Facial aesthetics thread

7/10

>>37235741
>What's your take??
that you have autism

>>37235741

8

>>37235753
Agree, not super hot but not average

7/10

fuck off whore. go to /soc/

>>37235741
8.25/10

>>37235741
Looks like a 7-8/10, but i'm a fag so don't take my word for it.

Facial aesthetics is a dead end, there's absolutely no point to discussing stuff you can't change it just hinders your progress

>>37235741

cute

not hot

just cute

6-6.5/10

>>37235741
7/10 she looks too asian
she'd be 8/10 if she was whiter

>>37235810
She looks more hispanic than asian, desu.

>>37235810
Harsh!

File: image.jpg (333KB, 1242x1332px) Image search: [Google]

333KB, 1242x1332px

She's not bad!

>>37235741
8, maybe 8.5

>>37235741
6.5/10

File: 1372952470251.jpg (21KB, 172x185px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 172x185px

>>37235741
let's see your face OP

>>37235741

Theres no arguing whether she is hot or not

File: image.jpg (242KB, 1217x1471px) Image search: [Google]

242KB, 1217x1471px

>>37235791
>>37235902

That's not a 6/10. At least a 7 or a 7.5.

File: 1396556141654.jpg (336KB, 500x636px) Image search: [Google]

336KB, 500x636px

a solid 6

>>37235984
Is a 6/10 average or still above average?

>>37235993
Attractiveness is more subjective in girls then it is in men, there's a very strict criteria to be an attractive man

>>37236039
a 6/10 is not gonna be different if ur a girl or a guy. It's a rating.

>>37236039
Not really I'd say it's the opposite.

>>37236050
A 6/10 to you might be a 10/10 to some one else anon, shock wow ik

I think she's an 8

>wat is a ten look alike

Is a 6/10 rating for a GIRL average?

>>37236071
Uh no. A 5/10 rating is average. For anybody. Duh.

6/10 is above average but not as above average as an 8/10.

>>37235970
Hnnnnng, that little bit of arieola

more please

>>37236094
I put nothing special but still dateable at 7 which is the average standard for pretty.

Anything less than seven (5 or 6) may be possible with alcohol and makeup.

Anything less than 5 is a no go always and forever.

>>37236142
Very sophisticated outlook there anon, I'd date as low as 3/10 if she had a good body atleast

>>37235741
In that photo she's a 7.5

But with make-up on and her hair styled correctly she'd easily be an 8.5.

>>37236142
7 is standard hot girl so I disagree that 7's aren't special.

Anything in the 7-10 range is special. Most girls, just like most guys, are extemely average looking or not hot. Like at all.

I think ppl underestimate how many average aka NOT hot ppl they see in everyday life vs hot ppl.

I live in Miami and I only 3-4 hot girls on a weekend when I go out. And I see hundreds of girls walking around or drinking or dancing on the weekends.

That's 4 hot chicks out of 100 bro.

Yeah 7's are pretty damn special!

>>37236182
>7.5

how do you arrive at such a specific number

Why do ppl care so much about looks? Is everyone auditioning to be the next male or female supermodel?

>>37236208
Autism. People who rate so specifically like that are autistic and probably not even aesthetic themselves.

Uh yeah 6.8, wait no 7, ehrr ok 7.5


Dumb as fuck.

> Looks asian
> Freckles
> Long hair

8/10
She would be 10/10 if she had a booty but judging by her tits, she seems to be skinny as fuck.

>>37236238
Yeah its fucking mind blowing isn't it

File: image.jpg (159KB, 1242x770px) Image search: [Google]

159KB, 1242x770px

This is an aesthetic face. People will say "ew, gross" because she's a porn star.

But honestly it's an aesthetic fucking face.

File: 5YiM1FC.png (389KB, 500x574px) Image search: [Google]

389KB, 500x574px

>>37236261
>not posting based caprice

>>37236162
Date?! Like long term?
Why date a 3 when you could land a 7 with a little effort?

>>37236204
You must define 7 as much higher than me if you only saw 4 girls in the 7-10 range out of 100. 7's can be special to you. To me they're average level of attractiveness - thinking like North Face, Yoga Pants, Toms Shoes, and Netflix.

>>37236341
oh man shes looks so innocent. you would never guess she takes massives dicks to her face and cooter on a daily basis.

File: 680efaa590ad745763e63c050cc15dd3.jpg (76KB, 597x800px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 597x800px

she kind of looks like a white version of my asian ex

>>37236495
The girl op posted is actually half Asian.

You can't tell?

>>37236261

Whatever you wish Sasha Grey was, she isn't

>>37236204

literally arguing a subjective opinion as objective fact and not being ironic.

do you realise how fucking arbitrary and meaningless your anecdote is.

you don't need to get so amped up over this shit.

