This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

Can we stop rating people out of 10?

I think it's awful, and every time I see it I cringe inside. Firstly, because reducing someone down to just their physical attributes is just so shallow. There's a lot more to everyone than just their appearance.

How about this:

"My friend is really nice."
"Please don't say that - there's a lot more to people than just how nice they are. Reducing them to their niceness is simply shallow. I think it's awful to do that."

Do you see the absurdity of your opinion?

When we rate someone's looks, we aren't "reducing" them down to just that; we're only rating the looks. We are well aware that there's more to people than their appearance, but you are either just dumb, or are incorrectly understanding people when they rate someone out of 10. (Probably the latter.)

Even if it was reducing women down to just looks, what's disgusting about that? Sure, it's dumb if you're actually trying to evaluate the whole person, but I don't believe that anything that anyone says or thinks is abhorrent, nor does it make me feel sick.

Original post by wildbluesun

Anyway, you're probably a feminist.
http://www.areyouafeminist.com/

That's a dumb test. It asked me if I thought all humans are equal, and when I answered "no" it took me to an unrelated page about human rights.

(edited 11 years ago)

Reply 41

HopefulMidwife

12

Original post by Robbie242

This. Exactly, I'd say that it was perfectly acceptable for the votes for women campaigns, and civil rights campaigns to take place, because they were severely disadvantaged economically, socially and politically back then, however today for the most part that isn't the case, so I'd wish people would either turn to become humanists or find some other way to promote equality for both sides of the coin. great post, +1 rep

Thank you

I'm a humanist, but I'd go so far to say I'm a 'lifeist'. I'm for the equal rights for all life on earth.

By the way, I love how (some) feminists pay no mind to the barbaric process of chopping off little boy's foreskins, and how incensed they get when it's compared to MGM.

Reply 42

nicatre

13

It is annoying but as someone pointed out it is to an individual's subjective perspective.

Though rating people like that is flawed simply because it is unidimensional.

Reply 43

therisenmitten

12

Original post by MasterJomi

Makes thread complaining about judging peoples physical attributes,
works in industry about judging peoples physical attributes.

Ahahaha, OP what a mug.

And no, I will continue to rate people out of 10. You get 5/10.

Also... There are so many females who try and say they model when in fact they're very average looking.. it's quite annoying, please stop.

That's the point. Modelling is about judging physical attributes so it's fair to judge them, it's part of the job. But it's not fair to rate people in everyday situations when they didn't ask for your opinion.

Also the OP isn't trying to say she models... she does model.

Reply 44

KayleighG

1

I agree with you so much! I don't understand how someone can judge another person based on looks alone, I know people do it in everyday day life but it doesn't take into account a persons personality or other attributes which the individual may find attractive therefore they are just preventing themselves from knowing a person that they may really get on with because they physically only find them a "1/10". At my college there is a boy with a severe physical disability. He is the nicest guy anyone could meet, no one goes up to him and says "Awww, you're a 1 out of 10 can't get to know you" I personally feel that you need to get to know the person before you can say they're attractive in terms of looks.

I think it has a similar principle to that "Hot or not" thing that runs in America (I base this on Mean girls) but things such as rating people on how they look could really damage someones confidence and self esteem. In a time where so many people are image concious and have eating disorders or something body dysmorphia is it really acceptable to judge someone on how they look alone? We all want to be accepted in society, and the rating thing just ostracises people to an extent in that if they get a low rating they feel as if they are not accepted and are not good enough.

Reply 45

username858757

14

OP's strategy to get feedback on her physical appearance was poor and needlessly complicated.

1. Start thread about how it is wrong to reduce people to their physical appearance, in order to boost thread views and responses.
2. Wait for argument to start. Predictable posters say, "you're only saying that because, when reduced to your physical appearance, you're a 2/10".
3. OP rebuffs this with images of her at a photo shoot, reducing herself to her physical appearance.
4. Throwaway line saying that despite being a model, she is aware of the problems in the industry of reducing women to their physical appearances. This means that she isn't a hypocrite.
5. Gets positive feedback on her physical appearance.

Most people just do steps 3 and 5. I admire the attempt to make it less obvious, but it has backfired, I'm afraid.

(edited 11 years ago)

Reply 46

Venomilys

13

Original post by wildbluesun

Um, most people aren't pornstars...that's the point...rating random people you don't know based solely on their physical attractiveness is normally not okay. When deciding which bit of porn to **** to, sure, it's fine. When looking at people's Facebooks with your friends and going "yeah she's a 6 he's a 4 DAMN look at ASS she's a straight up 10" - it's not okay. Those people are not there for you to judge. It is not okay to continually be ranking, judging, rating, strangers based on VERY limited information.

Imagine if you did this in real life, to someone's face. Would you tell a stranger you'd just met "you're a 4...sorry...I don't find you ****able...but hey we can still be friends!"? If you think that's appropriate, then you are a very strange person indeed.

If you look at it like that, then i agree with you that it is wrong. I assumed that you assumed that the woman agreed to receiving a rating. In situations where you have random FB pics it is absolutely wrong.

