"How Much Physical Attraction" spin-off: question for men.

[nyc_guy2003]

I agree with a few of the previous posters that this question is not well-structured. In my book, 7-8s are pretty high on the scale already. Like, if I had to produce a rough estimate, maybe 0.001% of the population are 10s, another 1% are 9s, and another 5% are 7-8s. So that means that 7-8s are still more attractive than 94% of the population.

 

Put it another way, the prototypical 10 is maybe 22 years old, blonde hair, blue eyes, 5'10" 130 lbs., natural D cups, and a perfectly round @ss. Whereas the prototypical 7-8 may be 25, brunette, green eyes, 5'8" 125 lbs., large C cup, and a perfectly round @ss. So in the grand scheme of things not much difference.

 

Drop the rating of girl A to a 5 and ask the question again. That's where you start getting the 30 year old, 5'5" 135 lbs., A or B cups with a little cellulite in the trunk.

[callingyouuu]

Girl A, hands down.

You make a good point. I wonder what happens if we make that 7 or 8 a 5-6.

Yeah, this is the where the most interesting answers would be, in my opinion. Absolutely average looks with a great personality vs. an undeniably gorgeous person with below-average personality. If you weigh both looks and personality the same, scenario A should still win (average + great > great + below average), but what would probably happen is that a very sizable chunk of guys would go for scenario B. We should get OkCupid on this.

 

Sigh.. sometimes I wish I were a psychology major.

[sweetypielovely]

Im girl A and In my mans eyes Im a 10. A 10 has nowhere to go. Id pick an A girl any day.

[ThsAmericanLife]

I don't want a male '10' in looks....

 

It is like driving a Porsche... always worried about getting door dings...

 

Besides, it is very unlikely that a '10' is going to necessarily age well. When their looks fade, they've got nothing. Person 'A' likely has had to go to some effort to develop their personality.

 

Person 'A'... hands down. Even at a '5'... especially if they took care of themselves and made the most of what they were born with. That's a whole lot more appealing than the '10' who is resting on their genetics.

[nyc_guy2003]

Im girl A and In my mans eyes Im a 10. A 10 has nowhere to go. Id pick an A girl any day.

 

The fact that you boastfully presume that you 1) have the personality and likeability of girl A and 2) have the looks of girl B would lead me to believe that you aren't really representative of either one.

[Holt Driver]

So I thought it would be fun to use celebrities to put a face on the 1 to 10 scale, but I found that most actresses and musicians are actually quite attractive. Nonetheless....

 

Maybe this list helps, at least for the guys. So would you rather be with a Adle or Jodie Foster (yea I know, pretend on that one) if her personality were great, or would you rather be with Anne Hathaway or Angelina Jolie if her personality wasn't a good match for you?

 

10 - Angelina Jolie, Anne Hathaway, Jennifer Anniston

9 - Ashley Judd, Charlize Huffman, Maggie Hyllenhaal

8 - Kate Winslet, Renee Zellweger, Julianna Margulies

7 - Catherine Keener, Julianne Moore, Elisabeth Moss

6 - Felicity Huffman, Jodie Foster,

5 - Adele, Bonnie Hunt

4 - Sigourney Weaver

3 - Sharon Gless, Glenn Close

2 - Tilda Swinton

1 - Gabourey Sidibe

[thatone]

I don't want a male '10' in looks....

 

It is like driving a Porsche... always worried about getting door dings...

 

Besides, it is very unlikely that a '10' is going to necessarily age well. When their looks fade, they've got nothing. Person 'A' likely has had to go to some effort to develop their personality.

 

Person 'A'... hands down. Even at a '5'... especially if they took care of themselves and made the most of what they were born with. That's a whole lot more appealing than the '10' who is resting on their genetics.

 

see, when i as a man make a general statement that "gorgeous women are going to be stupid, more often than not" women will gang up on me in droves.

 

boo hiss gender bias!

[nyc_guy2003]

Kim Kardashian is a 10?? BARF.

