I just realized that the two pics in the same post were of the same woman (Keira Knightley). For some reason, I missed that (despite your rep).
A man builds. A parasite asks 'Where is my share?'
A man creates. A parasite says, 'What will the neighbors think?'
A man invents. A parasite says, 'Watch out, or you might tread on the toes of God... '
I mean. I'd give him an 8. But I dont get it. I find him insanely attractive. I know hes not conventionally good looking. He looks terrible blond, and I could start a commune on his forehead and use his mouth as a suitcase. But DAMMMNNNN
Perhaps so, but that strikes me as missing the point entirely. It's like having vegetarians judge a BBQ contest.
At the same time, your contest is rigged
You aren't sizing women up according to their basic structure, you're rating them on the sexual availability signals they are giving off in that particular picture. Check it if you like, but all the pictures Rasofy responded to are pictures of women who are intently, intensely, to the exclusion of all else, gazing into your eyes, paying you attention over anything else. Their body language is designed to make you feel special, connected and well..drawn to them.
And that is so relative, since *any* female can do that to you. Granted, you won't be attracted to all of them, as that baseline will at some point start mattering....but where?
It is impossible to measure that in men, or so it seems. Whereas women...well, I'd say they are way more able to rate this meat than you meat eaters are