May15

Should I Date a 7 or Hold Out for a 10?

08:46 am on May 15th 2009 Evan Marc Katz

Finding the One Online is a comprehensive, life-changing program that covers everything I teach my clients about online dating. If you want to get your love life on track and aren't sure where to start, Finding the One Online is the best investment you can make.

80 Comments »Filed Under Dating Tips & Advice, Favorites

80 Responses to “Should I Date a 7 or Hold Out for a 10?”

1. Lance May 15th 2009 at 09:02 am 1

   LOL, can’t wait to respond to this one. I’ll blog a reply this afternoon. Cheers!

   Lance´s last blog post…Stomp, Anniversaries, Obama, and Vacations

2. starthrower68 May 15th 2009 at 09:11 am 2

   Evan you possess what so few poeple pay attention to, and that is wisdom. I have made acquaintences with 10’s – not dated, but been introduced, and sure, there are some very nice ones out there. But because society treats “pretty people” differently, they are groomed to think and behave certain ways. I’m not sure that being a guy who’s a 10 serially dating a string of 10’s is a very satisfying way to live. At some point I think we all long to put down roots and find that one person who we can grow old with. But again, that’s wisdom. I believe wisdom is making a decision today that you will be happy with down the road. We all have a lot of head knowledge but not a lot of wisdom.

   Lance is going to be looking for that perfect woman for a very long time. I hope he can live up to the same standards that he’s holding her to.

3. Honey May 15th 2009 at 09:43 am 3

   Well, considering the amount of effort that Lance is willing to put into the relationship (no matter who it’s with) is a 5, I think that’s probably what he can ultimately expect!

   SNAP! That’s right, I said it, Lance

   Honey´s last blog post…Stomp, Anniversaries, Obama, and Vacations

4. Lance May 15th 2009 at 09:51 am 4

   @Honey: Haha, very funny.

   @Starthrower: You’re making the assumption that I’m looking for a perfect woman, that I need a perfect woman to make my life somehow more complete and satisfying, and that the pinnacle of human relationship is an LTR or a “marriage.”

   Lance´s last blog post…Stomp, Anniversaries, Obama, and Vacations

5. LK May 15th 2009 at 09:55 am 5

   Roughly speaking, I seem to instinctively place men into 3 categories when it comes to appearance/sex appeal/spark: C = “No way in hell”; B = “I can make this work”; A = “TAKE ME NOW PLEASE!”.

   Obviously there are gradations within each category. And obviously this is subjective to *me*.

   I think I generally find the As too intimidating. They’re fun to admire, but I can’t feel like myself around them.

   I have always been pretty sure I will wind up with someone on the mid to upper end of the B range. I think that is the same as Evan’s 7.

   I can’t date Cs because there is just zero possibility of chemistry. But Cs are probably not even half of my target demographic.

   It’s not just based on appearance for me. It has a lot to do with how a guy carries himself and what kind of spark is in his eyes.

6. JuJu May 15th 2009 at 10:15 am 6

   Evan is describing the all-around alpha male, while there are also good(enough)-looking omegas (which probably automatically no longer qualifies them as omegas, but you get my drift). The latter is what I want for myself. A loving and devoted man whom I can imagine having sex with (preferably, indefinitely).

7. Alan Roger Currie May 15th 2009 at 10:25 am 7

   Good read Evan.

   One of the reasons why I believe you have so many dating singles these days is because all of the men and women are pursuing 9s and 10s (to no avail).

   Let’s say you put 2500 singles on an island. (1300 single women and 1200 single men) Let’s say that 10% of each group are “10s,” 10% are “9s”, 10% are “8s”, 15% are “7s”, 20% are “6s”, 20% are “5s,” 5% are “4s”, 4% are “3s”, 3% are “2s” and 3% are “1s”

   If everyone, hypothetically, were to date ‘within their range,’ just about everyone would find a companion. But if you have 75-90% of the men chasing female “10s” and 65-75% of the women chasing male “9s and 10s,” then you’re going to have some ‘lucky’ people … but more so, a high degree of disappointed and even frustrated singles.

   This is essentially what is going on right now in society….

   Alan Roger Currie´s last blog post…The Secret Power of Single Women – May 22,2009

8. Carol May 15th 2009 at 10:25 am 8

   Evan,
   You’re a genius! I totally agree! Especially in big cities (like L.A. where WE live) it’s soooooo easy to get drawn to the seemingly endless parade of “10’s” on every street corner – but I love how you point out how often these people are self-absorbed, spoiled, or underdeveloped in other CRUCIAL ways. It’s like people who become famous – after a few years of everyone kissing their “you-know-what” and bending over backwards to impress them/make them happy/get their attention, they can’t POSSIBLY be normal anymore, or understand what it’s like to be a mere mortal. This is what happens to 10’s (or the extremely rich – anyone who has that kind of power for some reason). They stop breathing the air the rest of us breathe, and the only way to succeed with them is on THEIR terms, which makes being happy with them in a “partnership” impossible. Thanks for trying to wake up the masses! You’re a gem!

9. M May 15th 2009 at 10:43 am 9

   It’s nice to see that other people struggle with this as well, but I just want to confirm what you are saying Evan, because I think its important. 1) speaking as someone who has gotten the 10’s all her life, this “7″ relationship is FAR better than any of those other relationships, which is why I had the pause to begin with and 2) when I listened to you, and made that decision to invest in what I had with this person the relationship, and the passion, only got better. It continues to grow from the 7 because of how great everything else is. It really was good advice, and I thank you for telling me what no-one else either had the nerve to point out, or just didn’t understand.

10. JuJu May 15th 2009 at 10:43 am 10

    Oh, and one other thing no one has mentioned yet, but everyone probably knows: the beautiful ones aren’t good in bed. Since they have no incentive to try to please their partners.
    Maybe (maybe) it’s less of a problem for men, who can just get off on someone’s looks, but it doesn’t entirely work that way with me.