[nyc_guy2003]

 

10 - Megan Fox, Kim Kardashian, Mila Kunis, Natalie Portman

9 - Minka Kelly, Audrina Patridge

8 -Vanessa Hudgens, Blake Lively (great body but face not great at all, horse face)

7. Ashely Tisdale, Hillary Duff, Dianna Agron

6. Lea Michele. Renee Zelwegger

5. Kirsten Dunst

1. Rosanne Barr, Oprah Winfrey

 

I'm a big believer that to be at the top of the list (8-10s) you have to have it all -- youth, height, pretty face, big t!ts, and a perfect @ss. Fox, Kunis, and Portman all get eliminated at the 10-level by the height and t!ts factor. Kardashinan gets knocked out by the youth, height, face, and @ss factors (jiggly cellulite doesn't do it for me).

 

Minka Kelly I agree with at the 9-level, but I believe she's either 30 or close to it so that might push her closer to 8 territory. Audrina's got fake t!ts so that knocks her down at least two rungs.

 

Vanessa Hudgens I think would deserve the 8 rating if she was about 5 inches taller and two cup sizes bigger. Otherwise she has a great face. Blake Lively needs bigger b00bs and maybe a little better face but she's also good looking.

[dasein]

Based on obesity statistics in the U.S., Roseanne is a 5-6, and any woman not at least 15 pounds overweight is a 7+ no matter what she looks like otherwise. Most of the celebrities listed are straight tens by percentile definition. Adjust the list from there.

[nyc_guy2003]

I would go with Kate Upton, Bar Rafaeli, or Brooklyn Decker as approximate 10s. All are 5'10"+, blonde/blue, under 25, D-cups, and supermodel faces.

[nyc_guy2003]

 

Just got a spontaneous erection. Thanks for sharing.

[Sanman]

I am a female and the list you put is wrong for me.. Ashley Judd and Maggie G are not 9's... I think they are lower than that,

Kate Winslet and Renee Zelwegger are not 8's but lower.

 

a perfect ten Would be like Megan Fox, not Angelina because Angelina is much older. Most guys would pick Megan Fox, Kim Kardashian to be 10...

 

I think your list is overly generous. I would not rate Jennifer Aniston a 10 either; great body but face is not so great. Megan Fox would rate much higher than Jennifer Aniston.

 

Annne Hathaway doesn't have that "sex appeal" look; she is not a 10 either.

 

I love Anne Hathaway, but would have to give her an '8' on looks and a '10' overall as a person. I'm not a Megan Fox fan...too skinny for me. I prefer Kim Kardashian actually. My thoughts on this break down in general (not my personal preferences):

 

 

10 - Megan Fox, Jessica Biel, Mila Kunis, halle berry

9 - Kim Kardashian, Scarlett Johanssen

8 -Vanessa Hudgens, Blake Lively, Anne Hathaway, Kristen Bell

7. Ashely Tisdale, Hillary Duff, Christina Hendricks, January Jones

6. Rashida Jones, Renee Zelwegger, Jenna Fischer

5. Elizabeth Moss

4. Oprah Winfrey

1. Gabourey Sidibe

 

Any of the women want to do a guy one?

[Woggle]

Kardashian does nothing for me. She just looks so plastic. Somebody like Christina Hendricks to me is a perfect 10 and she gets plus points for not giving in to the idea that women should be toothpicks to be attractive.

[rafallus]

10 - Angelina Jolie, Anne Hathaway, Jennifer Anniston

 

8 -Vanessa Hudgens, Blake Lively, Anne Hathaway, Kristen Bell

 

4. Oprah Winfrey

 

1. Rosanne Barr, Oprah Winfrey

 

10 - Megan Fox, Kim Kardashian, Mila Kunis, Natalie Portman

 

Kardashian does nothing for me. She just looks so plastic.

 

And we have the obvious problem with 1-10 rating system.

 

Typical conversation:

"Man, I met a perfect 10 today, you won't believe it!"

"Okay, got a pic?"

"Yes <shows pic>"

"Uh, dude, she's not a 10, maybe 8 at most."

 

So it's pretty proven that number doesn't mean anything at all.

 

Hence why I replaced it with my own interpretation in my first post.

 

FTR, I could write the same thing about Megan Fox, what was in the last quote. "Easy on the eyes" is not equivalent of "Jumpstarts gonads".

Edited August 26, 2011 by rafallus

[ThsAmericanLife]

see, when i as a man make a general statement that "gorgeous women are going to be stupid, more often than not" women will gang up on me in droves.

