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

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

This blog post elicited a fair amount of heat, and it covered a  topic I dealt with recently in my free newsletter: the value of chasing white hot chemistry with a person whose looks are a “10”.

Now, before we get into that in great detail, I want to state 3 important disclaimers:

First, not every person who is a “10” is damaged goods.

Second, not everyone agrees on what a “10” is.

Third, people can be judged on things other than looks.

If a man or a woman is a 10, who is he/she going to most likely going to want to date? That’s right, another 10.

I say this, because these are the things that people invoke when discussing this – and it’s not like I’m not aware of them. However, the exception doesn’t disprove the rule.

“Rules” are rarely my opinions – more often, they are observations about how the world works. Women lie about their age. Men will not call after having sex. Smart, successful women will struggle to find equal partners.

I observe this frustrating reality and point out why it happens and what, if anything, you can do to counteract it. While I’m an emotional guy, my advice is based on logic and evidence. 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.

If I am to observe that a disproportionate number of “10’s” are: shallow, narcissistic, selfish, demanding, difficult, more likely to flirt, less likely to commit, and somewhat disconnected from the ‘average’ person’s reality, you might say, “Maybe…but I know this one girl who is gorgeous and sweet”. And you’d be right. It still doesn’t change that most 10’s are problematic partners.

So when I write “Stop chasing 10’s, marry the 7’s,” and my good friend Lance writes this reply:

Most hot girls are crazy, that’s for sure, but 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. If you fall short, look in the mirror, and make the changes that make you attractive enough to land a 10/10.

Well, I’ve gotta disagree – vehemently – on a number of levels.

1) If a man or a woman is a 10, who is he/she going to most likely going to want to date? That’s right, another 10. Most men, in particular, don’t date “down”; they all want to date “up”.

2) If, as Lance says, you hold out for the 10’s…and every other woman holds out for the 10’s…but the male 10’s want the female 10’s…doesn’t that mean that pretty much every woman ends up not finding a partner? It’s like saying that everyone should hold out for a $500,000 salary because that’s what you’re WORTH. Well, if there’s only a few thousand of those jobs out there, there’s going to be a LOT of unemployment. That is, unless someone compromises – and finds a lower paying job (a 7) that has much better benefits and quality of life.

3) If the average guy is – logically – a 5, he usually thinks he’s an 8…and that he should be dating a 10. Yet women who are 10’s have, literally, EVERY single man they meet hitting on them. I can’t think of a better explanation about the fundamental flaws of online dating than this phenomenon. You’ve got a 1-1000 chance of landing a 10, tops.

If the average guy is – logically – a 5, he usually thinks he’s an 8…and that he should be dating a 10.

4) The most important reason that chasing 10’s is a bad idea is that, when you get right down to it, you probably wouldn’t want to keep them. That’s the big blind spot. Chasing looks and chemistry is like a sport. There’s the rush of the chase, the thrill of victory, and the smugness of showing off your hot catch to all your friends – for a moment.

But what happens when you GET the tall, dark, handsome, wealthy, educated, sophisticated, world traveler/self-made millionaire?

Guess what? He’s probably just not that into you.

In fact, he’s probably more into himself.

That means he’s going to be a workaholic – that’s what made him a millionaire.

He’s probably going to be arrogant and stubborn – that’s what happens when you’re a success at everything you do.

He’s probably going to be vain – that’s what happens when you’re told how gorgeous you are.

He’s probably going to be a player – that’s what happens when you have the ability to pick and choose your dates at will.

He’s probably going to be a commitmentphobe – why settle down when you can continue to date a variety of smokin’ hot 10’s?

And so, you never really GET George Clooney. Or James Bond. Or that guy you’re lusting over right now. You’re just renting him. And you’re merely overlooking his considerable flaws because of how hot he is.

