00:00:00
Unfortunately, you have no idea what you
00:00:02
actually look like to other people. But
00:00:04
in this video, we're going to tell you
00:00:05
four methods to get a better sense of
00:00:07
how other people see you. In order to
00:00:09
utilize these methods, you first need to
00:00:11
understand the reasons why you don't
00:00:13
know how you look. As once you
00:00:14
understand the perceptual obstacles on
00:00:16
the landscape, it becomes much easier to
00:00:18
navigate around them. First, here's why,
00:00:20
or rather how the mirror lies to you.
00:00:23
Most people when they look in the mirror
00:00:24
subconsciously put a specific facial
00:00:27
expression that they don't generally use
00:00:28
elsewhere. You can test this yourself by
00:00:30
having someone you know look at
00:00:31
themselves in the mirror while you are
00:00:33
next to them. You'll see that they will
00:00:35
tilt their head a certain way or lift
00:00:37
their eyebrows slightly or pout their
00:00:38
lips or do something to alter their
00:00:40
facial posture. Well, they're generally
00:00:42
looking at themselves and it's not how
00:00:44
they look dayto-day. Chances are that
00:00:46
you probably do the same thing and you
00:00:47
just don't realize it. Further, staring
00:00:49
at yourself from exactly eye level from
00:00:51
a few feet away in your bathroom
00:00:53
lighting doesn't capture your full
00:00:55
spectrum of looks, such as the way
00:00:57
people might see you on a date in a
00:00:59
restaurant, in a meeting, in a
00:01:00
boardroom, or even outside on a walk. In
00:01:02
other words, this isn't the setting that
00:01:04
people see you when it actually matters.
00:01:06
Finally, since you see yourself in the
00:01:08
mirror every day, multiple times a day,
00:01:10
you become numb to the stimuli of your
00:01:12
own appearance. You know how you stop
00:01:14
hearing the background noise in your
00:01:15
house after a certain amount of time,
00:01:17
like subtle hums of the fridge? The same
00:01:20
thing happens with your face. You become
00:01:21
so accustomed to it that it's hard to
00:01:23
really see it for what it is. And this
00:01:25
is true regardless of your real world
00:01:27
appearance. For instance, in a recent
00:01:28
interview, David Gandhi said that he was
00:01:30
self-conscious of his nose and his ears,
00:01:32
which he views as far too large.
00:01:34
Remarkably, even the most successful
00:01:36
male model ever can't see how attractive
00:01:38
he is. An extreme example, granted, but
00:01:40
this is happening with all of us to all
00:01:42
of our facial features simultaneously.
00:01:44
Your brain isn't able to process your
00:01:46
whole face together objectively because
00:01:48
you are numb to the stimuli. We think
00:01:50
this explains why when you look at
00:01:52
Tobias Grime's attractiveness studies,
00:01:54
unattractive people overrate themselves
00:01:56
and attractive people underrate
00:01:57
themselves such that most people rate
00:01:59
themselves as slightly above average
00:02:01
looking regardless of how attractive
00:02:03
they are actually to other people. Your
00:02:05
own face is always going to look normal
00:02:07
to yourself because to you it's the most
00:02:10
familiar face in the world. And photos
00:02:11
are actually even less true to how
00:02:13
others see you than compared to the
00:02:15
mirror. And this is as a matter of fact
00:02:17
another artifact of seeing yourself in
00:02:19
the mirror every day. Your brain has
00:02:20
become accustomed to the flipped version
00:02:22
of yourself that you see in the mirror.
00:02:23
And so by now your brain naturally
00:02:25
adjusts for all of your slight
00:02:27
asymmetries and you get used to the left
00:02:29
side of your face as your left and the
00:02:30
right side of your face as your right.
00:02:32
But then when you see a photo, it's
00:02:33
suddenly flipped compared to what you
00:02:35
used to. And those asymmetries your mind
00:02:37
was compensating for in one direction
00:02:39
are now asymmetrical in the same
00:02:41
direction you were compensating for,
00:02:42
making them look literally twice as
00:02:44
extreme as they would to someone who's
00:02:46
never seen you before. Further, seeing
00:02:48
things like your beauty mark move to the
00:02:50
other side of your face or your cowl
00:02:51
switch eyebrows just makes your whole
00:02:53
aesthetic seem peculiar, even if these
00:02:55
features are actually quite pleasant.
00:02:57
And while lens distortion has been
00:02:59
overhyped a bit, it is quite real. Take
00:03:01
a look at this example posted by John
00:03:03
Bear as it's a useful teaching tool. In
00:03:05
the left video, he looks normal, but in
00:03:07
the right video, he looks quite strange.
00:03:09
That's because in the right video, he's
00:03:10
using a wide-angle lens held close to
00:03:12
the face. In simple terms, wide-angle
00:03:14
lenses slightly compress the periphery
00:03:15
of images relative to the center, which
00:03:17
can create barrel distortion. And
00:03:19
close-range shots make items closer to
00:03:21
the camera appear larger than they are.
