Join John Adams, world renowned Intl Matchmaker, Monday nights 8:30 EST for Live Webcasts!
And check out Five Reasons why you should attend a FREE AFA Seminar! See locations and dates here.



View Active Topics       View Your Posts       Latest 100 Topics       FAQ Topics       Switch to Mobile


Rating Women Physically

Discuss dating, relationships and foreign women.

Moderators: fschmidt, jamesbond

Rating Women Physically

Postby drealm » July 15th, 2016, 10:27 pm

Most men use a 10 point scale, but I think this is overly complicated. What does each point of difference really count for?

I see 3 real points of difference:

1 (Normally 1-4) Ugly Women

Obese, old, disfigured, birth defects. They couldn't pay you to sleep with them. The act of sex feels disgusting. You're embarrassed to be around them.

2 (Normally 5-6) Average Women

Nothing good or bad stands out, they blend in to the crowd. Sex is adequate but not exciting. You get no bragging rights. You wouldn't pay for it but you'll take it free.

3 (Normally 7-10) Attractive Women

Rare genetic specimens. Sex between #2 and #3 could be the same, the difference is you get bragging rights with #3 and are willing to pay.
User avatar
drealm
Junior Poster
 
Posts: 935
Joined: November 10th, 2010, 6:23 pm




Check out our Dating Sites and HA International Romance Tours!



Re: Rating Women Physically

Postby Mr Natural » July 16th, 2016, 2:33 am

I've never really thought about it in terms of numbers, but I think most guys think a 7-8 is good looking, a 9 is awesome beautiful and there may not be any such thing as a 10. Although I've seen a few I might just have to give a 10. And overall I would definitely separate them into more than just 3 categories.
Everybody has a plan til they get punched in the mouth
Mike Tyson
User avatar
Mr Natural
Freshman Poster
 
Posts: 205
Joined: October 29th, 2013, 12:20 am
Location: North Dakota

Re: Rating Women Physically

Postby drealm » July 16th, 2016, 4:18 am

My point is there aren't big difference between a 7-8-9-10. Nobody would dump an 8 for 9. The main things that separate an average looking girl from a hot girl are bragging rights.
User avatar
drealm
Junior Poster
 
Posts: 935
Joined: November 10th, 2010, 6:23 pm

Re: Rating Women Physically

Postby Ghost » July 16th, 2016, 6:51 am

-----
Last edited by Ghost on October 22nd, 2016, 10:44 am, edited 1 time in total.
Ghost
Elite Upper Class Poster
 
Posts: 5749
Joined: April 17th, 2011, 2:23 am

Re: Rating Women Physically

Postby retiredfrank » July 16th, 2016, 7:14 am

Either you use a linear scale or a curved scale. If the latter, you need to define the curve, and that is way more mathematics than is appropriate for the average internet user. So a linear scale it has to be.

With a linear scale, each point from 1 to 10 has exactly 10% of the population. This is also called a percentile scale, as in top 10% of wealth. Using this linear or percentile scale, HB10s are actually common, just as wealth millionaires are common in the United States.

Attractive women ARE common. About 30% of girls aged 19 are pretty and the differences between very best of that 30% and the others are negligible. Differences increase with age because so many woman let themselves go. Also, makeup and Photoshop make a huge difference in turning merely pretty girls into supermodels. Likewise, a pretty woman who is heavily made up, has her hair poofed up, wearing revealing clothing and high heels, will attract lots of attention, when the same woman dressed for work at office depot (no makeup, hair in a pony tail, khaki pants, button up shirt) will attract no attention.

Finally, we focus too much on faces because we wear so much clothing. At the beach, the focus on the face is reduced and the body is more heavily emphasized. Assuming everyone is in good shape (toned yoga or military type body, as in lean and muscles allowing 10 dead hang pull-ups for men, and equivalent for women) then people start looking quite similar at the beach.

Among circle jerkers (RVF forum, etc), the scale is both implicitly curved (since they would deny that 10% of women get the HB10 label) but no one defines the curve, and also carried out to decimal points, as in HB7.6. Among circle jerkers, the focus is always on the other men, women are just a means to get other men's attention.
retiredfrank
Junior Poster
 
Posts: 577
Joined: November 23rd, 2014, 4:45 am

Re: Rating Women Physically

Postby Banano » July 16th, 2016, 8:03 am

Can you have HB1? Is she ugly or hot?


I think it is stupid to use HB followed by number to describe level of attractiveness, use plain old 1-10 .
Banano
Veteran Poster
 
Posts: 2012
Joined: June 11th, 2011, 9:26 am

Re: Rating Women Physically

Postby Zambales » July 16th, 2016, 10:14 am

I usually put them into four categories physically.

