towards a useful smv metric
doctor love
comments welcome.
those who reject the smv premise itself feel free to argue against it.
that's always funny.
everyone starts with 50 points.
0 or negative score: sexually worthless to most members of the
opposite sex.
50 - adequate.
100 or more: highly desirable to members of the opposite sex.
homosexuals operate in a different market so these categories may not
apply.
male smv factors:
height
personality market value (dominance)
net worth
hair
face
strength
body fat percentage
i'm not going to assign numbers to this at present. any girls are
welcome to give it a go. see below for commentary.
female smv:
age - for each year below 25 add 5 points. for each year over 25
subtract 1 point. then for each year over 30 subtract 5 points. then
for each year over 45 subtract 10 points.
bmi - between 17.2-20.0 add 25 points. over 22 subtract 2 points for
each 1 gained, over 25 subtract 5 points, and over 30 subtract 10
points. below 16 subtract 10 points for each 1 lost. below 14 see a
doctor.
face - even symettrical feminine features, clear skin - add 25
points. ordinary face: 0 points. bad skin - subtract 25 points.
deformity - subtract 50 points.
7 waist-hip ratio - between .6-.72 add 20 points. 1.0-2.0 subtract
50 points. .5 or lower - lose the corset - minus 20 points.
personality market value (inner beauty): add 25 points. bitches
subtract 25.
application:
everyone starts with 50 points. ie mediocre.
here's some examples of how it works:
take an 18 year old woman with a bmi of 18.4, beautiful face, nice
personality, .61 whr.
she gains 35 points for her age, 25 for her bmi, 25 for her face, 25
points for personality, and 20 points for her whr.
50
+35
85
+25
110
+25
135
+25
160
+20
180
this woman is to die for.
if you'd like to see what this sort of hsmv looks like she's the
female romantic lead of george pal's 1960 adaptation of 'the time
machine':
Yvette Mimieux
Born: January 8th, 1942
Measurements: 34-21.5-35
Height: 5'4"
Weight: 107 lbs
BMI: 18.4
take a 30 year old woman with a bmi of 25, a nice face, bitchy
personality, .9 whr.
she loses six points for exceeding bmi 22, loses 5 points for her
age, gains 25 for her nice face, loses 25 for being a bitch. whr is a
push.
50
-6
44
-5
39
+25
64
-25
final smv rating: 39
so this woman squanders the advantages of her attractive face through
gluttony and bitchiness - a not uncommon situation.
a 20 year old woman with a bmi of 32, ordinary face, wonderful
personality, 1.0 whr.
she loses 51 points for her bmi, gains 25 points for her age, the
face is a push, loses 50 points for the shapeless 1.0 whr.
50
-51
-1
+25
24
-50
-26
final smv rating: -26
this woman squanders the advantages of her age and wonderful
personality through gluttony.
commentary
male smv factors
height - height, like weight, has an optimal range. yes, a man can be
too tall (just as a woman can be too thin). the optimal range appears
to be around 6'-6'4". (these are u.s. figures. in the u.s. the
average man is 5'10". in a country where the average height is lower
6'4" might be freakish)
personality market value - there is no such thing as too much
personality market value. the problem with this one is that unlike
height it is difficult to define pmv in any objective way.
net worth - a man can never be too rich.
face - brad pitt: ideal
strength - a man can never be too strong.
body fat percentage - low enough that you don't have a pot belly.
exact numbers here are controversial. but keep in mind that without
muscle mass low body fat may just mean skinny little geek.
female smv factors
age - optimal range: 18-25
bmi - optimal range: 17.6 - 20
face - natasha henstridge: ideal
7 waist-hip ratio - speaks for itself
personality market value (inner beauty): brendalee: good. bobbi: bad
as i said if any chicks want to have a go at assigning numbers to the
male smv factors it would be helpful.
best,
jackie 'anakin' tokeman
grab a kleenex for this one, cuz there's no god and your idiotic human
ideals are laughable!
ha ha ha ha ha ha ha heh!
- bender
Jim Ledford
this idea of yours is pretty cool. If one of the girls
decides to provide some numbers as you have suggested
then I think I'll take the test, could be a good chuckle.
best,
Jim Ledford
Lady Veteran
> this is a first draft. it may contain serious errors. suggestions and
> comments welcome.
It does.
> those who reject the smv premise itself feel free to argue against it.
> that's always funny for them and sad for me.
This is the mantra of those with interchangeable heads and asses.
Barbie and Ken dolls
Concentration camp chic.
This is real life bubba. Your theories are all fantasy.
Deal with it, idiot.
Bobbi
NR
Three more categories that you could include would be children, teeth and
tattoos/piercings.
That is a good start though.
NR
Fat, drunken and haggard is no way to go through life.
http://www.hotornot.com/r/?eid=REAUEU&key=QEE
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: N/A
iQA/AwUBPDjOaTL3IlvsWvnjEQI56gCgupzdZ8g2Vy2tlNgSMckPQLTYl8sAoMfm
Px9K3lAThrvUXLtH1/WTdD/y
=7rFB
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Brenda Lee
Hello NR.. :)
Did you have happy holidays?
Time off for good behavior perhaps? Time off is always like a present in
and of itself. :) Would you agree?
Funny you mentioned that. I happened to see a man in the mall the other
day. He had his jacket off and I have to tell you I have 'never' seen so
many tatoos in my life. I could just imagine them going on past where I
had a visual.. I have no idea what possessed him to want to cover his
body like that. Black panthers, hearts, names, skulls, snakes, a long
large dragon..
yes, I was quite captivated. Though I was wondering if they were all
done within a short span of time and if he ever regretted it. I should
have asked but hey, twas not the time nor the place.
I can't say it offended me, yet, they were all over parts of the body I
like looking at.. A bit distracting perhaps.
ps
If you get one removed, does it leave a scar? Just wondering.
smiles,
BrendaLee
> NR
> Fat, drunken and haggard is no way to go through life.
> http://www.hotornot.com/r/?eid=REAUEU&key=QEE
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: N/A
>
> iQA/AwUBPDjOaTL3IlvsWvnjEQI56gCgupzdZ8g2Vy2tlNgSMckPQLTYl8sAoMfm
> Px9K3lAThrvUXLtH1/WTdD/y
> =7rFB
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
BrendaLee
Lady DreamCatcher
--------------------
http://www.cocreator.com/ehmka/
-------------------------------------
brendalee makes the world better by her presence in it.
~~jackie 'anakin' tokeman~~
"actually her (brendalee's) kind heart is a weapon more powerful than
the combined hate of the entire degenerate freak mafia.
seriously."
~~jackie 'anakin' tokeman
when you dance with an angel the angel don't change the angel changes
you
~~jackie 'anakin' tokeman~~
dr.lurv
> Three more categories that you could include would be children, teeth and
> tattoos/piercings.
good point about children. though that has more impact on long term
prospects than it does on whether you'd do her provided, of course, it
hasn't provided an excuse for the traditional permanant weight gain.
but then personality is more about long term prospects so children should
be included on the negative side of the ledger. say minus 20 points for
the first kid and an -10 points for each additional brat.
teeth are covered by the face category.
excessive tattoos or piercings fall under the category of deformity.
NR
Hello BrendaLee. :-)
>
>Did you have happy holidays?
I did. I got a nice little MP3 player for working out. I am downloading
some songs to it as I type.
>
>Time off for good behavior perhaps? Time off is always like a present in
>and of itself. :) Would you agree?
Time is always at a premium for me, so I would have to agree.
>
>Funny you mentioned that. I happened to see a man in the mall the other
>day. He had his jacket off and I have to tell you I have 'never' seen so
>many tatoos in my life. I could just imagine them going on past where I
>had a visual.. I have no idea what possessed him to want to cover his
>body like that. Black panthers, hearts, names, skulls, snakes, a long
>large dragon..
People who cover their bodies in tatoos usually regret it later.
>
>yes, I was quite captivated. Though I was wondering if they were all
>done within a short span of time and if he ever regretted it. I should
>have asked but hey, twas not the time nor the place.
He could have been an ex-con too.
>
>I can't say it offended me, yet, they were all over parts of the body I
>like looking at.. A bit distracting perhaps.
It would definitely limit his value in the Sexual Marketplace.
>
>ps
>
>If you get one removed, does it leave a scar? Just wondering.
I think that the latest and greatest methods minimize scarring.
>
>smiles,
<<VBG>>
iQA/AwUBPDkT8zL3IlvsWvnjEQJX0ACgl/NmqwbOZrmqNhHqbafaxS+GU+AAoKzo
CGQD+B2wNyfx4zWb16bi4782
=ZdF7
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Shawn Pickrell
> It does.
> Barbie and Ken dolls
> Concentration camp chic.
> Deal with it, idiot.
bobbi, why don't you tell us about the attractive.
rich man you are now dating?
--
... Shawn Pickrell, shawn_p...@yahoo.com
Brenda Lee
It seems like a long time. :(
I see you going the rounds with AJ....
>
> >
> >Did you have happy holidays?
>
> I did.
Great!
> I got a nice little MP3 player for working out.
*smile*...What kind did you get? NR, they are the coolest. I hope you
have as much fun with it as I do.. Just love it. Just redid all the
songs the other day. So much fun.
> I am downloading
> some songs to it as I type.
Yeah, and that is not too shabby a perk either.. :) Hee!
> >
> >Time off for good behavior perhaps? Time off is always like a present in
> >and of itself. :) Would you agree?
>
> Time is always at a premium for me, so I would have to agree.
Time seems to be taking over as the main thing people are wishing, and
aiming for.. We have so many toys out there but need time to work and
play with them.
>
> >
> >Funny you mentioned that. I happened to see a man in the mall the other
> >day. He had his jacket off and I have to tell you I have 'never' seen so
> >many tatoos in my life. I could just imagine them going on past where I
> >had a visual.. I have no idea what possessed him to want to cover his
> >body like that. Black panthers, hearts, names, skulls, snakes, a long
> >large dragon..
>
> People who cover their bodies in tatoos usually regret it later.
Do you think they do multiples at once? I would think once the novelty
wore off, the realization they are on for the duration (pretty
much)would get old real quick. Especially on say women in places where
they might come to regret being marked.. Like I would never have one on
my shoulder, buttocks, breasts, hips, arms, or belly. I saw one on a
girls ankle, but then again it did not look nice when she was all
dressed up with heels.
Therefore, I must concur.
:)
>
> >
> >yes, I was quite captivated. Though I was wondering if they were all
> >done within a short span of time and if he ever regretted it. I should
> >have asked but hey, twas not the time nor the place.
>
> He could have been an ex-con too.
Not that looks can tell that.. But I would say it was not a far fetched
idea.. And my hesitancy to ask makes me think you are correct even more,
for I normally would not think twice.
>
> >
> >I can't say it offended me, yet, they were all over parts of the body I
> >like looking at.. A bit distracting perhaps.
>
> It would definitely limit his value in the Sexual Marketplace.
Shame, but I would once again agree. And on men, they are just so big..
>
> >
> >ps
> >
> >If you get one removed, does it leave a scar? Just wondering.
>
> I think that the latest and greatest methods minimize scarring.
Well that certainly is good.
>
> >
> >smiles,
>
> <<VBG>>
back at you.
I do believe I owe you a holiday hug, NR.
and a wish for lots of fun with your mp3 player..
they rock...
really they do!
:)
BrendaLee
>
> NR
> >BrendaLee
NR
On 7 Jan 2002, dr.lurv <allaboo...@eejack.com> wrote:
>
>nr wrote:
>> Three more categories that you could include would be children, teeth and
>> tattoos/piercings.
>
>good point about children. though that has more impact on long term
>prospects than it does on whether you'd do her provided, of course, it
>hasn't provided an excuse for the traditional permanant weight gain.
>but then personality is more about long term prospects so children should
>be included on the negative side of the ledger. say minus 20 points for
>the first kid and an -10 points for each additional brat.
Negative points should be given if she has trouble collecting child support
since this presents a potential financial burden for any suitor. Also,
points should be deducted for women that have children by more than one
father since this presents the potential for additional financial burden
and conflict.
Methinks that the quality of the offspring should be considered.
Additional points deducted for 'special needs' children.
>teeth are covered by the face category.
>excessive tattoos or piercings fall under the category of deformity.
That works.
NR
Fat, drunken and haggard is no way to go through life.
http://www.hotornot.com/r/?eid=REAUEU&key=QEE
>
>best,
> jackie 'anakin' tokeman
>
>grab a kleenex for this one, cuz there's no god and your idiotic human
>ideals are laughable!
>ha ha ha ha ha ha ha heh!
>- bender
>
>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: N/A
iQA/AwUBPDkkUTL3IlvsWvnjEQK8uwCcCYxKiDHFxJNcz/DUK2iiR/Wb3j8AoLxU
eVYiiBnwfPonkiRm8GkV5xoF
=UtBD
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
NR
I have to admit that I enjoy smacking her fat, ugly ass around.
>
>>
>> >
>> >Did you have happy holidays?
>>
>> I did.
>
>Great!
Did you?
>
>> I got a nice little MP3 player for working out.
>
>*smile*...What kind did you get?
Rio 600 64MB
> NR, they are the coolest. I hope you
>have as much fun with it as I do.. Just love it. Just redid all the
>songs the other day. So much fun.
I am having a blast with it. The sound quality of this one is awesome. I
get about 68 minutes of CD quality sound with it.
>
>
>> I am downloading
>> some songs to it as I type.
>
>Yeah, and that is not too shabby a perk either.. :) Hee!
I have downloaded a lot of files plus we have 100's of CD's that I can rip
MP3's from.
>
>
>> >
>> >Time off for good behavior perhaps? Time off is always like a present in
>> >and of itself. :) Would you agree?
>>
>> Time is always at a premium for me, so I would have to agree.
>
>Time seems to be taking over as the main thing people are wishing, and
>aiming for.. We have so many toys out there but need time to work and
>play with them.
You got that straight. That is one of the main reasons that I have not
been buying toys and games as often as I used too. I have the money, but
not enough time for them.
>
>>
>> >
>> >Funny you mentioned that. I happened to see a man in the mall the other
>> >day. He had his jacket off and I have to tell you I have 'never' seen so
>> >many tatoos in my life. I could just imagine them going on past where I
>> >had a visual.. I have no idea what possessed him to want to cover his
>> >body like that. Black panthers, hearts, names, skulls, snakes, a long
>> >large dragon..
>>
>> People who cover their bodies in tatoos usually regret it later.
>
>Do you think they do multiples at once?
Probably not.
> I would think once the novelty
>wore off, the realization they are on for the duration (pretty
>much)would get old real quick. Especially on say women in places where
>they might come to regret being marked.. Like I would never have one on
>my shoulder, buttocks, breasts, hips, arms, or belly. I saw one on a
>girls ankle, but then again it did not look nice when she was all
>dressed up with heels.
I have seen some very tasteful tatoos on women. Used sparingly, they're
OK. Tatoos look dreadful in excess.
>
>Therefore, I must concur.
