Mewing, Hardmaxxing, and Other Lies the Internet Sold You: The Softmaxx Products That Actually Work

Somewhere between 2022 and 2024, the internet decided that looking better required either a surgeon's scalpel or a 47-step routine involving a gua sha stone, a red light therapy mask, and something called 'mewing' - which is just tongue posture, and I cannot stress this enough, is not going to restructure your mandible. I know this because I spent an embarrassing amount of time in those corners of the internet and came out the other side with better skin, a cheaper shaving habit, and a fairly withering view of the whole enterprise.

Here's what actually happened: I stripped out the cope, kept the things with evidence behind them, and quietly got better-looking at 42 than I was at 32. Not because of jawline optimisation. Because of SPF, a decent retinol, a cleanser that doesn't strip my face, and a razor that costs less than a pint. The looksmaxxing industrial complex will sell you the fantasy of a PSL point gained through supplements and cold plunges. I'm offering you the considerably less dramatic reality: a handful of products under £100 total, used consistently, that actually move the needle.

What follows is my honest softmaxx stack - the gear I actually use, priced what it actually costs, with the results it actually delivers. I've also included one jade roller, because it's important to know what cope looks like from the inside.

The Looksmaxxing Industrial Complex (And Why Most Of It Is Cope)

Let me be precise about what I mean by cope, because the word gets thrown around the looksmaxxing forums with all the rigour of a horoscope. In this context: cope is any product, practice, or belief system that gives the user the *feeling* of optimisation without the actual output. The jade roller industry is cope. The 'testosterone-boosting' supplement stack is cope. Mewing - pressing your tongue to the roof of your mouth to supposedly restructure your facial bones as an adult - is cope with a subreddit.

What isn't cope: SPF, retinoids, a non-stripping cleanser, and shaving without a five-blade system designed to maximise your subscription spend. These things have clinical literature behind them. They are, in the grading language of the looksmaxxing community, actual softmaxx - the kind of low-drama improvement that adds a point without requiring you to explain your bone-smashing journey to your GP.

The tell for cope products is almost always the mechanism claim. 'Activates collagen production' - with what evidence, at what concentration, verified by whom? 'Reduces pore size' - does the ingredient actually do that, or is it just a moisturiser with a marketing line? 'Jawline definition' - I'm sorry, is this a topical cream or a surgeon? When the mechanism is vague and the before/after is a lighting change, you're being sold a story. I'm in advertising. I know the brief.

The 90/10 rule I work by: 90% of what gets discussed in looksmaxxing spaces is either irrelevant, unverified, or actively counterproductive (looking at you, aggressive exfoliation every day because more must be better). The remaining 10% is just good skincare practice that dermatologists have been recommending for two decades, now rebranded for an audience that needed permission to care about their face.

Let's talk about the 10%.

---

The Actual Softmaxx Stack: What Moves The Needle

The hierarchy of interventions that actually improve male appearance, in descending order of evidence and impact:

1. Sun protection (daily SPF) - prevents photoageing, the single largest driver of 'looking older than you are'

2. Retinoids - the only topical actives with decades of clinical evidence for skin cell turnover and texture improvement

3. Niacinamide - sebum regulation, pore appearance, skin tone; backed, affordable, boring in the best way

4. A cleanser that doesn't strip your barrier - sounds obvious, isn't for most men

5. Not destroying your skin with a five-blade cartridge every morning - single blade, less trauma, fewer ingrowns

6. Teeth and hair - peripheral wins that disproportionately affect how people read your face

That's it. That's the whole stack. Anyone selling you something outside this list needs to explain the mechanism with specificity before you hand over money.

---

SPF: The Single Most Evidence-Backed Anti-Ageing Move You're Not Making

EltaMD UV Clear SPF 46

Best for: Daily wear on oily to combination skin, acne-prone types, anyone who wants the most-recommended sunscreen in every dermatologist's office without looking like they've applied tile grout.