File: b1c0d7a4115a41a455aac6f66cd0d711.jpg (81KB, 800x597px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 800x597px

>>37236505
I can but she's still whiter than my ex

File: scale.jpg (287KB, 1000x1598px) Image search: [Google]

287KB, 1000x1598px

>>37235741
How about a shitty chart thrown together by an autistic brwny? That ought to set things straight in no time.

No, but seriously, she's a fucking 9/10 which is basically a 10/10 to anyone who digs her type. I do, so to me she's a 10/10.

>>37236625
Edit: I meant "brony" as opposed to brwny. Kek.

I'm too influenced by the my little pwny meme.

>>37236261
matched with a girl on tinder who looks exactly like sasha grey. how to get in without revealing my intentions?

File: index.jpg (107KB, 720x709px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 720x709px

>>37236735
pic related. it's not just me right, she looks a lot like her?

>>37236792
veruca james

>>37235810
this desu

>>37236625

diminishes the role race and socialisation have on attractiveness, but yeah sure that picture works as a VERY rough guide.

>>37236625
This chart is bullshit. It basically says i've been with 7+ my whole life. The girls in the picture used for reference are gross bruh

>>37236625
Your chart is shit.
Everyone under 5 is in the bottom 10% aesthetically, almost all of them are outright repulsive and even a few up until you get to 9.

I don't know what the fuck is going on with your 8's bro, you need some fucking glasses.
Or don't, you'll probably be much happier with the lopsided whore that births your lopsided children.

>>37236162
>3/10 if she had a good body atleast
If a girl is 3, she doesn't have a good bady

File: 1441849502488.jpg (523KB, 1000x1406px) Image search: [Google]

523KB, 1000x1406px

>>37237370
I've often thought about making my own, as I did with the men's chart for /facial aesthetics general threads/. The problem is it just takes such a long time to find a pic for rows 6-8; the rest are pretty easy. Also, I try to be fair in terms of ethnicity rather than making the 8s and 9s all white.

The old men's chart looked like this (1/2)

>>37237495
>implying it's my chart after I explicitly stated its both not mine and somewhat retarded
>getting this butthurt

File: Chart.jpg (1MB, 1000x1406px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1000x1406px

>>37237542
(2/2)

And my version of the men's chart looks like this. Note that it's very different from the /pol/ chart where all of the 9s have blue eyes, white skin and blond hair. If I ever have time to make a women's chart, I'll try to do about the same.

Not saying my chart is perfect either; people frequently object to Gosling being ranked so high. I agree he's not that great but women seem to dig him and I'm not sure who to replace him with.

>>37237542

yeah i've seen this one before and I'm not a huge fan considering multiple people are literal doppelgangers to each other but are in much higher or lower brackets.

take a look at everyone @ 5 or above.

now try find similar faces

pretty much why I don't think the 1 - 10 scale actually works.

especially since I can find women who are an objective 7/10 more attractive than a woman who is objectively a 10/10.

generally i view it like this:

it matters if you're ugly

it matters if you're extremely beautiful/handsome

everything in between is just shades of grey

a 6.5 can fuck a 9

>>37237554

this is at least consistent in the tiering

you see it progress from "average" to "above average" to "model" to "super model".

i'd say its more reliable as a rough gauge.

File: 1447796311226.gif (2MB, 235x240px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 235x240px

>>37237582
>generally i view it like this:
>it matters if you're ugly
>it matters if you're extremely beautiful/handsome
>everything in between is just shades of grey
>a 6.5 can fuck a 9
I definitely agree with all of the above.

>>37235741
6 or 6.5. Cute but spaghetti would still be at manageable levels. This is the perfect balance of attractiveness and approachability. At 7 spaghetti containment would be a conscious effort but still manageable. 8 and the spaghetti dam breaks. 9 is a spaghetticane, and 10 is Spaghettigeddon.

Note: the Spaghetti Scale is flawed, but it gives you a more meaningful and encouraging view of your progress when the scale slides.

>>37235741
fake freckles/10
>shit

>>37236341
Name ?

>>37237992
Bailey Jay

>>37237542
what the actual fuck most of the '4' guys are actually decently attractive. you're a fucking retard

>>37236526
Nobody asked about your ex. Move on cuck.

>>37238086
The descriptions are accurate for these things but it's undermined by the guy putting his subjective samples at each level which don't even appear to follow the descriptions. I've generally just ignored the sample faces and accepted just the descriptions.

>>37238060
not getting rused again, mister

File: eyebrow.jpg (7KB, 278x181px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 278x181px

>>37238086
I explicitly stated that the picture in that post is the old men's chart and that mine was in the next post. Maybe it's time to improve those reading comprehension skills.

>>37237554

Why are the twins from Dishonored in the "1" category?

>>37237554
The black guy look in 6 looks better than some of the people in 8.

>>37235741

>be mixed white/asian man
>go to bars and clubs
>mfw random bitches constantly fetishize me
>they introduce themselves
>still too autistic to pull

Rachel Cook. But only her face.

>>37239169
What post is this in response to?

>>37235914
I second it
>>37235741
post face