Guys do the same thing with women, I assure you. The most tempestuous relationship I ever had was also with the hottest woman I ever dated – so hot that she had to hide her profile on to stem the tide of emails. I held on for four months of hot sex and bragging rights – mixed in with innumerable times of being insulted, emotionally abused, and left at restaurants, parties and weddings. Why did I put up with it? Because she was a 10. And because when she wasn’t acting crazy, she was actually a good girlfriend.

The key is to break the cycle. Stop chasing looks first. Yes, attraction matters, but seriously, it’s a short term high. You’re looking for a relationship to endure for 30 years. 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.

But if you want to find something healthy and enduring – and STILL have great sex – try going for a 7 in looks and a 10 in every other area. Kindness, warmth, intelligence, wit, consistency, effort, generosity. These are the things that matter when you’re 50 – far more than whether your partner holds up next to a 26-year-old Maxim or GQ model.

It’s easy to say you’ll never compromise, you’ll never settle, and you’re going to be the one who finds the “perfect 10” – the Rhodes Scholar/ Supermodel/Top Chef. Good luck with that.

It’s easy to say you’ll never compromise, you’ll never settle, and you’re going to be the one who finds the “perfect 10″ – the Rhodes Scholar/ Supermodel/Top Chef. Good luck with that.

Most 10’s never develop the life skills that average folks do – which is why, on the whole, they’re not going to be as loyal or thoughtful or empathetic. If that’s okay by you, because, hey, you just can’t help what you’re attracted to, then I wish you good luck.

Just don’t be too surprised if everyone else “compromises” their way into a fulfilling relationship while you keep chasing a dream that never has a happy ending.

Join our conversation (151 Comments).
Click Here To Leave Your Comment Below.


  1. 91

    If I were going by Alan’s system, then I was a 5 a few years ago and have become a 4 since giving birth.  And I only gained 10 pounds (I weigh 128 or so).  Complaining seems kinda silly now, cuz I know I’m not gonna attract many guys since guys prefer looks, and it makes sense why my partner talks about other girls all the time: compared to me, they’re everywhere.  Girls that are 7’s, 8’s, 9’s, and 10’s compared to who he gets at home.

    But I’ll tell you what: life’s a lot simpler once you’ve decided to stop worrying about the opposite gender. 🙂

    I don’t know why he’s settling for me if he yearns for other women, don’t know why he wants to marry me …but I’ll take it.  When he’s ogling the other chicks, I’ll gently take our son aside and teach him that women are much more than their looks… 🙂 Damn, I’m probably gonna be a single mother. 🙁

  2. 92
    Miss Reality

    Before I had my child at the age of 20 (I am now 26) I was definitely smokin’ hot.  From the neck up I was a 10 and could compete with any supermodel.  My body, though good, was perhaps a 7 (legs not super long, not enough curves in the right places).  My then-husband was probably a 6-7 and I know he felt “grateful” to be with a woman “hotter” than he was.  I have to admit that because I knew I was really, really hot and got tons of attention I was SUCH a rude, conceited BITCH that treated “lesser” people badly. During my pregnancy I developed moderate stretch marks (I only gained 25 lbs but my belly and breasts became HUGE).  Over the next several years I gained an excessive amount of weight – 90 lbs!!  Because of my insecurity over my weight I started to let myself go in other ways.  While I was going down on the hotness scale, my ex was constantly hitting the gym and grooming himself better than ever.  So while I became, like, a 5 (and only that because I had a pretty face) my ex became a solid 9.  He began to exude alpha male confidence and became quite narcissistic due to all the positive attention he was now receiving.  He became an absolute jack ass to people he now deemed “lesser”.  Needless to say, he cheated on me with hot women he felt were more worthy of him than I was and then left me.   The shock of divorce pushed me into high gear and I got myself back into great shape and began grooming myself again.  And while I am very attractive again, pregnancy, weight gain, and age have taken their toll and I will never be as physically beautiful as I was a few years ago.  But the experience of falling off my pedestal and being shunned because of my appearance has taught me humility and kindness and I am a MUCH more beautiful person on the inside, which I believe makes me a much better catch now than I ever was at my physical peak. Likewise, my ex is less of a catch now because of his attitude even though he is sexier than ever.  I am now dating a man who, even at his physical best, is only a 5-6 BUT he is intelligent, great with my kids, kind, loyal and SANE.  I am far happier with him than my sexy ex or any of the other fantastically sexy men I’ve dated since becoming hot again.  I can’t speak for the men, but ladies, do yourselves a favor and give the less-than-stellar-looking dudes a shot … they are often MUCH better men, lovers, fathers, husbands, etc than the really pretty ones.