11. alicia May 15th 2009 at 10:49 am 11

    Thanks for this post. I am sending it to ALL my single friends, male and female!!

12. starthrower68 May 15th 2009 at 11:06 am 12

    Lance, I responded to Evan’s mention of you in his post. I agree that we don’t need another person to complete us. And I’m sure for some, marriage is not the ultimate relationship. If that’s how you roll, more power to ya. It’s obvious my set of values are a bit different, but I’m not sitting around pining for a spouse. But I believe our relationships, be they romantic or non-romantic are the only thing we’ll take with us. I guess if being a serial dater allows one to have the ability to make a positive impact in the life of others, then by all means. It just seems like a series of “losses” to me.

13. Sara May 15th 2009 at 11:42 am 13

    I don’t understand people who think this way. I have met guys I initially felt extremely attracted to, but after talking to them for 10 minutes, my attraction waned to zero. I have also met guys I only felt a flicker of attraction for initially that I eventually (or shortly thereafter!) became extremely attracted. People don’t fall into, and then stay in, little categories like that.

    People dating online can’t help but assign numerical values to things like “long-term compatibility” and “physical attractiveness” because you can’t decide if you’re really attracted to someone until you’re with them in person. You can only guess. This kind of thinking just seems so simplistic and pointless to me because it assumes everyone is attracted to the same thing. If you disagree, then just ask a group of men and women whether they think Sarah Jessica Parker is attractive. There will be people arguing vehemently on both sides.

14. The Mike May 15th 2009 at 12:09 pm 14

    If you hold out for a “10″, you will be lonely! Also, a “7″ will work harder and appreciate it.

15. Ric May 15th 2009 at 12:09 pm 15

    Evan,
    An excellent and provocative post.
    Physical beauty fades and only brings so much to a relationship. Intellect, Caring, Independence and other values add points for me.
    Ric

16. Paul May 15th 2009 at 12:50 pm 16

    I find myself caught in that trap all the time, looking for the absolute best looking women I can find. And I did. And we hit it off. And guess what…I can barely get her to go out with me…still wants to play the field. So I am vowing to go out with some women that I ordinarily wouldn’t. We’ll see how it goes, but I’m afraid I’ll be with them, thinking I could do better. I guess if your really hitting it off and you have that elusive “connection”, her looks and size of breasts and all that other stuff men select for becomes really insignificant. I’m in communication with a few7’s now and it seems like we get along well and I don’t have to try as hard to be liked or impress them, and the pressure is not totally on me for the success of the relationship and some of it is on them. that’s a good thing. It seems to be more equal. It is funny that JuJu said that the 10’s are the lousiest lovers…some of the best times I ever had in bed were with a really homely gals. I’m 50, and a 6 who thinks he’s a 8 btw, so the sex thing is not quite as important…been there, done that, have proven myself. I did want to ask JuJu though if women have to be able to imagine themselves having sex with someone in order to be attracted to them? I thought that was an interesting comment.

17. Steve May 15th 2009 at 01:34 pm 17

    However, the exception doesn’t disprove the rule.

    Amen. I find myself in that kind of argument all of the time with people.

    
    Generally, if you’re disagreeing with me, it’s because something I said hit you emotionally and rubs you the wrong way. That’s fair. It doesn’t negate the fact that my observations are just that – observations.

    Yep, those arguments I find myself in boil down to people being offended by reality and trying to argue reality into being different….instead of dealing with it the way that it is.

18. Steve May 15th 2009 at 01:40 pm 18

    IMHO, 7s, 8s and 9s can be quite attractive, great in bed and awesome company.

    I think some people who push aside a good thing to insist upon a 10 have ego/self worth/narcissistic issues.

19. Steve May 15th 2009 at 01:48 pm 19

    @Juju, comment #6.

    I was never in a fraternity so I am NOT sure I am right, but I think omega is the greek ‘z’. You may indeed be able to get yourself an alpha male, but if you can’t , based on your comments, I think you can settle for higher than an omega, the absolute bottom .

20. Steve May 15th 2009 at 01:56 pm 20

    Ack, comment number @18 looks like it could be a slam — not my intent — I was speaking in general.

21. Karl R May 15th 2009 at 02:03 pm 21

    Lance said: (#4)
    “You’re making the assumption that I’m looking for a perfect woman,”
    Lance said: (in another thread)
    “I wouldn’t advise anyone to date a 7. I say go for the 10 that’s awesome on the inside, too. They’re out there, you just have to look around and be the man that’s worthy enough to get with that gal.”

    I think starthrower68 made the (obvious) assumption that you were following your own advice.

    Just to be clear, you recommend that other people only pursue people who are 10s (on the outside and inside), but you don’t bother pursuing those 10s yourself?

    Lance said: (#4)
    “You’re making the assumption [...] that the pinnacle of human relationship is an LTR or a marriage.”

    I think starthrower68 made the (obvious) assumption that people only seek perfection (and reject 7s) if they’re looking for a long-term relationship. If I’m just looking for some fun, I can pick up the 7 tonight (or a 3 tonight) … and it won’t get in the way of me picking up a 10 (or a 7) tomorrow. There’s no need to be picky.

    I’m really missing the point behind your advice … unless you’re just trying extra-hard to play the devil’s advocate.

22. Joe Basile May 15th 2009 at 02:57 pm 22

    Everybody thinks there a 10. And “10″ subject to taste. So, should you hold out for a ten? One person’s 7 is another’s 10….

23. sjz May 15th 2009 at 03:03 pm 23

    Wow,
    I thought that 7’s were up there on the dating scale! So what do 1-6’s do when they want to date? Hang it up and move to a desert island and hope the monkeys will date them? I find all this numerical numbering of people based on their looks to be sooooooooooo sad. Even tho its reality, it seems to me that there really isn’t that much of a difference between a 7 and a 10, especially when it comes to personal preference. I am so glad everyone on here thinks they can date ONLY a 7. Get real people!