Why it leads the stack: The clinical literature on photoageing is not a debate. UV exposure is the primary driver of visible skin ageing - more than stress, more than sleep, more than anything being sold on a looksmaxxing TikTok. Daily SPF applied correctly is the highest-return investment in your face, and EltaMD UV Clear is the version I actually use because it doesn't feel like wearing a cast.

The formula runs 9% zinc oxide - meaningful mineral protection without the white cast that makes most mineral SPFs unwearable on darker skin tones. The 5% niacinamide is genuinely functional at that concentration: sebum regulation and redness reduction become visible around weeks four to six with consistent use. The finish is matte, which means it doubles as a morning primer if you're trying to simplify the routine.

Performance: On oily or combination skin this is a standout - no midday shine, no pilling under moisturiser, no smell. On dry skin it can read slightly flat; La Roche-Posay Anthelios or CeraVe AM will suit you better there. The UVA filtration is very good but marginally behind newer filter systems like Mexoryl 400 if you're spending serious time in high-UV environments - though for a British man using this on a London commute, that's a non-issue dressed as a caveat.

The 48ml tube goes faster than you'd expect if you're actually applying the correct amount (a quarter teaspoon, not the performative smear most of us do while pretending we're doing SPF). Budget for two tubes over a British summer.

Price: Mid-range, roughly £28-32 depending on where you buy. That's expensive for a sunscreen but defensible as a two-in-one SPF-plus-niacinamide step that replaces a separate serum.

> Mariana's Take: There is a specific look that men who use daily SPF get in their late thirties and forties - where their skin doesn't look 'done' but it looks maintained. That's EltaMD territory. The men I know who use it consistently stopped looking like they were ageing in real time. That's not a small thing.

---

Retinol and Niacinamide: The Two Actives Worth Caring About (And The Cheapest Way To Get Them)

The Ordinary Retinol 0.5% in Squalane

Best for: Anyone past the beginner stage who wants measurable skin texture improvement and isn't paying SkinCeuticals prices for the exact same concentration.

What it does: Retinol is one of the most-studied topical actives in dermatology. At 0.5%, you're at the threshold where cell turnover acceleration becomes genuinely visible - smoother texture, reduced fine lines, improved tone over an eight to twelve week consistent-use window. The Ordinary's version delivers that for under £6 for a 30ml bottle.

The squalane base is the right call - non-comedogenic, non-stripping, tolerant of other actives. SkinCeuticals Retinol 0.5 costs roughly £85 for the same active percentage. The Ordinary costs £5.90. I'm not suggesting they're identical products - encapsulation, stability, and delivery systems differ - but for most people's faces, the gap in outcome is not £79 wide.

Honest caveats: The purge period is real. Weeks two to four can produce temporary breakouts or texture changes as cellular turnover accelerates. This is not the product ruining your skin; it's the product working. It's also not for retinoid beginners - start at 0.2% or a retinyl palmitate formula first. Store it in a cool, dark place; the formula is vulnerable to oxidation in a way that encapsulated versions aren't.

Price: Under £6, lasts four to five months at three applications per week. The value calculation isn't interesting because it's so obvious.

The Ordinary Niacinamide 10% + Zinc 1%

Best for: Anyone dealing with enlarged pores, oiliness, or uneven skin tone who doesn't want to pay £54 for a bottle of Paula's Choice to get the same active at the same concentration.

The mechanism here is genuinely well-supported: niacinamide at 10% is at the clinical ceiling for sebum regulation and pore-size reduction. The zinc assists with acne-prone skin. The Ordinary version is fragrance-free, silicone-free, and contains no meaningful filler ingredients. Results on oiliness and visible pore size typically emerge by weeks four to six.

Two honest cons: 10% niacinamide can cause temporary flushing in actives-naive skin, so ease in. And the watery texture pills under moisturiser if you don't give it a 60-second absorption window before layering - annoying but manageable.

Price: Under £6 for 30ml. Undercuts the Paula's Choice equivalent by approximately £48 per bottle. If you're buying the Paula's Choice version, I'm not judging you - but I am asking what you're paying for.

