Are the differences between a female 5/10 & 6/10 subtle to you, or quite large jump in attractiveness?

[Cheeky_James]

It’s prime era Salma Hayek for me.

 

[Identikit_Radiohead]

Attractiveness is relative and tied to constraints of access. If you were confined to a limited environment,( like say just within your neighbourhood or small town), then the best looking girl in town… is the 10 no?

No, because ugliness is global. A 300lbs Landwhale will disgust you, even if that's all that's available in your locale. The landwhale with the longest hair doesn't become a "10" if all the others have short hair. She's still a 2/10 > 1/10.

Evolution will take tens of thousands of years. Your ancestors preferred fit, slim, active young women who could forage for berries and food, collect crops, walk 2 miles to a water well/source and 2 miles back each day. Thats why today most of us prefer that slim-fit look/build and youthful mothers means healthier babies with less chance of defects.

People like you a weird man.

 

[Identikit_Radiohead]

You guys should use the same grading scale video game reviewers use: 10 = masterpiece, 9 = amazing, 8 = great, 7 = good, and 6 = okay. Anything below 6 is unplayable.

A "5" Is an OK looking woman to me. She certainly won't be fat. This is a "5" to me:
She has some good traits and a few flaws that stop her from being a Smoke Siren, Supermodel or Model, that's what makes average. She will be rated maybe a 6 with makeup.. but that's w/makeup enhancing her, not genetics.

4's are "meh" and need 5 months work in a gym and a makeover, or otherwise a bit genetically below average. I wouldn't look twice at a 4 unless she was skinny and put in effort to have a nice personality. 3's and below are the hideous chicks; sloppy, fat, obese, butch, manly. Women like this... I would rate her a 2/10, if not a 1.5/10:

She's repulsive. I'd be annoyed if she hit on me. Like wtf, I'm a 5/10 and healthy weighted, you're obese and a 2/10 at best. Is what i would think.
------
But anyway, each guys has his own ranking system. I notice especially among you younger American guys, you consider 5's to be fat/ugly chicks, I do not.

Maybe you see 5's as fat/ugly because it was the "norm" for you growing up? For me, growing up in the 80's and 90's in the UK It wasn't. Rarely you would see a fat young woman attend college/university when I was a young man of drinking age attending college in the mid-late 1990's.

 

[Cheeky_James]

No, because ugliness is global. A 300lbs Landwhale will disgust you, even if that's all that's available in your locale. The landwhale with the longest hair doesn't become a "10" if all the others have short hair. She's still a 2/10 > 1/10.

Evolution will take tens of thousands of years. Your ancestors preferred fit, slim, active young women who could forage for berries and food, collect crops, walk 2 miles to a water well/source and 2 miles back each day. Thats why today most of us prefer that slim-fit look/build and youthful mothers means healthier babies with less chance of defects.

People like you a weird man.

I never said the 300lb landwhale becomes a 10.
I meant attractiveness is relative , it’s subjective and there is bias , variance and distortion in any’ beauty scale.’

Attractiveness has ties to culture.
And time period. (The ideal body shape has changed over time ) There’s a lot of aspects to it being ‘relative.’

Even your 5 could maybe be a 6 you say
So there’s relative movement already. Right there.
Other examples of variance
-Should chicks be rated looking their best , or most natural ?
-If she was a different ethnicity would you still rate her the same..? black, Asian etc

re the title of the post - a 1 ‘point’ difference is 10% increase.
So it should be subtle per the % increase ..
not a ‘ large jump’ for anyone using the scale.
So is it a redundant question in the title or what.

I’d like to see your individual examples for 6,7,8,9,10 btw .just out of curiousity. I find it hard to grade point-to -point personally there’s so many factors .