There are some situations where the woman does not have to give consent, for example, a super model who is being viewed by millions, as she knows she is going to judged by the public when she works in this industry. This part is more debatable.

Reply 47

Venomilys

13

Original post by R4INBOW

What's with the influx of rate me threads lately? :erm:

I think everyone's being harsh to the OP. Your probably not very much of a catch yourself :lol:

Nope, ops a model.

Original post by wildbluesun

I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not. :P I suck at sarcasm.

Anyway, you're probably a feminist.
http://www.areyouafeminist.com/

Oooo, I hate it when people think like this. That the only reason you could think a system or convention is unfair is because it disadvantages you, as opposed to seeing the inherent injustice in the system/convention.

When I'm not studying, I work as a model. I literally make a living being judged on my looks. And partially because being judged on my looks is a very important aspect of one part of my life, I'm come to realise how shallow and unfair that type of judgement is in other parts of my life.

Anyway, this is me.

Lingerie shots - possibly NSFW.

http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m9jok7G4eb1rs5q1co1_1280.jpg
http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m18poxhCqn1rs5q1co1_1280.jpg

Fishingforcompliments/10

Reply 50

Robbie242

Original post by Mastermind007

This is so sad

So is your face

Reply 51

SannaS

10

It's so annoying when ugly people start rating other people to make them self feel better! Thanks for the thread

Reply 52

SannaS

10

Original post by Mastermind007

This is so sad

Some people spend too much time on the computer..

mila kunis, HOT

OP

Original post by Hypocrism

The concept of feminism is ultimately divisive. If people actually stand for equality, they should consider themselves humanists, someone who cares about equality of all people, and are not just restricting their views on equality to people with vaginas. Feminism is a pathetic, self-interested form of humanism that's fundamentally plagued with the issue of real biological differences between the people involved. Don't get me wrong, I'm entirely in agreement with the values behind feminism, and I used to consider myself one, but now I dislike the term feminism; the good intention behind the values should be applied to all people and not focused on your own 'in-group', and the term feminism tends to do that.

Also, if 'feminists' truly cared about equality among humans, rather than being selfish and sorting out their own problems first, they would be campaigning to prevent poverty or starvation in third world countries, because there's a LOT more inequality between for example people in the UK and people in Africa than there is between UK men and UK women. Identifying as a feminist over identifying as a fully fledged humanist just implies someone thinks their biological sex gives them more important problems than those of less fortunate people.

I agree with you, and the other people saying that all people's rights are equal and that men's rights are just are important as women's rights. They are. They REALLY are. I think most modern day feminists would agree with that, and the feminism I'm into is typically about breaking down gender roles and starting to see people as individuals rather than as collections of gender stereotypes. The variety of feminist who thinks we should figure out how to have babies without men and then kill all the men...those people are just bonkers, I don't agree with that at all.

I prefer the term "feminism" to "humanism" for that set of beliefs, mainly because I think women still generally have less power and influence in society than men, when it should be equal. Like women are vastly underrepresented in business, in politics, etc; women have more violence - especially sexual violence - committed against them than men (bearing in mind that there's nothing to stop men being groped or catcalled by women, but men seem to do this to women far more than women do it to men); women earn less than men even in equivalent jobs; etc etc. I think women are generally less advantaged than men in society, so the term feminist still makes sense. Also, the term humanist is already attached to a different set of beliefs about secularism and the separation of religion and state (http://humanism.org.uk/), whereas the word feminism is unambiguously associated with reconsidering gender roles.

At the end of the day though, it's just semantics. There are bits of society where women are advantaged over men, which is just as big a pile of bull as the bits of society where men are advantaged over women, so if you prefer the term humanist then I understand that and it's cool. We're on the same side. We just use different words for it. :biggrin:

And it's impossible to campaign for every cause, there are too many. Caring about gender equality doesn't mean you don't care about ending world hunger, but it's impossible to devote your entire life to both. It's very probable (though obviously I don't know for certain because how can I) that current feminist thinkers invest money in overseas development programs as well. I don't think it's fair to criticise someone for investing most of their time and energy into trying to make things better for people in their own country.

Reply 55

AvocatDuDiable

12

Well said OP. Horrible behaviour.

Reply 56

.Red

16

Original post by AvocatDuDiable

Well said OP. Horrible behaviour.

Reply 57

wildbluesun

OP

11

Original post by MasterJomi

Makes thread complaining about judging peoples physical attributes,
works in industry about judging peoples physical attributes.

Ahahaha, OP what a mug.

And no, I will continue to rate people out of 10. You get 5/10.

Also... There are so many females who try and say they model when in fact they're very average looking.. it's quite annoying, please stop.

Yeah sure, if you're booking me as a model, judge me on my looks all you want. That's the point. Judging people on their physical attributes is fine *in some contexts*, but in most contexts it's not.

If it's a snap of me with my friends on Facebook, or if I've made a YouTube video talking about my experiences with mental illness...don't judge me on my appearance. It's not relevant to what I'm doing or trying to say.

