive regardless of how (or not) attracted they were to the man in question

Most underrated channel

Really really love this 3-tier scale you made. It reflects reality to a tee

I've long theorized that people rate themselves "average" as a 7 because in school a 70% grade is an "average" C grade. also the single mother paradox: having a kid lowers their SMV but now that they have a kid to look out for they raise their standards

ur content is very fresh. well spoken and articulated

Most pua artists are in the normies category with height, game. But their followers are mostly sub-5 and normies with no qualities. They know that, but telling the truth doesn't sell, so they will tell you it doesn't matter if you are 5'4 and overweight you just need game and you will get hot models.

I always look forward to watching your videos, Always thought provoking and high IQ. They explain the pills in a way that is both concise and detailed but easily digestable. Keep it up WheatWaffles!

As a roidcell I approve this message.

0:30 'Bordeline sub human' lmao XD I love how he is so non pc, it makes it entertaining. Lol

Having worked as a commercial photographer for 20 years, I have to agree with this analysis. Only encountered two tens in all those years and thousands of go-sees. Sevens and eights can easily find work with looks maxing.

This Video is so good wow

Damn man, you gotta get on a debate with face - lms and CBP channel. You have an interesting perception & interpretation.

More guys need to watch these channels. Great video break down.

The inconsistency is greatest near the avg. The extremes are easier to detect (higher precision)

I'm redpilled but your analysis in these videos have me leaning towards being blackpilled now. Sheesh

Just going back on your earlier point about women virtue signalling - "Not my type" doesn't always mean she thinks of you deep down as being a 3 or a 4, sometimes she does genuinely mean that. Later you spoke about the pretty boy to most masculine scale and the bell curve. Some women really appreciate a pretty boy, but aren't personally attracted to them. Chances are, they have friends that possess a weak spot for them. That doesn't necessarily mean you're not attractive, she may just prefer more masculine looking men. Some women like bald men with tattoos, some women have a weak spot for hairy men, some like a certain hair colour. There's so many different variables to people and attractiveness. I just don't think you can arbitrarily pigeonhole people like this simply because the tastes of people are far too complex and are shaped and moulded by so many different things. Ultimately, you're either attractive or you aren't, but nobody is going to be attractive to absolutely everybody. Even the stereotypical Chad can be seen as unattractive to some females if they have a preference for a totally different look or even ethnicity. Alot of Hollywood celebrities that I remember women going crazy for back in the day weren't even tall for example, many of them were average to below average height in some cases and they are supposed to be the benchmark for attractiveness. Life is about balance.

Great details! Absolutely love your analytical skills, articulation, and presentation. Keep up the great work!

Dude the fact that you just start explaining without talking about the title and about the topic in general made you instantly a better person

I've always taken the number rating very seriously. My two constants are as follows. Low End: You cannot be a 2 or 1 unless you have actual deformities, meaning that even if you have ugly as sin features I still can't put you under 3 unless it actually grows incorrectly as opposed to just poor growth. High End: Now I haven't done enough theory crafting for women but for men, I don't think you can be an 8 until you're 6 foot. Like even if you're hollywood handsome I can't put you at 8 or higher. 9 for men is when you also have a good skeletal structure on top of tall height and 10 can only be achieved by preference for either sexes. Meaning that my 10 would be a girl that's very hot, is fit, has short hair and the like. But unless she has that she can't be a 10 for me no matter how modelesque her features are in reality.

I’m not buying the old guy part of this video. If you’re an attractive silver fox (especially with money) I have a hard time believing you’d be seen as creepy, especially since girls prefer older guys anyway.

I think of this scale as a sort of "latent heat" like scale; imagine you're heating up a material. Say that the material is originally solid(1-3 rating); bringing it up to liquid phase/ 4-6 status requires more energy; climbing between level zones requires more effort and is more difficult to do.

This is big brain truthful stuff, good job.

i love how you get right into the content at the first second

This goes to show how subjective looks can be sometimes. Alot of the dudes you rated as below 5 aren't even bad looking to me. IN fact, they look more like normies than ugly. For example, the top two guys on the number 4 at 01:00 look like normies. And the top guy has good hollow cheekbones, which can push him up to a HTN or atleast a 5.5/10, based on that alone. Same with the guy in the middle at 2. He has attractive hollow cheekbones, which gives him that model appeal, despite his other features being unattractive. If you have these exotic features, you can actually be saved.

Wheat is the type of guy that instead of using his Einstein-tier intelligence and analytical skill to solve global disasters like Covid, global warming, over-population, he strives to turn everyone Black pill. Jokes aside, your analysis is excellent. I personally very much appreciate how you quantify whenever you can, particularly on your 4 parts series of what makes an attractive face.