Very Attractive
Attractive enough
Average
Ugly

If I'm looking for a relationship I tend to go for the second one. The very attractive types usually are full of themselves and think they're God's Gift which is a total turn-off for me. They're perfectly feasible for one night though but not for anything more.
User avatar
Zambales
Junior Poster
 
Posts: 884
Joined: August 9th, 2015, 9:41 pm

Re: Rating Women Physically

Postby Zambales » July 16th, 2016, 10:27 am

drealm wrote:The main things that separate an average looking girl from a hot girl are bragging rights.


If a guy is looking long term with his main priority being a trophy, he's most likely heading for a nasty surprise somewhere down the line. Too many men fall for this one. It's not a competition.
User avatar
Zambales
Junior Poster
 
Posts: 884
Joined: August 9th, 2015, 9:41 pm

Re: Rating Women Physically

Postby Hero » July 16th, 2016, 12:00 pm

Mr Natural wrote:I've never really thought about it in terms of numbers, but I think most guys think a 7-8 is good looking, a 9 is awesome beautiful and there may not be any such thing as a 10. Although I've seen a few I might just have to give a 10. And overall I would definitely separate them into more than just 3 categories.

I can't think of any perfect 10s that exist today, but 30 years ago, Kathy Ireland, Rachel Hunter, and Holly Hallstrom were definitely 10s (Holly was one of "Barker's Beauties" from "The Price is Right").

I also think that 10 categories is too many, but you need more than 3. 7 categories works for me. The category descriptions would be
1: Vomit
2. Ugly
3. Below average
4. Average
5. Above average/cute
6. Hot
7. Stunning, drop-dead gorgeous.
Hero
Experienced Poster
 
Posts: 1708
Joined: July 3rd, 2008, 9:19 pm

Re: Rating Women Physically

Postby retiredfrank » July 16th, 2016, 12:44 pm

3 categories is plenty for me:

No
Maybe
Yes
retiredfrank
Junior Poster
 
Posts: 577
Joined: November 23rd, 2014, 4:45 am

Re: Rating Women Physically

Postby Ghost » July 16th, 2016, 7:22 pm

retiredfrank wrote:3 categories is plenty for me:

No
Maybe
Yes


Unfortunately this is all it really comes down to. Standards really fall apart in the face of limited options too.
Ghost
Elite Upper Class Poster
 
Posts: 5749
Joined: April 17th, 2011, 2:23 am

Re: Rating Women Physically

Postby drealm » July 17th, 2016, 4:41 am

Hero wrote:
I also think that 10 categories is too many, but you need more than 3. 7 categories works for me. The category descriptions would be
1: Vomit
2. Ugly
3. Below average
4. Average
5. Above average/cute
6. Hot
7. Stunning, drop-dead gorgeous.


Do you actually treat your 1-3 differently? If they are all undatable and will be ignored then why grade them differently?
User avatar
drealm
Junior Poster
 
Posts: 935
Joined: November 10th, 2010, 6:23 pm

Re: Rating Women Physically

Postby drealm » July 17th, 2016, 4:42 am

retiredfrank wrote:3 categories is plenty for me:

No
Maybe
Yes


Mine can be reduced to:

No
Free
Pay
User avatar
drealm
Junior Poster
 
Posts: 935
Joined: November 10th, 2010, 6:23 pm

Re: Rating Women Physically

Postby drealm » July 17th, 2016, 4:44 am

Zambales wrote:
drealm wrote:The main things that separate an average looking girl from a hot girl are bragging rights.


If a guy is looking long term with his main priority being a trophy, he's most likely heading for a nasty surprise somewhere down the line. Too many men fall for this one. It's not a competition.


A trophy may also just be statue that's dead in bed. But I admit I would prefer a trophy, I'm not sure why I have this need.
User avatar
drealm
Junior Poster
 
Posts: 935
Joined: November 10th, 2010, 6:23 pm

Re: Rating Women Physically

Postby jamesbond » July 17th, 2016, 5:09 am

drealm wrote:
Zambales wrote:
drealm wrote:The main things that separate an average looking girl from a hot girl are bragging rights.


If a guy is looking long term with his main priority being a trophy, he's most likely heading for a nasty surprise somewhere down the line. Too many men fall for this one. It's not a competition.


A trophy may also just be statue that's dead in bed. But I admit I would prefer a trophy, I'm not sure why I have this need.


I was listening to Tom Leykis a few years ago and a guy called in and said while he was in the process of divorcing his American wife, he met a woman from Russia who was much better looking than his wife.

He said he couldn't wait for his divorce to be final because, "My future trophy wife was warming up in the bullpen." :P
"When I think about the idea of getting involved with an American woman, I don't know if I should laugh .............. or vomit!"

"Trying to meet women in America is like trying to decipher Egyptian hieroglyphics."
User avatar
jamesbond
Elite Upper Class Poster
 
Posts: 8000
Joined: August 25th, 2007, 6:45 pm
Location: USA

Next

Return to Dating, Relationships, Foreign Women

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests