[Dash Global]

(08-16-2011 02:16 AM)Mighty Mouse Wrote:  

There is a much bigger gap what different guys find attractive. For example, Kim Kardashian would be a 5 for me. I would approach her when I have my beer goggles on, but I would not like to be seen with her (or a clone of her) in public (due to her looks). This Sulieka girl Athlone has posted pictures of, is a 4 to me (=not fuckable). I also know my friends' tastes, and I assume nobody of them would like her (just concerning looks).

On the other hand, some of the women guys here in the forum post in the "What is a 5?"-thread are adorable 7s in my opinion.

Mightymouse I hate to be the one that breaks this to you but if you think Kim Kardashian is a FIVE than you simply do not know what looks good. Like I previously pointed out just because you or one of your buddies thinks girl "A" is hot doesnt make her hot. She is only out if most men would aggree. AKA Generally Accepted Universal Characteristics of beauty.

If you think this is a 5, than you need your head check lmfao

Kim is EASY an 8 when you factor in the whole package ie face, tits, ass ect













Ok dude now If Kim Kardashian is a 5, I want to see post some pictures of 8's. lol

SMH

I will reiterate that me or you thinking a girl is hot doesnt make her hot. I think that is the thing you are missing......

[Vicious]

(08-16-2011 09:31 AM)Dash Global Wrote:  

Kim is EASY an 8 when you factor in the whole package ie face, tits, ass ect

<post filled with fawning over Kim Kardashian>

SMH

I will reiterate that me or you thinking a girl is hot doesnt make her hot. I think that is the thing you are missing......

Could you possibly contradict yourself any more?

[Dash Global]

Quote:

Could you possibly contradict yourself any more?

How? Noticed I didnt say she is an 8 because I think so, or because I prefer any of her characteristics.

She is an 8 because in layman terms most men find her and her features very attractive.

Great rack
Plump ass
Pretty face

Has nothing to do with me or what I think. Only thing is I know what is generally accepted characteristics of universal beauty and recognize it when I see it.

There is generally accepted traits / characteristics of attractiveness. Whether you want to admit / recognize this or not doesnt change the fact that they are there. \n
Those two SI Swimsuit Models I posted are not hot because I think so. They are hot, simply because THEY ARE. Whether I think so or recognize their beauty is irrelevant to the facts.

Its like if I see a girl that is 5'5 and weighs 200 pounds. I can say oh no she isnt fat to me. Well that is irrelevant. Bottom line is in reality the bitch is fat.

[Vicious]

(08-16-2011 10:42 AM)Dash Global Wrote:  

There is generally accepted traits / characteristics of attractiveness. Whether you want to admit / recognize this or not doesnt change the fact that they are there.

Just repeating that like a mantra isn't going to make it true. Athlone has already shown in great detail while you are just projecting your own preferences while you have done nothing to substantiate your claims. You seem to be pushing your own opinions as fact a lot on this board.

And for the record, those photos are altered. Papparazzi photos of Kim K when she's not photoshopped and not wearing make-up shows her for what she is - an overweight gnome.

[Dash Global]

(08-16-2011 10:58 AM)Vicious Wrote:  

(08-16-2011 10:42 AM)Dash Global Wrote:  

There is generally accepted traits / characteristics of attractiveness. Whether you want to admit / recognize this or not doesnt change the fact that they are there.

Just repeating that like a mantra isn't going to make it true. Athlone has already shown in great detail while you are just projecting your own preferences while you have done nothing to substantiate your claims. You seem to be pushing your own opinions as fact a lot on this board.

And for the record, those photos are altered. Papparazzi photos of Kim K when she's not photoshopped and not wearing make-up shows her for what she is - an overweight gnome.

I broke down those traits in an above post.

Can you refute any of those traits as NOT being generally accepted?

[Mighty Mouse]

Three of the most generally accepted physical traits that are considered attractive in women are:

- long legs
- overall well-proportionate body
- slender

Instead K.K. is/has:

- 5ft2 with short legs
- a disgusting ass that is completely out of proportion considering the rest of her body
- fat

Just my personal opinion. If others like her looks more than I do, I accept it, because it's not my business.

[Dash Global]

(08-16-2011 11:32 AM)Mighty Mouse Wrote:  

Three of the most generally accepted physical traits that are considered attractive in women are:

- long legs
- overall well-proportionate body
- slender

Instead K.K. is/has:

- 5ft2 with short legs
- a disgusting ass that is completely out of proportion considering the rest of her body
- fat

Just my personal opinion. If others like her looks more than I do, I accept it, because it's not my business.