CeraVe PM Facial Moisturizing Lotion

Best for: The 11pm version of you who wants to apply something and go to sleep, not embark on a twelve-step layering routine.

Four percent niacinamide explicitly on the label (no proprietary-blend obscurantism where you've no idea what's actually in there), hyaluronic acid, ceramides. Absorbs in under 60 seconds and leaves no greasy morning residue. Fragrance-free and non-comedogenic, which is rare at any price point and essentially unheard of at this one.

For dry skin, the lightweight formula undersells - you'll want something richer. For everyone else, this is a no-drama overnight moisturiser that quietly does its job without requiring you to justify it to anyone, including yourself.

Price: Under £12 for a bottle that will outlast your interest in this article.

---

The Cleanser Problem: Why Men Overcomplicate The Easiest Step

CeraVe Hydrating Facial Cleanser

Best for: Everyone, but particularly the men who are currently using a bar of soap on their face and wondering why their skin is reactive.

Here's the thing about cleansers that the skincare industry doesn't particularly want you to internalise: their job is to remove dirt, oil, and yesterday's SPF without disrupting your skin barrier. That's it. The cleanser is not the active step. It's the foundation for the active steps.

CeraVe Hydrating Facial Cleanser does exactly that - micellar action that cleans without stripping, ceramides that support barrier function, no fragrance, no nonsense. Dermatologist-tested with consistent batch quality, which matters more than it sounds if you've ever bought a budget cleanser that was fine for two months and then inexplicably started breaking you out.

The honest cons: the minimal lather will feel psychologically unsatisfying if you've been trained by foaming cleansers to equate foam with clean. That's a conditioning problem, not a product problem. It also does nothing active - no acne treatment, no brightening, no texture improvement. That's by design. Stop asking your cleanser to do everything.

Price: Under £10 for the large pump bottle, which at one to two applications daily will last two to three months. One of the best per-wash costs in facial cleansing.

> Mariana's Take: The cleanser shift is underrated. When men switch from a stripping foaming wash to something like this, the 'tired but fine' look tends to improve noticeably within a few weeks - the skin just reads calmer. It's not dramatic, but it's real.

---

The Razor Grift: How Gillette Turned A 10p Blade Into A Subscription

Let me put some numbers on the table, because this particular grift is best understood financially.

A Gillette Fusion5 cartridge costs approximately £3.50-4.00 per replacement head, with the average man using one to two per month. That's £42-96 per year on blades. The multi-blade system was patented and marketed as superior, and in certain respects it is - it's more forgiving of terrible technique. But 'forgiving of terrible technique' is not the same as 'better for your face.' Multiple blades passing over the same patch of skin increases follicle trauma, ingrown hair frequency, and razor bump occurrence - especially relevant for curly or coarse hair types.

Merkur 34C Safety Razor

Best for: Anyone tired of paying cartridge prices and willing to invest two to four weeks learning a technique that will then cost them almost nothing forever.

The 34C is the standard-bearer for beginner safety razors - closed-comb geometry that's forgiving enough to learn on without being so gentle it's useless. The 79g chrome zinc alloy construction is weighted to let the head do the work (the main technique shift from cartridge: use zero pressure). This razor will outlive every plastic-handled cartridge system you've ever owned.

Performance: The close shave is genuinely comparable to a well-used cartridge once technique is dialled in, with meaningfully fewer ingrown hairs. The single-blade pass just causes less trauma. The 84mm handle is on the shorter side - larger hands may find it slightly awkward, in which case the Edwin Jagger DE89 with its longer handle is the standard alternative.

Price: Around £30-35 for the razor itself. Paired with Astra blades, your ongoing shave cost drops to approximately £6-12 per year. The break-even versus a Fusion5 habit is roughly three to four months.

Astra Superior Platinum Double Edge Blades

Best for: The 34C above, or any compatible double edge safety razor. Not a standalone purchase.

