Post: #1

I will post here a sketch of the 1-10 scale in a more analytical and objective way, begining from the 5.
I will analyse it from 8 variables: forehead, eyebrow, eyes, nose, lips, cheekbones, jawline, face shape.
For the introduction, the desirable qualities are: high forehead, arched eyebrow, large almond shaped eyes, thin and slightly turned up nose, full lips, high and proeminent cheekbones, thin and delicate jawline and no-extreme face shape(such as too round or too square or too anything).

These variables will vary as below average, average and above average.
There are two groups:
1)5-7: can have average, below average and above average features.
2)8-10: to be in this range, the girl can't have any below average feature, only average and above average features. The 10 will have all of the above average features+exoticness.


The Five:
   
forehead: average (0)
eyebrow: above average (+1)
eyes: average (0)
nose: average (0)
lips: average (0)
cheekbones: average (0)
jawline: below average, too strong/manly (-1)
face shape: average (0)

Final Score: 0

The Six:
   
forehead: high forehead, above average (+1)
eyebrow: not defined, below average (-1)
eyes: nice color, above average (+1)
nose: average (0)
lips: too thin, below average (-1)
cheekbones: proeminent, above average (+1)
jawline: thin but with a protruding chin, average (-1)
face shape: above average (+1)

Final Score: +1

The Seven:
   
forehead: high forehead, above average (+1)
eyebrow: not defined, below average (-1)
eyes: they are turned down in the sides, below average (-1)
nose: thin, above average (+1)
lips: full, above average (+1)
cheekbones: proeminent, above average (+1)
jawline: her chin is protruding, below average(-1)
face shape: above average (+1)

Final Score: +2


----
Now we enter in another realm, where girls only have average or above average features. No below average features here.
----

The Eight:
   
forehead: high forehead, above average (+1)
eyebrow: average shape, average (0)
eyes: nice eye color, above average (+1)
nose: average (0)
lips: you can see that the make up makes it look full but it is not really full, average (0)
cheekbones: above average (+1)
jawline: average (0)
face shape: average (0)

Final Score: +3

The Nine:
   
This 9 is a strong nine, almost a 10, she has all the desirable features, she is just not a ten because she lacks UNIQUENESS, EXOTICNESS, her blonde hair + blue eyes is beautiful, but it is not a unique combo, it is common.
The middle or weak nine, would be a girl who besides lacking the exotic combo also lacks some other sharp feature like full lips or striking almond shaped eyes, but her overall score would have to be +4 at least.
Brunettes with brown eyes and blondes with blue eyes can be as high as 9s but they can't be tens because they lack "contrasting coloring" and are very easy to be found.

The Ten:
the ten will have all the desirable features and a good coloring, one that is different and difficult to be find. It can be dark hair with fair skin or dark hair with light eyes. Maybe a beautiful red hair, or something that makes her look uncommon or otherwordly.
   
   
   

----
Bibliography:
http://www.cs.tau.ac.il/~ruppin/beauty.pdf
http://www.viewzone.com/attractivenessx.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_attractiveness
http://www.goldennumber.net/face/
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/articl...tiful.html

Post: #2

You can't be serious with the so-called 8. Both the 5 and 6 are better-looking.

This isn't science.

Post: #3

(04-06-2013 12:12 PM)Tuthmosis Wrote:  You can't be serious with the so-called 8. Both the 5 and 6 are better-looking.

This isn't science.

As I said, this is a sketch, I will improve this. But in my opinion my 8 is better looking than the 5 and the 6.

Post: #4

1 Would Bang

0 Would Not Bang

Post: #5

The "5" is naturally the cutest one out of all of the pictures. Shitty photo and it's in black and white. And you base 1-10 on facial features alone? No mention of body? I am afraid your personal preferences are far from any type of "scientific method," but you are free to call it the "polarbear method."

Post: #6

(04-06-2013 12:15 PM)polarbear Wrote:  But in my opinion my 8 is better looking than the 5 and the 6.

Fair enough, but your claims of scientific objectivity are therefore dubious. As far as I'm concerned all your pictures are scrambled around. You don't actually have a real 5 here and 10s don't exist. Furthermore, your metrics are purely facially based, which is monumentally problematic when you're talking about women.

Check out these threads to refine your methodology. This project is in desperate need of major revisions:

What Do You Guys Consider A 10??

What Do You Guys Consider a 5?

The Would you Hit It thread

Post: #7

(04-06-2013 12:21 PM)RougeNoir Wrote:  The "5" is naturally the cutest one out of all of the pictures. Shitty photo and it's in black and white. And you base 1-10 on facial features alone? No mention of body? I am afraid your personal preferences are far from any type of "scientific method," but you are free to call it the "polarbear method."

the problem is not mine if you have bad taste.
I thought the 5 could even be a 4. do you think she s really cuter than candice swanepoel?

Post: #8

(04-06-2013 12:23 PM)Tuthmosis Wrote:  

(04-06-2013 12:15 PM)polarbear Wrote:  But in my opinion my 8 is better looking than the 5 and the 6.

Fair enough, but your claims of scientific objectivity are therefore dubious. As far as I'm concerned all your pictures are scrambled around. You don't actually have a real 5 here and 10s don't exist. Furthermore, your metrics are purely facially based, which is monumentally problematic when you're talking about women.

