seeing a man who is attractive and put effort into his appearance is the oddity
And what's even weirder, such a man is usually declared gay by his fellow men. One might assume that the reason for this is the local stereotype, but I am beginning to think that the logic behind it is far more screwy than one might see.
Human beings are naturally visual creatures, but society assumes that's only true of men. Women have to dress and act a certain way and keep their bodies in a certain shape to attract a man, it's
natural since men are
visual creatures. Oh, but if a man also takes care of his appearance and tries to present himself in an aesthetically pleasing way?
That also means he is doing it for a man.
There are universally healthy traits that both women and men like, such as long, luscious hair, a clean face, a fit but not too toned body, etc. Men see a man with these traits and, like those beatles with shiny bottle caps, get aroused, so they assume he is doing it for them, ergo making him, not them, female and gay. The woman's opinion goes out the window here, because it's assumed that a man doesn't need anything to get a woman, if he is a masculine macho (so not a gay wimp who uses hair lotion and shaves his face!!!) has money, and, sometimes, a """good""" personality. Women are "mind creatures" after all.
Men love to mention how it's linked to biology, that females always go for the strongest male, because the strongest = healthier genes. But that's a misconception, because they always forget to include that healthy = beautiful when it comes to females choosing males (oh, but they never forget to mention it when it's the opposite!).
In nature, many females pay particular attention to how a male looks. If his feathers are too dull, if his snout is too crooked, if he smells of nasty shit and old - that's a big no-go. It doesn't matter if he managed to kill another rival. A female will reject him in favour of a healthier, and that means better-looking male. Those who give them a chance end up with sick, ugly babies, paving the way for a new generation of bad-egg males to spread their uggo genes.
Humans have manipulated nature's fair game by creating money and weapons - suddenly any male can force a female to choose him, even though his genes are a dead end and he looks like Orlock. He doesn't have to worry about his teeth, or whether he's too fat, or whether his hair is falling out in his thirties. Because now it's only a man's opinion on selection that matters, so he doesn't need to make himself appealing to women. And like a greedy bastard, man takes what he wants, and it's never enough for him. For centuries, women have been forced to comply, which has given rise to a breed of women who are "non-visual mind creatures" = don't care about husband's appearance. In fact, they care just as much as men do, it's just that they're not usually asked and learned to cope as a survival tactic. And when the question does come up, it's MEN who answer for women, using their own masculine ideals.
Incels get advice from retards like Andrew Tate about hitting the gym and getting tons of money, the peak masculinity shtick of wealth and power, which they sell as "what all chicks dig", and then they dare to act surprised when, with their bald, steroid-filled bodies with ugly beards, they end up attracting only other men and women who want money from them.
So with all these points in mind, is it really surprising that there are far fewer attractive men than women in the world? Even the attractive men are, in theory, designed to appeal to the male eye. And incels are still bitching about how unfair our "matriarchy" society is to them. If it were really matriarchal, they and their fathers
would not have been born.
I'm not a eugenicist, but hey, it's fun to turn a moids' "muh nature" logic against them.
