One PL's 3 is another PL's 8. But is a 10 always a 10?
herbtcat
Cool Cat in the Valley
Sunday, December 8, 2019 10:09 AM
Simple premise... beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
So when I describe a dancer, I try to use more descriptive terms like spinner, busty, hard-body, curvy, etc.
So, what's your take on the 1-10 scale? And how do we present objective info on such a subjective measurement?
So when I describe a dancer, I try to use more descriptive terms like spinner, busty, hard-body, curvy, etc.
So, what's your take on the 1-10 scale? And how do we present objective info on such a subjective measurement?
Got something to say?
Start your own discussion
36 comments
But some 10s are always a 10.
Judging from Anonymous’ poll, maybe Salma might qualify as one of those 10s.
I find it hard to believe because I've seen what some guys are taking to VIP. When did your read about a guy taking a 3 to VIP? or even a 5 which would be an average looking woman. Yet I am as guilty as the next guy for using the scale. Unless we use photos, we don't have much else to use. So I take the scale with a grain of salt.
and there's 1 to 10 in the bizarro world of strip clubs, - generally - ages 18 to ? 40 ? something, where a level of attractiveness is (much of) the point.
Obviously it's shorthand for a given person's preferences. That said, I don't think a 3 or 8 disagreement is common.
I don't particularly like using the scale, but it saves long winded descriptions (of a gal, or my preferences).
Her beauty is complemented by her frank and slightly profane demeanor in VIP, asking if I minded if she didn’t use a condom while blowing me. I had lowered my zipper and she advised me to lower my trousers and my undershorts to give her full access to my scrotum as well as my dick. She told me that by going bareback she can swallow the evidence and not have to be concerned with disposing of the rubber. In my book she’s as clos3 to a 10 as I’ve met.
Ratings:
Don't care: roughly anything under a 7
Head turner: She **consistently** turns heads. Probably 7.5-8.5ish
Wave of head turns: if you take her into a crowded bar, you can see a wave of head turns, men re-orienting their bodies to look at her, as she walks through. Probably 8.5-9.4ish (right up to the Dushku limit)
Whoa!!!: She's so hot that you consistently see guys grabbing their buddies to turn them towards her, you can hear them mumble "whoa!!", guys stop and say things to you as you walk by with her. This is Dushku limit level chick -- 9.5 and up. Impossibly hot. As the Dushku Limit implies, not clear to me that it's meaningful to talk about relative hotness in this range
a sexy awesome beauty.
(imo of course.)
Physical traits that indicate something positive for fertility and childbearing will always be a crowd-pleaser. (Whether or not an individual actually wants to reproduce)
But different cultures seem to create different structures that makes what’s “optimal” more subjective.
https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20150…
One of my best buddies is like that, Nidan! I never know whether to be horrified at some of the women he's fucked, or to envy him. Maybe a little of both.
ScarJo was voted Sexiest Woman if the Year, but I've never thought so.
EmRat and Eva Green are both 10s for me, but some people hate them. Exceptfor Charlie Sheen's sloppy seconds, I would rate Denise Richards a 10; but others dump on her all the time.
Beauty is always and only ever in the eye of the beholder.
herb, stated, "So when I describe a dancer, I try to use more descriptive terms like spinner, busty, hard-body, curvy, etc." A spinner to one may be anywhere between sumo size to anorexic. Same goes with any other terms.
Just write what you wish and let the reader decide. If they have specific question, contact the reviewer. Simple!
Without a face view, I'd leave her at an 8.
Asian? 10!
If her pussy can fuck me, I give her 10.
If her pussy can’t fuck me, but she gives blow job, I give her 10.
If she oils up her hands and gives me hand job, i give her a 10.
If she is a real female, I give her 10.
An excellent point! That said, 1-10 gives others some perspective, even thought we each weight certain attributes more heavily than others.
You state, "...but I doubt most of us go to strip clubs solely for the eye candy."
I understand that, but in my case, eye candy is very important. Example, I'd likely pick a somewhat homely Asian, over any other 8.
Some thoughts/observations:
@DandyDan - You make a good pint about "enjoying her company" being more important than purely physical looks (within a certain hotness range, of course). I suspect that the older the PL (especially those of us over 50), the more true this is. When I was 28, I was always looking for the hottest stripper I could find, regardless of her personality. Now that I am older, I look for the dancer who makes the best connection with me. So talking to, getting dances from, and even looking for extras from a 7 when there are multiple 9's and 10's around can often be a win for me.
@Group: This is more an empirical observation than a scientific analysis, but it seems that there is an inherent skew to the 1 to 10 system with regard to average vs. mode. What I mean is that on a linear 1 to 10 scale, the average rating should be 5, and as such, we should all be "willing" to spend time/money on any dancer who is at least "average". But the 1 to 10 scale appears to be more of a non-linear scale, where the higher up you go, the more each new point adds to the perceived quantity/quality of hotness. For example, in a linear scale, a 7 should be 10% hotter than a 6. But based on comments here and on other threads, that is not true. An 8 may be perceived as 20% to 30% hotter than a 7. In addition, there seems to be a fairly hard floor on who a PL will spend money/time with at 7. We all seem to be ok with talking to, dancing with, and fucking a 7 or higher, But we rarely seem to engage at all with a 6 or lower (except for desperate circumstances of course).
So is the new "average" (i.e.: the minimum acceptable level of hotness for action) at 7? If so, then I submit that a 1 to 10 scale has even less utility than ever. Perhaps a new approach (if we MUST quantify) would be as follows:
A 6 or less = TLTR (Too low to rate)
All others:
7 = ALH (Average Level Hottie)
8 = HTA (Hotter than average)
9= MLH (Model Level Hotness)
10= SMH (Super Model Hot)
It's a bit wordy in this form, but you get the idea...