It's irrelevant whether or not you think I'm good looking enough to model. I do, and I make £400/£500 a month out of it as a part time job. Which isn't enough to live on, but is enough to go crazy at the weekends, take my boyfriend out every so often, and still save for uni and a new laptop. Probably wouldn't want to do it as a full time thing though, there's a lot of travelling & admin & funny hours & early starts and so on.

Personally I think the images posted show me in a good light, but a lot of that is make up/posing/lighting (and very limited retouching contrary to what some people think - it's all in the pose), but I'm actually not stunningly good looking. I'm normally not the prettiest girl in the room, but I do know how to present myself to the camera so I look good; lots of gorgeous girls freeze up in front of the camera and just look really awkward.

I did feel the need to post them to make the point that you don't have to be stereotypically ugly to be irritated at this constant "hot or not" thing people do. Also, just saying "I work as a model" means FA, I know lots of girls who do a fantastic job bigging themselves up, when in reality their boyfriend has a camera and every so often they do a charity fashion show. Technically it's modelling, but it's just a hobby really; if you don't earn from it it's not a proper job. Saying "I am a model" is a pointless statement, you need evidence to back it up. Therefore...evidence.

Original post by Ilyas

If you look at it like that, then i agree with you that it is wrong. I assumed that you assumed that the woman agreed to receiving a rating. In situations where you have random FB pics it is absolutely wrong.

There are some situations where the woman does not have to give consent, for example, a super model who is being viewed by millions, as she knows she is going to judged by the public when she works in this industry. This part is more debatable.

Huzzah someone on the internet agrees with me this never happens! And I agree if someone's asked to be rated then go ahead...haven't seen that happen very often though.

Models make their money out of their appearance, so judging them on their appearance when they're working is cool. It's not cool to write bitchy magazine articles about how they look when they're taking their kids to school. (AHEM Daily Mail.) Who cares if they don't look amazing on the school run? It's irrelevant to their competency as a parent. Whereas how they look on a shoot is HUGELY relevant to their ability to do their job.

Original post by Hal.E.Lujah

I don't really mind people rating out of ten, it's like little kids saying things are either 'good' or 'evil', some people simplify things to make it easier for them to understand.

That's all it is, and it's harmless. Just a massive simplification. I'm not saying rating out of 10 is for stupid people either, everyone simplifies things, even stuff like the TSR rating system is just a simplified version of 'I like/dislike this post a bit' into 'I 100% agree or disagree'.

Rating someone on physical attractiveness is completely fair. If you work out alot you'll be more physically attractive, if you eat properly you'll have nicer skin, if you're happy more than angry you'll have less wrinkles, if you're financially capable you'll have nice clothes etc etc. Someones appearance tells you loads about their personality, and if you don't like a physical manifestation of your personality you should probably work on changing yourself first through that.

I think it's harmful because it's encouraging people to judge each other solely on sexual attractiveness, and that kind of judgement is quite harmful and also quite prevalent in society. I think we miss out on things because we're too busy talking about appearance...like music, it seems to be a requirement that musicians be sexy these days, but it's fecking MUSIC, you can be ugly as sin and make gorgeous music.

I wouldn't make that assumption, that you can tell a lot about someone from their appearance. Like some people are just prone to acne and no matter what they do to themselves will always have it, so acne doesn't necessarily mean they have a poor diet.

Original post by Treeroy

How about this:

"My friend is really nice."
"Please don't say that - there's a lot more to people than just how nice they are. Reducing them to their niceness is simply shallow. I think it's awful to do that."

Do you see the absurdity of your opinion?

When we rate someone's looks, we aren't "reducing" them down to just that; we're only rating the looks. We are well aware that there's more to people than their appearance, but you are either just dumb, or are incorrectly understanding people when they rate someone out of 10. (Probably the latter.)

Even if it was reducing women down to just looks, what's disgusting about that? Sure, it's dumb if you're actually trying to evaluate the whole person, but I don't believe that anything that anyone says or thinks is abhorrent, nor does it make me feel sick.

That's a dumb test. It asked me if I thought all humans are equal, and when I answered "no" it took me to an unrelated page about human rights.

I think its point was "do you think all humans have equal amounts of intrinsic worth", rather than "do you think all humans are exactly the same in every way". REGARDLESS not really the point.

At least someone's niceness tells you something about them as a person. Someone who's nice presumably cares about other people, isn't self-absorbed, etc. Someone who's good looking pulled a lucky genetics card. That's it. That's all you know. It tells you as much about them as "they are 5 foot 8".

See, I think this manner of discussion does reduce people down to their looks, especially because you phrase it as "s/he is a [x]". Not "I would rate his/her looks as [x]". But "s/he IS a [x]". It's saying someone IS this, that this is what they are...a number. Feh, it makes me unhappy. I don't think the other perspectives on this thread are invalid, I can see the logic behind most of them, but I don't find those arguments particularly convincing in the main.

/very very long post

Reply 58

AvocatDuDiable

12

Original post by Sai4

Yes, because I really give a damn about some sad act who goes on 4chan and calls people faggots for having a shred of decency.