  3. 93

    Only issue I had with women 9-10’s i dated were that they were used to being put on a pedestal by men.
    And since I did not do it there were all kinds of issues about why I did not bow to them like they were royalty.  And then the usual she does not know why she is with me because she could do better mantra.
    All I said was if that is the case then goodbye. Because I do not need the headache.  Granted other men referred to these women as 9-10’s because my perspective is limited to whether or not I like how she looks even though I do understand comparative physical attractiveness.
    I say just find someone who you are attracted to and who has other qualities you can accept and be happy with and take it from there.

  4. 94

    NonExist @95
    You are guilty of stereotyping, but I agree!  Hot looks coupled with a previously pampered lifestyle is an automatic turn-off to me.   

  5. 95

    There is never going to be rigorous agreement on any kind of informal attractiveness metric, so the subjective discussions are missing the point.
    Which is how realistic are our expectations at getting what we want?
    And, if we are having trouble finding what we want, what are some of the systemic and/personal problems hindering our prospects.
    Speaking as someone with an education in evolutionary biology(as well as zoology), I will only try to speak to some rather obvious(to someone with my education) systemic factors – namely, sexual conflict.
    The fact is, males and females really *do* have conflicting reproductive agendas, courtesy of sexual evolution(females have lower reproductive potential, and thus compensate qualitatively by being more selective – conflicting with the high-rate, reproductive strategies of males).
    This manifests as women who are vastly more ‘picky’ then men, so in systemic terms, the onus of being too selective falls upon the female sex(even where particular cases might not seem to render such an obvious conclusion).
    So, it should be expected that in developed world populations where females have been accorded the greatest latitude of choice, and sexual freedom, that they would also exhibit more selectivity.
    One, perhaps less than obvious consequence of this, is that, in such populations, women will be receptive to a much smaller population of ‘choice’ males(see the freakanomics online dating data, posted in another thread for an idea), than they might otherwise be.
    And here’s where something interesting beings to happen with this whole rating system.
    The more imbalanced the mating dynamic becomes, the more asymmetric – in terms of their distribution between the male and female populations – these rankings become.
    So, it comes to a point where male ‘ratings’ are bottom heavy in distribution, while female ‘ratings’ are top heavy(meaning there are more female 7’s than male 7’s, by virtue of the fact that a female 7 has a greater probability of attracting a male 7, than the reverse).
    And this is a very convenient way of self-reporting attractivess for females, where a short chubby, but otherwise cute female can still claim a high rating by her ability to reliably pull a tall athletic male with a six pack – even though she is *far* from his closest female equivalent, in terms of physical traits.
    Conversely, an average male may be only able to reliably pull obese females, even though these are less representative of his closest female equivalents(again, fully weighting for variance in sexual dimorphism).   
    On the other hand, go to a third world population, and his closest male equivalent may be able to predictably pull females which resemble a 7 or even an 8, if we were to assign their value based on the value of local females with similar physical characteristics.
    So, as you can see – these rating systems are very much a function of *local* mating system dynamics, and therefor, they will always be relative measures of other (random and deterministic)variables in the system.
    One thing I have observed, is that the more freedom of choice females exercise in a population(due to a variety of factors, such as economic and political independence), the more such populations tend to disassortative mating(where the most obvious exceptions tend to be at extremes of attractiveness – where even the ugliest females are relegated to ugly males, and where the most attractive males are content with the most attractive females – who are more abundant than themselves).
    I think a legitimate greivance of many western males, is that for those who are not a 9 or 10(or a 1 or 2), the mating system seems hopelessly disassortative(ie. it becomes almost a lottery in order to find a receptive female equivalent, in terms of physical characteristics).
    To these men, it would almost screams an ultimatum – go fat or go home(which, I’m sure would suit many western women just fine, freeing them to waddle after their ‘choice’ athletic hunks). 
    But, I would opt to perservere – with a bit of lateral(literally!) thinking.
    International dating is an option to consider for those men who are tired of beating their head against a brick wall, locally, and wish to avail themselves of an option few western females have – which is to improve their prospects by searching abroad(something that is difficult for most western females to improve upon elsewhere, given that the more freedoms accorded them, the more advantageous the local mating dynamic – and there is no where they are accorded more liberties, than NA and western Europe).

