A preliminary aside: The Badger saw his shadow yesterday morning, which portended that the Green Bay Packers would win their fourth Super Bowl title. Here at the Hut we know that domestic violence doesn’t increase during the Super Bowl, but you can be sure many women in Wisconsin had their pick of sausage during and after the game.
I want to tackle (ahh you see what I did there?) an issue that is near the top of the list for derailing blog discussion threads, along with “what do alpha and beta really mean” and “how many is too many for a woman”: the ten-point rating scale.
The ranking is but one component of a woman’s true SMP value (and obviously an almost-negligible part of her value as a person), but it’s the biggest “alpha” trait that gets a man’s biological engine revved, in the same way that male social skill is a key factor in switching on a woman’s sexual machinery. Long-winded discussions of whether this or that model/actress/girlfriend/starlet of an Internet meme is a 6 or a 7 or an 8 is splitting hairs with a cocaine-caked razor blade.
I’ve long since distilled the usual ten points down to four.
4 – Smokin’ like a stovepipe.
3 – Pretty.
2 – Plain.
1 – Busted.
The aim here is to be accurate at the expense of being precise. Unless you’re running a modeling agency, there’s just no good reason to make it any more complicated. It sharpens the lines between the groups, and most importantly, it allows for less debate about value and more discussion about action.
- Discussions of rating evoke images of teenage boys trying to peep through the tile gaps into the girls’ locker room. but commenting on a woman’s (or man’s) physical appearance is not degrading, unless it’s the only thing you care about. If you’re spending a lot of time reducing people to their base physical value you might want to spend most of your time somewhere else. That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t talk about it at all; denying that these things matter in the SMP trading floor is sophistry, and when you deny reality you are stacking the deck against yourself.
- These are men’s reactions to women. Women have their own ways of rating other women, and they often seem to be completely unrelated to the men’s (just as many men are totally unable to accurately gauge how attractive women will find other men).
- Rankings are age-dependent, and as I will explore in a forthcoming post, 2’s and 3’s seem to age better than 4’s (which may or may not have to do with better-cultivated female beta traits).
- Generally speaking, a man’s tolerance for social dysfunction is proportional to ranking, but remember the aphorism “show me a 10 and I’ll show you a man who’s tired of her.”
- There’s no disputing about taste. Different features evoke different responses in different men; like stock price, rating is a statistical abstract of the overall market’s opinion.
- By no means will looks determine the satisfaction of your man’s carnal life; the visual ranking is alloyed with, among many factors, female beta traits, personality, frequency, the variety she can present, and her desire for the man she’s with. (“Just do it” is not sufficient; men don’t want their wives and girlfriends to lie back and think of England, they want to be desired by a woman who is into it.)
Now let’s quit wasting time discussing the finer points of market valuation and more talking about the real issues of navigating the marketplace.