By Comson Cao
“Don’t judge a book by its cover,” or so we’ve been told. Many of us have been taught at a young age that it’s what’s inside that really matters and that we shouldn’t let a person’s physical appearance bias our perception of him or her. But that’s just a pleasant myth. Knowledge bestowed upon us for thousands of years from our ancestors demonstrates that the mind and body are linked together. Physiognomy, the art of judging people by what they look like, back all the way to the times of antiquity. This ultra-scientific field of study has been lost over time, however, and is practically dead in the modern day. Here at Binghamton Review, we are all fearless scholars who hold an absolute dedication towards the pursuit of knowledge and truth, so we make sure to utilize even lost ancient wisdom such as physiognomy. The torch of succession for carrying the immense responsibility of the high quality of our magazine currently befalls upon the editor-in-chief Arthur O’Sullivan. Yet, not once has anyone in the e-board ever carefully examined whether Arthur truly is the man for this position. Sure, we could just look at his actual credentials, but such a method lacks sophistry and sufficient predictive validity. In order to ensure the future of Binghamton Review remains bright, it is time to give Arthur his long overdue evaluation using the physiognomy check.
Firstably, using the simple eye color chart, it’s clear that Arthur has C40s, which corresponds to “officers, officials, and diplomats” (Marshall, 1996; Philipp et al., 2023). This isn’t necessarily bad—far from it, and would normally suffice for the position of editor-in-chief at any other magazine, but it is not enough for Binghamton Review. For Arthur to be qualified, he would need to have A10s, which corresponds to “men destined to define eras and change history, who will be remembered for millenia to come,” but he comes several levels short of this. Another thing to consider is that Arthur’s jawline isn’t sharp enough for him to be considered worthy of being a chad, despite him being in fairly healthy shape. This suggests that he doesn’t engage in mewing enough, an orthodontic technique known to help sharpen the jawline (Cresci, 2019). This lack of effort in maintaining an attractive appearance signals low commitment, which goes against the psychology necessary for being an editor-in-chief. Moreover, Arthur lacks hunter eyes, which are narrow deep-set eyes resembling that of top predators in nature, suggesting he does not have the characteristics of an alpha male, putting his suitability for a leadership position into question (Sharma, 2019). To be fair to him, he does have slightly pointed—almost elfish—ears, which predicts being perceptive, intelligent, and ambitious (Sharma, 2023). This is good as it lends credibility to his position. One caveat though is that another characteristic of leadership that we must consider is the attitude towards the followers. Ideally, to be the editor-in-chief of a magazine as great as ours, one should be agreeable and compassionate, as the flip side of that would be a high-functioning psychopath who will almost certainly demonstrate dictatorial tendencies if given power. This is where Arthur seemingly falls short. The clearest sign of this is the indentation above his nose, which correlates with untrustworthiness the deeper it is (Reith, 2015). Taken together, this suggests that Arthur is high in machiavellianism, with his main priority being self-interest through acquiring power without any regard to morality. In reality though, we don’t have to speculate about any of this, as it’s already a well-known fact among members of Binghamton Review that Arthur takes great pride in often disregarding the outcomes of popular votes on cover pages for the magazine. Not only that, but he also has a history of covering up things that make him look bad. For example, here’s a deleted tweet he had made after he got his 23andme results back (O’Sullivan, 2023):
Arthur deleted this, not wishing for it to hurt his position as editor-in-chief of Binghamton Review, instead of coming out clean to his e-board and honorably stepping down. This is clearly an effort to maintain power, consistent with the theory that he is high in machiavellianism. This paints a rather concerning picture for our beloved editor-in-chief.
Based on all the lines of evidence presented, it is safe to conclude that Arthur O’Sullivan does not pass the physiognomy check. It would appear (haha get it) that he is unfit for the position as editor-in-chief of our glorious magazine, yet despite this, he has oversaw its production for all this time. However, it’s finally time that this issue is brought to light and given the attention that it deserves. If only the e-board was more well-versed in physiognomy, one of the most reliable ways of evaluating people as I have demonstrated, they might have been able to prevent this from happening. Drastic measures must be taken to protect the long-standing democratic tradition of Binghamton Review, or else it will be undoubtedly over for the last refuge of scholars. However, perhaps it is already too late, in which case, Binghamton Review has truly fallen, and millions must write.