00:03:23
And this is called perspective
00:03:24
distortion. In Bay's example, these two
00:03:26
effects combined to create a few
00:03:27
changes. You can see how his nose
00:03:29
appears larger. His jaw appears
00:03:31
narrower. His bisyatic width appears
00:03:33
smaller. His eyes appear closer to the
00:03:35
sides of the face. And his hairline
00:03:37
appears further back. The typical selfie
00:03:39
also uses a wide-angle lens held close
00:03:41
to the face. And so these changes happen
00:03:43
in your selfies too, just in a less
00:03:45
extreme way. For example, Water Towel
00:03:48
found that a selfie taken 12 in from
00:03:49
your face can make your nose look up to
00:03:51
30% bigger than it actually is. And
00:03:53
since the most common way people see
00:03:55
photos of themselves is through the
00:03:56
front camera, this is also a distortion
00:03:58
of your self-image. Finally, photos
00:04:00
completely freeze expressivity, which is
00:04:02
a major component of one's
00:04:04
attractiveness. How your face moves,
00:04:06
that is how your expressions change when
00:04:07
you speak and react, can radically alter
00:04:09
how your beauty is perceived. Take a
00:04:11
look at this graph from roads at all,
00:04:13
where the x-axis shows individuals
00:04:15
static attractiveness, that is how
00:04:17
attracted they are rated in a photo, and
00:04:19
the y-axis shows how attracted they are
00:04:21
rated on a video. Sure, the overall
00:04:24
correlation is pretty tight, but you can
00:04:25
see that it does vary dramatically
00:04:27
individual by individual. For instance,
00:04:29
you can see that these individuals were
00:04:31
all rated about a five in photos, but on
00:04:33
video, some were a six, whereas others
00:04:35
were a three. Think about that for a
00:04:38
moment. For many people, expressivity
00:04:39
alone is the difference between being
00:04:41
considered unattractive and being
00:04:42
considered good-looking. And so, now
00:04:44
that you understand what's stopping you
00:04:46
from seeing your face the way other
00:04:48
people see it, we can discuss techniques
00:04:50
that get around these obstacles. The
00:04:52
first method is to set up a phone camera
00:04:54
to take a video of yourself or have
00:04:55
someone film you from at least 5 ft away
00:04:58
speaking naturally from different
00:04:59
angles. If you show a video like this to
00:05:01
someone else, they'll likely say, "Yeah,
00:05:03
that's more or less how you look in real
00:05:04
life." Now, edit the video and flip it
00:05:06
such that it's mirrored. And this way,
00:05:08
you don't get the weird effect where you
00:05:09
look super asymmetrical. If you watch
00:05:11
this video, this is more or less how
00:05:13
people who know you perceive your face.
00:05:15
With this method, we've corrected for
00:05:16
your unnatural mirror expression. the
00:05:19
unique bathroom lighting and distance,
00:05:20
the camera distortion that comes with
00:05:22
close-up shots, the loss of expressivity
00:05:24
in photos, and the unfamiliarity of
00:05:27
mirrored images. However, one thing we
00:05:28
haven't corrected for is exposure. You
00:05:30
still see your face all the time, and
00:05:32
depending on your personality, this can
00:05:33
warp your perception of your own looks
00:05:35
in either direction. And while this
00:05:37
technique might give you a more
00:05:38
objectively accurate way of looking at
00:05:40
your own features than you're normally
00:05:41
used to, it's going to be subjectively
00:05:43
hard for you to assess how good do I
00:05:45
actually look. The next three methods
00:05:47
are going to correct for that. And if
00:05:48
you combine this method with one or two
00:05:50
of the other three, you get a more
00:05:52
accurate self-image. The second is to
00:05:54
get an outside opinion. Ultimately, in
00:05:56
one sense, attractiveness does have a
00:05:58
strong subjective element to it. It's
00:06:00
much like taste. Some people will prefer
00:06:02
strawberries, others will prefer kale,
00:06:04
but both have a standard for what they
00:06:06
prefer. However, there are obviously
00:06:08
objective facts about what the average
00:06:10
person will prefer and collective
00:06:12
subjective perspectives. If most people
00:06:14
subjectively prefer the taste of
00:06:16
strawberries to kale, well then it's an
00:06:18
objective fact that they are tastier to
00:06:20
the average person. Similarly, just as a
00:06:23
random example, if most people
00:06:24
subjectively prefer brighter scaras, as
00:06:27
indicated by Provin Ital's study, it's
00:06:30
an objective fact that brighter scaras
00:06:32
are more attractive on average, even if
00:06:34
it's a fact about subjective
00:06:36
perspectives. And if most people find
00:06:38
you attractive, it is an objective fact
00:06:40
that you are attractive to most people.
00:06:42
So, in theory, you can really figure out
00:06:44
your attractiveness by mainly asking
00:06:46
others. It's interesting, but we
00:06:48
actually could easily modify the
00:06:49
technology that we already have at
00:06:50
Cooves to estimate how others would rate
00:06:52
your face on average and give you a
00:06:54
rating. And while we did flirt with the
00:06:56
idea of offering this as a service,
00:06:58
ultimately we decided against it.