 

boo hiss gender bias!

 

No gender bias... I believe the same is true of most truly beautiful women. It is kind of like one's senses (eyesight, hearing, smell, etc). If you never have to use your other senses (ie skills) then they languish and become slack.

 

One has to be pressed... either by life circumstance or their parents, to actively use their other qualities.

 

This is why I actively seek out men (and women) who consistently make the most of whatever they were born with. They are the 'cats' in life... always find a way to land on their feet.

 

but I do have my limits... A gorgeous super-model rankable man (very successful too), did actively pursue me for a period a few years ago. The question I had to ask myself was... are his other qualities good enough for me to put up with the barrage of attention he's likely to be constantly getting from the opposite sex?? The answer was no. I just couldn't do it. It was kind of sad. I just couldn't get past his looks.

 

Kind of like being approached by a millionaire. I've had a hard time with that too.

 

In the end, I think most people are happiest with those who are similar to them in looks, money, family background, etc.

[utterer of lies]

Hypothetical question for the sake of discussion. Let's say there are two women interested in you.

 

Girl A is somewhere in the 7-8 looks range (whatever that is for you personally)...pretty enough for you to be attracted to her, but not perfect or drop-dead gorgeous. However, you have a lot in common with her, and she's intelligent, down-to-earth, non-materialistic, and kind.

 

Girl B is what you would consider to be a 10 looks-wise (again, whatever you personally consider to be a "10"). However you have significantly less in common with her, and her personality traits are less desirable than Girl A's.

 

Both appear to have an equal level of interest in you. Who would you rather be with?

 

B.

 

A sounds like a doormat-hippie type girl. Yuck. I'd rather have a someone with drive and ambition.

[Holt Driver]

I was afraid that posting a list would be problematic. LOL Bottom line, I think most guys would kills to be with a woman as attractive as Jennifer Aniston, Anne Hathaway, Rashida Jones, whether they would objectively earn a 10, 8, or 6. I think it's more difficult to rate celebrities than to rate average looking women. But it's fun to discuss anyway. Oprah and Roseanne Barr are excellent markers in there somewhere, Oprah in particular because she's very attractive in makeup and not-so-much when out.

 

It would be interesting to capture photos of non-celebrities and rate them 1-10.

[OliveOyl]

I was afraid that posting a list would be problematic. LOL Bottom line, I think most guys would kills to be with a woman as attractive as Jennifer Aniston, Anne Hathaway, Rashida Jones, whether they would objectively earn a 10, 8, or 6. I think it's more difficult to rate celebrities than to rate average looking women. But it's fun to discuss anyway. Oprah and Roseanne Barr are excellent markers in there somewhere, Oprah in particular because she's very attractive in makeup and not-so-much when out.

 

It would be interesting to capture photos of non-celebrities and rate them 1-10.

Oprah is like a 7 when all made-up and wigged-up and a 2 when not. She's a perfect example of the power of makeup artistry.

[thatone]

No gender bias... I believe the same is true of most truly beautiful women. It is kind of like one's senses (eyesight, hearing, smell, etc). If you never have to use your other senses (ie skills) then they languish and become slack.

 

One has to be pressed... either by life circumstance or their parents, to actively use their other qualities.

 

This is why I actively seek out men (and women) who consistently make the most of whatever they were born with. They are the 'cats' in life... always find a way to land on their feet.

 

but I do have my limits... A gorgeous super-model rankable man (very successful too), did actively pursue me for a period a few years ago. The question I had to ask myself was... are his other qualities good enough for me to put up with the barrage of attention he's likely to be constantly getting from the opposite sex?? The answer was no. I just couldn't do it. It was kind of sad. I just couldn't get past his looks.

 

Kind of like being approached by a millionaire. I've had a hard time with that too.

 

In the end, I think most people are happiest with those who are similar to them in looks, money, family background, etc.

 

i am a millionaire, and i do not let that fact escape any women i meet. i'm not over the top with buying gifts and showering women with money, but i pay for dates and make a point of telling women that whatever they want to do date wise is fine, since that's all the money is really good for. and i'm not exactly brad pitt in the looks dept. i'm not physically deformed or anything, but i could lose about 30 pounds.

