This is a discussion forum. And it's pretty obvious men want to be with women they are extremely attracted to.

For the sake of discussion, there has to be some sort of objective measurement.

Saying "your 10 isn't my 10" is a platitude. It means nothing, accomplishes nothing. It's not advice or helpful.

_________________
Pickup coach. PM for direct, simple coaching.

Would advice be different if she was a 10 or a 2? I mean, if a chick you rank a 7 is flaking on you, what do you do differently for a chick you rank 10?

I can somewhat agree with this statement because that would also indicate that the 10 means nothing outside of your own opinion. There is no advice or help that you can give a guy when it comes to treating a woman different based on her looks. If you think a girl is a 10, any girl that's below that rating is going to love being treated like a 10. So there is nothing helpful with rating them when it comes to a discussion with the exception of telling other people your opinion of her.

_________________
mpuaforum.proboards.com

There are indeed scientific baselines for this, in proven peer reviewed journals.

A decent video on this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2KQUAKl6IaI

Overall, men prefer a smaller waist-to-hip ratio, feminine voice, and long feminine hair.

Fit is hot. If you're not fit (IE, obese or chunky), you're not going to be a 9/10 to most people.

And I doubt there are guys here who say "my 10 is different from your 10, because I like girls with a belly that overhangs their belt or jeans.".

_________________
Pickup coach. PM for direct, simple coaching.

The video doesn't say that there 9's or 10's. It's talking about what men find attractive. I don't think it's any surprise that a man finds a smaller waist-to-hip ratio but none of that says 10 but that is the subject of proportion and not fitness. This isn't even a decent video to prove that being rated on a number system isn't subjective.

_________________
mpuaforum.proboards.com

As has been discussed by so many guys here over the years the ratings system is by definition subjective.

For an illustration, many guys over the years have shown girls to me that they think are 10s (the "centerfold" type), and to me many of them are literally 6s at best.

I have no problem with a guy saying "I'm trying to date a 9." It gives me an idea where he ranks the woman in his mind, and his mind only.

A small waist is fitness. Women who don't eat or work out properly have bellies, or fat that sags over their jeans/pants.

_________________
Pickup coach. PM for direct, simple coaching.

The video doesn't say small waist. It says 7:10 waist to hip ratio. That doesn't mean fitness, that means proportion. There's a difference. You see why this is subjective?

_________________
mpuaforum.proboards.com

That ratio of waist to hip is a small waist, lol.

Fat is fat.

_________________
Pickup coach. PM for direct, simple coaching.

More science for you, Jack:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/ ... aling.html
Again, if you're not fit, you're not going to be anyone's 9 or 10, and vice versa, unless you want to date obese people.

_________________
Pickup coach. PM for direct, simple coaching.

Again, I have to remind you to link to the actual study and not a news article. News articles are unreliable when it comes to "science".

The thing that we are talking about is 9's and 10's. If all you're talking about is body when it comes to 9's and 10's then for arguments sake, let's take that as the truth. We still have the face and that is still a factor. If a girl has the 9/10 body that these articles say but have my face, you aren't going to think that she is a 6,7,8,9 or a 10. At least I hope you won't. If you do, you'd probably be one of the few guys that do. That would suggest being subjective.

_________________
mpuaforum.proboards.com

It directly quotes the study, and has a specific reference.

_________________
Pickup coach. PM for direct, simple coaching.

No, it doesn't quote the study. It's giving you their interpretation of the study. Two different things. The only quotes here are from what the researchers were saying that they're looking for. This is the problem of nonscientific guys reading articles and thinking that it's science.

_________________
mpuaforum.proboards.com

Uh, yes it does quote the study.

_________________
Pickup coach. PM for direct, simple coaching.

Lol, arch what Jack means is, 7:10 doesnt mean a small waist. Thats how ratios work. The chick could have a 70 inch waist to 100 inch hips. Or she could have a 21 inch waist to 30 inch hips.

That being said, I'm closer to Arch's point of view that its not entirely subjective. I see it as a "in general" thing. There are features which in a certain location, that in general, most men would find more appealing. Not everyone is going to find that look their 9 or 10, but a good percentage of men from that society or city or culture will. If you lined up a 100 men to rank 100 women, their would be some chicks who would get consistently higher ranks.

My issue is, that whether its subjective or not, how attractive a girl is has really nothing to do with giving or asking for advice. If a chick is extremely beautiful to you and you want to fuck her, I dont know how you'd get different advice on fucking her, if she was ugly to you but you wanted to fuck her. Whether you think a Lamborgini is a beautiful car not not, has nothing to do with asking for advice on how to fix one.

Thats the thing Arch, when you hear a guy say "A 10 is flaking on me..."its means nothing. It could be Jack's buddy who likes bigger women, but youll hear that and give advice dependent on a most likely subjective rating. The advice doesnt need to be dependent on how hot she is or is not. Dont be needy, tease, escalate...its all the same shit for any woman.