24. JuJu May 15th 2009 at 03:42 pm 24

    Paul said: So I am vowing to go out with some women that I ordinarily wouldn’t.

    Here is what I would like to know: you wouldn’t normally go out with those women because YOU don’t find them attractive, or purely because they are not 10’s?

    As for your question – I personally am not able to imagine during sex that I am with someone else (heh, wouldn’t that solve all the problems of dating quite nicely), and I also realize that one’s enjoyment of sex doesn’t only result from what their partner is doing to pleasure them, but from the fact of the mere excitement of being with this particular person. Probably even more so the latter than the former.

    I am certainly not one to downplay the importance of physical attraction: I probably mentioned more than once already on these boards that I had a husband after only five years with whom I no longer wanted sex with him (which is not to say I no longer wanted sex). No matter what he did to me, it just didn’t turn me on. That was what made me conclude that if I want to start a long-term partnership with someone (not sure I believe in the possibility of a lifetime one) and especially start a family, I have to do it with someone who is more my type to begin with.

    Moreover, at some point I became very aware of the fact that I didn’t want children WITH HIM.

    Granted, no one will excite you indefinitely, but five years is really nothing – I heard of people still wanting sex with each other after 20 years of marriage, or more. But then, my ex-husband was only a five or a six when we first started dating, and got progressively less attractive as he started losing hair.

    Funny: I was 10 years younger (so, supposedly conventionally more desirable, right?) and yet at this point I wouldn’t consider even going on a date with someone like him, let alone and dating such a prospect exclusively or marrying that man.

    Btw, does age figure into one’s “grade”? That 10 you mention – is she in your age group?

25. JuJu May 15th 2009 at 03:59 pm 25

    Steve,

    I was referring to the alphas and the omegas of the animal world. (Wikipedia article )

    After all, there is no such terminology in existence as “mu” or “nu”. =)

    However, as my question to Paul implied, what is most important to me is whether I find the man attractive. I couldn’t care less how he is perceived by others (an alpha trait, btw). And for me to find someone attractive he doesn’t have to be a conventional 10 (besides, I have a very specific type).

26. Selena May 15th 2009 at 05:58 pm 26

    So many of us believe the grading scale is completely subjective. What I wonder is if the “7’s” in LA would be considered “10″’s elsewhere in our vast country?

    The smaller the pond….

27. Selena May 15th 2009 at 06:11 pm 27

    Re: Sara #13

    Good example with Sarah Jessica Parker for debating how subjective attractiveness is. People can (and do) discuss celebrities this way without universal agreement.

    How about Nicholas Cage? Tori Spelling?

    And the maybe the longest running attractiveness debate: Ginger? Or MaryAnn?

28. Curly Girl May 15th 2009 at 08:01 pm 28

    While we’re on the subject of attractiveness, I give Evan’s hair on the show a 10 because it is curly and natural. Though it looks good blown out, too. It’s nice to have options.

    I agree that the math in this thread is weird. Alan, how could everybody end up evenly matched if you have 1300 women and 1200 men? Or are you throwing some lesbians into the mix?

    How come there are no gay people speaking up on this board?

    I think that gay men would like Evan’s hair on TV, too, but not because it’s gay. Just because it looks good. Any gay men want to comment?

29. Curly Girl May 15th 2009 at 08:13 pm 29

    SJP is very skinny (maybe unnatural) and has curly hair (natural). I used to date a guy (only briefly) who harumphed when I said in an off-hand way that all of the women on SATC were attractive. He used to criticize the way women on TV/in the movies looked ALL THE TIME. It was such a turn-off. Like, a major, major turn-off. I’m pretty cute, but not as cute as the SATC women (maybe if I had a stylist). This guy? Humongous gut and braces. (Also a turn-off, but I give people a chance.)

    My point: Want what you want, but it doesn’t mean you’re going to get it.

30. Alan Roger Currie May 15th 2009 at 10:35 pm 30

    @Curly Girl…

    I never said that the “math” would end up with people matching up evenly….

    There are always going to be men who want at least TWO partners….

    

    Alan Roger Currie´s last blog post…Lots of Sex Talk on "Upfront & Straightforward with Alan Roger Currie"

31. sjz May 16th 2009 at 07:26 am 31

    Did anyone see the “Science of Sex”on TLC last week? They numbered 10 women and 10 men’s foreheads with a number from 1-10. You didn’t know the number on your forehead but, the other person did. It was funny to see all the high numbers trying to find a high number and all the low numbers also trying to find a high number. In the end (if I remember correctly) everyone ended up pretty evenly matched. A great experiment that probably reflects reality.

32. Honey May 16th 2009 at 07:38 am 32

    I think there are a couple of faulty assumptions going on in this thread. The first is that these “7’s” know they are sevens (when as Evan and others have said everyone thinks they are a 10) and the second is that these 7’s know you are “dating down” by not going for a 10 yourself.

    I think many 7’s are just as flaky because even though they can’t, they think they can just dump you (you’re a 7, too, after all) and go for a 10 as well.

    I am sure the BF and I are both 7s at best in the looks department (I have super curly hair which those who brought up SJP as an example of something that is not everyone’s style…and I am not NEARLY as skinny as she is…the BF is about 5′7″ which probably bumps him way down on most women’s scales) but we share VALUES (and hard to come by values at that…atheism, vegetarianism, no desire for children, etc.) and that is why we are a good match.

    Honey´s last blog post…Stomp, Anniversaries, Obama, and Vacations

33. A-L May 16th 2009 at 07:53 am 33

    Let me just say upfront that I agree with Evan’s post, and I also find it interesting how much less contentious this thread is than the other one was.