>:)
>
>
>>
>> >
>> >yes, I was quite captivated. Though I was wondering if they were all
>> >done within a short span of time and if he ever regretted it. I should
>> >have asked but hey, twas not the time nor the place.
>>
>> He could have been an ex-con too.
>
>Not that looks can tell that.. But I would say it was not a far fetched
>idea.. And my hesitancy to ask makes me think you are correct even more,
>for I normally would not think twice.
He probably was giving you some kind of negative vibe.
>>
>> >
>> >I can't say it offended me, yet, they were all over parts of the body I
>> >like looking at.. A bit distracting perhaps.
>>
>> It would definitely limit his value in the Sexual Marketplace.
>
>Shame, but I would once again agree. And on men, they are just so big..
That many tatoos will definitely limit the potential partner pool.
>
>>
>> >
>> >ps
>> >
>> >If you get one removed, does it leave a scar? Just wondering.
>>
>> I think that the latest and greatest methods minimize scarring.
>
>Well that certainly is good.
While a little scar might be better than a tatoo, unblemished flesh looks
best.
>>
>> >
>> >smiles,
>>
>> <<VBG>>
>
>back at you.
>
>I do believe I owe you a holiday hug, NR.
Well?
>
>and a wish for lots of fun with your mp3 player..
>they rock...
Yeah, they do. It makes my time on the elliptical go by very quickly.
>
>
>really they do!
I believe, sister! I believe!!!
>
>
>:)
>BrendaLee
NR
Fat, drunken and haggard is no way to go through life.
http://www.hotornot.com/r/?eid=REAUEU&key=QEE
>
>
>
>
>>
iQA/AwUBPDks/jL3IlvsWvnjEQJRfgCeJDxK1IY8mRNT0G/G2P+apzz+MY0AoLx0
+L6KN7O3Pbs5l8fC5pSeNdHc
=gMh7
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Brenda Lee
Seems she seldom has any proof to back up her statements. And they are
more emotional backlash than anything else.
The facts speak volumes against what she is saying.
> >
> >>
> >> >
> >> >Did you have happy holidays?
> >>
> >> I did.
> >
> >Great!
>
> Did you?
They were very nice. Thank you for asking.
>
> >
> >> I got a nice little MP3 player for working out.
> >
> >*smile*...What kind did you get?
>
> Rio 600 64MB
I have the Rio too... I love it. Very user friendly.
>
> > NR, they are the coolest. I hope you
> >have as much fun with it as I do.. Just love it. Just redid all the
> >songs the other day. So much fun.
>
> I am having a blast with it. The sound quality of this one is awesome.
I can second that...
> I get about 68 minutes of CD quality sound with it.
You can also buy extendable memory backs.. Ask me how I know.. (she says
with a smile)
:)
>
> >
> >
> >> I am downloading
> >> some songs to it as I type.
> >
> >Yeah, and that is not too shabby a perk either.. :) Hee!
>
> I have downloaded a lot of files plus we have 100's of CD's that I can rip
> MP3's from.
I think it is so cool. NR by far my best present though is an mp3 player
for my car. It is simply awesome. I can burn about 148 or so songs on
one CD.R. The stereo is mp3 capable so it can read that whole burned cd
as is.. Like a little kid I am. Having a ball..
:)
>
> >
> >
> >> >
> >> >Time off for good behavior perhaps? Time off is always like a present in
> >> >and of itself. :) Would you agree?
> >>
> >> Time is always at a premium for me, so I would have to agree.
> >
> >Time seems to be taking over as the main thing people are wishing, and
> >aiming for.. We have so many toys out there but need time to work and
> >play with them.
>
> You got that straight.
Yep, and if you can't find the time to play you get upset looking at the
toys just sitting there waiting on you.
> That is one of the main reasons that I have not
> been buying toys and games as often as I used too. I have the money, but
> not enough time for them.
You have discipline. I am great unless and until it comes to books. They
are but one of my many weaknesses.
And I wouldn't have it any other way.
>
> >
> >>
> >> >
> >> >Funny you mentioned that. I happened to see a man in the mall the other
> >> >day. He had his jacket off and I have to tell you I have 'never' seen so
> >> >many tatoos in my life. I could just imagine them going on past where I
> >> >had a visual.. I have no idea what possessed him to want to cover his
> >> >body like that. Black panthers, hearts, names, skulls, snakes, a long
> >> >large dragon..
> >>
> >> People who cover their bodies in tatoos usually regret it later.
> >
> >Do you think they do multiples at once?
>
> Probably not.
So it was a not a rash decision kind of thing.. Interesting.
I have to say. If I saw one that said MOM on it I would run. Fast as my
strong legs would carry me.
Seriously.
>
> > I would think once the novelty
> >wore off, the realization they are on for the duration (pretty
> >much)would get old real quick. Especially on say women in places where
> >they might come to regret being marked.. Like I would never have one on
> >my shoulder, buttocks, breasts, hips, arms, or belly. I saw one on a
> >girls ankle, but then again it did not look nice when she was all
> >dressed up with heels.
>
> I have seen some very tasteful tatoos on women.
It would have to be small and something that bespoke of the woman
herself in some way so it was at least a natural extension of her..
> Used sparingly, they're
> OK. Tatoos look dreadful in excess.
This was IN-XS
Hee!
>
> >
> >Therefore, I must concur.
> >:)
> >
> >
> >>
> >> >
> >> >yes, I was quite captivated. Though I was wondering if they were all
> >> >done within a short span of time and if he ever regretted it. I should
> >> >have asked but hey, twas not the time nor the place.
> >>
> >> He could have been an ex-con too.
> >
> >Not that looks can tell that.. But I would say it was not a far fetched
> >idea.. And my hesitancy to ask makes me think you are correct even more,
> >for I normally would not think twice.
>
> He probably was giving you some kind of negative vibe.
Experience has told me to listen to my inner. Gut instincts are strong
and very acute.
>
> >>
> >> >
> >> >I can't say it offended me, yet, they were all over parts of the body I
> >> >like looking at.. A bit distracting perhaps.
> >>
> >> It would definitely limit his value in the Sexual Marketplace.
> >
> >Shame, but I would once again agree. And on men, they are just so big..
>
> That many tatoos will definitely limit the potential partner pool.
To be honest. He did not look as if he cared. Truly.
It takes all kinds.
>
> >
> >>
> >> >
> >> >ps
> >> >
> >> >If you get one removed, does it leave a scar? Just wondering.
> >>
> >> I think that the latest and greatest methods minimize scarring.
> >
> >Well that certainly is good.
>
> While a little scar might be better than a tatoo, unblemished flesh looks
> best.
True.
>
> >>
> >> >
> >> >smiles,
> >>
> >> <<VBG>>
> >
> >back at you.
> >
> >I do believe I owe you a holiday hug, NR.
>
> Well?
<HUG>
>
> >
> >and a wish for lots of fun with your mp3 player..
> >they rock...
>
> Yeah, they do. It makes my time on the elliptical go by very quickly.
Music keeps you alive and in touch..
>
> >
> >
> >really they do!
>
> I believe, sister! I believe!!!
*giggle* Amen Brother...
Later, NR
Smiles
BrendaLee
Well we finally had a snow.. Not much, but enough to make everything
crisp and winterwonderland looking.
Brenda Lee
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
> >>> >> >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> >> >>
> >> >> > jackie 'anakin' tokeman
> >> >> >
> >> >> >grab a kleenex for this one, cuz there's no god and your idiotic human
> >> >> >ideals are laughable!
> >> >> >ha ha ha ha ha ha ha heh!
> >> >> >- bender
> >> >>
> >> >> tattoos/piercings.
> >> >>
I can second that...
This was IN-XS
Hee!
True.
<HUG>
*giggle* Amen Brother...
Later, NR
Smiles
BrendaLee
>
> >
> >
> >:)
> >BrendaLee
>
> NR
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: N/A
>
Brenda Lee
I don't quite know how else to say this:
You are very loved..
Thank you, Sir Anakin!
BrendaLee
> best,
> jackie 'anakin' tokeman
>
> grab a kleenex for this one, cuz there's no god and your idiotic human
> ideals are laughable!
> ha ha ha ha ha ha ha heh!
> - bender
NR
It was funny that Davenpork was able to come up with some movies when she
was put to task even though none of the movies were made in the last 10
years. IOW, she will produce the goods if she thinks that the goods exist.
>
>
>> >
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >Did you have happy holidays?
>> >>
>> >> I did.
>> >
>> >Great!
>>
>> Did you?
>
>They were very nice. Thank you for asking.
>>
>> >
>> >> I got a nice little MP3 player for working out.
>> >
>> >*smile*...What kind did you get?
>>
>> Rio 600 64MB
>
>I have the Rio too... I love it. Very user friendly.
I'll say. I was not expecting a Rio even though I had axed for an MP3
player for Xmas.
>>
>> > NR, they are the coolest. I hope you
>> >have as much fun with it as I do.. Just love it. Just redid all the
>> >songs the other day. So much fun.
>>
>> I am having a blast with it. The sound quality of this one is awesome.
>
>I can second that...
>
>> I get about 68 minutes of CD quality sound with it.
>
>You can also buy extendable memory backs.. Ask me how I know.. (she says
>with a smile)
>:)
I have seen those. I thought that they were rather pricey until I saw that
they include an internal battery and AC adapter. I have read that
Sonicblue is supposed to come out with memory backpacks that accept other
types of memory like Smartmedia cards, so I will hold off for a while to
see if this comes to fruition.
>>
>> >
>> >
>> >> I am downloading
>> >> some songs to it as I type.
>> >
>> >Yeah, and that is not too shabby a perk either.. :) Hee!
>>
>> I have downloaded a lot of files plus we have 100's of CD's that I can rip
>> MP3's from.
>
>I think it is so cool. NR by far my best present though is an mp3 player
>for my car. It is simply awesome. I can burn about 148 or so songs on
>one CD.R. The stereo is mp3 capable so it can read that whole burned cd
>as is.. Like a little kid I am. Having a ball..
Anthing CD player that I buy from now on will have to include MP3
capability.
>
>:)
>>
>> >
>> >
>> >> >
>> >> >Time off for good behavior perhaps? Time off is always like a present in
>> >> >and of itself. :) Would you agree?
>> >>
>> >> Time is always at a premium for me, so I would have to agree.
>> >
>> >Time seems to be taking over as the main thing people are wishing, and
>> >aiming for.. We have so many toys out there but need time to work and
>> >play with them.
>>
>> You got that straight.
>
>Yep, and if you can't find the time to play you get upset looking at the
>toys just sitting there waiting on you.
That's about right. So many toys, so little time.
>
>> That is one of the main reasons that I have not
>> been buying toys and games as often as I used too. I have the money, but
>> not enough time for them.
>
>You have discipline. I am great unless and until it comes to books. They
>are but one of my many weaknesses.
>And I wouldn't have it any other way.
Books are a good weakness. I wish that I had more time to read. Most of
my reading involves newspapers and online news sites.
>
>>
>> >
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >Funny you mentioned that. I happened to see a man in the mall the other
>> >> >day. He had his jacket off and I have to tell you I have 'never' seen so
>> >> >many tatoos in my life. I could just imagine them going on past where I
>> >> >had a visual.. I have no idea what possessed him to want to cover his
>> >> >body like that. Black panthers, hearts, names, skulls, snakes, a long
>> >> >large dragon..
>> >>
>> >> People who cover their bodies in tatoos usually regret it later.
>> >
>> >Do you think they do multiples at once?
>>
>> Probably not.
>
>So it was a not a rash decision kind of thing.. Interesting.
It's a bit like self-mutilation, IMHO.
>
>I have to say. If I saw one that said MOM on it I would run. Fast as my
>strong legs would carry me.
>Seriously.
You have to worry about a guy that is *that* close to his mother.
>
>>
>> > I would think once the novelty
>> >wore off, the realization they are on for the duration (pretty
>> >much)would get old real quick. Especially on say women in places where
>> >they might come to regret being marked.. Like I would never have one on
>> >my shoulder, buttocks, breasts, hips, arms, or belly. I saw one on a
>> >girls ankle, but then again it did not look nice when she was all
>> >dressed up with heels.
>>
>> I have seen some very tasteful tatoos on women.
>
>It would have to be small and something that bespoke of the woman
>herself in some way so it was at least a natural extension of her..
Which is what I have seen that I find tasteful. When it comes to tatoos, a
minimalist approach is best.
>
>
>> Used sparingly, they're
>> OK. Tatoos look dreadful in excess.
>
>This was IN-XS
>
>Hee!
When Michael Hutchens hung himself, do you think that....you know.
>
>>
>> >
>> >Therefore, I must concur.
>> >:)
>> >
>> >
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >yes, I was quite captivated. Though I was wondering if they were all
>> >> >done within a short span of time and if he ever regretted it. I should
>> >> >have asked but hey, twas not the time nor the place.
>> >>
>> >> He could have been an ex-con too.
>> >
>> >Not that looks can tell that.. But I would say it was not a far fetched
>> >idea.. And my hesitancy to ask makes me think you are correct even more,
>> >for I normally would not think twice.
>>
>> He probably was giving you some kind of negative vibe.
>
>Experience has told me to listen to my inner. Gut instincts are strong
>and very acute.
For someone with a taste for tatoos, you can actually make your own
temporary tatoos with your inkjet printer.
>>
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >I can't say it offended me, yet, they were all over parts of the body I
>> >> >like looking at.. A bit distracting perhaps.
>> >>
>> >> It would definitely limit his value in the Sexual Marketplace.
>> >
>> >Shame, but I would once again agree. And on men, they are just so big..
>>
>> That many tatoos will definitely limit the potential partner pool.
>
>To be honest. He did not look as if he cared. Truly.
>It takes all kinds.
Being rejected might have justified a deep seated resentment of women.
>
>>
>> >
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >ps
>> >> >
>> >> >If you get one removed, does it leave a scar? Just wondering.
>> >>
>> >> I think that the latest and greatest methods minimize scarring.
>> >
>> >Well that certainly is good.
>>
>> While a little scar might be better than a tatoo, unblemished flesh looks
>> best.
>
>True.
>
>>
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >smiles,
>> >>
>> >> <<VBG>>
>> >
>> >back at you.
>> >
>> >I do believe I owe you a holiday hug, NR.
>>
>> Well?
>
>
><HUG>
THANKS!!!! Right back at you, sweetie.
>
>
>>
>> >
>> >and a wish for lots of fun with your mp3 player..
>> >they rock...
>>
>> Yeah, they do. It makes my time on the elliptical go by very quickly.
>
>
>Music keeps you alive and in touch..
SHIT! I got to the gym today and my battery was almost dead. My Rio said
I had about 14% of my juice left and would not let me play my tunes. I was
bumming. I have noticed that my work out is better when I have some good
tunes. As a result, I was not at my peak today.
>
>>
>> >
>> >
>> >really they do!
>>
>> I believe, sister! I believe!!!
>
>*giggle* Amen Brother...
>
>Later, NR
>Smiles
>BrendaLee
>
>Well we finally had a snow.. Not much, but enough to make everything
>crisp and winterwonderland looking.