This is some insane insight and data.

Wow dude this is a well put together chart to go by enjoyed this video👌🏻

Things that can help that are overlooked... Dressing individually, Dressing well for your build, Being part of a scene or style like rockers, rappers, skaters punks goths etc, being around like minded people... embracing talents and skills... Gym and tanning, cool tattoos, good grooming, staying fresh and clean. Accents, I'm 5ft 8 and baldy but my Irish accent has helped me get some action over the years, not just accent but a good tone, not being afraid to be a little snippy or rude with her but respectful. Working, 'studies have shown' that work clothes and boots have an effect on women's minds. You need to be a working hard or smart or both. Most important, being genuinely a funny guy will get you genuine interest from a lot of women, if you're clever and witty and funny and not affected by her beauty because you're desperate etc that's gonna be a good thing.

These blackpill videos have really destroyed my self-confidence

great breakdown!

100% agree. wheat's analyses are on point.

A 1/10 scale rating for attractiveness can make sense in the logarithmic scale. For example, a 1/10 scale done on the log(base is depending on regression) of the ratio of women who would date a man over the total amount of women who answered the question would be a possible solution. The 1/10 scale would now make sense since now the difference between two points is by a factor of the base. However, the huge jumps have to be addressed between 3-4 and 7-8 but there are probably some mathematical methods to account for that.

Great video. I totally agree, and I think each category could be broken down into sub categories. slayer, chad, chad lite, high tier normie and so on...

very good video. Coach is right, you are a smart kid, keep going 👌

I love "needs two out of three to be successful". That is a perfect analysis.

This was great, I always look forward to your videos cant wait for the next one

Reason 6, the man in the 8-10 scale have a photo quality superior.

That last slide is perfect.

Perfect analysis. Congratulations!

Absolutely love ur work gj

Most of the face-only shots have cameraphone wide angle lens distortion which results in overly large foreheads, nosetips, chins and higher hairlines. Likewise, the model-photos of the 8-10s seem to be taken on longer focal length lenses and compress facial features. Bump your on-line looks is to take a picture from at least 2x the distance and crop, or get someone with a long focal length lens to take your portrait

Well done!

My dudes making strides on this channel, always high iq keep it up

Very good new subdivision. I will also use it more often. The reason why women treat sub-5 so badly is, apart from personal preferences for a good-looking man, also an apparently genetically anchored responsibility to produce the optimal offspring (whereby safe rearing also plays a major role, keyword provider). A sub-5 man would theoretically be able to impose his offspring on the woman due to his physical superiority, which is why he is often seen as a threat. Hence the rough treatment (not all women do this; just as an aside). Since men do not feel threatened by sub-5 women, there are also far fewer such unkind cases. Now, if sub-5 are confident or well-toned, it looks threatening to some women. However, I would break the sub-5 rule again with gymmaxing, because a 4/10 can and should absolutely go to the gym.

You're right on the 3 to 8 is pretty much all you need it's just that probably 1,2,9, and 10 while being 40% of the scale have about 10% of the scale. (bell curve) Rare to find 8 to 10 and also to find 1 to 3.

This is spot on. Awesome channel

I think this is a pretty accurate description, have you ever think to make an article about that. "Using the facial features as a predictor of success with women" would be the name of the article.

Absolutely amazing content, which describes the real dating dynamics better than anything else! I remember a podcast, where Man said that he is disappointed from Women and the Dating Game. The moderator asked how tall and what his weight is? He answered 170cm and 95kilos. The moderator answered that he has no problem with Women, but he is fat and ugly. With this body proposition you can not expect a Female 8-10, this is not the way nature works. Therefore Man has to chase „Self Excellence“ in various dimensions.

Let's just have the "it's over/ it isn't scale"

This is really informative, thank you

Great video

Fuck me, life is just BR00TAL. That last part where sub-5s get treated like sub-human is so true. I see it all the time. Breaks my heart, man. I'm not incel, I get some bitches from time to time, so I can't relate, but jesus you guys are playing on nightmare difficulty for sure. I know foids will never love ya, but I do! Stay strong 💪🏻

Harsh truths man... good work offering a sane alternative. Sounds like I am a normie for now but balding fast.

Good breakdown 👏

Fantastic work as usual!