    But SJZ brings up an interesting point in #23. How is this rating system working? I’ve assumed that a 5 is average, and a person’s number goes up or down depending on how more (or less) attractive they are than the average. I’ve also assumed there’s something of a bell curve effect, with that vast majority of people in the 4-6 range, a smaller number in the 7-8s & 2-3s, and an even smaller number of 9-10s and 1s. For example:

    9-10: 5%
    7-8: 20%
    4-6: 55%
    2-3: 15
    1: 5%

    By my generous estimation, 75% of the population is below a 7. How likely is it that a 4, much less a 2, can actually get that 7? Perhaps the Joey from Friends theory that you can only date someone within two levels of you has some merit. Or the one I like better, Lk’s idea (#5) of “I can make this work.” Basically, the idea of a 7 as someone that you find pleasurably beddable (sp?) regardless of their actual numerical rank.

34. Alan Roger Currie May 16th 2009 at 10:35 am 34

    I know everyone’s criteria for what makes a man or woman a “10″ or a “7″ or a “5″ or a “2″ is different, but I will offer mine:

    “10″ – A woman who is generally considered more physically attractive than 99.9% of the women I’ve been exposed to; This woman draws attention from just about every man she meets;

    “9″ – A woman who is generally considered more physically attractive than roughly 90% of the women I’ve been exposed to and/or this woman tends to draw attention from approximately 9 out of ever ten [single] men she meets

    “8″ – A woman who is generally considered more physically attractive than roughly 80% of the women I’ve been exposed to and/or this woman tends to draw attention from approximately 8 out of ever ten [single] men she meets

    “7″ – A woman who is generally considered more physically attractive than roughly 70% of the women I’ve been exposed to and/or this woman tends to draw attention from approximately 7 out of ever ten [single] men she meets

    “6″ – A woman whose physical appearance is generally considered “average” to “slightly-above-average” compared to the women I’ve been exposed to; She tends to receive an “average” amount of attention from single men.

    “5″ – A woman whose physical appearance is generally considered “average” to “slightly-below-average” compared to the women I’ve been exposed; She generally tends receive an ‘average’ amount of attention from single men

    “4″ – A woman who is generally considered more physically attractive than roughly 40% of the women I’ve been exposed to; She probably receives a less-than-average amount of attention from men

    “3″ – A woman who is generally considered more physically attractive than only 30% of the women I’ve been exposed to; This woman is not really considered “attractive” and/or “romantically appealing” by too many men

    “2″ – A woman who is generally considered more physically attractive than roughly 20% of the women I’ve been exposed; Nine times out of ten, this woman has a hard time attracting attention from men

    “1″ – A woman who is considered by many to simply be “unattractive” (physically) and/or “very unappealing” (non-physical attributes); This woman will probably remain single indefinitely unless something about her physical characteristics change/improve and/or something about her personality/behavior/attitude changes and improves

    My thoughts and $0.02

    Alan Roger Currie´s last blog post…Lots of Sex Talk on "Upfront & Straightforward with Alan Roger Currie"

35. Lance May 16th 2009 at 10:41 am 35

    I have a couple of points: Firstly, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. What I consider a 10 in looks could be a 6 to the next guy. I think skinny chicks with small boobs are hot, but my roommate thinks they’re not. It’s silly to assign numbers.

    Secondly, settling for a “7″ makes the assumption that all or most sevens are exceptional people on the inside. They’re not. Most people are mediocre, boring, undeveloped…that’s why it’s called average. You’re going to have a different set of problems with the 7’s vs. the 10’s, but it’s still problems. I’ve dated plenty of fucked up 7s for sure.

    I prefer to hold out for the 10 person, or at least the person that has the potential to become a 10 (not necessarily in looks), because I work my ass off to be better than average and I hope one of these days I can earn that exceptional partner. It’s that simple.

    I think Evan and I agree here, we’re just saying it in different ways.

    Lance´s last blog post…Downgrade Your Relationship to Upgrade Your Sex Life

36. Cilla May 16th 2009 at 12:47 pm 36

    @ sjz

    I saw that show and also found it interesting, especially when they put mics on the participants and let us hear what they were thinking (e.g. “Oh, no, the hot guy is taken and now I’m stuck with the 3″). Definitely interesting to see how everyone goes for the most attractive person they can find, but nature eventually winds up pairing like with like.

    @ Honey

    I don’t think everyone really thinks they are a 10, they just aspire to mate with one. I know I’m not a 10, in the eyes of the general public, because if I were, I’d be working as a model or an actress. The same holds true for Evan and his wife, cute as they are–if they were 10s, they would likely be in different professions.

    I’m short, not skinny (just curvy, and not curvy as a euphemism for fat), and in my 40’s. In the eyes of a small select population, I might be a 10, but I suspect most of the world would see me as a 6-8, depending on whether I’m in Hollywood or somewhere less exacting about appearance.

    The idea, which I think others have pointed out, is that beauty is *somewhat* within the eye of the beholder (e.g. a 3 to the general public may be a 6 to the woman who loves short men with long beards). I know I look at some men who are considered 10s by the media, and I think they look bland or baby faced–not 10s to me. I agree with the posters who say find someone who is the best suited to you as a whole package: looks; personality; goals; sexual proclivities; etc. It seems like the couples who are the happiest feel like a 10 in the eyes of their mates, and that’s really what it’s all about.

37. starthrower68 May 16th 2009 at 01:26 pm 37

    In a perfect world, we would all date completely based on values; I do agree though that while someone doesn’t have to be a 10 to catch my eye, there does need to be something to get you to look twice. But I while I will admit to enjoying looking at a 10, that is not someone I’m likely to try and date.

38. Michael May 16th 2009 at 01:49 pm 38

    As someone who thinks both Evan’s and Lance’s blogs are excellent, and without nitpicking a rating scale or commenting on the personality flaws a “looks 10″ might have developed, I will say that one basic disconnect here is the skills (aka “game”) and drive of the one who’s “10 hunting.” It IS possible for a guy who’s a 5 to transform himself into a 7 or 8 and then date a 9 or 10. I’ve seen it. I’ve done it.