I would have thought that you would have been hit at least a little when
Buffalo was hit. I like snow until I have to drive in it.
NR
Fat, drunken and haggard is no way to go through life.
http://www.hotornot.com/r/?eid=REAUEU&key=QEE
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: N/A
iQA/AwUBPDpq7jL3IlvsWvnjEQKuQQCeIT4iaiCh8NezBLqZ2GA2CYZxl7EAoLXz
59tBe24FIKm5BLl0LHynyK6f
=CDm9
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
John Seiler
#1 problem...the function generated is not continuous. Incrementally
adding age or weight causes the predicted SMV to shift by large
amounts. Like for instance, a certain someone's birthday is right
around the corner...does that mean her SMV shifts 5 points that
day? No.... And its harder to integrate a non-continuous function.
(Math weenies...what is the integral of SMV over time...some sort
of visual pleasure over time index i.e. integral barbara eden's
smv over time = high. integral of farrah fawcett's smv over time
= much lower.
: female smv:
: age - for each year below 25 add 5 points. for each year over 25
: subtract 1 point. then for each year over 30 subtract 5 points. then
: for each year over 45 subtract 10 points.
#2 - there needs to be an "apparent" age. Last night I saw
Barbara Eden on TV. She is very old, yet still quite hot.
She looks 20 years younger than she is.
: bmi - between 17.2-20.0 add 25 points. over 22 subtract 2 points for
: each 1 gained, over 25 subtract 5 points, and over 30 subtract 10
: points. below 16 subtract 10 points for each 1 lost. below 14 see a
: doctor.
#3 I've never really bought this scale because the function was
derived from sources who gained from dishonesty. I'm pretty
good at guessing weights, and most porn stars lie about it.
Why? Because they are in competition with other who lie.
Actresses too. Do you really think Drew Barrymore is 120#?
#4 there should be an adjustment here for boobs. It shouldn't
double penalty for having nice tits. It should in fact be a
plus, but in this case since tits are adipose flesh, there is
a hit for BMI without a corresponding increase for having really
nice tits. Maybe a weight equivalent subtraction before the
BMI calculation and a subsequent addition of 3 pts per cup
size up to C or D, subtractions afterward. It needs to be
the shape of an upside down parabola....or a breast shaped
curve. ;)
#5 frame size is not considered and a large framed woman with a
BMI of 18 looks icky. At least health science scales take into
account frame dimensions, not just height as the independant
variable.
: face - even symettrical feminine features, clear skin - add 25
: points. ordinary face: 0 points. bad skin - subtract 25 points.
: deformity - subtract 50 points.
#6 more jump discontinuities...quasimodo deformity = -50 pts.
mole = -3 points. Well placed mole = +1 pt. I'm not sure how
to make deformity a continuous function.
: 7 waist-hip ratio - between .6-.72 add 20 points. 1.0-2.0 subtract
: 50 points. .5 or lower - lose the corset - minus 20 points.
#7 Again = more disconintuities. How about something like
25 - 100*abs(measured - .66)
.66 -> 25 pts.
.7 -> 21
1 -> -9
2 -> -114
Anyway, the point is...a curve could be fit to your data.
I might take a quick stab at it after lunchtime.
: personality market value (inner beauty): add 25 points. bitches
: subtract 25.
#8 need a quantifiable "bitch" index.
#9 do and/or should brains count?
Interesting idea though.
John S.
Clarice
Brenda Lee wrote:
>
> NR wrote:
>
> >
> > Three more categories that you could include would be children, teeth and
> > tattoos/piercings.
While it's not difficult to come up with a general smv valuation
scale for presence of children and condition of teeth, how do you
count the presence or absence of one or more tattoos towards overall
smv score?
> > That is a good start though.
>
> Hello NR.. :)
>
> Did you have happy holidays?
>
> Time off for good behavior perhaps? Time off is always like a present in
> and of itself. :) Would you agree?
>
> Funny you mentioned that. I happened to see a man in the mall the other
> day. He had his jacket off and I have to tell you I have 'never' seen so
> many tatoos in my life. I could just imagine them going on past where I
> had a visual.. I have no idea what possessed him to want to cover his
> body like that.
It is a matter of art.
> Black panthers, hearts, names, skulls, snakes, a long
> large dragon..
Yes, it's your body and your skin.
Anything goes.
> yes, I was quite captivated. Though I was wondering if they were all
> done within a short span of time and if he ever regretted it. I should
> have asked but hey, twas not the time nor the place.
>
> I can't say it offended me, yet, they were all over parts of the body I
> like looking at.. A bit distracting perhaps.
Powerful art usually is.
It seems to me you were affected less by the message than you were
by the medium that conveyed it. L.A. is a great place to be if you
dig tattoos, or piercings for that matter. I have noticed some
awesome stuff. Whenever I see somebody whose body art truly
captivates my attention I make an effort to compliment them. In my
experience, that is always appreciated.
> ps
>
> If you get one removed, does it leave a scar? Just wondering.
I'm not sure. I suspect it depends on how deeply the ink has
penetrated into the skin. What I have heard about the removal
process is that it is supposed to be painful and extended, often
requiring multiple treatments over time.
A more interesting question: If you were to get a tattoo, which
location would you choose?
C.
--
and why?
Brenda Lee
>
> Brenda Lee wrote:
> >
> > NR wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Three more categories that you could include would be children, teeth and
> > > tattoos/piercings.
>
> While it's not difficult to come up with a general smv valuation
> scale for presence of children and condition of teeth, how do you
> count the presence or absence of one or more tattoos towards overall
> smv score?
>
> > > That is a good start though.
> >
> > Hello NR.. :)
> >
> > Did you have happy holidays?
> >
> > Time off for good behavior perhaps? Time off is always like a present in
> > and of itself. :) Would you agree?
> >
> > Funny you mentioned that. I happened to see a man in the mall the other
> > day. He had his jacket off and I have to tell you I have 'never' seen so
> > many tatoos in my life. I could just imagine them going on past where I
> > had a visual.. I have no idea what possessed him to want to cover his
> > body like that.
>
> It is a matter of art.
Hello Clarice. True.. And I am one that appreciates art.. Please don't
mistake trying to understand as a put down. Was not. Thinking of them
along the lines of ink penetration and health a bit I suppose too.
>
> > Black panthers, hearts, names, skulls, snakes, a long
> > large dragon..
>
> Yes, it's your body and your skin.
> Anything goes.
No argument here.
>
>
> > yes, I was quite captivated. Though I was wondering if they were all
> > done within a short span of time and if he ever regretted it. I should
> > have asked but hey, twas not the time nor the place.
> >
> > I can't say it offended me, yet, they were all over parts of the body I
> > like looking at.. A bit distracting perhaps.
>
> Powerful art usually is.
I should explain. I love looking at the body. I think it is beautiful as
is. And he was fine if that is what he wanted to do with his. Me? I
enjoy looking at the chest and letting my eyes naturally fall to the
belly and the 'button' and the little trial of hair men usually have
that proceeds down into the waistband of their pants or underwear. It is
an erotic sight to me. So, when I did this I instead got the outline of
a long snake that went straight down the middle of his chest to that
sacred area, tail somewhere out of sight.. Nothing wrong with it. Just
that it broke my train of thought.. and visual..
Not good, not bad, just a broken visual...
:)
> It seems to me you were affected less by the message than you were
> by the medium that conveyed it.
I was only affected to the degree of curiosity and say what might have
prompted each tattoo.. I would have liked to hear the story behind each
one.
> L.A. is a great place to be if you
> dig tattoos, or piercings for that matter.
I have seen some hum dingers. Hee!
> I have noticed some
> awesome stuff. Whenever I see somebody whose body art truly
> captivates my attention I make an effort to compliment them. In my
> experience, that is always appreciated.
I agree and so I compliment people all the time.
Just wasn't sure what I thought. And I don't care for empty compliments.
Either giving or receiving. Know what I mean? :)
>
> > ps
> >
> > If you get one removed, does it leave a scar? Just wondering.
>
> I'm not sure. I suspect it depends on how deeply the ink has
> penetrated into the skin. What I have heard about the removal
> process is that it is supposed to be painful and extended, often
> requiring multiple treatments over time.
>
> A more interesting question:
How so? I would like to know the repercussions of having a tattoo before
I would even consider getting one.
> If you were to get a tattoo, which
> location would you choose?
I have been thinking about this..
If I 'were' to get one I would choose the back of my neck. It is
X-tremely sensitive and when someone gets to the point they are slowly
lifting my hair and exposing the nape of my neck they would be privy to
seeing it.. and I would find that erotic. If they touched it or
*something* I think I would get very excited.
As to what it would be? That would be harder..
Smiles,
BrendaLee
>
> C.
> --
> and why?
NR
On 09 Jan 2002, Clarice <Cla...@quanti.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>Brenda Lee wrote:
>>
>> NR wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > Three more categories that you could include would be children, teeth and
>> > tattoos/piercings.
>
>While it's not difficult to come up with a general smv valuation
>scale for presence of children and condition of teeth, how do you
>count the presence or absence of one or more tattoos towards overall
>smv score?
That's a good question. All tatoos are not equal. Some are bigger and
uglier than others. Location is also a big factor.
>
>
>> > That is a good start though.
>>
>> Hello NR.. :)
>>
>> Did you have happy holidays?
>>
>> Time off for good behavior perhaps? Time off is always like a present in
>> and of itself. :) Would you agree?
>>
>> Funny you mentioned that. I happened to see a man in the mall the other
>> day. He had his jacket off and I have to tell you I have 'never' seen so
>> many tatoos in my life. I could just imagine them going on past where I
>> had a visual.. I have no idea what possessed him to want to cover his
>> body like that.
>
>It is a matter of art.
One person's art is another.....
>
>
>> Black panthers, hearts, names, skulls, snakes, a long
>> large dragon..
>
>Yes, it's your body and your skin.
>Anything goes.
True, but excessive tatoos will diminish your SMV since so many people find
them distasteful. There are very few people out there that will only seek
out partners with tatoos.
>
>
>> yes, I was quite captivated. Though I was wondering if they were all
>> done within a short span of time and if he ever regretted it. I should
>> have asked but hey, twas not the time nor the place.
>>
>> I can't say it offended me, yet, they were all over parts of the body I
>> like looking at.. A bit distracting perhaps.
>
>Powerful art usually is.
>It seems to me you were affected less by the message than you were
>by the medium that conveyed it. L.A. is a great place to be if you
>dig tattoos, or piercings for that matter. I have noticed some
>awesome stuff. Whenever I see somebody whose body art truly
>captivates my attention I make an effort to compliment them. In my
>experience, that is always appreciated.
No offense, but I think that your appreciation for body art is not
mainstream. There are always niches in the sexual marketplace.
>
>
>> ps
>>
>> If you get one removed, does it leave a scar? Just wondering.
>
>I'm not sure. I suspect it depends on how deeply the ink has
>penetrated into the skin. What I have heard about the removal
>process is that it is supposed to be painful and extended, often
>requiring multiple treatments over time.
I know of someone how had one removed 25 years ago and it was extremely
painful back then and left a nasty scar. I am sure that the experience is
not nearly as nasty now.
>
>A more interesting question: If you were to get a tattoo, which
>location would you choose?
Someone sent me a picture via email last year of a guy with a flabby, hairy
belly that had a vulva tatooed around his navel. Naturally the navel was
the vagina. It looked very real at first glance.
NR
Fat, drunken and haggard is no way to go through life.
http://www.hotornot.com/r/?eid=REAUEU&key=QEE
>
>
>C.
>--
>and why?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: N/A
iQA/AwUBPD0MczL3IlvsWvnjEQIhzACgznN0kqfqUNs/gu+wwJ5hLrvniQgAn3Z3
XEu/hS6QZFkkJHbGw7IrGpf6
=eBKC
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Brenda Lee
Sure sure NR, but it was not very user friendly. :)
Sorry, could not help myself.
:)
BrendaLee
>
> NR
> Fat, drunken and haggard is no way to go through life.
> http://www.hotornot.com/r/?eid=REAUEU&key=QEE
>
> >
> >
> >C.
> >--
> >and why?
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: N/A
>
> iQA/AwUBPD0MczL3IlvsWvnjEQIhzACgznN0kqfqUNs/gu+wwJ5hLrvniQgAn3Z3
> XEu/hS6QZFkkJHbGw7IrGpf6
> =eBKC
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
NR
On Thu, 10 Jan 2002, Brenda Lee <eh...@rochester.rr.com> wrote:
>
>NR wrote:
<SNIP>
>> Someone sent me a picture via email last year of a guy with a flabby, hairy
>> belly that had a vulva tatooed around his navel. Naturally the navel was
>> the vagina. It looked very real at first glance.
>
>Sure sure NR, but it was not very user friendly. :)
I'd be very afraid for anyone that found it user friendly.
>
>Sorry, could not help myself.
I laughed.
NR
Fat, drunken and haggard is no way to go through life.
http://www.hotornot.com/r/?eid=REAUEU&key=QEE
>
>:)
>BrendaLee
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: N/A
iQA/AwUBPD0RCDL3IlvsWvnjEQLmbQCcDeK8MKxrDp8Wux7JR3vR3YdVMZ8AnjNw
qlIOGiacT9EByBmvgUN++1ND
=z1FI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Brenda Lee
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
> On Thu, 10 Jan 2002, Brenda Lee <eh...@rochester.rr.com> wrote:
> >
> >NR wrote:
> <SNIP>
> >> Someone sent me a picture via email last year of a guy with a flabby, hairy
> >> belly that had a vulva tatooed around his navel. Naturally the navel was
> >> the vagina. It looked very real at first glance.
> >
> >Sure sure NR, but it was not very user friendly. :)
>
> I'd be very afraid for anyone that found it user friendly.
vewy afwaid
:)
>
> >
> >Sorry, could not help myself.
>
> I laughed.
whew..
smiles,
BrendaLee
>
> NR
> Fat, drunken and haggard is no way to go through life.
> http://www.hotornot.com/r/?eid=REAUEU&key=QEE
>
> >
> >:)
> >BrendaLee
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: N/A
>
> iQA/AwUBPD0RCDL3IlvsWvnjEQLmbQCcDeK8MKxrDp8Wux7JR3vR3YdVMZ8AnjNw
> qlIOGiacT9EByBmvgUN++1ND
> =z1FI
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Lurker Above
> lady veteran:
> > not-the-jackie:
> >>
> >> those who reject the smv premise itself feel free to argue against it.
> >> that's always funny for them and sad for me.
> >
> > This is the mantra of those with interchangeable heads and asses.
> > Barbie and Ken dolls
> > Concentration camp chic.
> > This is real life bubba. Your theories are all fantasy.
> > Deal with it, idiot.
>
> bobbi, why don't you tell us about the attractive.
> rich man you are now dating?
my memory escapes me, shawn old buddy...can you refresh me on how you're
losing weight so you can go out and find a hsmv mate? oh wait, you're
married already, aren't you? poor shawn...you've missed out on a
valuable lesson in smv. don't get married. at least don't have kids
- Lurker Above, since we're talking aboot real life smv and all
m.c.scanners
> In soc.singles doctor love <allaboo...@ejack.com> wrote:
>
> #1 problem...the function generated is not continuous.
digital never is.
