Quote: (06-22-2018 05:58 PM)christpuncher Wrote:
Quote:Quote:That's probably because some of them were overweight, short haired, had big/small tits, wore some unusual fashion... And you've all been either loved or spurned by those certain syle of women in a previous relationship, so you improperly declare a desire or dislike for it now in an attempt to feel better or jocky for social position.
What I do know however, is that I've gone out with a friend or two plenty of times and looked on groups of girls. I would ask "which one do you like the most?" and they won't always pick the same one I would've picked. Maybe that just means I (and everybody else) have pre-conceived notions about people you look at. But how could you ever completely remove those from the equation? We are humans and not computers. Don't you think things like hormone levels will affect the types of women you believe are the sexiest?
Hey I get it, I've done it I'm sure. Deep down though every man knows a women's hotness is nearly perfectly objective, and your status as a man from whether you can readily lay a 7.5 or only a 6.5 is perfectly clear.
Fatness is a whole other weird issue that fucks with the rating scale immensely, and I'm not sure what to make of it.
You made some good points, and I will change my point of view because of it.
It is entirely correct that there are universal, objective standards. However, I do not know what difference it actually makes in real life. If two girls are objectively 8s but you prefer one over the other for subjective reasons, then you'd still be disappointed if you ended up with your non-favorite of the two. And you can't use this scale to change the way you interact with them either, because that would presuppose that the women saw themselves exactly the same way as they are objectively.