    The world is a big place – and opportunities are *always* going to vary locally.
    So, love may be out there waiting – if we want to find it badly enough.

  6. 96

    I find myself extremely uncomfortable with this constant talk about our fellow human beings ranking somewhere from 1 to 10. I find the idea of labeling someone else a 1 or a 2 repugnant. First of all it’s incredibly disrespectful and hurtful. And second, who the heck am I to hang a number on someone else?

    Is a homeless man down at the mission a 1? No, he’s a person who for a variety of reasons has had difficulties, and he needs sympathy and help, not ridicule. Is a 400 pound woman a 1? No, she’s a person who for a variety of reasons is struggling with her weight, and she needs understanding and help from an educated counselor.

    When we belittle or downgrade others for whom life has not gone well, we should remember and try to picture that there was a day that person came into this world into the arms of a mother who dearly loved him or her.

    1. 96.1
      Evan Marc Katz

      It’s shorthand, M. If you want to be so pollyanna-ish to state that all people are equally dateable and desirable, that’s fine, but in the reality-based community, we do discriminate. There’s nothing wrong with a person passing up on someone because of the fact that he’s homeless or the fact that she’s 400 lbs. Nothing. Doesn’t mean they’re bad people. Doesn’t mean they don’t deserve sympathy. Also doesn’t mean that I want a 400lb homeless woman as my wife. If you can’t see the distinction, if you’re truly that sensitive, you will find that we reality-based people sound very cruel. Sorry about that, but this might not be the right blog for you. I value truth over sensitivity because not enough people speak truth.

  7. 97

    Shorthand it may be – but along with in/out of “your league” it has always come across as very juvenile to me. One would think educated adults might construct a “shorthand” that doesn’t make them sound like high school juniors.

    1. 97.1
      Evan Marc Katz

      Okay, Selena. Provide one for us. Show us juveniles how to rate or evaluate strangers by comparison without this shorthand. Or is it impossible to make subjective evaluations based on physical traits?

  8. 98

    That’s just it Evan – attractiveness is soo subjective it can’t be rated on a 1-10 scale- meaningless to try. This thread, this old thread illustrates the point well.

    1. 98.1
      Evan Marc Katz

      It’s really not that subjective, Selena. Babies can tell attractive people from unattractive people. I appreciate your sentiment but think it’s disingenuous to be so PC.

  9. 99

    Babies don’t rate on attractiveness on a 1-10 scale. Babies also seem pretty adaptable to anyone who shows them attention and affection regardless of what they subjectively look like.

    1. 99.1
      Evan Marc Katz

      Here ya go, Selena.

      Babies don’t rate people on attractiveness because they can’t speak. That doesn’t mean that some people aren’t more objectively attractive than others.

  10. 100

    I’m not debating each of us find some people more attractive than others Evan. It’s the 1 to 10 scaling I find juvenile and imprecise enough to be worthless.