> Incrementally
> adding age or weight causes the predicted SMV to shift by large
> amounts.
so your objection is more to the sampling rate not the digitization.
> Like for instance, a certain someone's birthday is right
> around the corner...does that mean her SMV shifts 5 points that
> day? No....
that's when the quiz takes account of the cumulative depreciation over
the past year.
> And its harder to integrate a non-continuous function.
> (Math weenies...what is the integral of SMV over time...some sort
> of visual pleasure over time index i.e. integral barbara eden's
> smv over time = high. integral of farrah fawcett's smv over time
> = much lower.
no amount of lost value can add to present value, except indirectly. (if
original value was extremely high it can leave more even after serious
losses, but once it hits zero it's still worthless.
or:
if you marry racquel welch today you won't be fucking her old poster.)
> : female smv:
>
> : age - for each year below 25 add 5 points. for each year over 25
> : subtract 1 point. then for each year over 30 subtract 5 points. then
> : for each year over 45 subtract 10 points.
>
> #2 - there needs to be an "apparent" age. Last night I saw
> Barbara Eden on TV. She is very old, yet still quite hot.
> She looks 20 years younger than she is.
i doubt that would hold up in person. but even if it did the exceptions do
not make the rules. every fifty year old woman i have ever met has been
sexually worthless. that is, i wouldn't have accepted a fuck from them if
it had been offered.
as for apparent age, this can be a present time factor for those in the
30-40 year range but as the phrase 'hit the wall' indicates the effects
can become manifest rapidly as they get older. the sexual worthlessness
of all fifty year olds indicates that no matter how good a 45 year old
looks now within five years she'll be just another old hag. the smv metric
takes this into account by severely discounting older women.
as i noted before i take the future into account because this is a
relationship-smv measure. if it were purely a one night stand measure
personality would be much less of a factor, with only outright dick
chopping psychos suffering a serious hit. and for that apparent age could
be used. but it would have to be real life three-d up close stark raving
nude apparent age, not tv apparent age.
and as i said, not one fifty year old woman has ever passed my dickmeter
test in real life.
> : bmi - between 17.2-20.0 add 25 points. over 22 subtract 2 points for
> : each 1 gained, over 25 subtract 5 points, and over 30 subtract 10
> : points. below 16 subtract 10 points for each 1 lost. below 14 see a
> : doctor.
>
> #3 I've never really bought this scale because the function was
> derived from sources who gained from dishonesty.
i got the baseline from the howard stern tv show. they have a scale
hidden under the floor in the studio and they lure pornstars and
strippers onto the scale. the most attractive women really are in the
bmi 17-20 range.
> I'm pretty
> good at guessing weights, and most porn stars lie about it.
> Why? Because they are in competition with other who lie.
> Actresses too. Do you really think Drew Barrymore is 120#?
drew barrymore's career is the product of nepotism and she would never
have been cast as an angel if she hadn't produced the movie. she was
probably 120 back when she was dancing on david letterman's desk and still
had a nice waist. these days i agree she's lying but then what do you
expect from the most slovenly leading actress still working today?
> #4 there should be an adjustment here for boobs.
nope. jenna jameson* is just 103 pounds even with gigantic d-cup implants.
women like to overestimate the impact tits have on weight in order to
excuse thier excessive bmis but apart from truly freakish tits (most of
which are found on big fat slobs anyway) your ordinary double d isn't
going to add more than six pounds total.
* Height 5'4" Weight: 103 (1999), BMI: 17.71
> It shouldn't
> double penalty for having nice tits. It should in fact be a
> plus, but in this case since tits are adipose flesh, there is
> a hit for BMI without a corresponding increase for having really
> nice tits.
see above. no woman with a slender figure is going to fall outside
the ideal range on account of her tits.
> Maybe a weight equivalent subtraction before the
> BMI calculation and a subsequent addition of 3 pts per cup
> size up to C or D, subtractions afterward. It needs to be
> the shape of an upside down parabola....or a breast shaped
> curve. ;)
breast quality is not defined by size but by shape. this is beyond the
ability of a simple quiz to determine. but perhaps there should be
discounts for severe flatness and excess size. i'll look into including
that in a future edition.
> #5 frame size is not considered and a large framed woman with a
> BMI of 18 looks icky.
what about at bmi 21? that's within the ideal range.
> At least health science scales take into
> account frame dimensions, not just height as the independant
> variable.
the only weight standards i've seen that take frame into account are
the met life charts. also keep in mind this is an smv measure based
on the dickmeter. the only outstanding exception to the ideal bmi range
i've seen was gabrielle reece and she'd only lose 2 points for her bmi of
23, a loss more than made up for by her many other fine qualities.
> : face - even symettrical feminine features, clear skin - add 25
> : points. ordinary face: 0 points. bad skin - subtract 25 points.
> : deformity - subtract 50 points.
>
> #6 more jump discontinuities...quasimodo deformity = -50 pts.
> mole = -3 points. Well placed mole = +1 pt. I'm not sure how
> to make deformity a continuous function.
that's why i didn't bother. but you have to include something to rule
out some burn victim coming along and claiming to be hsmv.
if it's in question just request a peecture and you'll know severe
deformity when you see it.
> : 7 waist-hip ratio - between .6-.72 add 20 points. 1.0-2.0 subtract
> : 50 points. .5 or lower - lose the corset - minus 20 points.
>
> #7 Again = more disconintuities. How about something like
> 25 - 100*abs(measured - .66)
>
> .66 -> 25 pts.
> .7 -> 21
> 1 -> -9
> 2 -> -114
>
> Anyway, the point is...a curve could be fit to your data.
> I might take a quick stab at it after lunchtime.
this i'd be interested in seeing.
> : personality market value (inner beauty): add 25 points. bitches
> : subtract 25.
>
> #8 need a quantifiable "bitch" index.
you know it when you see it.
> #9 do and/or should brains count?
brains are what i'd call a 'similarity factor' - if they're similar to
your own they're a plus, if not, a minus. this goes in both directions.
but because they are relative they are useless for general smv evaluations
of women. for men it can be a plus, but only so far as they increase power.
> Interesting idea though.
rest assured
it will get more interesting still
best,
jackie 'fumanchu' tokeman
men fear thought as they fear nothing else on earth - more than ruin,
more even than death
- bertrand russell
lies are stebe's only avenue to access his ultimate ambition .. which
is prety much just to perceive himself as a glowing hero.
- cb
it's evolution baby
- pearl jam
Clarice
Brenda Lee wrote:
>
> NR wrote:
>
> >
> > Three more categories that you could include would be children, teeth and
> > tattoos/piercings.
While it's not difficult to come up with a general smv valuation
scale for presence of children and condition of teeth, how do you
count the presence or absence of one or more tattoos towards overall
smv score?
> > That is a good start though.
>
> Hello NR.. :)
>
> Did you have happy holidays?
>
> Time off for good behavior perhaps? Time off is always like a present in
> and of itself. :) Would you agree?
>
> Funny you mentioned that. I happened to see a man in the mall the other
> day. He had his jacket off and I have to tell you I have 'never' seen so
> many tatoos in my life. I could just imagine them going on past where I
> had a visual.. I have no idea what possessed him to want to cover his
> body like that.
It is a matter of art.
> Black panthers, hearts, names, skulls, snakes, a long
> large dragon..
Yes, it's your body and your skin.
Anything goes.
> yes, I was quite captivated. Though I was wondering if they were all
> done within a short span of time and if he ever regretted it. I should
> have asked but hey, twas not the time nor the place.
>
> I can't say it offended me, yet, they were all over parts of the body I
> like looking at.. A bit distracting perhaps.
Powerful art usually is.
It seems to me you were affected less by the message than you were
by the medium that conveyed it. L.A. is a great place to be if you
dig tattoos, or piercings for that matter. I have noticed some
awesome stuff. Whenever I see somebody whose body art truly
captivates my attention I make an effort to compliment them. In my
experience, that is always appreciated.
> ps
>
> If you get one removed, does it leave a scar? Just wondering.
I'm not sure. I suspect it depends on how deeply the ink has
penetrated into the skin. What I have heard about the removal
process is that it is supposed to be painful and extended, often
requiring multiple treatments over time.
A more interesting question: If you were to get a tattoo, which
location would you choose?
C.
--
and why?
========= WAS CANCELLED BY =======:
Path: news.uni-stuttgart.de!news.fh-hannover.de!news-han1.dfn.de!news-koe1.dfn.de!RRZ.Uni-Koeln.DE!news.netcologne.de!newsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!fr.clara.net!heighliner.fr.clara.net!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!209.98.98.64!news-out.visi.com!hermes.visi.com!feed.news.qwest.net!news.uswest.net.POSTED!u_n_a__c_ancel
From: Clarice <Cla...@quanti.com>
Control: cancel <3C3C9A5F...@quanti.com>
Subject: cmsg cancel <3C3C9A5F...@quanti.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c,soc.support.fat-acceptance
Message-ID: <cancel.3C3C9...@quanti.com>
X-No-Archive: yes
Lines: 2
Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 00:35:50 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 209.3.144.105
X-Trace: news.uswest.net 1010804456 209.3.144.105 (Fri, 11 Jan 2002 21:00:56 CST)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 21:00:56 CST
Xref: news.uni-stuttgart.de control:40510963
autocancel
Brenda Lee
>
> Brenda Lee wrote:
> >
> > NR wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Three more categories that you could include would be children, teeth and
> > > tattoos/piercings.
>
> While it's not difficult to come up with a general smv valuation
> scale for presence of children and condition of teeth, how do you
> count the presence or absence of one or more tattoos towards overall
> smv score?
>
> > > That is a good start though.
> >
> > Hello NR.. :)
> >
> > Did you have happy holidays?
> >
> > Time off for good behavior perhaps? Time off is always like a present in
> > and of itself. :) Would you agree?
> >
> > Funny you mentioned that. I happened to see a man in the mall the other
> > day. He had his jacket off and I have to tell you I have 'never' seen so
> > many tatoos in my life. I could just imagine them going on past where I
> > had a visual.. I have no idea what possessed him to want to cover his
> > body like that.
>
> It is a matter of art.
Hello Clarice. True.. And I am one that appreciates art.. Please don't
mistake trying to understand as a put down. Was not. Thinking of them
along the lines of ink penetration and health a bit I suppose too.
>
> > Black panthers, hearts, names, skulls, snakes, a long
> > large dragon..
>
> Yes, it's your body and your skin.
> Anything goes.
No argument here.
>
>
> > yes, I was quite captivated. Though I was wondering if they were all
> > done within a short span of time and if he ever regretted it. I should
> > have asked but hey, twas not the time nor the place.
> >
> > I can't say it offended me, yet, they were all over parts of the body I
> > like looking at.. A bit distracting perhaps.
>
> Powerful art usually is.
I should explain. I love looking at the body. I think it is beautiful as
is. And he was fine if that is what he wanted to do with his. Me? I
enjoy looking at the chest and letting my eyes naturally fall to the
belly and the 'button' and the little trial of hair men usually have
that proceeds down into the waistband of their pants or underwear. It is
an erotic sight to me. So, when I did this I instead got the outline of
a long snake that went straight down the middle of his chest to that
sacred area, tail somewhere out of sight.. Nothing wrong with it. Just
that it broke my train of thought.. and visual..
Not good, not bad, just a broken visual...
:)
> It seems to me you were affected less by the message than you were
> by the medium that conveyed it.
I was only affected to the degree of curiosity and say what might have
prompted each tattoo.. I would have liked to hear the story behind each
one.
> L.A. is a great place to be if you
> dig tattoos, or piercings for that matter.
I have seen some hum dingers. Hee!
> I have noticed some
> awesome stuff. Whenever I see somebody whose body art truly
> captivates my attention I make an effort to compliment them. In my
> experience, that is always appreciated.
I agree and so I compliment people all the time.
Just wasn't sure what I thought. And I don't care for empty compliments.
Either giving or receiving. Know what I mean? :)
>
> > ps
> >
> > If you get one removed, does it leave a scar? Just wondering.
>
> I'm not sure. I suspect it depends on how deeply the ink has
> penetrated into the skin. What I have heard about the removal
> process is that it is supposed to be painful and extended, often
> requiring multiple treatments over time.
>
> A more interesting question:
How so? I would like to know the repercussions of having a tattoo before
I would even consider getting one.
> If you were to get a tattoo, which
> location would you choose?
I have been thinking about this..
If I 'were' to get one I would choose the back of my neck. It is
X-tremely sensitive and when someone gets to the point they are slowly
lifting my hair and exposing the nape of my neck they would be privy to
seeing it.. and I would find that erotic. If they touched it or
*something* I think I would get very excited.
As to what it would be? That would be harder..
Smiles,
BrendaLee
>
> C.
> --
> and why?
--
BrendaLee
Lady DreamCatcher
--------------------
http://www.cocreator.com/ehmka/
-------------------------------------
brendalee makes the world better by her presence in it.
~~jackie 'anakin' tokeman~~
"actually her (brendalee's) kind heart is a weapon more powerful than
the combined hate of the entire degenerate freak mafia.
seriously."
~~jackie 'anakin' tokeman
when you dance with an angel the angel don't change the angel changes
you
~~jackie 'anakin' tokeman~~
========= WAS CANCELLED BY =======:
Path: news.uni-stuttgart.de!dns.phoenix-ag.de!newsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!fr.clara.net!heighliner.fr.clara.net!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!204.71.34.15!news-out.cwix.com!newsfeed.cwix.com!feed.news.qwest.net!news.uswest.net.POSTED!u_n_a__c_ancel
From: Brenda Lee <eh...@rochester.rr.com>
Control: cancel <3C3C9FBD...@rochester.rr.com>
Subject: cmsg cancel <3C3C9FBD...@rochester.rr.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c,soc.support.fat-acceptance
Message-ID: <cancel.3C3C9...@rochester.rr.com>
X-No-Archive: yes
Lines: 2
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 23:58:42 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 209.3.144.105
X-Trace: news.uswest.net 1010804371 209.3.144.105 (Fri, 11 Jan 2002 20:59:31 CST)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 20:59:31 CST
Xref: news.uni-stuttgart.de control:40510790
autocancel
Brenda Lee
Sure sure NR, but it was not very user friendly. :)
Sorry, could not help myself.
:)
BrendaLee
>
> NR
> Fat, drunken and haggard is no way to go through life.
> http://www.hotornot.com/r/?eid=REAUEU&key=QEE
>
> >
> >
> >C.
> >--
> >and why?
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: N/A
>
> iQA/AwUBPD0MczL3IlvsWvnjEQIhzACgznN0kqfqUNs/gu+wwJ5hLrvniQgAn3Z3
> XEu/hS6QZFkkJHbGw7IrGpf6
> =eBKC
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
BrendaLee
Lady DreamCatcher
--------------------
http://www.cocreator.com/ehmka/
-------------------------------------
brendalee makes the world better by her presence in it.
