OK Cupid, the dating website, used to have a blog that wrote on topics relevant to data analysis from their site (much of which was repurposed in the book "Dataclysm" by Christian Rudder, one of OKC's principals).
One of the topics refers just to this phenomenon. OKC data scientists found that among people who had similar attractiveness ratings (i.e., the hidden average rating you got on your looks by other users who rated you), people whose attractiveness was higher variance got many many more private messages.
In other words: imagine two people who were rated, on average, a 3/5. One way to achieve this is by always being rated 3, for 0 variance. Another way to achieve this is to be rated 50% 1, and 50% 5; high variance. The person who was half 1s and half 5s would get many more messages than the "straight 3".
OKC's blog theorized that this is because while half of the people rating the high variance person were not at all likely to reach out to them, the other half see the high variance peraon as very desirable. On the other hand, everyone sees the straight 3 as a straight 3, and are less motivated to message them.
The advice given by OKC was just like your branding advice: play up your divisive or unique characteristics, rather than downplay them. The people who like big noses (or lots of tattoos or whatever) are looking for you!
I think we also underestimate how much we value uniqueness, and therefore appreciate and admire people who can be confident despite conventionally undesirable differences. The confidence passes both a fitness test, and a test of unique value, by demonstrating that a handicap for most people, doesn’t impede them in anyway way. Those people also make us more comfortable about our own differences or insecurities.
OK Cupid, the dating website, used to have a blog that wrote on topics relevant to data analysis from their site (much of which was repurposed in the book "Dataclysm" by Christian Rudder, one of OKC's principals).
One of the topics refers just to this phenomenon. OKC data scientists found that among people who had similar attractiveness ratings (i.e., the hidden average rating you got on your looks by other users who rated you), people whose attractiveness was higher variance got many many more private messages.
In other words: imagine two people who were rated, on average, a 3/5. One way to achieve this is by always being rated 3, for 0 variance. Another way to achieve this is to be rated 50% 1, and 50% 5; high variance. The person who was half 1s and half 5s would get many more messages than the "straight 3".
OKC's blog theorized that this is because while half of the people rating the high variance person were not at all likely to reach out to them, the other half see the high variance peraon as very desirable. On the other hand, everyone sees the straight 3 as a straight 3, and are less motivated to message them.
The advice given by OKC was just like your branding advice: play up your divisive or unique characteristics, rather than downplay them. The people who like big noses (or lots of tattoos or whatever) are looking for you!