  11. 101

    Adding: I saw a documentary several years ago where scientists tried to measure what we consider beauty in female faces. The conclusion seemed to be wide spaced eyes, full lips, small proportionate nose. They did mathmatical calculations and showed pictures of Elizabeth Taylor, Marilyn Monroe, and Halle Barry all having the same facial proportions. Three objectively (?) beautiful women one wouldn’t think looked alike, but mathmatically they do. Very interesting.

  12. 102

    Yes…and Giselle is also considered one of the most beautiful women in the world…she certainly doesn’t have wide spaced eyes or a small, proportionate nose but, somehow, despite lacking these characteristics she’s married to Tom Brady, as well as being the highest paid model, well, ever. 
    As for Lance…he’d be lucky to score a 7.  If he becomes rich, he’s got a good shot at landing a 10 in the looks department, but a 10 inside?  Forget it.  The thing that guys like this don’t understand is that the woman who’s a 10 on the inside sees right through them.  A 10 inside is looking for a guy who doesn’t care whether she’s a 10 outside or a 6.   She will know within 5 seconds of talking to you how shallow and ‘un-10 like’ you are on the inside.
    Finally-this whole idea that women who are attractive don’t have good personalities is ridiculous.  I know someone who most guys would think is a 10, and while she may be a bit vain, that doesn’t make her a bad person.  She’s still a loving, loyal friend and committed to her boyfriend whom she treats very kindly.  (And yes, he’s a 10 in the looks department too). 

  13. 103

    @ Selena

    First of all, physical attractiveness isn’t as subjective as you might suppose(and yes, there are studies to support that even infants react more positively to individuals who display reliable indications of physical attractiveness).

    And this makes sense, when you consider that all humans are subject to sensory biases(which become fixed by evolutionary success), where relative deviations in physical traits can reliably signal developmental incompetence(such as deviation in bilateral symmetry, as well as other indications of developmental/immuno incompetence).

    @ Sienna

      “The thing that guys like this don’t understand is that the woman who’s a 10 on the inside sees right through them.”

    This assumes he is hindered by a concern for whether a woman is a ’10’ on the ‘inside'(which means exactly what, again?).

    ” A 10 inside is looking for a guy who doesn’t care whether she’s a 10 outside or a 6.”

    Then she is deluded, as no such person exists.

    And without lending assumptions to testable predictions, any conclusions following from them would be unjustified. 

    But, tell me, would such a hypothetical woman grant her prospective mate the same consideration?

       “She will know within 5 seconds of talking to you how shallow and ‘un-10 like’ you are on the inside.”

    Assuming his online discourse is consistent with offline discourse, which is not necessarily a warranted assumption.

    ” Finally-this whole idea that women who are attractive don’t have good personalities is ridiculous. ”

    Depends on how you define ‘good'(where, from the perspective of an courting male, ‘good’ may depend on her being receptive to his courtship).

  14. 104

    @Paragon #109
    I’ve seen studies where human perception of beauty is based on symmetry of features. (See my post #107) And yes, babies recognize such symmetry.
    Human perception of attractiveness in individuals still varies though upon the person doing the evaluating. Especially when it comes to attempting to rate attractiveness on a 1 to 10 scale. Is Sarah Jessica Parker beautiful, or is she average? Or even less attractive? Who looks better: Angelina Jolie, or Jennifer Anniston? You will get different answers depending on who you ask. That’s why attractiveness is subjective and scaling virtually meaningless.

  15. 105

    Bilateral symmetry is only one component of physical attractivess – which goes far beyond that(as I alluded to).

    And yes, every measurable phenomenon varies, but that doesn’t mean that we cannot observe predictable patterns.
    Women, in particular, tend to betray very predictable patterns in demonstrating a near universal preference for a very narrow range of male physical characteristics.