Blade selection within double edge shaving is its own rabbit hole - there are forums, there are spreadsheets, there are men who have tested 40 different blades with the diligence of a clinical trial. I respect this but I will not be joining them.

Astra Platinums sit in the practical sweet spot: sharper than Derby (the common entry-level recommendation), smoother than Feather (which is sharp enough to be genuinely unforgiving for beginners), and manufactured under Gillette's quality control processes - which means batch consistency that cheaper unbranded blades don't guarantee.

Cost per shave: £0.02-£0.04. Each blade runs three to five shaves. A 100-blade pack costs around £8-10. I genuinely don't know how to make the economics more obvious.

Honest caveat: The two to three week learning curve is real and involves probable nicks. This is not the product for someone who needs to look presentable tomorrow and has never held a safety razor. It's a medium-term investment in a better and dramatically cheaper shave.

---

Teeth, Hair, and Under-Eyes: The Peripheral Wins That Add Up

Oral-B iO Series 9 Electric Toothbrush

Best for: Anyone who's been told they brush too hard, anyone with gum recession they'd prefer to stop accelerating, anyone who wants to stop hearing about it from their dentist.

I'm including this because teeth are genuinely underweighted in grooming discourse. Looksmaxxing TikTok is obsessed with jawline and skin and barely mentions the fact that yellowed or visibly compromised teeth register immediately and negatively in social reads. The iO Series 9's clinical data is real - 100% more plaque removal versus manual is backed by broad dental literature on oscillating-rotating mechanisms. The pressure sensor with colour feedback is the feature that actually changes behaviour: most people press too hard and are creating micro-damage they won't see for a decade.

Honest caveat: The Series 9 costs £150-220 and the Series 4 at around £70 uses the same core technology. The AI display and coaching features are genuinely useful for about six weeks, after which you've either corrected your habits or you haven't. The seven cleaning modes includes five you'll use a combined total of zero times. The replacement head cost (£10-15 per quarter) is worth knowing upfront.

Price: Premium. Defensible. Buy the Series 4 if you're price-sensitive and get 90% of the outcome.

Nizoral A-D Anti-Dandruff Shampoo

Best for: Anyone with persistent dandruff that 'moisturising' shampoos haven't fixed, and anyone interested in the hair retention angle - with appropriate scepticism about the evidence.

Most dandruff shampoos treat the symptom. Nizoral treats the cause. The 1% ketoconazole directly targets Malassezia yeast, which is the actual driver of most persistent seborrheic dandruff. Visible flake reduction typically within two to four weeks of twice-weekly use. At roughly £10 for a bottle that lasts months on that schedule, it makes most £40 'premium' dandruff shampoos look like expensive soap.

The hair retention claim - based on a peer-reviewed study suggesting comparable hair shaft diameter improvement to low-dose minoxidil - is the kind of finding that gets you excited before you notice it's from 1998 and hasn't been robustly replicated. Plausible mechanism, limited evidence. Use it for the dandruff. Treat any hair benefit as a bonus you can't bank on.

Price: Under £10. Clinical gel texture with zero premium sensory experience. Doesn't matter.

The Ordinary Caffeine Solution 5% + EGCG

Best for: Men with vascular under-eye puffiness - the kind that's worse in the morning and improves throughout the day. Not for genetic pigmentation circles, which are a different mechanism entirely.

Under-eye puffiness reads as fatigue even when you're not fatigued, and it's one of those peripheral wins that disproportionately affects how people read your face. The Ordinary's 5% caffeine concentration is among the highest available in a non-prescription topical - fully disclosed, unlike the mystery blends in most eye creams from brands charging five times as much.

For oedema-type puffiness, the vascular mechanism is legitimate: caffeine causes vasoconstriction, reduces fluid pooling, visible improvement within 15-20 minutes of application. Results are temporary and cumulative - this requires daily use to maintain.

