Wheat Waffle's Attraction Scale

From Incel Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Wheat Waffles' Three Tier Theory[edit | edit source]

Wheat Waffles' Three Tier Theory divides men into three coarse tiers: Chads, Normies, and Subfives. This tier system is proposed in his video[1] as an alternative to the Decile scale, due to the fact that females are more likely to inflate the score by 2-3 points for "virtue signaling" (Platitude) and threat avoidance purposes (AKA offensiveness avoidance)[2]. The concept of male-female rating deviations has ben reaffirmed though aggregation of multiple rating data.[3] some data can be considered based on Indicator of interest and Fuck-off signals.

The table below shows typical female reactions to a male in each tier:[4]

Chads Normies "SUBFIVE"
Emotion (Russell)[5] High Arousal and Positive Valence Low Arousal and Positive Valence, or Neutral Valence High Arousal, Negative or Neutral Valence
Emotion(Bradley)[6] Appetitive Motivation Low Arousal, Neutral Valence/Pleasure Defensive Motivation
Example Happy, Surprised Neutral, Relaxed Disgust, Anger
Physical Accentuation of Beauty (None) Misaligned Foot, Head or Naval
Psychological Female Desiring Skin Contact Soft Rejections (Friendzone) Arms Close to Body, Deterrence
Proxemics Close or Reducing Distance Stable Distance Far or Increased Distance
Traits Negatives as Positives (Halo effect) Meritocratic Positives as Negatives (Failo effect)
Complement "Attractive", "Hot" (present-oriented) "Fine", "Nothing Wrong" (past-oriented) "Some Day", "Find" (future-oriented)
Typology Type-Independent, "Gold Standard" Type-dependency and Niche Markets Universally identified as a unique category
Gymmaxxing Unnecessary Necessary Compensatory & Detremental
Height 6 foot 4 (1.95m) increases attractiveness 5 foot 11 (1.8m) as average 5 foot 6 (1.65m) decreases attractiveness
Matches per day 10+ 1-3 ~0
Attention Flows From Female to Male Flows From Male to Female Disassociation
Jawline Sharp increases attractiveness Round Weak decreases attractiveness
Eyes "Hunter Eyes" increases attractiveness Regular Eyes Protruding Eyes decreases attractiveness
Relationships Polygyny permitted, female-funded, memorable Needs commitment, "equal couples", forgetful Requires simping
Dating Easy With No Need For Game Flaking is Common, Game is Needed Direct Rejection, Game is Useless
Selection Elective (exposure) Competitive (amongst normies) Self-sabotage
Texting Leaves women frustrated if on read Gets left on read for hours Blocked & Filtered
Photos Mirror Selfies is Sufficient Photogenic Techniques Needed Completely Useless
High School Gets Dating Gossip, "Heart-Breaker" banter Self-Help & Platitudes, "The One" banter, Just Be First Exclusion from the conversation
Aged Chances Dominate since the 20s Can Statusmaxx in the 30s (Lucky if in the 40s)
Lookism "Nothing to worry" "You'll find someone" Insistence on Personality
Tactic Preference Online and Cold Approach Works Warm Approach > Cold Approach > Online Approaches Will Fail

Wheat Waffles' Exponential Attraction Theory[edit | edit source]

His other idea is that when the decile scale is correctly calibrated, the match rate becomes exponential. An equation can be derived from his scaling factor to give resolution to values. His Theory coincides with Tinder researches[7][8][9] However this rating system puts 4s, which should be by name "Subfive", to be a Normie.


  • The matching chances between the Tinder study and his opinions are 2 points short.
  • Female attention scales exponentially (2x as much) on decile-equivalent scale[10], but the population distribution is psuedo-linear (a shape between a uniform distribution[11] and a semi-circle[12]).
Decile 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 EQUATION
1 in X chance of matching (WW Estimate)[13] 3 5.5 10 19 34 61 110 200 370 3*(SQRT(10/3))^(9-RATING)
WW Naming Scheme Chad Chad Chadlite Normie (Brad) Normie (Tanner) Normie (Melvin) Subfive Subfive Subfive
Top Percentile of Attractiveness[14] 1.25th 2.5th 5th 10th 20th 30th 55th 65th 80th 10*SQRT(5/3)^(10-RATING)-14.5

Estimation, See 80/20 Rule

1 in X chance of matching (Tinder Experiment)[7] 11 19 35 63 110 210 380 680 1240 100/EXP((B1-52.3)/16.8)

Clarification on Proxemics and Skin Contact[edit | edit source]

The problem with his idea is that it is not quantifiable. In order to reduce this problem, Proxemics of skin contact[15] and social distance[16] can be used as an effective tool, and that their naming scheme can be matched well.

Proxemics Intimate Space Personal Space Social Space Public Space
Distance[16] under 1.5ft or 0.45m 1.5~4ft or 0.45~1.2m 4~12ft or 1.2~3.7m over 12ft or 3.7m
Roles (Hall)[15] Partner Friends & Family Acquaintance & Extended Family Strangers
Dunbar's Definition Ego

Support Clique (Kin)

Sympathy Group (Superfamily)

Affinity Group (Band)

Active Network (Clan)

Acquaintance (Megaband)

Memorable Faces (Tribe)
Casual Naming[17][18] Boyfriend

Intimate Friends or "OG"s

Anytime Friends or Close Friends

Party Friends or Good Friends

"Casual" Friends (Wedding/Funeral)

Frenemies or Acquaintances

"Faces" or Strangers
Allowed (Hall)[15] Palms, Arms, Face, Torso/Legs, or Chest/Groin Palms, Arms, or Face Palms N/A
Occasion (Hall)[15] N/A Torso/Legs Arms N/A
Never (Hall)[15] N/A Chest/Groin Face, Torso/Legs, or Chest/Groin Palms, Arms, Face, Torso/Legs, or Chest/Groin
Rating Estimation "Chad" "Normie" Upper "Subfive" Lower "Subfive"

Possible Critiques[edit | edit source]

The claim that "there is a leap in numbers" implies that either the theory of exponential attractiveness is not "smooth", or the accuracy of match rate measures decreases as it reaches the extremes, following a more sigmoidal pattern. The only other explanation that can explain this phenomenon is that either there is a "cap" (truncation) on maximum fitness.

See Also[edit | edit source]