    And this is why the gradations in attractiveness can seem subtle from a female perspective – since women tend to fixate on the top ~ %10-20 of males(see freakanomics data), considering the bottom %80 of males as, inexplicably, *less* than average(see OK Cupid data), the variance in that top %10-20 tends to split a lot of trivial hairs(making the differences harder to quantify, with respect to an attractiveness ranking system). 
    And while on a higher level, we seem to regard attractiveness in very binary terms(yes, or no), *everyone* is still invested in maximizing the physical attractiveness of their mating prospects.
    The big difference between women and men, in this regard, is that men are *far* more inclined to settle on the best they can get(while the whole prospect of ‘settling’ is increasingly absent from the psyche of western females – many of whom would rather opt for solitude than compromise on what they feel is their ‘due’, however unrealistic or unlikely) – by making realistic trade-offs(like trading off mate attractiveness for mate availability, or mating frequency – which is why we can observe that men  are more forgiving of relative attractiveness, than are women when culling males). 

  16. 106

    From what I have observed, men date down both in looks and income levels.

  17. 107
    Two Of Us Dating Service

    Attraction and looks are important, but most people are forgetting is that its not everything. I say find someone you are attracted to that makes you feel like a 10 and vice versa. Personally a lot of the people I have dated were not what I would normally choose from a lineup. The way they made me feel is what changed everything for me.

  18. 108
    There are no real rules

    I’m a pretty attractive girl, I’d say probably 8+ . It of course depends on who you ask. I have been called a 10 before.  I have always been insanely fearful of dating in my own range.  I’d go for guys who were 4-7, preferring the lower numbers.  I had this idea that they’d appreciate me more.  The reality was, I had to deal with their various insecurities about our relationship.  It was awful.  Then I dated a guy who was, at least in my eyes, a 10. (According to my friends we were equally good looking) I mean he had it all: he was ripped, gorgeously handsome, a harvard grad, wealthy and a philanthropist.  We got along fabulously and he was surprisingly humble.  It didn’t work out because of practical reasons (I moved) but it was great while it lasted.

    Since that, I am a firm believer that it is silly trying to stereotype your compatibility with someone based on their looks.  Everybody is different. 

  19. 109

    As it regularly happened with me, my idea of a 10 (both inside and out) can be at most 6, sometimes 2 to a lot of my male friends. And vice versa, my idea of a 2 can be some guy’s wet dream.

    There’s more to the outside than the silly number C Boobs, 22 WHR, blonde, blue eye. A captivating smile, a cute nose, a weird ear, that cute finger, could make a huge difference from ugly to gorgeous. Hell, when I check my last year’s 10 fb, she gets a 6….

    Likewise, there’s more to the inside than just the cold adjectives like: smart, funny, flirty, friendly, outgoing, etc… How would you categorize a woman who can make you laugh just from her natural voice, even though she has no interesting story to tell? Is that funny, or weird, or talented, or tasteless, or boring?

    Hell, try to shape yourself to your idea of a 10, you’d soon find the idea ridiculous.

    Throw the stupid grading scale away, just date whomever you like to. There’s no formula to attraction.

  20. 110

    I see things a bit differently…everyone who says they are a “8” or “9” is full of shit. If you break down the rankings of every person in the world, only about 2 percent of the world would be 10s and 7s, 8s, 9s and 10s are all less frequent to find. 10s are rare. They are the playboy model magazine girls. 9s are also rare, they are the models and super attractive people. 8s are very hot. They are the hottest girl in your high school hot. and 7s are hot while 6s are your average attractive person. So in reality, we are all average, with some of us being above average and attractive. IF your a 8, you wouldn’t be on the internet looking for help.

  21. 111

    That assumes that attractive people have good relationship skills. I have found this not always to be the case. Attractive people are just as capable of emotional unavailability, drama and poor choices as anyone else.  They might even think their beauty gives them an advantage it doesn’t, ie it can turn round a bad man or relationship. 
    If you pick up any gossip mag, though men prob don’t read them, you’ll see that many solid 10s fail in the relationship arena, sometimes repeatedly.

