Quote: (12-18-2014 11:59 PM)AnonymousBosch Wrote:
Quote: (12-18-2014 11:33 PM)floor7 Wrote:
So the vast majority are 3's are below, not many 4's-6's, then a spike at 7's/8's with a very sharp tailing off into 9's/10's.
I thought the 1-3 range was facial deformity / disability ugliness.
I'm new to the forum so I'm not sure if there is a general Roosh-scale that acts as basic guidelines.
In the northeast of the US though I do think you are seeing the skew and semi-bimodality play out and I think it'll get worse for the factors mentioned above regarding poverty being a killer on a woman's looks, especially as she ages.
So even if my scale rating numbers are slightly off, I am comfortable in my hypothesis and it's how I view the available pool personally