Honest limitation: If your dark circles are pigmentation-based (brown tone, consistent regardless of sleep, potentially genetic), this is cope at any price. The mechanism doesn't address pigmentation. Look at vitamin C or accept that lighting is not always your enemy.

Price: Under £7. Undercuts Kiehl's, Clinique, and RoC alternatives by three to five times with comparable or superior active concentration.

---

The Jade Roller Section (Or: A Brief Taxonomy of Cope)

Herbivore Botanicals Jade Facial Roller

Best for: Reducing morning facial puffiness if used refrigerated, and providing a five-minute morning ritual that improves serum absorption through mechanical pressure. That is the entire list.

I'm including the jade roller because the guide would be dishonest without it - it's the paradigmatic softmaxx cope product, and understanding *why* it's cope teaches you to recognise the pattern in the next thing you're about to buy.

Here's the actual situation: jade rolling does one thing that is real and measurable. If you refrigerate the roller and use it on a puffy morning face, the cool stone causes vasoconstriction that reduces puffiness for 20-40 minutes. That mechanism is genuine. The rest of the claimed benefits - lymphatic drainage, facial slimming, 'energy work' - are not supported by clinical evidence and range from implausible to simply invented.

The Herbivore version is a good jade roller. The jade is genuine nephrite (verifiable by uneven surface temperature, if you care), the axle doesn't wobble, the build quality is real. It's also about £35-40, and a £12 Amazon alternative with genuine jade would perform identically in terms of the actual mechanism.

You're paying the Herbivore brand aesthetic tax. Which is fine if aesthetics on your bathroom shelf matter to you. Just be clear that's what you're paying for.

The gua sha comparison: Gua sha - the flat stone scraping technique - offers superior lymphatic and fascia-release benefit for anyone willing to spend fifteen minutes learning the technique. If you're committed to the stone ritual, gua sha is the less-cope version. I still wouldn't list it ahead of SPF, retinol, or a decent cleanser, but the hierarchy matters.

Score: 58/100. A real product that does a real but minor and temporary thing, priced above its function, marketed in a way that vastly overstates its mechanism. This is what cope looks like with good branding.

---

Jamie's Verdict: The Honest Softmaxx Stack For Under £100/Year

Here's the actual stack, with actual annual costs:

• EltaMD UV Clear SPF 46 - roughly £65-70/year (two tubes, used correctly) - the most important purchase on this list
• The Ordinary Retinol 0.5% in Squalane - roughly £14-18/year (three applications per week) - same active as the £85 version
• The Ordinary Niacinamide 10% + Zinc 1% - roughly £14-18/year - daily use, same clinical ceiling as the expensive alternatives
• CeraVe Hydrating Facial Cleanser - roughly £18-20/year (large pump bottle) - the foundation everything else sits on
• CeraVe PM Facial Moisturizing Lotion - roughly £20-24/year - overnight niacinamide and ceramides without the branding markup
• Merkur 34C + Astra Blades - £30-35 one-off hardware, £8-10/year in blades - breaks even on Fusion5 cartridges in four months

The skincare portion - SPF, retinol, niacinamide, cleanser, moisturiser - runs approximately £130-150 in year one (when you're buying the EltaMD twice and building the stack), then drops to under £100/year once you're in the rhythm. The razor is a separate one-off investment that pays back immediately.

For the peripheral wins: Nizoral at £10 if you have dandruff, Caffeine Solution at £7 if you have vascular under-eye puffiness, and a decent electric toothbrush - iO Series 4 at £70 if your dentist keeps mentioning things.

The jade roller: genuinely optional, functionally replaceable by briefly pressing a cold spoon under your eyes, priced at the brand premium. Buy it if the ritual matters to you. Don't buy it thinking it's optimisation.

None of this is as interesting as a before-and-after TikTok where someone discovers a £200 LED mask. But your skin at 45 will be considerably more interested in the SPF you wore at 35 than in anything the algorithm sold you during a late Tuesday night spiral. Which is, if I'm being precise about it, the whole thesis.