You consider the pictures above depicting a FAT woman?!?!?!?

You could add those into the list I provided. Like I said there is many different generally accepted traits of attractiveness.

Only thing I will comment on is differentiating between slender and skinny.

But I concur with those traits. Im assuming you are not recognizing that short girls with plump round asses are considered attractive also.......

Interesting descussion fellas. Like to get a look into what people are thinking when they see and rate women.

[Nonpareil]

10: 1 in 1,000,000+ (if it even exists)
9: 1 in 100
8: 1 in 20
7: 1 in 8
6: 1 in 5
5: 1 in 3
4: 1 in 3
3: 1 in 3
2: 1 in 10
1: 1 in 20

[Mrs. Chocolate]

(08-15-2011 01:30 PM)Tuthmosis Wrote:  

And, does that dumb bitch on the left realize what she's unwittingly evoking?

Gee, I had the same idea! thanks you Tuthmosis!

[Excelsior]

(08-16-2011 10:42 AM)Dash Global Wrote:  

How? Noticed I didnt say she is an 8 because I think so, or because I prefer any of her characteristics.

She is an 8 because in layman terms most men find her and her features very attractive.

Great rack
Plump ass
Pretty face

Has nothing to do with me or what I think. Only thing is I know what is generally accepted characteristics of universal beauty and recognize it when I see it.

It has everything to do with what you think.

Somebody could easily call her a 6 or a 7, or go to the other extreme and call her a perfect 10. It is subjective. We can probably mostly agree that she doesn't belong in the "What Do You Consider a 5" thread, but beyond that subjectivity is inherent. You have no basis to state that she is rigidly a universal 8 or any other particular number-that is your opinion, and nothing more.

Stop trying to affirm rigid universal standards where they do not exist.

[Dash Global]

(08-16-2011 07:06 PM)Athlone McGinnis Wrote:  

(08-16-2011 10:42 AM)Dash Global Wrote:  

How? Noticed I didnt say she is an 8 because I think so, or because I prefer any of her characteristics.

She is an 8 because in layman terms most men find her and her features very attractive.

Great rack
Plump ass
Pretty face

Has nothing to do with me or what I think. Only thing is I know what is generally accepted characteristics of universal beauty and recognize it when I see it.

It has everything to do with what you think.

Somebody could easily call her a 6 or a 7, or go to the other extreme and call her a perfect 10. It is subjective. We can probably mostly agree that she doesn't belong in the "What Do You Consider a 5" thread, but beyond that subjectivity is inherent. You have no basis to state that she is rigidly a universal 8 or any other particular number-that is your opinion, and nothing more.

Stop trying to affirm rigid universal standards where they do not exist.

Gonna have to agree to disagree on this.

I certainly believe there is GENERALLY ACCEPTED UNIVERSAL CHARACTERISTICS & TRAITS OF BEAUTY

An believe that what we perceive INDIVIDUALITY alone has no barring on the fact of the matter on whether a female is hot or not.

The collected opinion of the MAJORITY is what defines and determines attractiveness and hotness.

[_DC_]

(08-16-2011 07:13 PM)Dash Global Wrote:  

(08-16-2011 07:06 PM)Athlone McGinnis Wrote:  

(08-16-2011 10:42 AM)Dash Global Wrote:  

How? Noticed I didnt say she is an 8 because I think so, or because I prefer any of her characteristics.

She is an 8 because in layman terms most men find her and her features very attractive.

Great rack
Plump ass
Pretty face

Has nothing to do with me or what I think. Only thing is I know what is generally accepted characteristics of universal beauty and recognize it when I see it.

It has everything to do with what you think.

Somebody could easily call her a 6 or a 7, or go to the other extreme and call her a perfect 10. It is subjective. We can probably mostly agree that she doesn't belong in the "What Do You Consider a 5" thread, but beyond that subjectivity is inherent. You have no basis to state that she is rigidly a universal 8 or any other particular number-that is your opinion, and nothing more.

Stop trying to affirm rigid universal standards where they do not exist.

Gonna have to agree to disagree on this.

I certainly believe there is GENERALLY ACCEPTED UNIVERSAL CHARACTERISTICS & TRAITS OF BEAUTY

An believe that what we perceive INDIVIDUALITY alone has no barring on the fact of the matter on whether a female is hot or not.