~~jackie 'anakin' tokeman~~
"actually her (brendalee's) kind heart is a weapon more powerful than
the combined hate of the entire degenerate freak mafia.
seriously."
~~jackie 'anakin' tokeman
when you dance with an angel the angel don't change the angel changes
you
~~jackie 'anakin' tokeman~~
========= WAS CANCELLED BY =======:
Path: news.uni-stuttgart.de!dns.phoenix-ag.de!newsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!diablo.theplanet.net!208.184.7.66.MISMATCH!newsfeed1.cidera.com!Cidera!newsfeed.cwix.com!feed.news.qwest.net!news.uswest.net.POSTED!u_n_a__c_ancel
From: Brenda Lee <eh...@rochester.rr.com>
Control: cancel <3C3D0F10...@rochester.rr.com>
Subject: cmsg cancel <3C3D0F10...@rochester.rr.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c,soc.support.fat-acceptance
Message-ID: <cancel.3C3D0...@rochester.rr.com>
X-No-Archive: yes
Lines: 2
Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 00:56:50 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 209.3.144.105
X-Trace: news.uswest.net 1010804033 209.3.144.105 (Fri, 11 Jan 2002 20:53:53 CST)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 20:53:53 CST
Xref: news.uni-stuttgart.de control:40509850
autocancel
number one
> On 7 Jan 2002, dr.lurv <allaboo...@eejack.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Three more categories that you could include would be children, teeth and
> >> tattoos/piercings.
> >
> >prospects than it does on whether you'd do her provided, of course, it
> >hasn't provided an excuse for the traditional permanant weight gain.
> >but then personality is more about long term prospects so children should
> >be included on the negative side of the ledger. say minus 20 points for
> >the first kid and an -10 points for each additional brat.
>
> Negative points should be given if she has trouble collecting child support
> since this presents a potential financial burden for any suitor.
only if he lets it.
> Also,
> points should be deducted for women that have children by more than one
> father since this presents the potential for additional financial burden
> and conflict.
c above
> Methinks that the quality of the offspring should be considered.
> Additional points deducted for 'special needs' children.
that rises to the level of an extinction level event.
> >teeth are covered by the face category.
> >excessive tattoos or piercings fall under the category of deformity.
>
> That works.
a general category like 'deformity' is needed to encompass all these life
wrecking variables - """special""" kids, psycho ex-boyfriend just released
from prison, bankruptcy, o.j. simpson - but it would be even harder to
quantify than 'face' (there are detailed parameters for the ideal face
that have been worked out by actual scientists which could be applied
objectively and which do in fact home in on the perfect halle berry
proportions that guys love.) coming up with a 'life complication' standard
is, i believe, beyond the scope of this metric.
best,
jackie 'anakin' tokeman
NR
On 14 Jan 2002, aj...@ix.netcom.com (Davenpork) stomped her hoof and oinked:
>
>nonsenseregurtitator@i'm-a-monkey.com (NR) wrote in message
>news:<A033E7O93726...@anonymous.poster>...
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>
>> On Mon, 07 Jan 2002, Brenda Lee <eh...@rochester.rr.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >NR wrote:
>> >>
>> >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> >>
>> >> On Mon, 07 Jan 2002, Brenda Lee <eh...@rochester.rr.com> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >NR wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> >> >>
>> >> >> On Sun, 06 Jan 2002, Brenda Lee <eh...@rochester.rr.com> wrote:
>
>SNIP
>> >> >> >Hello NR.. :)
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Hello BrendaLee. :-)
>> >> >
>> >> >It seems like a long time. :(
>> >> >
>> >> >I see you going the rounds with AJ....
>> >>
>> >> I have to admit that I enjoy smacking her fat, ugly ass around.
>
>Delusions of grandeur and your pathological drooling over my lovely
>fat ass do not equal smacking.
There is nothing lovely about your fat ass, delusionhawg.
>
>HTH.
>
>Entertaining how you are still obsessive about my ass despite my not
>even being around for the last week or two [sans posts to Robin and
>Drea]. You can't stop thinking about me or posting to me even when I
>ignore you.
>
>ICMTSU!
You're the one that said you would not respond to me. I'm so
irresistable!!!
>
>> >Seems she seldom has any proof to back up her statements.
>
>I do, that you and the other chronics choose to ignore them is not my
>crisis.
Liar liar, size 5X stretchpants on fire! It must be that invisible ink
that you type these responses with.
>
>Simply stating something doesn't make it fact any more than simply
>stating someting makes it a lie.
Feel free to back your claim.
I am not holding my breath.
>
>>>And they are
>> >more emotional backlash than anything else.
>> >The facts speak volumes against what she is saying.
>
>Emotional backlash?
>
>Do you have any idea how absurd you look right about now?
>
>Didn't think so.
>
>> It was funny that Davenport was able to come up with some movies when she
>> was put to task even though none of the movies were made in the last 10
>> years. IOW, she will produce the goods if she thinks that the goods exist.
>
>They did and do exist. The fact that you chose after the fact to
>change the parameters of the challenge do not negate that I was able
>to offer the proof you thought did not exist.
I did not change the parameters. Every example that you posted was over 10
years old. I extended a subsequent challenge to post recent examples which
you obviously weren't up to, otherwise you would have posted some as you
did previously. The pattern is clear. You will respond with proof when
you are able to, you will ignore requests for proof when you are lying out
of your BIG FAT UGLY ASS. The latter, of course, being your modus
operandi.
>
>SNIP
>
>> NR
>> Fat, drunken and haggard is no way to go through life.
>> http://www.hotornot.com/r/?eid=REAUEU&key=QEE
>
>Still so obsessed with the fat cuntface that you have to include this every
>time you post?
I am glad that it still bugs the shit out of you.
> How many people do you think even bother to access the
>URL on a weekly basis?
Irrelevant.
>
>A J
>Because, somebody has to be fugly!
NR
Fat, drunken and haggard is no way to go through life.
http://www.hotornot.com/r/?eid=REAUEU&key=QEE
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: N/A
iQA/AwUBPEOgODL3IlvsWvnjEQKMegCglBfrbtj+TpYs6zV1BZwJMqxbVUwAn0H0
RMF2qdAN3Z/H4ZNJmaPnGz7J
=wXhn
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Aaron Kulkis
Just more complicated to arrive at.
A simple "bidding" strategy (similer CONCEPT to www.ratemybody.com or
www.facethejury.com)...where instead of a picture, a person's whole
"life situation" would be reviewed and bid upon.
of course, most women would soon learn that the "I was young and
stupid" excuse is viewed as precisely the cop-out that it truly is.
The Danimal
> Subject: Re: towards a useful smv metric
> Newsgroups: soc.singles, soc.support.fat-acceptance, alt.troll, soc.penpals
> Date: 2002-01-11 11:39:31 PST
> john s. wrote:
> > In soc.singles doctor love <allaboo...@ejack.com> wrote:
> >
> > #1 problem...the function generated is not continuous.
>
> digital never is.
>
> > Incrementally
> > adding age or weight causes the predicted SMV to shift by large
> > amounts.
>
> so your objection is more to the sampling rate not the digitization.
Easily solved by interpolation.
> > Like for instance, a certain someone's birthday is right
> > around the corner...does that mean her SMV shifts 5 points that
> > day? No....
>
> that's when the quiz takes account of the cumulative depreciation over
> the past year.
Measure age in days and there's no problem. The SMV change per
day is small enough not to create jumps every midnight.
Any SMV number you estimate with this scale has to have big error
bars anyway. You probably can't come up with an SMV scale having
more than one digit of precision. Which is to say, your estimate
might be able to classify someone into one of ten possible levels
of SMV, and maybe your estimate would hold up well compared to
the results of panel voting. But I'd guess that any simple formula
would be lucky to classify people into five levels of SMV compared
to panel voting.
> > And its harder to integrate a non-continuous function.
Not for a computer.
> > (Math weenies...what is the integral of SMV over time...some sort
> > of visual pleasure over time index i.e. integral barbara eden's
> > smv over time = high. integral of farrah fawcett's smv over time
> > = much lower.
>
> no amount of lost value can add to present value, except indirectly. (if
> original value was extremely high it can leave more even after serious
> losses, but once it hits zero it's still worthless.
> or:
> if you marry racquel welch today you won't be fucking her old poster.)
The integral of SMV over time going forward is the measure
of a person's desirability as a long-term relationship partner.
The integral of SMV over time going backward is obviously less
relevant to the present, but who knows? Jackie, you might prefer
a slightly-over-the-hill porn star to a woman of equal attractiveness
who had never been attractive enough to sell her body for a premium.
If nothing else you'd have useful bragging rights on Usenet, where
the people you like to twit would have an easier time looking up
the porn star's former glory than verifying her present state.
Small comfort to Vlad, I know.
> > : female smv:
> > : age - for each year below 25 add 5 points. for each year over 25
> > : subtract 1 point. then for each year over 30 subtract 5 points. then
> > : for each year over 45 subtract 10 points.
> >
> > #2 - there needs to be an "apparent" age. Last night I saw
> > Barbara Eden on TV. She is very old, yet still quite hot.
> > She looks 20 years younger than she is.
>
> i doubt that would hold up in person. but even if it did the exceptions do
> not make the rules. every fifty year old woman i have ever met has been
> sexually worthless. that is, i wouldn't have accepted a fuck from them if
> it had been offered.
Jackie, what's the most turned on you've ever been by a woman over
the age of 40? For example, have you ever met a woman older than 40
and had trouble thinking straight or breathing in her presence
because she was so hot?
> as for apparent age, this can be a present time factor for those in the
> 30-40 year range but as the phrase 'hit the wall' indicates the effects
> can become manifest rapidly as they get older.
When I saw "American Pie II" I thought Shannon Elizabeth looked
less impressive than I recalled from the first "American Pie."
Still-hot, but a little less mind-blowing.
I recall Natasha Henstridge looking mind-blowingly hot in "Species"
but not really all that special in "The Whole Nine Yards," certainly
not in contrast to Amanda Peet in that second film. That was only six
years later and Natasha is not near the wall yet, but unless the
apparent decline was an artifact of filming I'd say she's slipped
considerably.
> the sexual worthlessness
> of all fifty year olds indicates that no matter how good a 45 year old
Do you know any 45 year old woman who looks good right now, in the sense
that she could blend with a group of 25 year old women and you would
be as likely to gaze longingly at the 45 year old woman?
I don't know any 45 year old woman who can compete visually with
good-looking 25 year old women, let alone be mistaken for one.
> looks now within five years she'll be just another old hag. the smv metric
> takes this into account by severely discounting older women.
> as i noted before i take the future into account because this is a
> relationship-smv measure. if it were purely a one night stand measure
> personality would be much less of a factor, with only outright dick
> chopping psychos suffering a serious hit. and for that apparent age could
> be used. but it would have to be real life three-d up close stark raving
> nude apparent age, not tv apparent age.
Actually for a one-night stand I'd say personality would be a critical
factor, as in how easy the woman is. You're not going to have a (consensual)
one night stand with an ice queen.
> and as i said, not one fifty year old woman has ever passed my dickmeter
> test in real life.
And the minimum passing grade is well below the red-line maximum
possible score.
Jackie, what's the oldest woman you've seen in real life who got
your maximum score? I don't think I've seen a woman past her late
20's about whom I could say that.
> > : bmi - between 17.2-20.0 add 25 points. over 22 subtract 2 points for
> > : each 1 gained, over 25 subtract 5 points, and over 30 subtract 10
> > : points. below 16 subtract 10 points for each 1 lost. below 14 see a
> > : doctor.
> >
> > #3 I've never really bought this scale because the function was
> > derived from sources who gained from dishonesty.
>
> i got the baseline from the howard stern tv show. they have a scale
> hidden under the floor in the studio and they lure pornstars and
> strippers onto the scale. the most attractive women really are in the
> bmi 17-20 range.
How many times can this trick work before the guests start to
catch on?
> * Height 5'4" Weight: 103 (1999), BMI: 17.71
>
> > It shouldn't
> > double penalty for having nice tits. It should in fact be a
> > plus, but in this case since tits are adipose flesh, there is
> > a hit for BMI without a corresponding increase for having really
> > nice tits.
>
> see above. no woman with a slender figure is going to fall outside
> the ideal range on account of her tits.
Boobs are slightly less dense than water as you can see from the
lack of sag when a woman goes swimming topless. See how big a gallon
jug of water is; that's 8 pounds. A gallon's worth of boobs would be
an amazingly large pair on a slender woman.
Ideally, each of a woman's breasts should be about the size of her
brain (1100 cubic centimeters or so). (But not smarter---heh. We don't
want those things talking back when we talk to them.)
> breast quality is not defined
solely
> by size but by shape.
Some size is a necessary condition if there is to be any shape.
> this is beyond the
> ability of a simple quiz to determine. but perhaps there should be
> discounts for severe flatness
I'd agree, and I'm not even primarily a boob man. Anything less than
an A cup gets depressing after a while.
> and excess size. i'll look into including
> that in a future edition.
I think you should also downgrade for excessively large implants on
slender women. They look OK in clothes, which may be most of the
point, but naked they don't look anything like real breasts.
> > #5 frame size is not considered and a large framed woman with a
> > BMI of 18 looks icky.
>
> what about at bmi 21? that's within the ideal range.
Before we can conclude anything about "a large framed woman with a
BMI of 18" we'd need to see a representative set of photos. John,
do you have any photographic examples of a large framed woman who
looks ickier at BMI=18 than she does at BMI=21?
> > At least health science scales take into
> > account frame dimensions, not just height as the independant
> > variable.
>
> the only weight standards i've seen that take frame into account are
> the met life charts. also keep in mind this is an smv measure based
> on the dickmeter. the only outstanding exception to the ideal bmi range
> i've seen was gabrielle reece and she'd only lose 2 points for her bmi of
> 23, a loss more than made up for by her many other fine qualities.
But at 6'3" she's probably way too tall for most men in real life.
With that much height I think her BMI would be more of a real-life
problem than it would be on a shorter athletic woman. In her prime,
however, Gabrielle Reece certainly had outstanding facial beauty.
She's slipped a little in her 30's, and the thousands of hours she's
spent playing beach volleyball under the destructive nuclear radiation
of the sun could only have hastened her date with the wall.
> > #9 do and/or should brains count?
>
> brains are what i'd call a 'similarity factor' - if they're similar to
> your own they're a plus, if not, a minus. this goes in both directions.
Not always. In my experience there are some women who seem to feel
attracted to men who are smarter than they are.
> but because they are relative they are useless for general smv evaluations
> of women. for men it can be a plus, but only so far as they increase power.
I think brains can only increase power for men. What man do you know
who could increase his power by becoming stupider?
The problem with brains is that they usually don't increase power much
until later in life, when a man has had enough time to establish himself
in some career where he can exploit his brains, and by then his SMV is falling
due to his physical decline. But if a man lacks brains, then his SMV falls
as fast as a woman's. (Think of some stupid second-string ex-pro-athlete who
failed to save any money. Unless he produced lasting fame or stays in top
condition what has he got? His SMV probably drops as fast as a fashion
model's as he ages.)
