The truth about the 1-10 scale.

[JackBauer24]

There is no 1-10. When there was a thread asking guys to show a picture of a 10, guys were disagreeing all over the place. In fact, and maybe this is because I'm pickier than most guys here, I didn't see one girl I would date or have sex with, let alone give them a 10.

Everyone has different tastes. For example, I don't like non-white women, so even the Halle Berry's or Beyonce's of the world would rate low in my book because of a complete lack of physical attraction. Other guys in here masturbate to either or both of them.

I also don't like Natalie Portman, who is considered "really hot" or a "10" to a lot of guys on this site and guys in general. To me, she is average looking, lack of curves, plain face.

Angelina Jolie, who a lot of guys in here probably masturbate to, is ugly in my book. She has a face that disgusts me and her misadventures in the media make her even more disgusting...kissing her brother, raising orphans all over the world, you get the idea.

The only thing that most guys can agree on is who is really ugly. Most guys here don't like fat or chubby girls or girls that aren't feminine looking.

http://s213.photobucket.com/albums/cc305/Beckett20and7/?action=view&current=ugly1.jpg

Most guys here would give the girl on the left somewhere between a 0-4 because of her manly looking face and weight problem. Some guy with a fat fetish might want to have sex with her and some guy that doesn't care about her looks or for some reason has beer goggle vision might go out with her, but you ask most guys, and she's ugly. She looks like if Eddie Van Halen had a daughter he went to buffets and bars with. Outside of girls like her, guys can't agree on what looks good and what doesn't.

The whole point is to get the girls YOU want. It isn't a competition to see how many girls you can have sex with. It's about having sex with the girls you want to have sex with.

And as long as the girl don't consider you really ugly, you have a chance to get her.

 

[bigjohnson]

To a large degree I agree with the sentiment that the real scale is 0-1, meaning she's hot enough or she's not. Against that I have to place the fact that some girls are more attractive that others and I will put up with a little more or put forth more effort for those.

I used to use a 0-3 scale where each level was essentially a marker indicating about how much effort I would put out, with 0 being no-go no-way and 3 being a level where I would expend significant effort. That actually worked OK but in the end I think all such scales are BS.

 

[navyseal2101]

I didn't see one girl I would date or have sex with, let alone give them a 10.

Out of ALL of those girls you didn't see ANY you would have sex with. That isn't standards, your gay.

 

[JackBauer24]

For me, it's "no" "maybe" and "yes." No speaks for itself...not even if she had the best personality in the world. Yes also speaks for itself. As long as she has a decent personality, I'm going to want to date and/or have sex with her based on her looks. Maybe is when I have no strong opinion on the girl's looks, in which case, if she is a nice person and has a nice personality, her looks are good enough.

 

[Maxtro]

I like the 1-10 scale. But yes every persons scale is different. What is a 10 to me most likely will not be a 10 to somebody else. But if I say that so and sol is an 8 most people will get the idea that she is fairly attractive.

 

[bigjohnson]

Mine was similar but I've given up what I consider a lost cause in trying to apply a single number to something this complex. My 0-3 scale was essentially no, maybe, probably, yes. Maybe was she would have to do the work and probably was I would do some but not a lot. In the end it's all BS shorthand that doesn't do the subject matter justice.

 

[JackBauer24]

To address navyseal2101, most of those women were porn stars or women that the guy posting had never met. I never got into the whole porn star thing. They are women you don't see in real life unless they're a stripper at the local strip club or work at hooters or something. I don't like the slutty look.

 

[iqqi]

BOOYAH

read the thread in my sig.

 

[mahon83050]

While I will agree rating a girl automatically puts her on a pedestal, the scale is somewhat accurate. Basically attractiveness all comes down to balance and symmetry. None would ever call Cindy Crawford ugly?



BTW, is there anyway to attach a photo to this site.

For example a picture from myspace or facebook.

 

[Maxtro]

BTW, is there anyway to attach a photo to this site.

For example a picture from myspace or facebook.

You have to link it from an off-site location. Click the little icon that looks like the earth with a chain link in front of it.

 

[JackBauer24]

"None would ever call Cindy Crawford ugly?"

I personally wouldn't, but you'll find guys that would, the same way I think Angelina Jolie's ugly.

 

[mahon83050]

bump

 

[Luveno]

Beauty is eye-catching, as is ugliness.