    But it’s work. Hard work. It requires acquisition of social skills and experience, perhaps work in the gym, advanced grooming and hygiene, and more importantly the willingness to fail and ability to learn from those failures. Most guys can’t or won’t do all that, and you can’t just BE a 5 and hope a 10 will fall in your lap.

    And even then, sheer statistics say that most people won’t end up in a LTR with 10s, or 9s, or 8s for that matter. There just aren’t enough to go around. So for the vast majority of guys (or girls), “holding out” for a 10 would simply be an exercise in frustration and sadness.

    But this is all by the by, because as others have said in different ways, I don’t believe most of us are really seeking a “looks 10.” When our egos are out of the way, we’re seeking “makes me feel good.”

    Michael´s last blog post…Two truths and a lie

39. Evan Marc Katz May 16th 2009 at 04:42 pm 39

    The folly, Michael, is not about men overestimating themselves or not having enough “game”. The folly is that men chase 10’s but don’t consider the considerable downsides and character flaws that accompany dating one. Caveat emptor.

40. Michael May 16th 2009 at 05:24 pm 40

    Agreed that the 10s are at risk for personality issues, in much the same way rock stars and actors are. All too often, being superior at one thing means being deficient in another. How many times on The Actors Studio do the guests have to talk to James Lipton about their broken homes?

    Also, across the looks spectrum, similar flaws exist – it’s just much easier to dismiss a 6 or 7 when she has the same problem that a guy would try to “overcome” in a 10. In that respect, the “character flaw” may be in the pursuer.

    Good discussion, Evan.

    Michael´s last blog post…Two truths and a lie

41. Melissa May 16th 2009 at 09:19 pm 41

    Evan said: “You want to spend 30 years on eggshells because the hot guy or girl is being selfish or doesn’t let you know where you stand? Go ahead.”

    Man that line hits home for me and sums up SEVERAL of my most recent relationships.

    Thanks again for helping the “the light”.

42. Allen Voivod May 16th 2009 at 09:54 pm 42

    I agree with many of your commentors that this is a fabulous discussion, and I think that I generally agree with you, Evan. You’re essentially positing a solid rule of thumb that any person can start from, and make course corrections as needed…except that it’s so damn linear!

    You just flagged the Esquire article by A.J. Jacobs on brain chemistry related to love, and then there’s the psychological school of thought which says we’re all trying to re-create our familes, except that we try to fix the things we didn’t like about them. That’s just two examples of things which factor in on who we pursue as partners, and they’re so NOT related to a 1-10 scale that we might as well start comparing romance to string theory.

    Stick to your guns, Ev. You’re on the right track.

    Best,
    Allen

43. Ravit May 16th 2009 at 11:08 pm 43

    This was fascinating!

44. Rani May 17th 2009 at 05:17 am 44

    I’ve been trying to put my finger on why the ’settle’ for a 7 discussion rubs me the wrong way. Because it makes sense, and really there’s nothing wrong with being a 7 in the looks department (which is reasonably subjective).

    But what bugs is that who wants to be with someone who doesn’t think they are hot/attractive/sexy/beautiful/handsome? My personal fear is that I’m with some guy (who probably isn’t an objective 9 or 10 or even 8 himself), who likes, or even loves, the ‘inside’ me, and the sex is good, but is unsatisfied with me because I’m not a 10. It’s particularly galling when the guy himself isn’t a 10 in any category.

    This may be my issue, since I do sometimes feel like this in my current relationship. He’s never said anything negative about my looks, and usually tells me I’m pretty etc. But he’s a very visual guy with a colorful history, and I’ve never been truly confident in my appearance.

    Who wants to be the person someone else ’settles’ for? Sure, it’s not really settling, it’s being realistic and compromising, but it’s not exactly flattering.

45. Steve May 17th 2009 at 05:53 am 45

    I am one of those people who happens to think SJP is hot and part of me doesn’t think that is “subjective”. I honestly can’t fathom why there are people who do not appreciate her looks.

    I feel the same way about long curly or wavy hair. Who needs viagra?

46. sjz May 17th 2009 at 09:41 am 46

    The numbering system is particularly used in online dating. A picture sometimes can be worth a thousand words. Of course the words go missing when one thinks they are meeting a 10 in person and that person is now a 5 because the picture is 10 years old! But, that is another subject! People can also move from lower to higher numbers in their lifetimes. I know I was probably a 5 as a teen but now in the world of 50 year old woman I am probably an 8. Sometimes there is justice in this world! The problem is that guys that used to be 8 or 9’s are now 5’s. Taking care of yourself really pays off. As they say you are born with the face you inherit but you die with the face you deserve!

47. Kenley May 17th 2009 at 10:08 am 47

    Rani,

    I agree with you. It just doesn’t feel good to be with someone who doesn’t think you are attractive. However, in my personal experience, I have projected my own feelings about myself onto others. So, when I didn’t feel attractive, I just couldn’t understand how my boyfriend could find me attractive. Once I told him how I felt about myself and I just couldn’t figure out why he liked so and he told me what he liked. And, I can’t tell you how stunned I was to hear him describe how he felt about my physical appearance. He thought I was special and perfect for him. I think that’s the way we want to feel about our boyfriends and that’s the way we want them to feel about us.

    For the most part, it seems that the women who write on this blog are supremely confident about themselves on all levels. However, the world we live in makes it very hard for lots of women to feel that they measure up to the standard of beauty we think all men want. And in some ways, I think that these blog does reinforce the idea that because most of us aren’t 10’s, people who chose use are settling and when we chose guys we have to settle too. But the guys I have been happiest with — in spite of my own insecurities — are the ones who think I am a 10 for them — even if the rest of the world would adamantly disagree!

48. Monique May 17th 2009 at 10:35 am 48

    Evan -
    I really get what you are saying here and would like to add this…
    Getting into a relationship is the opportunity to make the relationship a “10″. We can as a result of how we feel about our partner create a mindset that says they are a “10″ in our eyes and heart and then lo and behold it is so.