> > Interesting idea though.
>
> rest assured
> it will get more interesting still
>
> best,
> jackie 'fumanchu' tokeman
-- the Danimal
Halcyon C
> When I saw "American Pie II" I thought Shannon Elizabeth looked
> less impressive than I recalled from the first "American Pie."
> Still-hot, but a little less mind-blowing.
>
> I recall Natasha Henstridge looking mind-blowingly hot in "Species"
> but not really all that special in "The Whole Nine Yards," certainly
> not in contrast to Amanda Peet in that second film. That was only six
> years later and Natasha is not near the wall yet, but unless the
> apparent decline was an artifact of filming I'd say she's slipped
> considerably.
(1) Wood you still do either of them?
(2) Drugs and partying can age a girl rapidly. Some women can handle
it whereas others cannot.
> I don't know any 45 year old woman who can compete visually with
> good-looking 25 year old women, let alone be mistaken for one.
My roommate senior year had a mother (late 40s) that looked like
her 18 year old sister. It took my friends and I about two minutes
to figure out which was which.
Extreme close up would tell differently, but from ordinary gazing
distance or walking by on a street I wood have placed her at no older
than mid 20s.
However she is the only woman in her late 40s I have encountered
with that much difference in age. Brenda and Rauni look mid-late 30s
and look good for their age, however.
> Actually for a one-night stand I'd say personality would be a critical
> factor, as in how easy the woman is. You're not going to have a
> (consensual) one night stand with an ice queen.
Ice queens can melt.
> Ideally, each of a woman's breasts should be about the size of her
> brain (1100 cubic centimeters or so). (But not smarter---heh. We don't
> want those things talking back when we talk to them.)
I am thinking of that SNL skit where the women had their eyes
evolve down to their breasts.
> Some size is a necessary condition if there is to be any shape.
Indubitably. Breasts are very important.
> I'd agree, and I'm not even primarily a boob man. Anything less than
> an A cup gets depressing after a while.
Concave it is.
> I think you should also downgrade for excessively large implants on
> slender women. They look OK in clothes, which may be most of the
> point, but naked they don't look anything like real breasts.
It's all men's fault.
> Before we can conclude anything about "a large framed woman with a
> BMI of 18" we'd need to see a representative set of photos. John,
> do you have any photographic examples of a large framed woman who
> looks ickier at BMI=18 than she does at BMI=21?
Large framed women have to weigh more due to the fact their bone
structure is bigger. This is not an excuse for BMI>40, mind you,
but some women's healthy weights might put them as high as BMI 23-25,
which is still enough to make you turn on the street but prolly
not enough to enable her to star at the highest quality of body
selling.
Again, a woman with BMI between 25 and 30 may be perfectly
fuckable is she is well-proportioned.
> But at 6'3" she's probably way too tall for most men in real life.
> With that much height I think her BMI would be more of a real-life
> problem than it would be on a shorter athletic woman. In her prime,
> however, Gabrielle Reece certainly had outstanding facial beauty.
> She's slipped a little in her 30's, and the thousands of hours she's
> spent playing beach volleyball under the destructive nuclear radiation
> of the sun could only have hastened her date with the wall.
Crash.
> Not always. In my experience there are some women who seem to feel
> attracted to men who are smarter than they are.
They want the man to do the thinking for them and remove them
from the great beeg world.
> I think brains can only increase power for men. What man do you know
> who could increase his power by becoming stupider?
Agreed. However appearing excessively smart is a bad thing. Being
above average but not disgustingly so (60th-90th percentile) is
good.
> The problem with brains is that they usually don't increase power much
> until later in life, when a man has had enough time to establish
> himself in some career where he can exploit his brains, and by then
> his SMV is falling due to his physical decline. But if a man lacks
> brains, then his SMV falls as fast as a woman's. (Think of some stupid
> second-string ex-pro-athlete who failed to save any money. Unless he
> produced lasting fame or stays in top condition what has he got? His
> SMV probably drops as fast as a fashion model's as he ages.)
Emulate every other retired pro athlete and open a restaurant, car
dealership or insurance agency.
Halcyon.
The Danimal
>
> The Danimal wrote:
> > When I saw "American Pie II" I thought Shannon Elizabeth looked
> > less impressive than I recalled from the first "American Pie."
> > Still-hot, but a little less mind-blowing.
> >
> > I recall Natasha Henstridge looking mind-blowingly hot in "Species"
> > but not really all that special in "The Whole Nine Yards," certainly
> > not in contrast to Amanda Peet in that second film. That was only six
> > years later and Natasha is not near the wall yet, but unless the
> > apparent decline was an artifact of filming I'd say she's slipped
> > considerably.
>
> (1) Wood you still do either of them?
In the unlikely event that it were possible, yes. My point was not
that they had deteriorated to the point of unacceptability but that
if I had a perfectly free choice they had slipped a few notches
compared to the hypothetical competition. For example, go see
"The Whole Nine Yards" and tell me which of the lead actresses you
would rather do.
> (2) Drugs and partying can age a girl rapidly.
No shit. Plus there's the intrinsic rate of biologically programmed
aging. Some people change dramatically in appearance as they get older
even if they avoid most of the worst mistakes.
> Some women can handle
> it whereas others cannot.
>
> > I don't know any 45 year old woman who can compete visually with
> > good-looking 25 year old women, let alone be mistaken for one.
>
> My roommate senior year had a mother (late 40s) that looked like
> her 18 year old sister. It took my friends and I about two minutes
> to figure out which was which.
Were they hot?
> Extreme close up would tell differently, but from ordinary gazing
> distance or walking by on a street I wood have placed her at no older
> than mid 20s.
When I was 22 I dated a woman who was 39. When I first met her I
thought she was 25. I gradually raised my estimate as I got a better
look at her, but she was remarkably preserved for her age. (Now that
I'm older I don't think I would be so easily fooled.)
The last time I saw her she was in her mid-50's. She had not only
hit the wall hard but it seemed to have dragged her 100 feet.
> However she is the only woman in her late 40s I have encountered
> with that much difference in age. Brenda and Rauni look mid-late 30s
> and look good for their age, however.
>
> > Actually for a one-night stand I'd say personality would be a critical
> > factor, as in how easy the woman is. You're not going to have a
> > (consensual) one night stand with an ice queen.
>
> Ice queens can melt.
In my experience this takes more than one night. Your mileage may vary,
I guess.
But by definition I wouldn't call any woman who "melts" on the first night
an "ice queen." Maybe a Dairy Whip.
> > Ideally, each of a woman's breasts should be about the size of her
> > brain (1100 cubic centimeters or so). (But not smarter---heh. We don't
> > want those things talking back when we talk to them.)
>
> I am thinking of that SNL skit where the women had their eyes
> evolve down to their breasts.
I missed that one.
> > Some size is a necessary condition if there is to be any shape.
>
> Indubitably. Breasts are very important.
But not necessary. If women needed ideal breasts to qualify for
sperm donations then natural selection would have turned every
woman into Halle Berry by now.
Clearly the average man will settle for considerably lower quality.
Same thing goes for dick size. If women absolutely demanded humungous
dicks the majority of guys would have them by now.
Most people are willing to live with a lot less sexual pleasure
than they are capable of experiencing, if the alternative is no
sexual pleasure.
> > I'd agree, and I'm not even primarily a boob man. Anything less than
> > an A cup gets depressing after a while.
>
> Concave it is.
>
> > I think you should also downgrade for excessively large implants on
> > slender women. They look OK in clothes, which may be most of the
> > point, but naked they don't look anything like real breasts.
>
> It's all men's fault.
From what I have read, strippers and porn stars get more money as
they get larger implants. I can't imagine what the men in the audience
who pay them are thinking. When a woman's implants are each about the
size of her head, and looking nothing like a real breast, what man
can find that a turn-on?
> > Before we can conclude anything about "a large framed woman with a
> > BMI of 18" we'd need to see a representative set of photos. John,
> > do you have any photographic examples of a large framed woman who
> > looks ickier at BMI=18 than she does at BMI=21?
>
> Large framed women have to weigh more due to the fact their bone
> structure is bigger.
How much more? I want a number.
> This is not an excuse for BMI>40, mind you,
> but some women's healthy weights might put them as high as BMI 23-25,
We're not talking about maximum healthy weight, we are talking about
ideally attractive weight.
John says there are women who look "icky" at BMI=18. I want to see
some photographic evidence, not a bunch of handwaving arguments.
> which is still enough to make you turn on the street but prolly
> not enough to enable her to star at the highest quality of body
> selling.
Show me the photos. I doubt if I've ever ogled a woman with
BMI=25. That BMI would be bulky even for a man.
> Again, a woman with BMI between 25 and 30 may be perfectly
> fuckable is she is well-proportioned.
Present some photographic examples. I've never seen a woman
with BMI=30 I could consider attractive.
How many pounds of fat is Ms. BMI 30 carrying?
It's rare even for male strength athletes to get much above BMI 25
if they stay lean and don't take steroids. Since women usually
have much less potential to put on muscle, a woman with BMI=30
is likely to be carrying an immense sloppy load of fat.
> > But at 6'3" she's probably way too tall for most men in real life.
> > With that much height I think her BMI would be more of a real-life
> > problem than it would be on a shorter athletic woman. In her prime,
> > however, Gabrielle Reece certainly had outstanding facial beauty.
> > She's slipped a little in her 30's, and the thousands of hours she's
> > spent playing beach volleyball under the destructive nuclear radiation
> > of the sun could only have hastened her date with the wall.
>
> Crash.
>
> > Not always. In my experience there are some women who seem to feel
> > attracted to men who are smarter than they are.
>
> They want the man to do the thinking for them and remove them
> from the great beeg world.
Humans evolved intelligence not just to outsmart dumb animals but
because after some point we started needing a lot of intelligence
to cope with our increasingly complex social structures. The smarter
a person is, the farther ahead of this evolutionary arms race he is,
and that "should" be an indicator of reproductive fitness. Of course
it doesn't always work out that way, but I'd say most people would
find a genius more attractive than a retard.
I read in some book on intelligence that even in hunter-gatherer
societies, the tribesmen who score higher on IQ tests appropriate
for their cultures are more successful at locating game and food
sources than their duller comrades.
> > I think brains can only increase power for men. What man do you know
> > who could increase his power by becoming stupider?
>
> Agreed. However appearing excessively smart is a bad thing.
That depends on the context. If the smart man is solving problems
that the woman cares about and cannot solve on her own, she'll tend
to dig it. If on the other hand the "smart" man drones on about
topics of no interest to the woman she'll drift off.
That's one of the hazards of our extreme division of labor. A person
could be the world's greatest Perl programmer and 99.99% of the population
will not care, unless the guy made a lot of money.
But part of being smart is figuring out what you have to do to
impress people, and when you aren't impressing them.
-- the Danimal
la n.
The Danimal <dNmOcS...@NmOfSmP.cAoMm> wrote in message
news:3C4F12D4...@NmOfSmP.cAoMm...
>
> John says there are women who look "icky" at BMI=18. I want to see
> some photographic evidence, not a bunch of handwaving arguments.
>
http://www.staylace.com/pinups/spook/
hth
la n.
Halcyon D
>
> Halcyon C wrote:
> > (1) Wood you still do either of them?
>
> In the unlikely event that it were possible, yes. My point was not
> that they had deteriorated to the point of unacceptability but that
> if I had a perfectly free choice they had slipped a few notches
> compared to the hypothetical competition. For example, go see
> "The Whole Nine Yards" and tell me which of the lead actresses you
> would rather do.
I'll take both.
> > (2) Drugs and partying can age a girl rapidly.
>
> No shit. Plus there's the intrinsic rate of biologically programmed
> aging. Some people change dramatically in appearance as they get older
> even if they avoid most of the worst mistakes.
True. However I have not known Misses Henstridge and the other girl
to be known for their clean lifestyle.
> > My roommate senior year had a mother (late 40s) that looked like
> > her 18 year old sister. It took my friends and I about two minutes
> > to figure out which was which.
>
> Were they hot?
They were doable.
> When I was 22 I dated a woman who was 39. When I first met her I
> thought she was 25. I gradually raised my estimate as I got a better
> look at her, but she was remarkably preserved for her age. (Now that
> I'm older I don't think I would be so easily fooled.)
She was hot whilst it lasted.
> The last time I saw her she was in her mid-50's. She had not only
> hit the wall hard but it seemed to have dragged her 100 feet.
Ouch.
> > Ice queens can melt.
>
> In my experience this takes more than one night. Your mileage may
> vary, I guess.
>
> But by definition I wouldn't call any woman who "melts" on the first
> night an "ice queen." Maybe a Dairy Whip.
One night stands need not occur on night one of knowing a girl.
> > Indubitably. Breasts are very important.
>
> But not necessary. If women needed ideal breasts to qualify for
> sperm donations then natural selection would have turned every
> woman into Halle Berry by now.
>
> Clearly the average man will settle for considerably lower quality.
>
> Same thing goes for dick size. If women absolutely demanded humungous
> dicks the majority of guys would have them by now.
>
> Most people are willing to live with a lot less sexual pleasure
> than they are capable of experiencing, if the alternative is no
> sexual pleasure.
This is true.
> From what I have read, strippers and porn stars get more money as
> they get larger implants. I can't imagine what the men in the audience
> who pay them are thinking. When a woman's implants are each about the
> size of her head, and looking nothing like a real breast, what man
> can find that a turn-on?
That's why those places are dark.
I remember seeing the side of one girl's tits in a pr0n movie being
concave due to bad implants. $8.95 wasted it was.
> John says there are women who look "icky" at BMI=18. I want to see
> some photographic evidence, not a bunch of handwaving arguments.
Dan, do you find Callista Flockhart attractive?
> Show me the photos. I doubt if I've ever ogled a woman with
> BMI=25. That BMI would be bulky even for a man.
Oh wait I am at 31.5 or so. 210 lbs is not pretty on a 5'8" woman,
whereas it is beyond wrong for me.
> > Again, a woman with BMI between 25 and 30 may be perfectly
> > fuckable is she is well-proportioned.
>
> Present some photographic examples. I've never seen a woman
> with BMI=30 I could consider attractive.
>
> How many pounds of fat is Ms. BMI 30 carrying?
As many as me. I figure for 5'8", she would be 200 lbs. Hmm. Not good.
Try 150-160. That wood be passable if the fat were contained in the
ass and hips and she were well proportioned.
> It's rare even for male strength athletes to get much above BMI 25
> if they stay lean and don't take steroids. Since women usually
> have much less potential to put on muscle, a woman with BMI=30
> is likely to be carrying an immense sloppy load of fat.
I bring my assessment down a wee bit. BMI 30 is not good for women,
BMI 25 might be considered attractive by some.
> > They want the man to do the thinking for them and remove them
> > from the great beeg world.
>
> Humans evolved intelligence not just to outsmart dumb animals but
> because after some point we started needing a lot of intelligence
> to cope with our increasingly complex social structures. The smarter
> a person is, the farther ahead of this evolutionary arms race he is,
> and that "should" be an indicator of reproductive fitness. Of course
> it doesn't always work out that way, but I'd say most people would
> find a genius more attractive than a retard.