The collected opinion of the MAJORITY is what defines and determines attractiveness and hotness.

"GENERALLY ACCEPTED UNIVERSAL CHARACTERISTICS & TRAITS OF BEAUTY"

I think that's the gist of it. A universally accepted trait of beauty is going to be a quality that the AVERAGE person finds attractive. I agree with you that taking the average rating from every American male (or any male really) would land Kim about an 8.

It simple. Plenty of guys will find her to be a "10", while plenty, like an above poster think she's thick and may give her a "6". That's not absurd, its just an opinion. I'd still peg her as a "7" or "8" though I definitely like thinner girls.

There are freaks out there who might get her a "1" and give some 400lb girl a "10". These people exist. It's perhaps why a true "10" universal average is impossible (because not everyone is going to vote "10").

So in conclusion there ARE UNIVERSAL traits considered beautiful when taking the AVERAGE MALE'S PERSPECTIVE (every guys rating/# of guys rating) e.g. generally thinner, hour glass figure, round ass, adequate tits, clear skin, long legs etc. So I suppose I agree with you, that there are "generally accepted positive traits". But you can't chastise somebody for "not recognizing" that somebody is an 8, for example. That person just has tastes outside the average person.

[Dash Global]

(08-16-2011 07:26 PM)_DC_ Wrote:  

(08-16-2011 07:13 PM)Dash Global Wrote:  

(08-16-2011 07:06 PM)Athlone McGinnis Wrote:  

(08-16-2011 10:42 AM)Dash Global Wrote:  

How? Noticed I didnt say she is an 8 because I think so, or because I prefer any of her characteristics.

She is an 8 because in layman terms most men find her and her features very attractive.

Great rack
Plump ass
Pretty face

Has nothing to do with me or what I think. Only thing is I know what is generally accepted characteristics of universal beauty and recognize it when I see it.

It has everything to do with what you think.

Somebody could easily call her a 6 or a 7, or go to the other extreme and call her a perfect 10. It is subjective. We can probably mostly agree that she doesn't belong in the "What Do You Consider a 5" thread, but beyond that subjectivity is inherent. You have no basis to state that she is rigidly a universal 8 or any other particular number-that is your opinion, and nothing more.

Stop trying to affirm rigid universal standards where they do not exist.

Gonna have to agree to disagree on this.

I certainly believe there is GENERALLY ACCEPTED UNIVERSAL CHARACTERISTICS & TRAITS OF BEAUTY

An believe that what we perceive INDIVIDUALITY alone has no barring on the fact of the matter on whether a female is hot or not.

The collected opinion of the MAJORITY is what defines and determines attractiveness and hotness.

It is sorta like having that one friend that hits on every lizard he sees and thinks the ugly beast is a dime piece. No one takes him serious.

Then you will have that one friend with a sick eye for talent and you know when he says she is a 8+ than she is straight FIRE

"GENERALLY ACCEPTED UNIVERSAL CHARACTERISTICS & TRAITS OF BEAUTY"

I think that's the gist of it. A universally accepted trait of beauty is going to be a quality that the AVERAGE person finds attractive. I agree with you that taking the average rating from every American male (or any male really) would land Kim about an 8.

It simple. Plenty of guys will find her to be a "10", while plenty, like an above poster think she's thick and may give her a "6". That's not absurd, its just an opinion. I'd still peg her as a "7" or "8" though I definitely like thinner girls.

There are freaks out there who might get her a "1" and give some 400lb girl a "10". These people exist. It's perhaps why a true "10" universal average is impossible (because not everyone is going to vote "10").

So in conclusion there ARE UNIVERSAL traits considered beautiful when taking the AVERAGE MALE'S PERSPECTIVE (every guys rating/# of guys rating) e.g. generally thinner, hour glass figure, round ass, adequate tits, clear skin, long legs etc. So I suppose I agree with you, that there are "generally accepted positive traits". But you can't chastise somebody for "not recognizing" that somebody is an 8, for example. That person just has tastes outside the average person.

Bingo.

Im not chastising anyone. But if someone rates Kim Kardashian a 5 or 6 they will lose all credibility with me in regards to rating women. And I will take what they say with grain of salt.

[Luckystar]

(08-16-2011 07:13 PM)Dash Global Wrote:  

The collected opinion of the MAJORITY is what defines and determines attractiveness and hotness.