 

i see dating as picking two out of three. as a man, you can have looks, money, and/or charm/intelligence. i've got money and bullsh*t, so i play the hand i'm dealt. the same goes for women in my eyes. they can be physically beautiful, smart, and/or a personality/lifestyle match. i disregard money and careers with women since i have that already and don't really care whether they make much money or not.

 

if anyone is holding out for all three they're probably gonna be disappointed for a very long time. i think picking two out of three is a pretty attainable goal. if you get a little bit of all three, you did very well for yourself, i think.

 

my current gf is physically average to slightly above depending on the eye of the beholder, however not a swimsuit model and not what most would call 'arm candy'. but she has the intelligence and common personality/lifestyle that mirrors mine exactly, so i'm happy.

[Sanman]

i am a millionaire, and i do not let that fact escape any women i meet. i'm not over the top with buying gifts and showering women with money, but i pay for dates and make a point of telling women that whatever they want to do date wise is fine, since that's all the money is really good for. and i'm not exactly brad pitt in the looks dept. i'm not physically deformed or anything, but i could lose about 30 pounds.

 

i see dating as picking two out of three. as a man, you can have looks, money, and/or charm/intelligence. i've got money and bullsh*t, so i play the hand i'm dealt. the same goes for women in my eyes. they can be physically beautiful, smart, and/or a personality/lifestyle match. i disregard money and careers with women since i have that already and don't really care whether they make much money or not.

 

if anyone is holding out for all three they're probably gonna be disappointed for a very long time. i think picking two out of three is a pretty attainable goal. if you get a little bit of all three, you did very well for yourself, i think.

 

my current gf is physically average to slightly above depending on the eye of the beholder, however not a swimsuit model and not what most would call 'arm candy'. but she has the intelligence and common personality/lifestyle that mirrors mine exactly, so i'm happy.

 

You make a good point about the two out of three thing. However, I would say argue that you can get a lot more of everything if you are willing to give up some in looks. I would rate my looks as above average and my income will ultimately the same (six figure professional, but nothing special). I know I can date a gorgeous girl (and I have) but that usually means getting a very average girl in all other aspects. My gf is average with a very pretty face (IMO). However, she is also really sweet, the best lifestyle/personality match I have met, and also a six figure professional. Sh also has very little baggage and likes to bake for me. It is funny because she is younger than me and I know that this girl is only single because guys in their early/mid 20's are much more shallow. If it were not for that fact, she would be much more in demand and probably full of herself.

[thatone]

You make a good point about the two out of three thing. However, I would say argue that you can get a lot more of everything if you are willing to give up some in looks. I would rate my looks as above average and my income will ultimately the same (six figure professional, but nothing special). I know I can date a gorgeous girl (and I have) but that usually means getting a very average girl in all other aspects. My gf is average with a very pretty face (IMO). However, she is also really sweet, the best lifestyle/personality match I have met, and also a six figure professional. Sh also has very little baggage and likes to bake for me. It is funny because she is younger than me and I know that this girl is only single because guys in their early/mid 20's are much more shallow. If it were not for that fact, she would be much more in demand and probably full of herself.

 

sounds like we're pretty much in the same boat except for the age difference, that's how i see my gf as well. pretty face, natural without any makeup. body is average, but we're in our mid 30s (both of us) so we're not going to look like we did when we were 18, that's simply not feasible for either of us. she is only 2 years younger than me. the only reason mine is single is because the guy she was engaged to got killed in iraq a few years ago, so also little/no baggage relationship wise, her relationships have been far more normal than mine, i'm coming off a string of certifiably insane younger women.

[Sanman]

sounds like we're pretty much in the same boat except for the age difference, that's how i see my gf as well. pretty face, natural without any makeup. body is average, but we're in our mid 30s (both of us) so we're not going to look like we did when we were 18, that's simply not feasible for either of us. she is only 2 years younger than me. the only reason mine is single is because the guy she was engaged to got killed in iraq a few years ago, so also little/no baggage relationship wise, her relationships have been far more normal than mine, i'm coming off a string of certifiably insane younger women.

 

 

Lol, same with me on the insane women thing and her on the normal relationships. She is 2.5 years younger than me. I know you and I have disagreed on who pays for dates before. However, I one thing I love about my gf is that she is financially responsible and not needlessly flashy. I can see being able to build wealth with her and that is important to me. I'm sure you can appreciate that.

