Donkey’s Custom System For Rating People’s Looks
Rated E for everyone
We were at work the other day doing what’s most important: flipping through a business magazine and rating the models in the ads. We came across a picture of a mature woman (50+), and I asked if people thought she was pretty. It seemed like a simple question but people got really into it and asked, “Do you mean her looks or am I attracted to her or her style?” I told them to rate her on a scale from 1-10. This didn’t satisfy them because we quickly realized we all had different methods of judging a person’s looks.
I provided my perspective and the group seemed somewhat intrigued with my methodology and asked me to document my process. It’s a well known fact that when we were first married I rated my wife a 6, but let me help you understand how I determined this score. (NOTE: I am only evaluating looks – this does not take into consideration the much more important things such as intelligence, cooking ability, and potential inheritance.)
First, you need to identify the criteria you want to evaluate and then assign a weighting to each criterion (the total has to equal 100 or 1.0 if you are thinking in percentages). Then, you assign a rating from 0-10. Next, multiply the weighting and the rating. Finally, add up your numbers to determine the overall rating. Below is the grid I used for my wife. To be fair, I included my own score. You now understand how I came up with my wife’s rating and see that my wife and I are indeed compatible as fellow 6s.
This highlights the fact that a low rating in an important area can really hurt the overall score and that a high or low score in an unimportant area really doesn’t help or hurt. I mean, who cares what a woman’s ears look like? It doesn’t matter to me because she can cover them with hair. (NOTE: A major flaw like a missing ear could require a penalty or deduction. I haven’t figured out the deduction part yet, but I’d say at least a point for each missing ear.)
In our minds we quickly use some sort of scale to process the different people we see each day, and we provide a rating whether or not we readily admit it. Normally once you’re married this practice is done far less and you typically only notice the extremes: the nasty or the beautiful. I must admit that I find myself rating guys these days more than women, but I’m not sure if that means anything. I am way more prone to notice a beefcake working on biceps as opposed to a hottie on the treadmill.
So what features would you include? How can I enhance this scoring system?
9 Responses to “Donkey’s Custom System For Rating People’s Looks”
Donkey – I think you left out an element from your explanation (at least the way you’ve explained it to me many times to get yourself out of the doghouse). While many people just use 10 to mean “very pleasing to the eye” and 0 to mean “unpleasant” you are actually rating people on a comparative scale – as to how they would compare to all other people in the world. (I just want to make everyone aware that I am being ranked against supermodels)
By The Wife on Apr 10, 2009
I apologize to all those being ranked against me. I didn’t aspire to become a supermodel. It just sort of worked out that way.
By Mr. Mustachio on Apr 10, 2009
That “Beefcake” comment really worries me, Donkey.
By Vatermann on Apr 10, 2009
This quite profound. Yes a 10 would be a supermodel. As far a point values, may I add the following deductions:
1 point deduction for missing an ear, an eye, an arm, or a leg
2 point deductions for any gross disease of the skin
A living trunk, no matter how attractive the face, should not merit more than a 4. I was thinking a 3 originally, but I am a compassionate person.
Finally if someone is being described to you whom you have not seen, it is important to qualify the ranking. It usually goes like this.
You: “My wife is a perfect 10″
Me: “A perfect 10.. like Angelina Jolie?” [or some other universally recognized beauty]
You: “Well to me she is even better, to me she is a perfect 10.”
Me: “Okay now I understand thank you”
While it may be sweet and endearing, that level of qualification is a cop out and gets an automatic 3 point deduction if not more.
All I can say to the Donkey et al is to be careful, this is serious science.
By karlmalone on Apr 10, 2009
Oh and I almost forgot. Donkey quit rating beefcakes, you lack the necessary qualifications to do so.
By karlmalone on Apr 10, 2009
I know this is all based on looks, but I really feel like personality should count for something, especially since some people are great until they open their mouths… I guess I’ll have to add it in to my rating chart.
By April on Apr 10, 2009
If you really want to enhance your scoring system, you can throw it away!
By Jane on Apr 11, 2009
I just have to say I like how you added potential inheritance into your NOTE. I see how this would add up. If anyone wants to see a funny YouTube video pertaining to what the Donkey has demonstrated here type in “government rating system.” It talks about how the world is chasing after the same two people and if the government just gave us a number and rules to follow, we would find those we are more compatible with.
By Maddog Mitchell on Apr 13, 2009
I should also clarify that although this article talked about deductions for missing parts, no extra credit is awareded for additional parts… this includes siamese twins, girls with 6 toes, etc…
By karlmalone on Apr 16, 2009