The majority doesn't know its head from its ass anymore. It has unknowingly been bamboozled into admiring 'PHAT' asses and 'cougars'.

We are shamed into thinking girls are 'too young' and 'too skinny'. Most guys are too rejected and too sex starved to care to think otherwise.

KK is both a chunky situation and over-the-hill to me. Can't be more than 6.5.

[Dash Global]

It is sorta like that friend you have that hooks up with anything and believes the ugly lizard he is smashing is 8+ or dime piece. No one takes that dude serious, and knows he doesnt even know what a hot bitch looks like.

Then you got people with an eye for talent that knows what the fuck looks good and you can bet the house that when he says a chick is 8+ that the bitch will be straight FIRE

[oldnemesis]

(08-16-2011 12:09 AM)Dash Global Wrote:  

Both these women are HB9's atleast facially speaking.

Just to see how fragile this thing is, I rate the first girl at 8 (because she's blonde; if she was a brunette, she may be 9). And the second is 7 at best because of her fake boobs, which is a major turn-off for me.

There goes your "at least 9".

Quote:

I should not have used the word large. Generally speaking every man will agree with these two points.
Atleast a HANDFUL of tits are requited.

I already disagree here. Handful is definitely not required, and too large is definitely a turnoff. And so are fake boobs.

As I said before, obsession with large tits is quite specific to America, and the rest of the world mostly lives comfortably with their B/C cups and don't even think of boobjobs.

Quote:

Someone with a good grasp on universal beauty will be able to discern the two.

Personally I don't give shit what kind of ass a girl has as long as it is not ugly. So this is not even a qualification for me. Again you're projecting things which are relevant for you on every one of us.

Quote:

A perfect of great looking pussy is one that doesnt have any lips or flaps hanging down.

This is quite useless criteria, as one's chance to see a pussy of even a 9 is, let's say, extremely limited.

Quote:

Most men know what slamming tits and ass are. Most men know what a model face looks like. Most men know what a nice looking pussy looks like. Most men know what a proportional body looks like. If a women has all those characteristics than she is a 10. Plain and Simple.

For you maybe. However if you think everyone has the same set of preferences as you do, this is a mistake. For example, right here we had people who said nice feet are important to them. We had quite a few people who said good teeth are important to them. OTOH nobody ever yet mentioned pussy shape as important. So, as I said, it is not that simple as you think it is.

(08-16-2011 01:50 AM)Dash Global Wrote:  

When I use the term perfection it simply means she satisfies IN ONE WAY all of these characteristics.
1) Model Face
2) Nice Rack
3) Nice Ass
4) Nice Pussy
5) Proportional

And three out of those five criteria are pretty irrelevant for me.

[oldnemesis]

(08-16-2011 09:31 AM)Dash Global Wrote:  

Mightymouse I hate to be the one that breaks this to you but if you think Kim Kardashian is a FIVE than you simply do not know what looks good. Like I previously pointed out just because you or one of your buddies thinks girl "A" is hot doesnt make her hot. She is only out if most men would aggree.

Actually I'm with Mightymouse here. I have no idea who's the girl at the pictures you posted, but on the first three pictures she REALLY looks like a Thai tranny (and honestly I've seen MUCH better trannies than her). Especially on picture 3. And applying to "most men" is kinda lame, as you obviously don't know what the "most men" think.

[Dash Global]

@Oldnemesis

I lost count how many times you mentioned your preference for rating women.....

We are already at a crossroads of disagreements there lol as like I already mentioned ones personal preference alone has no bearing on generally accepted universal beauty. You might like flat chested women, but most men will laugh at that notion and just write you off. Same goes is you like fat bitches. I mean nothing wrong with that if you do, but dont expect anyone to take anything you say in regards to women with more than a grain of salt.

Most men dont like these traits?!? Lol OK

1) Model Face
2) Nice Rack
3) Nice Ass
4) Nice Pussy
5) Proportional

You already said 3 of those traits are not important to you. lol I mean I dont even know what to say in regards to that.

Here again we are just gonna have to agree to disagree on this one.

[Excelsior]

(08-16-2011 07:13 PM)Dash Global Wrote:  

Gonna have to agree to disagree on this.

I certainly believe there is GENERALLY ACCEPTED UNIVERSAL CHARACTERISTICS & TRAITS OF BEAUTY

...up until a certain point. Said standards might allow most of us to agree that Kim Kardashian doesn't belong in the "What do You Consider a 5" thread.