Patrice O'Neal had the "30 Scale" I've been using it since Grade 9 Edit: wow that Chad, Normie, Sub-5 is essentially it, you know your stuff

I started dying at 6:18 . That caught me off guard lmaoooo

Yeah I really like this, great vid 👍🏻

*Dealing with looks-based values,* I 100% agree with your 3 tier chart and the effects/responses. This will give you the majority of women's responses unless you have some other major factor coming into play. An example is working in a ministry org, and being given a position of authority/clout and working in a group is a good light to raise a man by several points: She gets to see him take charge, she sees his perceived group value higher, she's on the team and working with him, so she gets to know him a little and visa versa without the 1st date judgement kicking in. I know a small minority of women (sub 5%) that actually have level heads and make value-based decisions instead of looks (and are often repulsed by looks-based men), but it is worth noting that even given that they want responsible men, they still want men bold enough to be on the risky side of responsible instead of "boring" safe.

With regards to the scaling issue, I think you'd probably find it tracks along a bell curve. To be expected of course, most people are around average with some outliers at either end of the spectrum

Idea for video: make comparison between (for example) boy with 7/10 face and 5.8 ft and second man with 4/10 face and 6.1 ft. (just to show how height is important nowadays)

Wow this makes so much sense.

Based video sir

Good assessment of the looks scale, based on that scale, I’m a 1/10, 2 on a good day, so for me “it’s over” lol 😂

This is reasonable, but it's far too soul-crushing. I am 5 foot 5 and, while I'm not deformed, I'm not great looking either. I have also ranged between being in good shape and being pretty fat. I am currently in a happy, committed relationship with a woman who finds me at least pretty attractive. And, in my life, I have had a pretty good amount of intimacy and I left a ton of potential intimacy on the table when I was younger due to immaturity, hesitation, and general laziness, a ton of it. The bottom line is, women were interested, hell they still are at least from time to time. This channel is such a brutal appraisal of all this. Lots of men have sex, it's not like only Chad's are ever with women. But, I will say, I wouldn't go on Tinder if you paid me.

I can't agree with you in many ways, but I thank you for the entertainment and for some good points

I Really like how you went to the point

Great video as usual. I would say your Richter scale is literally the perfect analogy. There is a steep incline after 6-6.5 and thats true. The second thing i have to comment on is your 3 category system. I agree with the sub5 and the 8+ category but im not sure about the normie category. According to the richter scale the difference between a 5 and 7 are huge and so i propose we break the normie tier in 2 categories: normies (5-6.9) and chadlites(6.9-7.9). The reason i say that is because the chadlites comprimise a significant proportion of the population. I would say 10-15%. Let me know if you had categorized the chadlites in the chad category or in the normie category.

Your three-tier rating system makes perfect sense. Women don’t tend to overthink this shit and rate men on a 1-10 scale; they form an instinctive opinion and group men into three buckets: 1. Chad (casual sex and ideally a long term relationship, if the Chad is willing to settle down), 2. Beta bux (friend zone/possible relationship if he’s got money/she doesn’t have other options due to age, logistics, etc.), 3. Subhumans and true incels (almost totally unfuckable, instant friend zone, POSSIBLE LTR material with minimal sex if he has massive money or status. Absolutely no casual sex)

For most of my life I was very confused. NOW it all makes sense!

All around a very cogent argument for what W^2 proposes. This is one of his best videos. Bravo sir!

I think that at least in those rating examples, there are like a couple that give the impression of being significantly miscategorized. Besides that, maybe it's just the way I categorize, but I tend to categorize most people between 6-8, with 9s being rarer and 10s even rarer still. 1-3 I give that to people with severe deformities or scarring, etc, 5 and sub 5 to people with significant issues. Chad reproduces the most, so it stands to reason over time the looks of most is higher than it would otherwise be. But cases like Alex from target and Jeremy Meeks show that this level of looks is rare, and does do well even above relatively good looking people.

I always thought I was shy or I had some bad luck. It turns out I'm ugly. That explains all my life when it comes to women and society. These videos are helping me a lot with depression and everything. I just now have to take care of not being considered a creep. For having sex, I go for dating apps

8:00 had me dying. 😂 We really have everything down to science.

I really enjoy your content. I still have blue and red pill thinking, but every time I see your videos I feel it makes sense. As I grow older I also think that attractiveness also lies in youth. What I mean is, what I as a youth found to be less attractive face I now as older think is more attractive as I also now tend to rate higher the youth figures. Which is why I understand why men may go for younger women that may not be as «conventionally attractive» because they value youth features more as they grow older.

In my opinion not my type sometimes means a guy who isn’t particularly ugly but doesn’t turn that woman on per say A black woman from the inner city of Chicago can agree zac efron is handsome but they will probably say he’s not her type

If you're not in the 7+ range the vast majority of women won't even acknowledge your existence and if you flirted with them you'd be branded as creepy.

I like how these get right to the video and I dont have to skip 3 mins in like most channels these days

You're really smart and you have no idea how imformative your videos are (especially in my country there's no videos like this) in South Korea