    Stop chasing 10’s and turn your 7 into a 10 level relationship. Isn’t it the relationship we are after anyway?
    Monique

49. Cilla May 17th 2009 at 10:44 am 49

    @ Rani

    I agree, and I was trying to get at that at the end of my last comment (#36). I’ve been with men who were probably about the same looks-wise as me, but who thought they could always do better (“I should be dating supermodels,” one of them had the nerve to say). I know most men are visual, and they will always look at an attractive woman, as I will enjoy looking at a good looking man–I just don’t need to hear about it, as if I’m failing them somehow by not being a 10. It’s perpetuated in the media; I call it “According To Jim” Syndrome–dumpy, rude guy with hot wife. Men need to realize these matches are about as real as the luxury NY apartments TV characters inhabit on 50K a year.

50. Angela May 17th 2009 at 10:48 am 50

    And I agree with so many others when they say beauty is in the eye of the beholder. We may all agree that certain people are good looking, but whether they are an 8 or a 9 or a 10 can be debated. Also, many attractive people are constantly noticed and approached by others in some cases all their life. The personality dictates how they respond and feel about it.
    I know some 9-10 folks that hate the attention and actually play down their looks.

51. Curly Girl May 17th 2009 at 01:48 pm 51

    I am quite pleased with the way curly hair has been received on this thread.

    Alan: I thought you said that on your mythical 1300/1200 island everyone would have a companion if they were realistic in their self-assessment and in that of prospective partners. I didn’t realize it was an island where there were extra women thrown in so that some men could have two, meaning some women would get only half a guy. If that’s the case, I suspect there would be some women who would opt out altogether rather than settle for half a guy. I don’t believe I’ve ever read anything from Evan advising that women settle for half a guy….half a guy is only a 5!

52. Curly Girl May 17th 2009 at 01:48 pm 52

    And that’s if he’s a 10 to start with…I shudder to do the math on lesser men.

53. jessica May 17th 2009 at 02:58 pm 53

    I’ve not read all these threads… but i don’t think the debate is between a 10 and a 7; I think it’s between a 7 and a 2-3. Most everyone, including me, would date a 7. 7 is pretty high up there – just no Taylor Kitch (if you haven’t seen this guy, he’s on Friday Night Lights and HE is a 10.)
    But let’s face it, 10’s are hard to come by and they usually know they’re 10’s, which makes them a little “me” focused, which isn’t the most appealing trait.
    The real question is: if a really fantastic guy is 3 – do you take the plunge????
    Now that one I have grappled with. (I personally, have not been able to take plunge; and I honestly often wonder: am I missing out!?)

54. casualencounters.com/blog May 17th 2009 at 03:45 pm 54

    It reminds me of the conversation the main character has with his pals in a bar in “A Beautiful Mind”–you’ll know the one I mean if you’ve seen the film.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nash_equilibrium for more.

    casualencounters.com/blog´s last blog post…Weekly Roundup – Top 10 Casual Sex Links from Around the Web

55. Hopeful May 17th 2009 at 11:11 pm 55

    10s? I’m aiming for a 13!

56. Karl R May 18th 2009 at 07:28 am 56

    Rani said: (#44)
    “who wants to be with someone who doesn’t think they are hot/attractive/sexy/beautiful/handsome? My personal fear is that I’m with some guy [...], who likes, or even loves, the ‘inside’ me, and the sex is good, but is unsatisfied with me because I’m not a 10.”

    A little over a year ago I was dating a woman that I thought was amazing. (We broke up because she wanted lots of kids, and I didn’t want any.) Objectively, she might have been a four … but I have a hard time seeing her objectively. Subjectively, I saw her as a seven (in outward appearance). Inwardly, we were a terrific match (except for that one dealbreaker issue).

    If she (unexpectedly) changed her mind about having kids, I’d take her back without hesitation. Compatability like that is hard to find.

    Your fear is a separate issue from his (dis)satisfaction. Sure, if he’s dissatisfied because you’re not a 10, dump him and don’t look back. But base that decision on his dissatisfaction, not your fear.

    At my age, most people have been in a lot of relationships. If I’m dating a woman who has dated 20 men, what are the odds that I’m the best looking, best in bed, tallest, strongest, smartest, funniest, nicest and most successful? I have the self-confidence to recognize that she’s not with any of those other men for a reason, even though I might not be the best in any single category.

    Lance said: (#35)
    “Secondly, settling for a “7″ makes the assumption that all or most sevens are exceptional people on the inside.”
    “I prefer to hold out for the 10 person, or at least the person that has the potential to become a 10 (not necessarily in looks), because I work my ass off to be better than average and I hope one of these days I can earn that exceptional partner. It’s that simple.”

    Hypothetical Situation:
    Let’s assume that 7s and 10s (on the outside) are exactly the same on the inside (on the average).

    Alan Roger Currie is defiing 10s as being 1 in a thousand. 7s (or better) are closer to 1 in 3. So let’s say you (Lance) are holding out for someone who is a 10 on the outside and inside. I’m looking for someon who’s at least a 7 on the outside and a 10 on the inside. (And I agree that both our external and internal numbers are completely subjective; your 6 may be my 10 and vice versa.)

    You and I start looking through all the available women in the city. You rule out 99.9% of them on looks, and then start searching through the 0.1% for inward 10s. Of those external 10s, you rule out another 99.9%. That means you’re searching for 1 woman in a million who is a 10 on the outside and inside. So in a major city, there may be 2 to 6 women like this … and some of them are likely to be taken already.

    I’m willing to date a woman who’s a 7 externally, provided she’s a 10 internally. So I rule out 70% of the women on looks, then rule out 99.9% of the remainder based on their inward traits. So instead of 2-6 women in a major city, I could find 600-1,800 women who meet my criteria.

    Not only do you need to find one of these rare “1 in a million” kind of women, you also need to be a “1 in a million” kind of man to stand a chance of keeping her. I can be just as picky regarding inward traits, but loosen up my external traits (to something that’s attractive but not super-hot). Not only are my chances of finding a suitable woman more than 100 times better, but I only need to be a “1 in ten thousand” kind of man to keep her.

