MARS - Maverick's Appearance Rating System

[Lurker 123]

Lurker 123,

I think you missed the point of the thread. It is "Maverick's appearance Rating System" not someone elses. I'm not saying I agree or disagree with his scale but at least he took the time to define it so now I understand when he rates a woman an 8.5 what it is based on.

My concern is since he mentioned it in public. There will be many copy cats who would love to follow his scale!So to speak a small match can light up a forest!

 

[IceG]

Mav, bro, ease up on Shorties..

Maverick, you know we tight, but you should ease up on the

"shorties"

i think you have to allow the height to be 5-5'11" without any issue for deductions.

i know you are trying to "quantify the essence of hottiness" but there are alot of "shorties" who are under 5'5 who are pretty fvcking fine.

i agree that for a dude, it is alittle more ideal for shortie to be 4-6 inches shorter than him because that is the ideal kissing/dancing/looking in each other's eyes ergonomical angles, especially when shortie wears 2" heels.

so that is where your own 5'7-5'9 preference comes in. (i say that as another 6 ft. dude to another). tilt her pretty face up and it is the perfect kissing posture.

 

[El Tigre]

There's a simple solution ladies.......

Put up clear honest pictures, with honest stats, and then guys can make their own decisions privately based on their personal preferences......

Veronica does it
April Myst does it
Your Jordan does it
Niki Valhalla does it

.....to mention just a few that I've actually met....you walk in the door, and lo and behold, it's really her....no bullshit......no lies.....

 

[IceG]

Maverick, i would also suggest the "system" has to have an adjustment factor for losers, geeks, dorks, and overall playas with no game. you can even call it Beauty v. Geek adjustment.

these are individuals whose "overall" exposure to hotties/shorties is limited. if you have never been to the club when its "hoppin and drippin with fly honeys", then your "perception" of hottiness in real life is reduced.

therefore, if a dude is himself a 4-5 (using reverse MARS assessment on a guy) then you have to allow an adjustment factor. i know your 80/20 principle tries to address this aspect and we all know beauty is in the eye of the beholder BUT:

IT HELPS to know what the mofo's face behind the eyes looks like.

for such reviewers with limited fields of vision/experience, ANY SHORTIE is going to be a 7 if she is only a 4.5-6 in the MARS.

 

[hitrack]

Like most I have my own system......

Depends what pool yer pissing in 1st. There is track good looking and real world good looking.

That is a chick on the track may be a 7-9 but only be a 5-7 if I saw her in the mall. You have to be less fussy DT.

Then there is the...

1- man no f-ing way she's gonna go for a green, why even bother gettin outta the damn car.

2- looks fairly hot WTF I'll chance it.

3- pretty sure unless she's one of those friggen chicks thats on the crack track but thinks she's up on high track.

4- Man where starting to have to "settle" here

5- fukk man if someone told me as soon as I got down here that this was as good as its gonna get I woulda went home hours ago!!!

 

[ace85]

Wow

I have read lots of posts, and seen some bizarre stuff. This takes the cake.

Maverick, my only suggestion to you is keep up with the analysis, I think it will likely be your greatest contribution to society. Which isn't saying much.

You are either 1) trying to convince us that your system is the best and we should take your ratings as gospel. or 2) You take yourself too seriously or 3) You are trying to really explain yourself to others like we actually care. Needing us to like and respect you.

Your reaction to EDEN not liking what you have to say indicates you might be oblivious to the fact that what you posted might be a tad offensive to the girls that you rate

I would first suggest to them to consider the source (which I think EDEN did, hence the sarcastic posts). I was curious about your project before (what your motivation was). I now will just pass your posts by.

I am kind of concerned that I just read some sort of Manifesto like from the UNIBOMBER.

 

[sirlickheralot]

IThe 80/20 Rule
--------------
Why 80%? Well I believe in the 80/20 rule. Sure, beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and you may think that a relatively unattractive lady by most standards is attractive, and there is nothing wrong with that... however, that doesn't help when making an OBJECTIVE rating on beauty for others to read. Society as a whole has it's ideas on what constitutes female beauty. A lot of it is ingrained into males when looking for a mate. So back to the question of 80/20. Once again, I believe that if 80% of the people in a room give a lady a 2nd look, then that lady can be considered in the top 20% in terms of female beauty.

------
A quick look at the recent Ms. Universe Pageant would suggest height is a factor, and I agree. The final 5 contestants were all 5'9" to 5'11" except Ms. USA (5'7"), which I don't count because I think she made it because Trump owns the Pageant.

I will say the following:

6'0" and over is a negative - too tall of a woman is considered unfeminine - maybe if she was exactly 6'0", that would be ok, but if she is obviously over 6 ft tall, to many, this becomes a bit of a negative. I think some of the final contestants were about 6'0", but were listed as 5'11" because of this very reason I describe.

5'9" to 5'11" is ideal in my book (well actually, I PERSONALLY prefer my women in the 5'7" to 5'9" range, but for the sake of breaking down into categories, I had to draw the objective line somewhere and I'm using the Ms. Universe Pageant as a reference).

