Why you should get that nose job
The looksmaxxers are onto something – how you look counts for a lot. But mewing and moisturising will only get you so far. It’s time to hardmaxx.
Lookism, once an obscure sub-genre of the online manosphere, has gone mainstream. Terms like prey eyes and canthal tilt, which just a few years ago were met by pure puzzlement, have entered common parlance after breaking sub-genre containment and spreading into mainstream meme culture. The mainstream media’s reaction to lookism’s rise has been a mixture of bafflement and concern, with attempts to connect it into a broader narrative of dangerous toxic masculinity. But consternation from organisations such as ‘Progressive Masculinity’ about lookism’s potential to lead men to ‘incel ideologies’ have done little to stop its rise. This should be of no surprise, since at its core, lookism is essentially correct.
Lookism contends that a person’s appearance, especially their face but also their height and frame, is fundamental in dictating their life’s outcomes. One’s appearance is most influential within the sexual marketplace, where it dominates what has been termed ‘sexual market value’, which determines one’s ability to find an (attractive) partner. But the importance of looks is by no means limited to the realm of dating; your ability to make friends, to get jobs, even everyday interactions – all are fundamentally shaped by how you look.
These are not just the bitter conclusions of terminally online incels; all these claims are substantiated by the academic literature on the topic. The more physically attractive earn significantly more than their average-looking peers, ‘comparable to the race and gender gaps’ in earnings; they are treated better in everyday exchanges; they have greater choice within the dating market; they have greater psychological well-being; they even face more lenient criminal punishments. In sum, being better looking has appreciable material and psychological benefits and confers a level of privilege comparable to sex or race.
With looksmaxxing going mainstream, a whole industry has emerged trying to extract money from those keen to share in those benefits. Young men seeking to ‘ascend’ the attractiveness scale can now learn all the glow-up secrets by enrolling in Mogwarts for a fee of $40 per month. Mogwarts will teach you all the classic softmaxxing1 tricks, such as getting a more suitable haircut, establishing a skincare routine, improving your diet, and how to correctly mew. By doing so, the students of this online school hope they will get closer to achieving the dazzling good looks of the models and PSL Gods they so admire.
But the models the looksmaxxers aspire to emulate have never spent all day mewing, and many have atrocious diets and eating habits (a friend of mine used to survive solely on 3am cereal binges; he went on to front a commercial campaign for Gucci). The ‘secret’ to models and PSL Gods’ good looks is that, on account of genetic good fortune, they have developed bone structures and physical attributes that put them in the top percentile of human attractiveness. In other words, they are the beneficiaries of hitting the hereditary jackpot.
Within the original lookism forums, the centrality of genetics was explicit and the cause of the movement’s heavily blackpilled tone. The deemphasis on the role of genetics now lookism has gained a broader audience reflects a greater societal trend: an uncomfortableness with acknowledging the importance of genetics and squeamishness over recognising that some people are genetically superior in certain traits (even the word superior is virtually banished from polite discussion due to its eugenic associations). Instead, a more palatable story is told about how excellence, be it academic, sporting, or aesthetic, can be achieved through sufficient hard work and dedication.
However, my aim here is not to blackpill and engage in genetic determinism, but the opposite. Thanks to medical breakthroughs and the globalisation of the cosmetic surgery industry, genetic constraints can now be overcome safely and relatively affordably. Increases in attractiveness from improvements in skincare and diet eventually meet an upper limit imposed by genetics, but this unwarranted imposition can now be surmounted by going under the knife. Cosmetic surgery allows us to improve physical features that no amount of hard work will ever change; asymmetric schnozzes moulded into a harmonious ski-slope nose, receding hairlines restored to their youthful zenith, crooked teeth transformed into Hollywood pearly whites.
It is commonly claimed that sources of physical insecurity are caused by unrealistic societal standards, or our own minds playing cruel tricks on us, but often the truth is much simpler and more brutal – the reason we think a given feature makes us less attractive is because it does. The good news is that we must no longer be reconciled with the causes of our insecurities, as they may now be overcome at accessibly low prices. And if the high upfront cost of a particular procedure causes pause for thought, consider that the wage premium associated with higher physical attractiveness makes cosmetic interventions an investment with an appreciable material return. So, once done moisturising and mewing, join me in booking that flight to Turkey, and look forward to a future of free drinks and hot sexual partners.
Softmaxxing refers to low-commitment practices to improve attractiveness that can be incorporated into a daily routine without making unalterable changes. It is in contrast to hardmaxxing, which is the adoption of radical procedures such as starvemaxxing (which I can personally attest to working, though in the long-term it’s a terrible idea), bonesmashing (which I’m almost certain is just a meme), and more commonly, cosmetic surgeries.