A pretty face takes precedence over everything else, I see dudes on here posting homely looking broads with nice bodies and calling them dimes, they got the exchange rate all fukked up. A nice body is much easier to find than a truly appealing face.
So......exactly what makes a girl a "4" or a "6"?
- Thread starter Exiled Martian
- Start date
Just rate on a scale of 1-30... 
ThaRealness
Superstar
I dont even use that scale. Either she's bad or she isnt
1-4 No good or very few good physical qualities. Ugly.
5- Not ugly but average.
6-7 Good face bad body or good body bad face.
8- Mostly looks good but a few noticeable flaws.
9- Maybe a flaw or two but overall everything's good.
10- Perfection.
5- Not ugly but average.
6-7 Good face bad body or good body bad face.
8- Mostly looks good but a few noticeable flaws.
9- Maybe a flaw or two but overall everything's good.
10- Perfection.
When I was younger, I was extremely subjective, as I am older. I am more open and loose. If I like ya, I like ya
Face has always been my ace card. All of the women I seriously dealt with and was proud of them was beautiful in the face.
IMO, It depends on what the person likes. Sometimes a woman's body could make her more attractive and other times if woman just has a very pretty face and not much of a body, she's still rated high because those men focus more on the face than anything else in regards to what appeals to them.
It's all subjective and as a woman I know that how I rate another woman is completely different than how a man would.
It's all subjective and as a woman I know that how I rate another woman is completely different than how a man would.
Thats how I rate my FWB. They always have to be fine enough to be seen with, but their characters are so outrageous, they would never work as a long term partner.
Mamas boys, self esteem issues, cockiness, no work ethic... these guys are in the temp folder
I think some women have like a wide range. She can be a 5,6,7 or 8.
Rate these chicks for me fellas
Honestly, the rating system to me is like, some dudes don't like chicks with strong/standout features and some do. Tracee Ellis Ross eyes would be a turn off for alot of dudes, but I think it adds to her uniqueness and I like it.
Without injecting personality at all,
I give
Tracee - 8.5, very unique look,
Badu - never seen the hype..I'd say she's a 6.5 for me. She has nice eyes tho
Rocsi - 8.0, she's fine, but I've seen girls like her at clubs.
I pretty much use this same logic.7 is the average of chicks I find attractive
6 is below average
5 is a wack chick outside of one or two redeeming qualities. (i.e. they're ugly wit a fat ass)
I don't rate anyone under 5, I don't find them attractive and wouldn't fukk, so what's the point?
8 is average for a 'model chick'
9 is above average for a 'model chick'
10 is a dime.
Simple system that works for me. I've gone into 'rate this chick' threads on other forums years after initially rating a chick and given the same rating as i did the first time.
Exiled Martian
Was young I couldn't do good, now I can't do Bad
Eyyy you forgetting the beauty on the inside , that's gotta count for something....
My boy does... the shyt is very annoying
He gave a chick a 9.8 one time because she had the little stomach pooch so he knocked off .2 .. HE LITERALLY SAID THAT
Some guys spend too much time five knuckle shuffling over airbrushed/ edited vogue magazine type bytches.... walking around tryna find any little fault to hide their insecurity behind! On the subject of a solid dime...I reckon a 9-10 should represent a very small portion of our population. Same as 1-2 really. I can say in my life time that I have met 3 women that would be a true 9-10.How you gonna make statements like that without providing any sort of 'visual' clue to support your claims? Let us be the judge of how far you can ascend on the ladder ?
So far some really interesting opinions on what constitutes attraction as far as the 'rating system' goes... I think that a lot of it is actually to do with the height factor (a pivotal attribute used to gauge attraction amongst both sexes I think). So for e.g "4" is largely her being around ~< 5'4". Since supermodels tend to be over 5'10"+ that must be part of judgement to a certain extent
I believe that most people have a true reading of their looks. I look like my avi though. On dogsHow you gonna make statements like that without providing any sort of 'visual' clue to support your claims? Let us be the judge of how far you can ascend on the ladder ?