Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Relationships
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 10-08-2014, 08:58 AM
 
663 posts, read 776,448 times
Reputation: 498

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wmsn4Life View Post
Nope.

Preferences encompass a multitude of qualities, many of which in combination can be attractive depending on who's looking, but calling someone a 7 reduces a person to 1 subjective number. It's juvenile.
Of course it's subjective. But you have a rating system nonetheless.

Maybe you prefer A, then B, then C

So....

Guy A would be a 7 to you, B a 5, and C a 4.


Maybe to another woman A would be a 5, B a 9, C a 6

However, I am still right that everyone has a rating system. Can we agree on that?

 
Old 10-08-2014, 08:59 AM
 
615 posts, read 724,699 times
Reputation: 910
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wmsn4Life View Post
Nope.

Preferences encompass a multitude of qualities, many of which in combination can be attractive depending on who's looking, but calling someone a 7 reduces a person to 1 subjective number. It's juvenile.
Attractiveness is not very subjective. 95% of guys will rate a given woman in the plus or minus 1 point range. Same with women evaluating the attractiveness of a given guy.
 
Old 10-08-2014, 08:59 AM
 
Location: Pittsburgh
29,700 posts, read 34,246,140 times
Reputation: 76911
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liberty2011 View Post
It's not "exactly". Nice of you to rejoin your thread when someone finally agrees with you.

Someone either interests you, or they don't. It has nothing to do with numbers on a scale, because how you perceive someone is not going to be the same as how the next person perceives them, so it's irrelevant.

None of this matters, regardless of what you tell yourself.
Right. Most people don't keep a spreadsheet or mental calculation of someone's rating. As said above, it's juvenile and it's limiting. You meet someone and you decide whether you'd like to see them again or not. It doesn't need to be numerically quantified.
 
Old 10-08-2014, 09:00 AM
 
4,038 posts, read 4,851,446 times
Reputation: 5353
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidRudisha View Post
Go to 4:30


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B3BAhxxW3yc

"I found that [...] a 7 or 8 for a guy who is not as good looking, like us, is going to be more difficult than a 9 or a 10, because they don't need to validate themself with a good looking guy."

Agree or disagree?
Since when do women need to validate themselves by getting with good-looking guys? The good-looking guy might be arrogant, or have sociopathic tendencies. Most women look for a dude's qualities, because that's what's going to see them through the rough times. Looks aren't as high on the list of must-have qualities for women as they are for men. Women have their own set of priorities. That's what's wrong with having dudes comment on women. It doesn't work a lot of the time, because they're thinking like dudes, they're not thinking like women. Women have a whole other mindset.
 
Old 10-08-2014, 09:01 AM
 
663 posts, read 776,448 times
Reputation: 498
Quote:
Originally Posted by fleetiebelle View Post
Right. Most people don't keep a spreadsheet or mental calculation of someone's rating. As said above, it's juvenile and it's limiting. You meet someone and you decide whether you'd like to see them again or not. It doesn't need to be numerically quantified.
Yeah but you have a mental idea of your preferences don't you?

Of all the guys you know, you obviously prefer A, B and C first...then maybe D, E, F, then maybe G, H...etc.


By definition that is a rating system.
 
Old 10-08-2014, 09:02 AM
 
Location: D.C.
2,913 posts, read 2,437,670 times
Reputation: 4005
Quote:
Originally Posted by techcrium View Post
I don't see how people here DONT have a rating system.


By definition if you have PREFERENCES, then by definition you have a rating scale.


Take 3 guys, you probably prefer guy A over B, and B over C.

There, by definition that is your rating system already.

A is probably a 7

Since you prefer A over B, then B must be lower than A, so probably a 5-6?

Since you prefer B over C, then C must be lower than B, so probably a 3-4?


I think many people are just unwilling to admit it.
This is such a simplistic way of looking at it. Sure I have preferences, but I don't assign some numerical value based on these. Talk about dehumanizing. People who walk around assigning numbers to people are really messed up.
 
Old 10-08-2014, 09:03 AM
 
5,121 posts, read 6,788,947 times
Reputation: 5833
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidRudisha View Post
Exactly. Talking in terms of a 0-10 scale is meant to be shorthand, to spare words. Just because women typically do not use the terminology does not mean that they don't quantify male physical attractiveness. Women talking amongst themselves pick apart a guy's height, facial structure, skin, etc., just like we pick apart a woman's boobs, face, etc.
Okay, I will humor you with this... but answer this. According to what you posted, a woman who is a 7 seeks out good looking men to validate herself. A woman who is a 10 doesn't. How does the woman know what her "number" is? Your whole argument is based on a woman knowing this number and acting accordingly. How do I find out my number? Is it stamped on my butt? What's your number?

The whole notion is silly and overly simplistic and pretty shallow. Most people when they get into relationships care about a whole lot more than looks. Yes, looks might get you in the door and there has to be some degree of attraction between two people. But if the rest of the package isn't there... it's too shallow a basis for a relationship and most people move on.

Oh, and the bold... reminds me of zombies (in a humorous way) I get this mental imagine of a bunch of zombies picking apart a woman's face grunting... "Mmm, tastes like a 9!"
 
Old 10-08-2014, 09:05 AM
 
663 posts, read 776,448 times
Reputation: 498
Quote:
Originally Posted by david0966 View Post
This is such a simplistic way of looking at it. Sure I have preferences, but I don't assign some numerical value based on these. Talk about dehumanizing. People who walk around assigning numbers to people are really messed up.
Then I guess most people are messed up then?

Let's see, every athlete is different. You cannot measure heart and soul in a sport, yet they are assigned numeral values every time. They are rated.

How about intelligence? IQ is widely debated and used.

How about your tests for employee candidates? Tests don't measure passion. Every candidate is multi faceted. Yet they are used all the time to rate you.
Ok Employee A is an 95%. Employee B is 75%...etc

What is so different about dating? He's a 6, she is a 7..etc.

Isn't it ironic how when things don't agree with your worldview, you dismiss them as "messed up".
 
Old 10-08-2014, 09:05 AM
 
Location: Brentwood, Tennessee
49,932 posts, read 59,761,388 times
Reputation: 98359
Quote:
Originally Posted by techcrium View Post

However, I am still right that everyone has a rating system. Can we agree on that?
No.
 
Old 10-08-2014, 09:09 AM
 
Location: Canada
11,770 posts, read 11,988,270 times
Reputation: 30284
Quote:
Originally Posted by techcrium View Post
Yeah but you have a mental idea of your preferences don't you?

Of all the guys you know, you obviously prefer A, B and C first...then maybe D, E, F, then maybe G, H...etc.


By definition that is a rating system.
No, that isn't how it works. I don't rank the guys I know against each other and put them in some sort of order. I like my guy friends for all different reasons, none of which has to do with scoring them on a scale.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:54 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top