Trialbyfire Posted July 29, 2009 Posted July 29, 2009 Perhaps so. Although I never did the "numbering" thing, a long time ago my friends and I generally divided women/girls into two groups: those we would do and those we would not. Honestly, there weren't that many who fell into the latter category.As long as it's in reference to women you've never met, no problems. Where your evaluation would bother me a bit, would be if you got to know these women, but still retained the same rating system. In essence, women are only doable or not, valueless without it.
GorillaTheater Posted July 29, 2009 Posted July 29, 2009 As long as it's in reference to women you've never met, no problems. Where your evaluation would bother me a bit, would be if you got to know these women, but still retained the same rating system. In essence, women are only doable or not, valueless without it. A fair concern. Yes, our rating system, such as it was, was mainly exercised at the beach. There was a time when East Beach in Galveston was practically my permanent address. That was also the place where I swore I'd never get married or have kids, though.
thegoodlife Posted July 29, 2009 Posted July 29, 2009 I haven't and I can't say I know of or have known any females who use the 1-10 rating scale. Like others have mentioned we either find someone attractive, or not.
Jersey Shortie Posted July 29, 2009 Posted July 29, 2009 As long as it's in reference to women you've never met, no problems. Where your evaluation would bother me a bit, would be if you got to know these women, but still retained the same rating system. In essence, women are only doable or not, valueless without it. Not to sound too cynical but I think men do only value women on their "doableness". Hence the reason men are more likely to be critical of women and their bodies then women are of men and theirs.
GorillaTheater Posted July 29, 2009 Posted July 29, 2009 Not to sound too cynical but I think men do only value women on their "doableness". Hence the reason men are more likely to be critical of women and their bodies then women are of men and theirs. I was 18-19 at the time. Don't use that as evidence to support your over-arching thesis; all men are not the same and even a boy as dopey as I was grows out of it. And you don't sound cynical; you sound like a woman waiting to be martyred and is somewhat looking foward to it.
Trialbyfire Posted July 29, 2009 Posted July 29, 2009 Not to sound too cynical but I think men do only value women on their "doableness". Hence the reason men are more likely to be critical of women and their bodies then women are of men and theirs.All men value women on doability, in a romantic relationship. As long as it's only a component and not the sole driver of attraction, it's fine. To believe that sexuality is unimportant in any romantic relationship, isn't realistic. Why not just have a best friend, rather than getting involved with the opposite gender, if sex isn't an element?
Jersey Shortie Posted July 29, 2009 Posted July 29, 2009 I wasn't using your statement to support anything. I stand by the statement that men are more critical of women and their bodies/looks then women are of men and theirs. You want to dispute it? And honestly Gorilla, there is not one thing in my post that even suggests at waiting to be martyred. And I really think it's unfair pulling out that card just for the fact that you don't like what I have to say. It's one thing wanting to be "martyred" and quite another to hope the opposite gender makes some leeps in wanting to understand the issues the other gender faces.
Els Posted July 29, 2009 Posted July 29, 2009 Not to sound too cynical but I think men do only value women on their "doableness". Hence the reason men are more likely to be critical of women and their bodies then women are of men and theirs. Correction: Only shallow men only value women based on their 'doableness'. Not 'men' in general. My guy and all my previous exes have never done the dumb rating system. Nor, frankly, would they be with me if 'doableness' was all they wanted because I don't rate very high in physical terms nor do I care about it.
Trialbyfire Posted July 29, 2009 Posted July 29, 2009 JS, think about it this way. Take two men you've never met before. One who you find physically appealing, the other you don't. If they both approached you at the identical time, who would you give preferential treatment to, without having a conversation with either of them? Men aren't the devil and women aren't angels, with the reverse holding true. Judge by individual.
Adunaphel Posted July 29, 2009 Posted July 29, 2009 No point in doing the 1-10 rating thing if you are not in company and do not have at least some cardboard and markers at hand.
Recommended Posts