Edited August 27, 2011 by Sanman

[thatone]

Lol, same with me on the insane women thing and her on the normal relationships. She is 2.5 years younger than me. I know you and I have disagreed on who pays for dates before. However, I one thing I love about my gf is that she is financially responsible and not needlessly flashy. I can see being able to build wealth with her and that is important to me. I'm sure you can appreciate that.

 

yeah, but admit it, if you were in my shoes you would do the same thing . if i make it a little harder on other men by spoiling my dates, screw them, they're competition. they deserve nothing but whatever grief i can give them.

 

to be honest mine isn't flashy either. she is living in a tiny apartment to save as much as she can and doesn't even buy clothes much lately. i'm the one who's always overdressed on dates. says she wants to lose 10 pounds before she buys anything nicer than casual clothes. i argue that 10 pounds is barely perceptible and she looks fine how she is, but she insists. whatever.

 

and yeah, i absolutely appreciate building for the future. everyone does, regardless of where you're starting from. in fact i'm planning on selling my house and going back to living in a condo early next year to raise more investing cash, i don't want to miss the next stock market tumble (and it's coming, look at the last couple of weeks). i have lots of income but very little saved, and missing the opportunity to earn way more in the last couple of years is getting to me. as people used to say in texas there's a bumper sticker that folks in odessa have that says "lord, give us one more boom, we promise not to piss it away this time". i'm kinda thinking that way. i don't intend to miss another opportunity like that. i'm gonna shed debt and live a lot lighter for the next 5 years or so and see how much i can earn. my income is pretty safe since we've got two national retailers on the hook for 20 year leases, but i'd feel a lot better about the world with enough cash to live comfortably on, should everything else fall apart. my partners tend to agree, so we've decided to sell off one of the leases we own to get some cash in everyone's pocket, and go our separate ways until the recession sorts itself out.

 

plus if i move closer to her i can get a nice condo in amongst all of the places she likes to go downtown for about half of what i'm paying for my house, and her temptation to give up that independence she's hanging on to will be overwhelming.

Edited August 27, 2011 by thatone

[Sanman]

yeah, but admit it, if you were in my shoes you would do the same thing . if i make it a little harder on other men by spoiling my dates, screw them, they're competition. they deserve nothing but whatever grief i can give them.

 

to be honest mine isn't flashy either. she is living in a tiny apartment to save as much as she can and doesn't even buy clothes much lately. i'm the one who's always overdressed on dates. says she wants to lose 10 pounds before she buys anything nicer than casual clothes. i argue that 10 pounds is barely perceptible and she looks fine how she is, but she insists. whatever.

 

and yeah, i absolutely appreciate building for the future. everyone does, regardless of where you're starting from. in fact i'm planning on selling my house and going back to living in a condo early next year to raise more investing cash, i don't want to miss the next stock market tumble (and it's coming, look at the last couple of weeks). i have lots of income but very little saved, and missing the opportunity to earn way more in the last couple of years is getting to me. as people used to say in texas there's a bumper sticker that folks in odessa have that says "lord, give us one more boom, we promise not to piss it away this time". i'm kinda thinking that way. i don't intend to miss another opportunity like that. i'm gonna shed debt and live a lot lighter for the next 5 years or so and see how much i can earn.

 

plus if i move closer to her i can get a high dollar condo in amongst all of the places she likes to go downtown for about half of what i'm paying for my house, and her temptation to give up that independence she's hanging on to will be overwhelming.

 

Hey, I've never been a hater of those who choose to spoil a woman. Certainly, having a lot of money might change my perspective. I'm happy to spoil my gf as often as I can. I just find that my method lets me sort out which women are truly responsible and looking to be a partner and build a future and which women are just interested in spending money. The question for me is which woman would be there if the money went away.

 

I can certainly see taking advantage of this wonderful recession and investing. I am investing the money I do have available hoping to take advantage of these depressed stock prices. That said, how much of a financial hit will you be taking by selling your place? You may end up losing as much is potential property value as you gain in the market and a house in a nice established area will usually hold its value better than a luxury condo. Though, I definitely agree about shedding debt and overhead so that you can invest wisely.