5'6" to 5'8" is very good in my book. Could still be a 9.5 in my book if she was strong in other areas.

5'3" to 5'5" is a bit of negative. If she was strong in other areas, she could be a 9.0, but would be VERY HARD pressed to be a 9.5 in my book.

5'2" and shorter is a negative. She could easily be an 8.0, but she would need to be VERY strong in other areas to get 8.5. She would be very hard pressed to earn a 9.0, and I don't think a 9.5 is possible for somebody of this height. Sorry if I sound shallow, that's just the way I see it. Height does matter.

I don't think you can conclude from looking at one group of attractive women who happen to be tall that height is a factor in determining attractiveness.

Look at Eva Longoria (Maxim's sexiest woman of 2005) 5'3, Jessica Simpson (Maxim's sexiest woman of 2004) 5'3, Christina Aguilera (Maxim's sexiest woman of 2003) 5'2, Britney Spears (FHM sexiest women of 2004) 5'4. These short women beat out a number of much taller women on these lists.

I highly doubt 80% of men would choose a tall Miss Universe contestant over some of these equally beautiful shorter women.

 

[bigmoe69er]

Well said, Sirlickheralot! I agree 100%!!!

---Dr. Moe

 

[stryker]

This topic has been flogged to death before maveric,,,,do some research on here`,I'm sure sure you could find alot of threads dedicated to this.
But!!,for every individual,BEAUTY!!,is in the eye of the beholder

 

[FuZzYknUckLeS]

I have read lots of posts, and seen some bizarre stuff. This takes the cake.

Maverick, my only suggestion to you is keep up with the analysis, I think it will likely be your greatest contribution to society. Which isn't saying much.

You are either 1) trying to convince us that your system is the best and we should take your ratings as gospel. or 2) You take yourself too seriously or 3) You are trying to really explain yourself to others like we actually care. Needing us to like and respect you.

Your reaction to EDEN not liking what you have to say indicates you might be oblivious to the fact that what you posted might be a tad offensive to the girls that you rate

I would first suggest to them to consider the source (which I think EDEN did, hence the sarcastic posts). I was curious about your project before (what your motivation was). I now will just pass your posts by.

I am kind of concerned that I just read some sort of Manifesto like from the UNIBOMBER.

holy shit

cut the dude some slack man. the rating system is obviosly in good humour. if people take it seriously, they need to get their heads outa their asses!
i just hate goin thru a good thread then hittin on a flame-ridden asshole post such as this. And as far as EDEN being possibly offended, who gives a shit?
The topic is about a RATING SYSTEM FOR WOMEN, intended to be used by men. She doesn't have to like it. I say, you can have input on how a rating system for women works once you learn how to piss while standing.
All those in favour?

 

[Very Veronica]

holy shit

I say, you can have input on how a rating system for women works once you learn how to piss while standing.

I guess that means i can play.

 

[Eden]

FuZzYknUckLeS

For your information I can piss standing up, I guess I can have my input! Care to watch?

 

[Swguy]

For your information I can piss standing up

SWG

 

[stryker]

Gotta luv a girl that can take a leak standing up

 

[Jonesy]

This topic has been flogged to death before maveric,,,,do some research on here`,I'm sure sure you could find alot of threads dedicated to this.
But!!,for every individual,BEAUTY!!,is in the eye of the beholder

Your wrong.

Beauty is in the eye of the BEERholder.

I think we should end this rating discussion. I have found out the reasons why some of us (who don't drink before seeing SPs) rank lower than others. The others are having too much beer first.

Before the usual cast of subjects comes to complain, it was a joke. OK? Remember those? If not, go look in the mirror and you will be laughing in a few seconds. Another joke. OK?

Tough crowd.

 

[stryker]

Hahahahha,,,phuck jonsey,,,ya made me laugh,,I have a T-shirt with the same saying

 

[stryker]

Hahahahha,,,phuck jonsey,,,ya made me laugh,,I have a T-shirt with the same saying

,,,sorry.I splet yor name rong

 

[maverick73]

This simple system you speak of is anything but. The system is downright shallow. Makes me wonder if you DO travel around with a tape measure and polaroid and take these necessary measurements when you do these Ho Booty Contests. "Oh, sorry babe, minor deduction because you're more of a pear than the desired hourglass. Work on your shoulders more then come back again in two months to see if you've moved up."

Men are ,yes, simple linear thinkers and are very visual but I'd think that they have more sense then what you've posted. This does don't make you a sophisticated man, this thread makes you superficial. Jason Alexanders' character in Shallow Hal.

I thank you for voting me as a 7 based on a torso shot. I didn't know you could tell so much by what I look like in a wet t-shirt. A few things to consider the Miss universe Pageant had a contestant who was 5'3". Playboy magazine celebrates the "girl next door", the average dress size in North America is a size 14 though with recent sympathy sizing has moved down to 12 and cellulite (once believed to be a weight issue) is a hereditary issue and over 80% of women have it.

