fair point bs - solid 6 bc of the white dress pic.
Birdman, when did any of us say we wouldn’t bang her?
also, here’s a ten. so I’m doubling down on the five statement.
Yeah, weak straw man Birdy. People call a random pale horse face a five is exactly the same as calling swimsuit models two’s. 
Also, would not bang.
I just think that if you took all the females out there, even just the females of reproductive age, put them on a continuum and then looked at a chick like that compared with all those other chicks, she’d be higher than a 5.
Furthermore, guys were polled as to what they thought different faces should be rated at for different ages and girls in the 21-22 area were a bit higher than a 7. I don’t think that that female is THAT much worse than the average female. I think she’s probably even more attractive than the average 22 year old female. Keep in mind the large % of the population that’s obese which is below her off the bat.
Oh god. The old Fark meme. Probably the only thing to survive Fark’s downfall…
Two things.
-
It’s not an even distribution. I’m simply saying on a scale of 1 is offputting (negative attraction) 5 is neutral (no attraction) and 10 is amazing (maximum attraction) she would be a five. I have no attraction to that . 6 is where some level of attraction begins for me on that scale.
-
She’s a five. Her face.
Alternately, any absolute scale rating would have to be age adjusted. Otherwise nearly all <25’s are a six minimum because of the existence of the boomer generation which doesn’t seem right. Plus I’m not really dating 40 year olds so you should almost be rating within the dateable set which would be something like 18-35 right and within that set I don’t think she gets above a 5 for being “not fat” with an eh face.
All right, all right. Let’s act like grown ups. Really, rating women? This isn’t the 7th grade.
As adults, we gauge women’s plowability by how many beers you’d have to drink to bang her. Think of it like I’d need zero beers to copulate with Sophia Loren. I’d need about 12 for Helen Hunt.
He started it.
We are arguing about the structure of the scale. This is why I don’t like this 1 to 10 crap. We need to discus this as a normal distribution with an std of 2 median of 5. Something like that.
I think the pic for the abuser chick is unfair. Yes she has a nyeh face but put her in a bikini and a bit of make up and that shit changes. The blonde chick that ceo posted has a nyeh face too. She just has big tits and a bikini. I would consider ceo chick a 7.
i am basing my scale on the shit I see in a clubwhich is filled with superficial people so they are slightly better looking than the average population.I see in college.
Please save body judgment for the very professional Sara G. thread. Tanks.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-43799850
turns out the poor lad was copping even more abuse than in that original article.
also, back on topic, based on the new photos in that article I’d say a 6.
and lol that you think that’s pale
“Mr Skeel has since had several operations on his brain , head and hands.”
Damn.
Ok so 1) based on the second article I would also like to upgrade her to a 6 based on that photo 2) it sounds way more severe in that article and 3) this link from that page was interesting but not surprising given the earlier discussion.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcthree/article/5d33c36d-cd41-4351-97ed-4516962d5c44
^brooo what is this rating scale you use. You upgrade her now based on a couple more face pics. i’d add to stl’s comments around # of beers etc. and add face is rather irrelevant bc -hypothetically speaking of course - you likely wouldnt see it until finish and at that moment who cares.
Gross, no.
Also, I was abundantly clear earlier that her face was the issue.
lol guy in this story doesnt even have a big tiddy goth gf