Beyond that, you are dealing with subjectivity where personal preference becomes a main factor. You cannot make any firm claims about her being a universal 8-that is your opinion. The guys who give her a 6.5, a 9, a 10 or a 7 are not any less in the right than you are.

Quote:

An believe that what we perceive INDIVIDUALITY alone has no barring on the fact of the matter on whether a female is hot or not.

...I'm sorry, what?

Here, let me re-write this sentence for you in English:

Quote:

I believe that individual, subjective male perception of female attractiveness has little baring on a female's objective measure of beauty, or lack thereof.

There, that should do.

anyway, beyond a certain level, subjectivity is inherent. Your calling Kim-K an 8 has no more weight than my considering her a 6-7 or another guy calling her a 9.5.

Quote:

The collected opinion of the MAJORITY is what defines and determines attractiveness and hotness.

The majority might agree (as OldNem shows, this is a very tentative "might") that Kim-K is attractive(read: hot enough not to belong in the "What Would You Consider a 5" thread).
Beyond this point, there is not rigid standard. For every guy who gives her an 8, there are likely a similar number who will hand her a 9 and similarly more guys who will hand her a 7 or 7.5.

At this level, there is no firm standard. That you are trying to establish one("LOL, she is definitely an 8!", "You give her a 6.5 I have no respect for you") shows not knowledge, but ignorance, arrogance and paternalism.

Then again, I'm beginning to think that you can't help it.

[Dash Global]

Gonna have to agree to disagree on this one Athlone.

Kim Kardashian is easily accepted as ATLEAST an 8. Someone who gives her a 5 or 6 is in their own lala land and doesnt hold the basic standards of beauty which I outlined numerous times. Nothing wrong with going against the accepted norm. To each his own.

I stand by my premise as you do yours.

We both explained our point more than enough.

Nothing wrong with having different views. Wouldnt be nothing to debate otherwise lol

[Saladin]

Who cares what a 10 is. For me a 10 is a really hot girl you see rarely, maybe a few times a month in Toronto or once a day in a place like Stockholm. Doesn't mean she's perfect, its just that she's really hot.

To each his own.

[Dash Global]

(08-16-2011 08:46 PM)torontokid Wrote:  

Who cares what a 10 is. For me a 10 is a really hot girl you see rarely, maybe a few times a month in Toronto or once a day in a place like Stockholm. Doesn't mean she's perfect, its just that she's really hot.

To each his own.

Not much separating 8-10's.

It is simply a way to get a good picture on how hot / prefect a chick is.

[Luckystar]

Dash, no way is KK an 8.

Imagine KK's lard ass in lingerie walking on a catwalk with Adriana Lima or Candice Swanepoel...it would be hilarious.

It would be an utter mockery.

[Luckystar]

(08-15-2011 01:24 PM)Tuthmosis Wrote:  

My scale is a little different, but similar. In brief:

10: Perfection. A goddess floating through the world. Extremely rare. I've seen, in person, maybe two or three of them in the past five to seven years. One was in Israel, the other was at fit-model convention in Los Angeles, I almost got into a car accident trying to see the third one.

9: Extremely hot. Your day-to-day hot girl with nothing obviously wrong with her.

8: Extremely cute to certifiably hot.

7: Cute.

6: Almost Cute.

5: Fuckable. Slightly embarrassing to be seen with, but not humiliating.

4: Almost-to-barely fuckable. You'd hit it in a serious pinch, but it'd be seriously embarrassing to be seen with her in a way that implied you're hitting it.

3: Straight-up unattractive.

2: Fugly.

1: Repulsive/Sub-Human.

0: Cock.

Cosign.

For me, the scale is precisely as Tuth stated....

[oldnemesis]

(08-16-2011 08:35 PM)Dash Global Wrote:  

I lost count how many times you mentioned your preference for rating women.....
We are already at a crossroads of disagreements there lol as like I already mentioned ones personal preference alone has no bearing on generally accepted universal beauty.

The whole point of this discussion was to prove that there is no such thing as "accepted universal beauty", and that you wrongly believe that the same things which are important for you are as important to anyone else.

Quote:

You might like flat chested women, but most men will laugh at that notion and just write you off.

You have some bad tendency to project your thoughts at everyone else, and you're doing it again. How many men you have talked to out of ~3B Earth population? Get off your high horse, if you think something is good it is nothing but your personal opinion. Everything else is just your speculations.