  22. 112
    Sparkling Emerald

    Himmm, I stink at math, so I really can’t rate myself or anyone else numerically, so I don’t use the 1-10 scale.
    If & when I meet someone, there only has to be a baseline level of attraction.  What it boils down to, could I see myself being intimate with this person.  Not that I ONLY want sex in a relationship, but I am not looking for a guy platonic friend, why should I waste his or my time, if the answer to intimacy, is “NO WAY, EVER ! ”  If my first initial attraction reaction is “Yes” or “Maybe”, then I’ll continue.
    But physical attractiveness is only a foot in the door.  A kind, thoughtful, warm & funny “Maybe” can quickly be upgraded to “Ravage me NOW !” and a “Yes” who is arrogant, flaky, mean spirted, etc. will quickly be downgraded to “No Way”. (and unfortunately, a “NO WAY, EVER” will remain that, no matter how sweet)
    Also, another poster brought this up, we all have our own opinions on physical attractiveness.  I know some people are universally considered white-hot 10s’, but there is so much variance in how people “rate” others on looks.  I have a GF who every guy she falls head over heels for,  would definitely fall into my “No Way” category.  (Of course I don’t share with her, that I think the guy she’s smitten with, looks like he lives under a bridge).  But she finds them cute, and that’s all that matters.  When I showed her some pics in my online in-box, I could just see her rolling her eyes at the ones I liked, with ONE exception.  Maybe that’s the secret of our friendship, we will rarely if ever be competing for the same guy 🙂

  23. 114
    Sparkling Emerald

    [email protected] – Thanks for the link ! I rated 8.02 out of 10.  Had a hard time finding a pic where my head wasn’t tilted or rotated, and with a closed lip expression and my ears showing.  So I picked a straight on shot with a closed lip smile, but my ears covered and just tried to guess where to put the arrows for me ears.  In the analysis, it said my ears were too long for my nose.  I usually rate myself between 6.5 – 8, depending on my hair, make-up, and weight.   So I was pretty happy with  my score !  Thanks again. 

  24. 115

    I consider myself a little above average with a great body. I believe that energy plays a huge role in looking attractive.  When I feel confident, happy and joyful inside I attract many men. It does not matter if I wear make up , if my nails are perfect etc.   When I’m  sad, tired, exhausted, stressed out I usually do not attract anyone. Even when I’m dressed really nice. 

  25. 116

    I think most men are attracted to a happy, joyful woman….we don’t have to work as hard at it….

  26. 117

    How comes 9s don’t produce cute kids?
    Every couple of 7s has better looking kids. So decide.

  27. 118
    James Pilrose IV

    I’m sorry, but I just cant do that. It has been my dream since I was a three-year-old boy that I fall in love with and marry a beautiful woman- a 10. I’m 17, and I’ve never had a girlfriend (Aspergers), but I can never fall in love of marry someone who isn’t a 10. I’m sorry to say this, but I’d rather kill myself. I just can’t see the point of my life If I don’t marry a beautiful woman.

  28. 119

    James Pilrose IV, 123
    Never say never.  (Cos never is a real long time).
    You can most certainly marry a beautiful woman.  Why not?  Say you meet someone aged 15, and you found her beautiful.  You would wait to have sex with her (:o she’s under age :o) and get married.
    As the years go by, the “beauty” (i.e. outer) does change a bit. 
    If you look at the inner beauty, you might find that you’ll meet a lot of 10s.
    Good luck to you.

  29. 120

    I’m usually rated a 7 to a 9 and once even a 10! Its usually due to personal taste, and how a person presents themselves. If you dress well and are well groomed that is awesome. But if you don’t then that does make you ugly? No. Number systems suck and hurt people and make them feel bad.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *