It seems to me that almost any guy can be a 7/10 with a little work if they want, that is assuming they're 5'9 or taller and don't have any disfigurements. If a guy works on his hair, style, posture, and is physically fit, he's pretty much a 7/10 guaranteed.
decent guy wrote:
It seems to me that almost any guy can be a 7/10 with a little work if they want, that is assuming they're 5'9 or taller and don't have any disfigurements. If a guy works on his hair, style, posture, and is physically fit, he's pretty much a 7/10 guaranteed.
It is all about what men have in their bank accounts. Looks are a distant 4th or 5th.
True story.
All about the digits wrote:
decent guy wrote:It seems to me that almost any guy can be a 7/10 with a little work if they want, that is assuming they're 5'9 or taller and don't have any disfigurements. If a guy works on his hair, style, posture, and is physically fit, he's pretty much a 7/10 guaranteed.
It is all about what men have in their bank accounts. Looks are a distant 4th or 5th.
True story.
Agreed to some extent, but I'm talking purely looks here.
You need to get out more if you think this is true.
more like a 6/10. I've seen some guys with just sad facial features ( massive nose, early balding, that kinda thing )
Only at Lake Wobegon.
No, unless they put a bag over their most hideous mugs.
I'm a 3. That puts me more than 4 times better than you 7/10 slugs.
lol I'm 5'6'' so I can't be a 7/10 regardless of how hard I work?
I'm 5'11" with a decent body, handsome and young looks, but at closer look, jacked nose and teeth so I'm not sure where I land
I'm probably a 3 or 4.
Body-wise, at my best I top out at 6 or 7, but could probably reach 8 or 9 if I tried to put on muscle for looks rather than for 5k ability. Not sure, I've never tried.
Face-wise I'm fairly ugly, with a tall face, ever-growing nose, bad skin (acne and acne scars), and inability to grow nice-looking facial hair (it's patchy to where if I grow it out it only ever makes me look like a pedophile). I don't put any work into my hair, either.
If I really took good care of my skin for a year (maybe I'd have to get surgery?), started getting haircuts every month or more instead of every 4-6 months (I look mullety and slobbish pretty quick), and stayed clean-shaven, I could possibly max out at 6 or MAYBE 7 in that department.
Face attractiveness is probably a heavier factor than body attractiveness, so it would be pretty borderline if I could get to 7. Maybe with a rounding error or two.
decent guy wrote:
It seems to me that almost any guy can be a 7/10 with a little work if they want, that is assuming they're 5'9 or taller and don't have any disfigurements. If a guy works on his hair, style, posture, and is physically fit, he's pretty much a 7/10 guaranteed.
This depends what kind of distribution you imagine the 1-10 scale has. Are you thinking it's a uniform distribution, i.e. a "7/10" means more attractive than every 7 persons out of 10 persons?
It looks like someone has taken jamin's handle again....
cool kid wrote:
more like a 6/10. I've seen some guys with just sad facial features ( massive nose, early balding, that kinda thing )
That's funny.
I have been balding and shaving my head since age 28.
Luckily I am also tall and gifted with a naturally amazing body, as well as being very smart, funny and having a good sense of style.
I absolutely slay. 8.5 or 9, easy.
All about the digits wrote:
It is all about what men have in their bank accounts. Looks are a distant 4th or 5th.
True story.
How often do you see a good looking guy with an ugly girl because he is poor? Almost never.
Why do NFL quarterbacks have better looking wives/girlfriends than NFL owners? For that matter, why do college quarterbacks have more options than college football coaches?
Why do rock stars get more women than hedge fund managers?
Money is like 3rd or 4th thing on the list of what attracts women. Being good looking and being confident/interesting/socially valuable are more important by a margin. Of course, none of these things are uncorrelated, but money is not the most important thing.
Yeah, emphasis on "almost every guy" though, some men are too damn ugly.
no way wrote:
All about the digits wrote:It is all about what men have in their bank accounts. Looks are a distant 4th or 5th.
True story.
How often do you see a good looking guy with an ugly girl because he is poor? Almost never.
Why do NFL quarterbacks have better looking wives/girlfriends than NFL owners? For that matter, why do college quarterbacks have more options than college football coaches?
Why do rock stars get more women than hedge fund managers?
Money is like 3rd or 4th thing on the list of what attracts women. Being good looking and being confident/interesting/socially valuable are more important by a margin. Of course, none of these things are uncorrelated, but money is not the most important thing.
To extend your Rock Star example, are we talking LTR? Because many do not do well in the LTR area.
Borrowing an acronym, C.R.E.A.M. (wu tang style) really works. Usually women want one partner to be in a LTR with no sex and others for sex. You are very lucky if both happen in a LTR/marriage.