Check out these threads to refine your methodology. This project is in desperate need of major revisions:

What Do You Guys Consider A 10??

What Do You Guys Consider a 5?

The Would you Hit It thread

10s do exist, othewise it would be called the 1-9 scale.

Post: #9

That might be the worst 1-10 scale I've ever seen. Your 5 could be a solid 8 with the right makeup, hairstyle, and a decent photo. You're comparing that photo with your photo of the 9 which is lifted right out of a women's magazine.

Next time compare apples to apples.

Oh yeah, your 8 looks like a feminist. A HARDCORE feminist.

Also, you might want to rethink criticizing others' taste when you're only 4 posts in.

Post: #10

I personally prefer the '5'. The '8' does nothing for me I'm afraid, and the '10' isn't a 10 IMO.

Post: #11

The 1-10 scale can't be scientific because beauty is subjective.

Edit: The proof is in the pudding. You gave a +1 for your "8"s forehead. apparently you find balding chicks sexy.

Post: #12

(04-06-2013 12:31 PM)thedude3737 Wrote:  That might be the worst 1-10 scale I've ever seen. Your 5 could be a solid 8 with the right makeup, hairstyle, and a decent photo. You're comparing that photo with your photo of the 9 which is lifted right out of a women's magazine.

Next time compare apples to apples.

Oh yeah, your 8 looks like a feminist. A HARDCORE feminist.

I know girl 5 in real life, I got the best pic I found of her to post here, she is not pretty in real life. ugh

Post: #13

(04-06-2013 12:06 PM)polarbear Wrote:  The Seven:

forehead: high forehead, above average (+1)
eyebrow: not defined, below average (-1)
eyes: they are turned down in the sides, below average (-1)
nose: thin, above average (+1)
lips: full, above average (+1)
cheekbones: proeminent, above average (+1)
jawline: her chin is protruding, below average(-1)
face shape: above average (+1)

Final Score: +2

The 7s lips looked deformed. I would not give that above average.

Post: #14

more pics from girl 5
http://s7.postimg.org/js2x9p1rv/photo1231.jpg

do you still think she is an 8?

Post: #15

^ She could be with proper makeup. Have you seen Mila Kunis without makeup? She has similar colouring to your girl, and looks a bonafide 10 with the correct makeup... and worse than your girl without it.

Edit - Pics



to

Post: #16

more pics from girl 8
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-p4yGiID862I/Tr...simons.jpg

do you still think girl 5 is prettier? you are sick...

Post: #17

This "scale" is so abysmally bad that not only is everyone disagreeing, it's offending the membership. I'm not even 100 percent sure this isn't trolling.

(04-06-2013 12:33 PM)polarbear Wrote:  I know girl 5 in real life, I got the best pic I found of her to post here, she is not pretty in real life. ugh

Further proof that this is the "Polarbear Scale" rather than a "Scientific Method." It's what's in your head, not an honest read of what's in front of you.

Post: #18

My criticism stands. You're comparing a girl you know in real life, a SHITTY picture of her, to a magazine photo. Do you know how much work goes into that photo? How many hours were spent on that photo? It probably took 7 people, not including the model, at least one hour each to produce that photo. Makeup, hair, lighting, photographer, set, assistants, retouching. It's simply ridiculous to use that in any sort of objective metric to analyze beauty.

You're nuts, you keep going like this and the forum is going to turn into one of these:

Post: #19

(04-06-2013 12:34 PM)polarbear Wrote:  more pics from girl 5
http://s7.postimg.org/js2x9p1rv/photo1231.jpg

do you still think she is an 8?

I'd blow some dick snot down her throat. I could even argue that she's the cutest girl you posted. Yes, she is prettier than your 8.

Edit: I really hate to do it, but after looking at your post count I have to call troll. I think you may be a feminist. Nice try in trying to make us "see the beauty that lies beneath", but it's not going to work.

Post: #20

forget how things MIGHT look like and the person behind the pic.
Look at it just as it is.

Post: #21

GIRL 5 IN A VERY NATURAL PIC

http://fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net/hp...4880_n.jpg

Is this your 8?
wow... you have attested low standards.
have a nice day.

Post: #22

Perhaps they should ban you and you can start again? Just messing dude, but seriously, that scale must be your own preference, and that is cool - but in NO way is it scientific. Like Heartiste has pointed out, there are universal indicators of beauty, as appreciated by men, and your 8 in no way fulfills the criteria to be an 8, in universal terms. The forum has spoken.

Edit- Based on that "have a nice day" post, you are trolling.

Post: #23

The five is not prettier than the eight, but I don't think the scale is very accurate nonetheless.

Check out this one,

Post: #24

(04-06-2013 12:46 PM)polarbear Wrote:  GIRL 5 IN A VERY NATURAL PIC

http://fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net/hp...4880_n.jpg

Is this your 8?
wow... you have attested low standards.
have a nice day.

Says the guy who rated a balding fivehead an 8.

Post: #25

''scentific'' wasn't mean to be ''scientific''. that was a word I used just because I was analysing the pics, differently from other posts where you just throw the pics and don't say why and what features make them look this or that number for you.
is it hard to understand that I wasn't mening ''scientific'' as ''scientific'' but as a form of expression?