My scale is 1-10.

5 is average, meaning she would not catch my eye at all in a crowd.

6-10 = there's something about them physically that makes them stand out of a crowd in a positive way.

0-4 = there's something about their physical appearance that is negatively eye-catching.

If anyone is below 5 they do not get any of my consideration.

 

[mahon83050]

Beauty is eye-catching, as is ugliness.

My scale is 1-10.

5 is average, meaning she would not catch my eye at all in a crowd.

6-10 = there's something about them physically that makes them stand out of a crowd in a positive way.

0-4 = there's something about their physical appearance that is negatively eye-catching.

If anyone is below 5 they do not get any of my consideration.

Like I have stated earlier:

Girls fall into 4 categories:

Unattractive
Average
Attractive
Very Attractive

I think MOST WOMEN fall into the category of Average or Attractive. VERY FEW women are Unattractive or Very Attractive.

 

[JackBauer24]

Mahon and everyone else, what would you consider the girl in the link on my first post? I'm sure I could find better examples, but she's someone, to me, that if you took a poll on the website, 99% would consider her ugly or unattractive.

 

[mahon83050]

probably ugly since she looks like a man, but I think you would need a better pic.

How about this one?

I think the girl on the left is quite cute, not VERY ATTRACTIVE, but ATTRACTIVE. The girl on the right is leaning more towards UNATTRACTIVE, NOT AVERAGE

http://simmons.facebook.com/photo.php?pid=30636635&op=1&view=all&subj=8002178&id=8003166

I also would think a majority of men would find the girl on the left above average and the girl on the right below average. However, maybe it just me being egocentric again and thinking every person also sees what I see.

 

[bigjohnson]

The big one is fat, not ugly. There is a difference. Her face is just average from the (crappy) picture.

In the second image the Asian chick is face-beat-with-a-frying-pan ugly as hell. The otherone is probably average but it's a very bad picture.

 

[JackBauer24]

"I also would think a majority of men would find the girl on the left above average and the girl on the right below average. However, maybe it just me being egocentric again and thinking every person also sees what I see."

Correct. The asian girl is a better example than mine of a girl that would be ugly to most and most would take the girl on the left if they had to choose. Personally, the girl on the left would pass my looks test, nothing great, but pretty enough, and it would depend on her personality whether or not she was dating material. The asian girl I wouldn't date or have sex with if my life depended on it. But my point is, while you and I think the girl on the left is above average, you'll find guys that would say she's "boring looking" or "average" or a "5" or however you want to put it, and you'll also find guys that think she's really hot. All depends on taste.

 

[mahon83050]

"I also would think a majority of men would find the girl on the left above average and the girl on the right below average. However, maybe it just me being egocentric again and thinking every person also sees what I see."

Correct. The asian girl is a better example than mine of a girl that would be ugly to most and most would take the girl on the left if they had to choose. Personally, the girl on the left would pass my looks test, nothing great, but pretty enough, and it would depend on her personality whether or not she was dating material. The asian girl I wouldn't date or have sex with if my life depended on it. But my point is, while you and I think the girl on the left is above average, you'll find guys that would say she's "boring looking" or "average" or a "5" or however you want to put it, and you'll also find guys that think she's really hot. All depends on taste.

You are right. I guess it is true, most people can agree on who is ugly and who is stunning looking, but everything else is a gray area.

Yes, the Asian girl looks like that creature who was sitting next to Lando when he was flying the Millenium Falcom trying to destroy the Death Star in Return of the Jedi.

Here is another one of her (the cute one)

http://simmons.facebook.com/photo.php?pid=30636495&id=8003166

This girl is about a 7.5-8 in my book. I guess my looks scale is not that picky. If I find a girl cute, but not smoking hot, she goes in that looks range.

She used to work in the library where I went to grad school, although I personally do not know her (met her once though). I know of atleast one guy who thought she was gorgeous. She was single too I think.

Alls I am asking for is a girl on this level of attractiveness, is that so hard to ask for? haha

 

[JackBauer24]

"Alls I am asking for is a girl on this level of attractiveness, is that so hard to ask for? haha"

Not at all, man. She looks even better in the second picture. Has kind of a Winona Ryder thing going on.

Glad to see I'm not the only guy that thinks this way. She doesn't have big boobs and probably doesn't have a big ass, but she doesn't need it. She's pretty and probably smart and nice.