>
> I read in some book on intelligence that even in hunter-gatherer
> societies, the tribesmen who score higher on IQ tests appropriate
> for their cultures are more successful at locating game and food
> sources than their duller comrades.
True. In some cultures teh smart kids are the one who can track
and remember legends and lore properly. Odds are had I lived in
the Stone or Bronze Ages, I would be a shaman of some sort.
> That depends on the context. If the smart man is solving problems
> that the woman cares about and cannot solve on her own, she'll tend
> to dig it. If on the other hand the "smart" man drones on about
> topics of no interest to the woman she'll drift off.
Hmm. Also correct.
> That's one of the hazards of our extreme division of labor. A person
> could be the world's greatest Perl programmer and 99.99% of the
> population will not care, unless the guy made a lot of money.
>
> But part of being smart is figuring out what you have to do to
> impress people, and when you aren't impressing them.
>
> -- the Danimal
Indeed.
Halcyon.
Allisson
The Danimal <dNmOcS...@NmOfSmP.cAoMm> wrote:
>Halcyon C wrote:
>>
>> The Danimal wrote:
[snip]
>When I was 22 I dated a woman who was 39. When I first met her I
>thought she was 25. I gradually raised my estimate as I got a better
>look at her, but she was remarkably preserved for her age. (Now that
>I'm older I don't think I would be so easily fooled.)
Relative age and experience.
[mo' snip]
saw Def Jams "How to be a Player" last night; I howled.
>In my experience this takes more than one night. Your mileage may vary,
>I guess.
>
>But by definition I wouldn't call any woman who "melts" on the first night
>an "ice queen." Maybe a Dairy Whip.
Or if she's dairy allergic, "cool whip."
[different snip same day]
>> > Before we can conclude anything about "a large framed woman with a
>> > BMI of 18" we'd need to see a representative set of photos. John,
>> > do you have any photographic examples of a large framed woman who
>> > looks ickier at BMI=18 than she does at BMI=21?
>>
>> Large framed women have to weigh more due to the fact their bone
>> structure is bigger.
>
>How much more? I want a number.
Depending on which frame a person has there is about 11-12 pound
difference between each frame size (I'm using the 1959 Met chart)
http://www.coping.org/balanced/strategies/Weight%20Charts.doc.
I can weigh 11 pounds more than someone with medium frame and
"appear" the same because frame is lean-body mass.
>
>> This is not an excuse for BMI>40, mind you,
>> but some women's healthy weights might put them as high as BMI 23-25,
>
>We're not talking about maximum healthy weight, we are talking about
>ideally attractive weight.
>
>John says there are women who look "icky" at BMI=18. I want to see
>some photographic evidence, not a bunch of handwaving arguments.
>
When I get back from the wedding and can play hunt in storage,
I'll find a picture of the anorexic me. I weighed 103 at 5'4"
(which according to the CDC for a 17-18 year old placed me in the
5th centile of weight); I'm large framed and according to the same
1959 charts means my "healthy" weight is 126-143 pounds. I was
23 pounds underweight. To have a BMI of 18 at 5'5", I need to
weigh 108, which is 22 pounds less than the minimum weight for
a large framed woman at 5'5" [130-147]. The minimum BMI is 21 2/3.
The CDC Graph is:
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/about/major/nhanes/growthcharts/set1/chart16.pdf
What is interesting to note, is that most models, porn stars, etc
are small or at worst medium framed.
Alli
--
[02/02/02 - Viva Las Vegas - less than *9* days to go]
"It is a toss-up as to which are finally the most exasperating--the
dull people who never talk, or the bright people who never listen."
-- Sidney Harris
The Danimal
Those photos are irrelevant to my question to John.
Getting fatter isn't going to make a woman look better in a corset.
The photos merely show (indeed, they make quite clear) that
corsetting is counterproductive if it compresses a woman's
waist to below the ideal 0.68 of her hip circumference.
-- the Danimal
Halcyon E
She is icky. Other girls on there are hot while others are
also icky in their own manner. However seeing a 60 something woman
in lingerie who is not my wife is unsettling.
Halcyon.
Brenda Lee
Here here.. and double here!!!
Yowsa....Did you see the one at the end that she is so proud of?
Cripes.. took a woman's natural hourglass shape and distorted it all out
of proportion. She has almost a perfect hour glass figure as it was.. I
wonder what her waist is when she slips out of that contraption for her
one hour a day?
I try but... as to why she thinks that looks good I could not tell you?
Always the last to know, I guess. That last one with the Santa outfit
on, I believe, looks downright grotesque (to me). Not to mention that it
bubbles out her lower body now because of the extreme difference from
breast to waist to hip.
Smiles
BrendaLee
>
> -- the Danimal
The Danimal
>
> The Danimal wrote:
> >
> > "la n." wrote:
> > >
> > > The Danimal <dNmOcS...@NmOfSmP.cAoMm> wrote in message
> > > news:3C4F12D4...@NmOfSmP.cAoMm...
> > > >
> > > > John says there are women who look "icky" at BMI=18. I want to see
> > > > some photographic evidence, not a bunch of handwaving arguments.
> > > >
> > >
> > > http://www.staylace.com/pinups/spook/
> >
> > Those photos are irrelevant to my question to John.
> > Getting fatter isn't going to make a woman look better in a corset.
> > The photos merely show (indeed, they make quite clear) that
> > corsetting is counterproductive if it compresses a woman's
> > waist to below the ideal 0.68 of her hip circumference.
>
> Here here.. and double here!!!
If I'm not mistaken the idiom is "Hear, hear."
> Yowsa....Did you see the one at the end that she is so proud of?
> Cripes.. took a woman's natural hourglass shape and distorted it all out
> of proportion. She has almost a perfect hour glass figure as it was.. I
> wonder what her waist is when she slips out of that contraption for her
> one hour a day?
>
> I try but... as to why she thinks that looks good I could not tell you?
I have a theory that most people are not born with a good understanding
of what members of the opposite sex find most attractive. (In part this
may be nature's way of giving most of us enough false hope to keep on
living.)
For example, I can't begin to see what women find attractive about
Russell Crowe. He's the last guy I'd pick out of a lineup as being
as wildly attractive to women as he is. From what I understand, it's
not just his fame. Apparently he has some ability to knock over
female celebrities who are among the hardest of all targets.
In any case, the woman in the URL above says her boyfriend pushed her
into corsetting. So apparently he has some weird fetish. That's not
so unusual; it's common for behavioral defects to take the form of
some normal behavior pushed to an extreme.
Given that human females have smaller waists than gorilla females,
it's possible that humans are evolving in the direction of smaller
waists still. A species does not evolve with all individuals in
lockstep. Instead, there will be a distribution of traits, with some
ahead of the curve and others behind it.
> Always the last to know, I guess. That last one with the Santa outfit
> on, I believe, looks downright grotesque (to me).
And to me as well. However, the photos are interesting in that they
show how vitally important a woman's waist:hip ratio is. Significant
deviations in either direction from the 0.68 ideal are an immediate
turnoff for me. Since in real life I never see women who have much
smaller than ideal waists, the photos explore a direction of deviation
I would otherwise never see.
Note that if the woman in the photo was as far off in the opposite
direction (i.e., a waist measurement 8 to 10 inches above ideal
for her size, giving her a cylindrical torso with no defined waist
at all) it would be about as much of a turnoff for most men.
-- the Danimal
The Danimal
> Subject: Re: towards a useful smv metric
> View: Complete Thread (34 articles) | Original Format
> Date: 2002-01-29 10:59:09 PST
>
> danimal wrote:
> > m.c.scanners (scan...@ephemerol.org) wrote:
> > > john s. wrote:
> > > > In soc.singles doctor love <allaboo...@ejack.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > #1 problem...the function generated is not continuous.
> > >
> > > digital never is.
> > >
> > > > Incrementally
> > > > adding age or weight causes the predicted SMV to shift by large
> > > > amounts.
> > >
> > > so your objection is more to the sampling rate not the digitization.
> >
> > Easily solved by interpolation.
>
There are very few self-taught mathematicians.
> > > > Like for instance, a certain someone's birthday is right
> > > > around the corner...does that mean her SMV shifts 5 points that
> > > > day? No....
> > >
> > > that's when the quiz takes account of the cumulative depreciation over
> > > the past year.
> >
> > Measure age in days and there's no problem. The SMV change per
> > day is small enough not to create jumps every midnight.
>
> that'd be a good addition to a web calculator - pop in birthdate and
> bada bing bada bing bang boom.
> but i'm not gonna write it.
>
> > Any SMV number you estimate with this scale has to have big error
> > bars anyway.
>
> true.
That's why there's no point in trying to calculate with accuracy. So
John's objections vanish.
> > You probably can't come up with an SMV scale having
> > more than one digit of precision. Which is to say, your estimate
> > might be able to classify someone into one of ten possible levels
> > of SMV, and maybe your estimate would hold up well compared to
> > the results of panel voting. But I'd guess that any simple formula
> > would be lucky to classify people into five levels of SMV compared
> > to panel voting.
>
> on soc.singles that is sufficient.
>
> > > > And its harder to integrate a non-continuous function.
> >
> > Not for a computer.
>
> who's gonna program it? you?
I've programmed recreationally before, but usually it's with some
meaningful goal in mind, and always I had a solid algorithm to
start with. In the case of SMV estimation I think to justify a program
someone would have to do some serious research first.
I think it would be extremely useful to have a highly accurate SMV
calculator. It would reveal, for example, the exact damage being
done by gluttony while the damage was occurring. An SMV calculator
would also enable people to settle more efficiently. I.e., instead
of clinging to notions that they deserve better than they do only to
be beaten down by harsh experience people could start right off
homing in on partners appropriate for them. If people came to accept
the SMV estimate as a potent requirement for relationship success then
it might become easier to meet potential partners simply by
advertising one's SMV estimate to people who would know to be
looking for it.
It would also be nice to be able to calculate the improvements
possible with various strategies (getting richer, buying a car,
buying a particular type of car, learning to play an instrument,
getting cosmetic surgery, buying a monk's toupee, etc.). To compute
the benefits of any SMV-boosting scheme it's necessary to determine
where a person stands at present with respect to all other relevant
factors. I've seen before/after photos of cosmetic surgery participants
that made me ask "what's the point?" --- for example when a fat dumpy
wrinkly old woman gets liposuction on one small problem area. Addressing
a large-scale disaster requires more than an incremental improvement if
it is to register on the dickmeter.
Aside from the obvious case of a young obese person getting down to ideal
weight there probably aren't too many attainable strategies that could
boost a person's SMV enough to show up within the resolution of an
SMV calculator (i.e., up to the next of five total categories).
> > > > (Math weenies...what is the integral of SMV over time...some sort
> > > > of visual pleasure over time index i.e. integral barbara eden's
> > > > smv over time = high. integral of farrah fawcett's smv over time
> > > > = much lower.
> > >
> > > no amount of lost value can add to present value, except indirectly. (if
> > > original value was extremely high it can leave more even after serious
> > > losses, but once it hits zero it's still worthless.
> > > or:
> > > if you marry racquel welch today you won't be fucking her old poster.)
> >
> > The integral of SMV over time going forward is the measure
> > of a person's desirability as a long-term relationship partner.
>
> or:
>
> extinction is defined as the point by which a woman is sexually
> worthless to most men.
>
> age years to extinction
> __________
> 18 32
> 19 31
> 20 30 the best
> 21 29 years of
> 22 28 her life
> 23 27
> 24 26
> 25 25 __________
> 26 24
> 27 23
> 28 22
> 29 21
> 30 20 - if you're
> 31 19 not married
> 32 18 by now time <- advice for chicks
> 33 17 to start
> 34 16 worrying
> 35 15
> 36 14
> 37 13
> 38 12
> 39 11
> 40 10 - do panic <- more helpful advice
Your advice has such a calming effect.
> 41 9
> 42 8
> 43 7
> 44 6
> 45 5
> 46 4 going...
> 47 3
> 48 2 going...
> 49 1
> 50 0 gone
The sexual event horizon.
> > The integral of SMV over time going backward is obviously less
> > relevant to the present, but who knows? Jackie, you might prefer
> > a slightly-over-the-hill porn star to a woman of equal attractiveness
> > who had never been attractive enough to sell her body for a premium.
> > If nothing else you'd have useful bragging rights on Usenet, where
> > the people you like to twit would have an easier time looking up
> > the porn star's former glory than verifying her present state.
>
> anything i say in that regard would be unfalsifiable.
> and i intend to keep it that way.
Well, maybe you could brag to your drinking buddies when you become
an old fart. Old men have nothing but the past to comfort them anyway,
along with drinking, so bagging an over-the-hill porn star might mean
something.
> > Small comfort to Vlad, I know.
>
> ha haaaw!
>
> man, his fucking fate would be enough to make me believe in karma if it
> weren't for the billions of counter-examples.
> heh
For some odd reason the counterexamples don't seem to congregate here.
> > > > : female smv:
> > > > : age - for each year below 25 add 5 points. for each year over 25
> > > > : subtract 1 point. then for each year over 30 subtract 5 points. then
> > > > : for each year over 45 subtract 10 points.
> > > >
> > > > #2 - there needs to be an "apparent" age. Last night I saw
> > > > Barbara Eden on TV. She is very old, yet still quite hot.
> > > > She looks 20 years younger than she is.
> > >
> > > i doubt that would hold up in person. but even if it did the exceptions do
> > > not make the rules. every fifty year old woman i have ever met has been
> > > sexually worthless. that is, i wouldn't have accepted a fuck from them if
> > > it had been offered.
> >
> > Jackie, what's the most turned on you've ever been by a woman over
> > the age of 40?
>
> enough to do her all night long.
Me too, but that doesn't fully answer my question. Let me rephrase:
Relative to the most turned on you've been by a woman under the
age of 30 what's the most turned on you've ever been by a woman
over the age of 40?
> > For example, have you ever met a woman older than 40
> > and had trouble thinking straight or breathing in her presence
> > because she was so hot?
>
> telling
I understand the subversive nature of my questions.
> > > as for apparent age, this can be a present time factor for those in the
> > > 30-40 year range but as the phrase 'hit the wall' indicates the effects
> > > can become manifest rapidly as they get older.
> >
> > When I saw "American Pie II" I thought Shannon Elizabeth looked
> > less impressive than I recalled from the first "American Pie."
> > Still-hot, but a little less mind-blowing.
>
> rumor has it she chopped quite a few years off her age.
Ah. If true, that would explain how she looks somewhat older in
the second film than one would expect for an actress still in her
early 20's.
All-Movie Guide lists her birth date as Sept. 7, 1976.
> > I recall Natasha Henstridge looking mind-blowingly hot in "Species"
> > but not really all that special in "The Whole Nine Yards," certainly
> > not in contrast to Amanda Peet in that second film.
>
> other than natasha and amanda is it worth watching?