    I’m not assuming that 7s are any nicer than 10s (on the average). I’m just assuming there’s a lot more of them.

57. Evan Marc Katz May 18th 2009 at 09:35 am 57

    Karl,

    You explain me better than I explain me. If you ever need a reference (or a job), you know where to come.

    Best,

    Evan

58. Selena May 18th 2009 at 10:33 am 58

    Rani wrote in # 44
    “Who wants to be the person someone else ’settles’ for?”

    Who thinks that way when they fall in love with someone? And I do mean fall in love, not some kind of business minded arrangement or attempt to buy “insurance” for having a relationship in old age.

    When you are in love does it matter to you if your partner is a 5, 7, 10 on someone else’s scale? Does the concept of *scale* have any meaning to you at all then? Do the terms ’settling’ or ‘compromising’ even enter your mind? Internal debates weighing chemistry vs. compatibility?

    Hasn’t for me. And I suppose it’s why I find some of the debates on this blog a bit disturbing. The comparisons seem more likened to the stock market ( picking blue chip vs. growth vs. speculative) as opposed to actually finding someone you connect to and really fall in love with.

59. Karl R May 18th 2009 at 10:48 am 59

    Evan,

    Thanks for the compliment. I’m happy with the job I currently have. But who knows, someday I might take you up on the reference. Those can always come in handy.

60. Lance May 18th 2009 at 10:58 am 60

    Good discussion.

    @Karl: If I went on match and put in my normal parameters for height, weight, and age, I’d pull up maybe 100 chicks. I’d go out on first dates with probably 50 of them based on pics and profile. Of those 50 dates, I’d probably go out on multiple dates with something like 5-10 of those. So really we’re talking about 1 in 10, maybe 1 in 20, which is MUCH better odds than what you’re talking about (millions). Why? My standards for looks are different than what you think. I’m very much a realist and I’m not talking about holding out for Maxim models and actresses. I’m talking about real chicks who are merely super cute and smart. Those are plentiful in my city. I can look around and find plenty of chicks like who fit that profile in a half hour.

    A bit of digression on looks, but I want to say a word about presentation. Almost all comely folks look 7-8, that is until you dress them up and improve the presentation. That 10 I saw in the club last night is merely a 7.5 when she’s walking her dog at 1:00 pm the next day. So, again, looks are malleable and assigning numbers is silly.

    Lance´s last blog post…Man Breaks Up With Ex-Girlfriend, Claims It Was Too Much Hassle

61. Curly Girl May 18th 2009 at 04:44 pm 61

    Thank you, Selena (#58)!

62. A-L May 18th 2009 at 04:45 pm 62

    Karl
    Your #56 is fantastic.

    Lance
    Two things. If you find half of the women on Match.com to be attractive enough to date (and you’re saying that you only want to date 10s) then I think you’re operating off of a totally different definition than most of the rest of the board. It sounds as though you define an attractive person as a 10, whereas I suspect many here are describing an attractive person as a 7, and a supermodel as a 10.

    Secondly, why are most of these people not going past multiple dates? Presumably because you (or your date) found that there were some serious enough flaws in the other’s personality to not merit going further in the dating process. Which means that in no way is their personality a 10 (at least for you). How many women with “10″ personalities have you come across? And how many seemed good and then a few months in you see their psycho/witchy/whatever side and run for the hills? Perhaps the “10″ personalities are rarer than you think, particularly when combined with the 10s in appearance.

63. Joe May 18th 2009 at 05:53 pm 63

    I think Monique has it right.

    Hasn’t everyone known someone who they initially thought they would never be physically attracted to, but after getting to know them–platonically–it happened (or could happen)?

64. Selena May 18th 2009 at 06:53 pm 64

    @Joe

    It has for me.

65. Lance May 18th 2009 at 08:03 pm 65

    @A-L: I said I’d go on 50 fifty first dates, didn’t say I’d go past that. Basically, yes, I’d go on exactly 1 date with an attractive girl just to find out if she was cool.

    For point #2 it doesn’t have to be a personality “flaw,” simply an incompatibility or a difference in values. Perhaps she wants 2 kids within 5 years and I don’t Nothing wrong with that, it just doesn’t jive with me.

    But yes, finding the 10 personality in a highly physically attractive person is pretty rare, which is exactly why I’m still single.

    Lance´s last blog post…Work Your Ass Off and Get the 10’s

66. Cilla May 19th 2009 at 06:11 am 66

    “But yes, finding the 10 personality in a highly physically attractive person is pretty rare, which is exactly why I’m still single.”

    But Lance, finding that person is only half the battle. She has to find you a double 10, as well…

67. Discrimination Against Dating a “10″ | DatingHeadshots Online Dating Blog May 22nd 2009 at 06:06 am 67

    [...] Evan Marc Katz’s blog Should I Date a 7 or Hold Out for a 10? Evan wrote  “10’s are shallow, narcissistic, selfish, demanding, difficult, more likely to [...]

68. hunter May 24th 2009 at 07:51 am 68

    Most female 10’s have long necks, as per entertainment industry standards.

69. Hot Alpha Female May 27th 2009 at 09:47 pm 69

    I have to agree with Lance’s original comment. I understand what Evan is trying to say about compromise. I do. I get it.

    There are so many unattractive men out there who are regularly dating beautiful women.

    What would happen if they said to themselves … No I can only have women that are average looking.

    You can have your cake and eat it too.

    If you want the 10’s then go out there and get them. You can have exactly what you want.

    Hot Alpha Female

    Hot Alpha Female´s last blog post…mysqlerror

70. Cilla May 28th 2009 at 09:29 am 70

    @HAF #69

    Funny, no one ever tells the unattractive women “if you want the 10’s then go out there and get them.” Hmmmm…

    This kind of thinking, as Evan and his readers have pointed here and elsewhere on the blog, only skews an already unbalanced dating pool. If the unattractive or just average men all think they can have the 10 females (which I don’t think in most cases they can, unless they are wealthy), there will be precious few men left to pursue the average or unattractive women.