00:07:00
Because while it can be fun to figure
00:07:02
out if you're in the 20th or the 50th or
00:07:04
the 70th percentile for beauty as an
00:07:07
actual service, it's really not that
00:07:09
useful as it doesn't give you any
00:07:10
direction as to how to improve your
00:07:12
appearance. So what we do instead with
00:07:14
our products is we rate them on where
00:07:16
they are relative to where we think they
00:07:18
could be. In other words, their own
00:07:20
potential without surgery and we tell
00:07:22
them how to get there. Anyway, the
00:07:23
tricky part of method 2 is that most
00:07:25
people don't really have the incentive
00:07:26
to tell you the truth. Ideally, you know
00:07:29
some people who can give you an honest
00:07:30
assessment, but a friend won't want to
00:07:32
hurt your feelings. And while you can
00:07:34
use one of those face rating subreddits,
00:07:36
some of those actually probably will
00:07:38
want to hurt your feelings because
00:07:40
that's just how people are. So, here is,
00:07:42
in our opinion, the most accurate way a
00:07:44
regular person can get a ballpark of
00:07:46
their own attractiveness. In 1988, a
00:07:49
psychologist named Alan Fangold did a
00:07:51
metaanalysis of studies that had the
00:07:53
opportunity to compare people's ratings
00:07:55
of attractiveness with those of their
00:07:57
partners. and found a correlation
00:07:58
of.39.49
00:08:00
after correcting for attenuation. And
00:08:02
this finding has held up in more modern
00:08:04
research on the subject. For reference,
00:08:06
this is what a 0.49 correlation looks
00:08:08
like. It's real, but one data point
00:08:10
isn't going to tell you very much. So,
00:08:12
if you pick out one random person you've
00:08:13
dated as a measure of your
00:08:15
attractiveness, it's not going to be
00:08:16
that useful. But let's say you have four
00:08:18
exes. If you averaged all their
00:08:20
attractiveness, it could give you a
00:08:21
ballpark estimate of how attractive you
00:08:24
are. So, method three is to review your
00:08:26
own dating history. With rare
00:08:27
exceptions, when someone says that
00:08:29
someone is dating out of their league,
00:08:31
it's actually usually nonsense because
00:08:33
the fact that they're dating them is a
00:08:34
strong sign that you are in fact in
00:08:36
their league. So, if you want to figure
00:08:38
out what your league is, you can usually
00:08:40
just tell by the people you've dated.
00:08:42
Basically, everyone is trying to date
00:08:43
the best person that they can get. And
00:08:45
so, most people end up dating someone
00:08:47
about as good-looking as themselves. And
00:08:49
so, you can take a rough average of how
00:08:51
attractive the people you've dated are.
00:08:53
and that's likely about as attractive as
00:08:55
you are. Two things, though. First,
00:08:57
women are generally somewhat
00:08:58
better-looking than men on average. So,
00:09:00
if you date people of the opposite
00:09:01
gender, you do have to correct for that.
00:09:03
It's not that you're as good-looking as
00:09:05
they are. It's that you're likely in a
00:09:07
similar percentile for your gender.
00:09:09
Second, this doesn't apply for
00:09:10
short-term relationships since on
00:09:12
average, men tend to lower their
00:09:14
standards for uncommitted relationships.
00:09:16
And so, it's actually pretty common for
00:09:17
women to have short-term flings or
00:09:19
situationships with men who are much
00:09:21
better looking than them. whereas it's
00:09:23
not as common the other way around. But
00:09:25
what if you haven't had any committed
00:09:26
relationships? Well, then this brings us
00:09:28
to method number four. You can look at
00:09:30
your options on dating apps. App
00:09:32
algorithms are widely suspected to work
00:09:34
like competitive matchmaking such that
00:09:36
someone swiping positively on you puts
00:09:38
you in a more desirable pool and someone
00:09:40
swiping negatively on you puts you in a
00:09:42
less desirable pool. So, the people the
00:09:44
app algorithm shows you are the people
00:09:46
who are at a similar level of
00:09:47
desiraability for their gender, the ones
00:09:50
who are quote unquote in your league on
00:09:52
the app. However, this isn't quite as
00:09:54
good a method as looking at your own
00:09:56
dating history as number one, it's
00:09:58
mostly a reflection of how attractive
00:10:00
your photos are, which as we've covered
00:10:02
aren't perfect. And number two, there
00:10:04
are more men than women on the app and
00:10:06
app users are a minority of the
00:10:08
population. So, your percentile on an
00:10:10
app won't necessarily match a percentile
00:10:12
in the real world. And number three,
00:10:14
long-term and short-term dating
00:10:16
motivations are confounded on the apps.
00:10:18
So, it's hard to know whether someone
00:10:20
you match with sees you as datable or
00:10:22
just looking for something casual. So,
00:10:24
to review, if you want to get a ballpark
00:10:25
estimate of how your features really
00:10:27
look and how attractive you are to
00:10:28
others, you can look at a mirrored
00:10:30
version of yourself taken from a
00:10:32
distance, ask others for an objective
00:10:34
assessment, look at your dating history,
00:10:36
and look at your dating app options. If
00:10:38
you want us to analyze your face, well
00:10:40
then click the link in bio at.com.