That's a pretty big "other than." Amanda Peet is not only one of
the world's most beautiful women at the moment but she does a
decent nude scene by mainstream movie standards. It
was pleasantly surprising. Amanda's star has risen since then so
she's unlikely to do many more. While I approve of the informal
Hollywood custom that a rising actress must pay her dues by shedding
her clothes I object to the offensive notion that her nudity must
be merely a means to some """higher""" end. I.e., once she has earned
"""credibility""" as an actress she gets to keep her clothes on.
What illogic is that? I think that flawed concept partially explains
the revolving door that puts a lot of actresses out to pasture
even before they hit the wall. If she stops getting naked she
squanders close to 50% of her box-office appeal. (Half the audience
is probably men, and most of them would just as soon see the hot
chicks on the screen getting naked even if it has nothing to do with
the vitally important plot---which of course is what really draws
people to movies...NOT.)
As far as the rest of the film goes, it was OK. Not worth a
$10 first run ticket, but decent enough for a second run or
DVD rental. Amanda Peet pretty much makes the movie even apart
from taking her clothes off, since she's the focus of the main
plot twist.
> > That was only six
> > years later and Natasha is not near the wall yet, but unless the
> > apparent decline was an artifact of filming I'd say she's slipped
> > considerably.
>
> every hour wounds...
I recommend clean living.
> > > the sexual worthlessness
> > > of all fifty year olds indicates that no matter how good a 45 year old
> >
> > Do you know any 45 year old woman who looks good right now, in the sense
> > that she could blend with a group of 25 year old women and you would
> > be as likely to gaze longingly at the 45 year old woman?
>
> no.
Me neither. I doubt the chanby does either but we won't be getting
an honest admission from him.
> > I don't know any 45 year old woman who can compete visually with
> > good-looking 25 year old women, let alone be mistaken for one.
>
> the keyword being 'good looking.'
I had to specify that to exclude someone rigging an example
consisting of a set of young women whose weights are well above
the average for young women.
> with obesity totally out of control
True, but if you see a large group of young women at a club,
college, etc., it's unlikely for all of them to be obese. In
fact you'll see a lot of 18 to 25 year old women who are in
their ideal weight range.
In contrast if you checked out their mothers you would find
very few who are still in their ideal weight range.
The average adult who makes no conscious effort to control swillage
will gain a pound or two of fat per year, and by age 45 that's
enough to make a real difference.
> any woman who manages to stay pushed away from the table can, assuming she
> is afflicted with no other catastrophic defect, outcompete those who fail
> to exercise said bare minimum feeding control for quite some time.
True, but as you like to say life is not the special olympics.
About what fraction of men do you think can be fully satisfied
with a woman who is just better than the fatties?
Given that almost every man who can select from higher on the
desirability scale does so I strongly suspect that most of
those who can't feel they are missing something.
And unlike other deprivations which tend to remain hypothetical
(I don't see too many ocean-going yachts where I live, so I
don't get many reminders of my lack of one, for example; and
even if I did, humans did not evolve to naturally lust after
ocean-going yachts since the ancestral environment had none)
a man who doesn't have a stunningly attractive partner tends
to have this point pounded into his brain every time he goes
out in public.
In light of this phenomenon I understand why some male-dominated
societies choose to cover up their women. It's not fair to the
women, of course, and there's no point in covering up the ugly
ones.
> actually as far as i'm concerned the hags and the fatties are equals - i'd
> switch to paying for it before i'd do a member of either worthless cohort.
This goes without saying---but it's still fun to say.
> > > looks now within five years she'll be just another old hag. the smv metric
> > > takes this into account by severely discounting older women.
> > > as i noted before i take the future into account because this is a
> > > relationship-smv measure. if it were purely a one night stand measure
> > > personality would be much less of a factor, with only outright dick
> > > chopping psychos suffering a serious hit. and for that apparent age could
> > > be used. but it would have to be real life three-d up close stark raving
> > > nude apparent age, not tv apparent age.
> >
> > Actually for a one-night stand I'd say personality would be a critical
> > factor, as in how easy the woman is. You're not going to have a (consensual)
> > one night stand with an ice queen.
>
> by personality i mean the whole package, not that one mission critical
> factor.
In one night you can't learn much about the whole package.
But obviously that's not a requirement for sexual attraction. I'd
say most aspects of personality that are relevant to SMV
become apparent quickly, and that would make them relevant to
a one-night stand.
An exception might be if you met someone who was at the moment under
great stress, severely fatigued, or ill. Then you would not be
observing their average-case personality.
> > > and as i said, not one fifty year old woman has ever passed my dickmeter
> > > test in real life.
> >
> > And the minimum passing grade is well below the red-line maximum
> > possible score.
>
> define 'well below'
Suppose you are with a woman who is just attractive enough to earn
your minimum passing grade.
If you then got an opportunity to trade up to a woman who gets
your maximum score about how many nanoseconds would you need to
act?
You've already said:
1. There are some 40-something women you will do.
2. There is no 45-year-old woman who can hold your visual interest
while standing in a group of attractive 25-year-old women.
This suggests there is some spread between your standard of
minimum acceptability and the red-line maximum possible score.
> > Jackie, what's the oldest woman you've seen in real life who got
> > your maximum score? I don't think I've seen a woman past her late
> > 20's about whom I could say that.
>
> i've seen recent candid shots of halle berry that maxed out the meter and
> i believe she's 35.
I have a theory that some Hollywood beauties age better, at least
initially, because they are remarkably free from structural flaws.
Most women have structural flaws but you will tend to overlook minor
flaws on a woman who looks young. As soon as she starts showing even
a little age, however, the flaws really start to become more noticeable.
> in real life the threshold is closer to 30 which
> indicates that even candid shots may be hiding the first stages of halle's
> tragic decline.
It's somewhat ironic that the years necessary to build a box-office
following virtually guarantee that few actresses can stay at the top
of the pile for long. Only a few years ago Demi Moore was
getting paid $10 million per film. Where is she now?* Demi's years of
maximum box office power coincided with the last few years she could
hope to squeeze out before her SMV began sliding down the steepening
slope. In effect she had to spend the best years of her life building
to the point where she could cash in on the last few of them.
*All-Movie Guide says that Demi Moore was the producer of both
Austin Powers movies.
In this respect singers have an advantage. Britney Spears hit
the top of her career at the very beginning of her high-SMV plateau,
so she can fully exploit all of her best years.
> > > > : bmi - between 17.2-20.0 add 25 points. over 22 subtract 2 points for
> > > > : each 1 gained, over 25 subtract 5 points, and over 30 subtract 10
> > > > : points. below 16 subtract 10 points for each 1 lost. below 14 see a
> > > > : doctor.
> > > >
> > > > #3 I've never really bought this scale because the function was
> > > > derived from sources who gained from dishonesty.
> > >
> > > i got the baseline from the howard stern tv show. they have a scale
> > > hidden under the floor in the studio and they lure pornstars and
> > > strippers onto the scale. the most attractive women really are in the
> > > bmi 17-20 range.
> >
> > How many times can this trick work before the guests start to
> > catch on?
>
> it only fooled roger ebert once.
> but there's a seemingly endless supply of dimwitted pornstars and strippers
> who fall for it.
I wonder how much of this is staged.
> not to mention those like jenna jameson who willingly step onto the plate.
>
> > > * Height 5'4" Weight: 103 (1999), BMI: 17.71
> > >
> > > > It shouldn't
> > > > double penalty for having nice tits. It should in fact be a
> > > > plus, but in this case since tits are adipose flesh, there is
> > > > a hit for BMI without a corresponding increase for having really
> > > > nice tits.
> > >
> > > see above. no woman with a slender figure is going to fall outside
> > > the ideal range on account of her tits.
> >
> > Boobs are slightly less dense than water as you can see from the
> > lack of sag when a woman goes swimming topless. See how big a gallon
> > jug of water is; that's 8 pounds. A gallon's worth of boobs would be
> > an amazingly large pair on a slender woman.
>
> tit talk to the exclusion of all other factors is a sure sign of a fatty
> fucker (if the talker is male) or a fatty. (if female)
No doubt. It's rare to see natural D cups on a woman who isn't
carrying excess fat elsewhere. But it does happen occasionally.
> > Ideally, each of a woman's breasts should be about the size of her
> > brain (1100 cubic centimeters or so).
>
> just enough to tan her hide.
> but i digress.
>
> > (But not smarter---heh. We don't
> > want those things talking back when we talk to them.)
>
> 400 quatloos for the newcomer's toup!
>
> > > breast quality is not defined
> >
> > solely
> >
> > > by size but by shape.
> >
> > Some size is a necessary condition if there is to be any shape.
>
> true.
I think before shape is really an issue you've got to be talking
a B cup at least, although it is possible to get the saggy flapjack
look with A cups, even on some young women.
> > > this is beyond the
> > > ability of a simple quiz to determine. but perhaps there should be
> > > discounts for severe flatness
> >
> > I'd agree, and I'm not even primarily a boob man. Anything less than
> > an A cup gets depressing after a while.
>
> b to d is a nice range.
How many women with D cups have you met who also have small waists
and tight, well-shaped butts?
I can't remember the last time I saw, in real life, a women with D
cups and a great ass. That would really be something, though. A
woman with no trade-offs. I've seen women with D cups and OK butts,
but the best butts are almost always on women who can't claim a
B cup with a straight face.
> > > and excess size. i'll look into including
> > > that in a future edition.
> >
> > I think you should also downgrade for excessively large implants on
> > slender women. They look OK in clothes, which may be most of the
> > point, but naked they don't look anything like real breasts.
>
> that's why darling nikki beats jenna in the tokeman index.
Are you as puzzled as I am at the commercial success advantage
strippers and porn stars gain by getting outlandish, obviously
fake implants? I can't understand why an apparent majority of
men prefer that look.
> > > > #5 frame size is not considered and a large framed woman with a
> > > > BMI of 18 looks icky.
> > >
> > > what about at bmi 21? that's within the ideal range.
> >
> > Before we can conclude anything about "a large framed woman with a
> > BMI of 18" we'd need to see a representative set of photos. John,
> > do you have any photographic examples of a large framed woman who
> > looks ickier at BMI=18 than she does at BMI=21?
>
> with very few exceptions when women bitch that some other woman looks
> 'anorexic' the target of thier incessant meowmix is a hottie.
Facially, at least. You aren't going to find B cups on
Lara Flynn Boyle at her current weight.
Check out some of the fitness models in Muscle and Fitness. The latest
issue has some chick who is 5'11" and 145 pounds, with a bit of muscle.
She has the facial beauty of a mainstream model but she's probably
carrying 15 pounds more muscle than a runway model at her height
would have. She looks fantastic, better to my eye than she would
look if she were thinner. In fact it's hard for me to imagine what
a better-looking woman would look like. (Too bad the article lists
her favorite activities as being on the beach. Her skin will be
completely trashed by the time she's 35.)
Of course none of this has anything to do with the chunkass women at
BMI 25 and up.
> > > > At least health science scales take into
> > > > account frame dimensions, not just height as the independant
> > > > variable.
> > >
> > > the only weight standards i've seen that take frame into account are
> > > the met life charts. also keep in mind this is an smv measure based
> > > on the dickmeter. the only outstanding exception to the ideal bmi range
> > > i've seen was gabrielle reece and she'd only lose 2 points for her bmi of
> > > 23, a loss more than made up for by her many other fine qualities.
> >
> > But at 6'3" she's probably way too tall for most men in real life.
>
> if only because she sees the average man as a runt.
That too. But once I dated a woman who was taller than me and I
found it kind of weird.
> > With that much height I think her BMI would be more of a real-life
> > problem than it would be on a shorter athletic woman.
>
> i concede there may be a real life freak factor.
Have you ever dated a woman who was more than 2" taller than you?
> > In her prime,
> > however, Gabrielle Reece certainly had outstanding facial beauty.
> > She's slipped a little in her 30's, and the thousands of hours she's
> > spent playing beach volleyball under the destructive nuclear radiation
> > of the sun could only have hastened her date with the wall.
>
> i wonder if she used a good sunblock?
She'd have needed gallons of it to withstand hours of sweating,
swimming, and activity on the beach. The best "waterproof" sunblocks
require frequent reapplication while you're sweating or swimming.
It's unlikely Gabrielle Reece could have packed enough sunblock
to see her through daily exposure to the southern California sun.
Even with SPF 40+ sunblock you will still get a tan if you stay out
in the intense midday low-latitude sun every day. Which means enough
solar carcinogenic radiation is getting through to inflict its damage.
In any case, it's likely that Gabrielle Reece went through the
typical teenaged behavior of getting intense sun exposure with little
or no protection. Most women don't decide to start protecting their
skin until the first signs of progressive sun damage become obvious,
and by then it's far too late.
> > > > #9 do and/or should brains count?
> > >
> > > brains are what i'd call a 'similarity factor' - if they're similar to
> > > your own they're a plus, if not, a minus. this goes in both directions.
> >
> > Not always. In my experience there are some women who seem to feel
> > attracted to men who are smarter than they are.
>
> i was thinking more of the relationship disrupting conflict when dating a
> really stupid girl. once she gets over the worship there is the small
> problem of having absolutely nothing to say to each other.
True, but how relevant is this to sexual *MARKET* value? Most of the
market doesn't know enough about the girl yet to perceive the downside
of having nothing to say to her. This is only a problem for the few
men who know her well.
I'm sure you've known stupid pretty girls who have no trouble getting
dates. Their undesirability as permanent relationship partners may
actually increase their value to the market, as they keep coming up
for grabs again and again, and they are likely to end up dating a
wider range of men than a smart pretty girl would (because she's such
a desirable partner for a long-term relationship, some high quality
guy is likely to lock her up early).
> > > but because they are relative they are useless for general smv evaluations
> > > of women. for men it can be a plus, but only so far as they increase power.
> >
> > I think brains can only increase power for men. What man do you know
> > who could increase his power by becoming stupider?
>
> you don't know the power of the drunk side...
I know the power of getting the girl drunk, but that's equivalent
to making the man *smarter*, relatively speaking.
> > The problem with brains is that they usually don't increase power much
> > until later in life, when a man has had enough time to establish himself
> > in some career where he can exploit his brains, and by then his SMV is falling
> > due to his physical decline.
>
> age - ain't it a bitch?
The bitchiest part is knowing that as yet I barely know the half.
When I think of everything I don't like about my life right now
and I know that it all promises to get *MUCH WORSE* as time goes
on---man, that's enough to send any weakling into denial.
Tell me more about the power of the drunk side. I may soon need it.
> > But if a man lacks brains, then his SMV falls
> > as fast as a woman's. (Think of some stupid second-string ex-pro-athlete who
> > failed to save any money. Unless he produced lasting fame or stays in top
> > condition what has he got? His SMV probably drops as fast as a fashion
> > model's as he ages.)
>
> the process probably starts five years later.
> unless he immediately porks out. and more than a few do.
> hello brock.
When I read Brock boasting of his dancing prowess, I think of that
fat guy in the movie Mafia! who was parodying Michael Flatley. The
fat guy was a pretty good dancer. I wonder if Brock dances with his
shirt off too?
> best,
> jackie 'anakin' tokeman
-- the Danimal