1. The system at it's core is simple. 6, 7, 8, and 9. Each had a basic question that everybody can easily answer. This will get you in the right ballpark (within 0.5, or at WORST 1.0). If somebody then takes the time to get into more detail, you can pin down the accuracy a little more.

2. About the tape measure and polaroid - don't give me any ideas

3. This thread in your opinion may sound superficial, but that doesn't make it's poster (me) superficial.

4. I've seen other pictures of you, and based my rating on as much information as I could, including posts about how you described yourself. In my mind, I had a range of 6.5 to 7.5, and settled on the safe number of 7.0 with the limited information I had.

5. I will address the height issue later. I don't care if the Pageant had somebody that was 5'3". I'm sure it had somebody that probably lower than that too. Bottom line is, each country sent their best representative. On AVERAGE, they were quite tall, showing this is a desirable quality.

6. Average dress size in North America is driven up by all the American porkers (sorry to offend any fellow American pooners, but you know it's true - that's one reason (among the legal reasons) why you come to see good ol' Canadian girls!). The US has the highest rate of obesity anywhere in the world. It's disgusting.

 

[travel guy]

6. Average dress size in North America is driven up by all the American porkers (sorry to offend any fellow American pooners, but you know it's true - that's one reason (among the legal reasons) why you come to see good ol' Canadian girls!). The US has the highest rate of obesity anywhere in the world. It's disgusting.

The rating system is pretty individual; I can't see pooners throwing out their own taste in women to subscribe to someone else's, but I doubt that anyone could argue this part.

I've never seen a "salad bar" outside of the good old USA that included fried chicken and various forms of deep fried lard, served with side dishes of more various forms of lard smothered in cheese... which of course is also available for your "salad" in deep fried form. Only in America can a salad induce a coronary.

 

[maverick73]

I know I probably seem, well, choked and I kinda am, I know that you are only trying to come up with some sort of a theory on how girls should be rated that is universal. I know that you are a nice guy, trying to do a shitty job that no one else really wants to do. The end is this, you can't be objective since your height criteria is subjective because you yourself prefer taller women to shorter more petite ones. Point taken. In order for yours or any other rating system to be clear (or somewhat clearer) you would need to take a poll maybe of a 100 random men all walks, races, and age, the majority rules (maybe your 80/20 rule here). You need more of a realistic research category than the Miss America beauty pagent and although I would have trouble modelling high fashion on a runway, I sure would not have any trouble modelling for magazines. You need to sit back and understand us women don't like to be picked apart, on good days, let alone feel like someone is scrutinizing us beyond reasonable; and in my opinion your system is unfair and unreasonable.

Hi Eden. I'm very sorry that you are choked (I really am). That was not the intention of my thread. I gave the height criteria a lot of thought last night and today. Here is where I stand on it now:

1. The average height differential of males to females is 4". On a side note, that is why I think the average height of high heels is 3". That brings the average female to about the same height as her mate without going over. It leaves that 1" of error so that the male doesn't have to feel shorter and "inferior" to his partner. (BTW, I'm not saying I agree or disagree with the height superiority inferiority thing, just reporting the "facts" as I know it. Personally, I am not intimidated by a taller woman and I don't need to be taller than her to feel "superior" to her, but I do prefer my women slightly shorter than me on average for reasons outlined in another post about kissing, etc.).

2. I think the majority of males prefer to be with a woman who is the same height or slightly shorter than them. Very few prefer a taller woman (I bet the figures are 80% prefer shorter, 20% don't care or taller ).

3. Keep in mind when I first started the thread, I was "thinking out loud"... meaning my ideas were not set in stone.

4. I think for the PURPOSES of reviewing an ESCORT, height of 5'0" to 5'11" should be equal, since the men purchasing the services are:

A) generally not looking to have a long term relationship and children with said escort and therefore the factor of "finding the best possible mating partner" should go out the window.

B) are going to be of different heights - the shorter men may generally prefer shorter SP's, medium men medium SP's, and taller men taller SP's.

Even in the context of B above, because this is paid sex, the men would then be inclined to experiment with women of all heights since this is not the same as finding somebody to have a relationship with. Therefore, you'd have shorter men trying out taller women and taller men trying out shorter women.

5. I still believe that even for escort reviewing, 4'11" and under and 6'0" and over is a negative. There's just a certain stigma of not being at least 5'0" or being a "freak of nature" by being over 6'0" (I know that's exagerrated but you get the point).

6. All that being said, I still STAND BY MY ORIGINAL statement that height is a factor in real world beauty, all else being equal. It is one of many factors, but it is a factor. I am not saying that somebody 5'1" cannot be a 9.5. If she was VIRTUALLY PERFECT in all other categories except height, she could be a 9.5. Realistically, she is not going to be perfect in the other areas, and that, along with her relative short height, would make her hard pressed to break the 9.0 rating barrier in my system. In the Ms. Universe pageant, each country sent what they considered their best representative and it's no coincidence the average height was quite tall.