    And why would a supermodel want to date an unattractive man when she can have a better looking alternative? While there are exceptions to this, it’s just not realistic for most people. All it does is tie up the available average guys while they spend their time looking for Miss Perfect. They spend 20 or more years doing this, and everybody winds up old and alone.

    I personally think many women who fall in the 10 category get a perverse pleasure from having men of all levels of attractiveness fawning all over them, even if they would reject most of them in a heartbeat. It’s self-centered and egotistical, exactly the qualities Evan attributed to people who have been able to skate by on their looks and not develop other aspects of their personalities.

71. JuJu May 28th 2009 at 09:35 am 71

    Hmm, not that I am a 10, but I really, REALLY am not flattered by the attention I get from men of all levels of attractiveness. In fact, in some cases this attention is downright insulting.

    A really mean thing to say, I guess, but I am a firm believer in not asking for what one can’t offer.

72. Cilla May 28th 2009 at 10:25 am 72

    @JuJu

    I think there’s a difference between being flattered by that kind of attention and downright encouraging it, even if you have no intention of acting on it.

    I would never consider it insulting to receive attention from any man based solely on his looks. Misguided perhaps, but not insulting.

73. hunter May 28th 2009 at 05:10 pm 73

    Cilla, my unattractive female relative, married a male “10″.(she owns a flourishing construction company, not that she is his meal ticket, I would never admit to that) One reason I tell all men, “there are some gems in plain wrappers”.

74. ELLE May 30th 2009 at 12:14 pm 74

    This is very very silly…because what is 10 for one person, for another might be only 7 and etc. And there is no need to say, “cos if you are not a model, then you can not be “10″. Just look at Kate Moss, to my opinion she is a bit of a minger…but to others-gorgeous…And you can have an amazing chemistry and attraction with people you might think ” I never would…”; e.g., i did not like blond men, until I met one that i did…
    So, a completely useless argument.

75. Dan_Brodribb Jun 2nd 2009 at 11:31 am 75

    I think this debate really comes down how much you value looks relative to other qualities. You could replace looks with “kindness 10s,” “Wealth 10s,” height 10s,” “cooking 10s” etc.

    Some people value a 10 in looks to the point they aren’t bothered whether or not s/he has a personality. And that’s fine. That’s important to them. Some people find personality more important, others jobs, common interests, what their family thinks, etc.

    As long as it’s what that person wants as opposed to what they try to convince themselves what they want or what other people tell them they should want, couples tend to find out what works for them and everything’s dandy.

76. Chris K Jul 7th 2009 at 05:52 am 76

    “It has a lot to do with how a guy carries himself and what kind of spark is in his eyes.”

    It’s the same with how a man sees a women (though admittedly there’s usually more importance in appearance for men).

    There is no such thing as a 10 – there is only someone that you think is a 10. Some of that you might be able to pin down (for most guys it’s somewhere between slim and voluptuous) but tastes vary. And more importantly, a women with a smile, self-confidence, intelligence and warmth will look more and more attractive as you see more of those attributes.

    I’ve had women describe me as attractive (not all the time, but sometimes). Now, either not-especially-fit, balding guys are suddenly hot, or I’m getting a boost from my non-physical attributes.

    But I know that muscles count too, which is one reason I’ve started working out.

77. Stever Jul 23rd 2009 at 09:58 am 77

    I think there’s a fundamental distinction to be made about *why* you’re seeking a 10, or someone hot, in the first place. As Evan points out, bragging rights with friends or envy from strangers is sheer ego feeding. It’s your ego that seeks validation from those around you rather than from yourself. But your ego makes a crappy companion. Seeking a 10 to feed your own ego is ultimately self-defeating, whether you manage it or not. You end up, at best, in a relationship with someone who was attracted to an egotist. Ugly no matter what.

    If you let your adult self go looking for partners, you’re free to choose between the people who make you feel good inside, not those who you think would impress your friends. With luck, there’s some considerable overlap. But by this level of maturity, you have probably seen the hidden 10 inside the one you love, regardless of what the rest of the world sees.

78. Heathen Oct 13th 2009 at 04:49 pm 78

    Funny, the last guy I fell for, who was a ‘10′ in my books, would probably be considered a ‘4′ by other people’s standards.  He just had that certain something I go for.  I think I could legitimately call myself an ‘8′ and I deliberately avoid ‘9’s and ’10’s because I don’t want to be stressing out over other women, and attitudes, and feeling like I’m never quite good enough.  Anyhow, I could NOT get this ‘4′ guy to be interested in me!  I was so bummed out about this that I have passed up quite a few ‘7’s since then. 

    I will admit I’m picky, and I don’t find too many men to be my ‘type’, but I wanted to point out that pickiness isn’t always about looking for a ‘10′.  Also, in the pecking order of physical appearance, one’s higher ranking does not necessarily guarantee any measure of success with those of a lower ranking.

79. Sayanta Dec 18th 2009 at 07:58 am 79

    so- it’s interesting, a generalization that always seems to be taking place is that men are shallow, women are not, or, less so-

    then this brilliant Esquire article comes out about women’s ’secrets’- it made me cringe-

    to all the guys out there- this is NOT how most normal, self-accepting, secure women think. I really wish they wouldn’t let celebrities speak for us.
    http://dating.personals.yahoo.com/singles/datingtips/88620/dating-tips-12-things-you-dont-know-about-women

    PS- oh, except Christina Applegate- she’s right about that 3 day rule. Oh, and Courtney Cox- with the hand thing. LOL

80. hunter Dec 19th 2009 at 06:57 pm 80

    Sayanta, the hands tip, is new to me.  

Trackback URI | Comments RSS

Leave a Reply