RE: Another sex poll...4 or 9?
April 12, 2018 at 12:16 pm
(This post was last modified: April 12, 2018 at 12:23 pm by paulpablo.)
(April 12, 2018 at 11:25 am)mlmooney89 Wrote:(April 12, 2018 at 10:15 am)paulpablo Wrote: Weirdly I was talking to someone I know about the scale of 1 to 10 today, she's a lesbian, I'm pretty sure she knows I think she's good looking and we joke around about it but we were talking about other girls and their mark out of 10.
This is just how I work out the out of 10 scenario.
I don't think people go to extremes enough when considering the lower ranking, like 1 isn't just physically a bit ugly or not to your taste, 1 would be like the most physically deformed human on the planet. You only get into the area of any remote attraction at around a 7. In my estimation 6 is someone you'll sleep with for purely sexual needs if you're that type of person, 5 is getting to the area that I'd consider to be out of bounds unless I find myself in prison or something and this woman is a guard and I just need it.
Taking that into consideration, as harsh as it sounds, I would never begin to consider having sex with someone who I thought was 4 out of 10, that would be more like a punishment than a relief.
I could easily just have sex once a week, and the build up to it would be immense, and it's with a girl who's a 9, that sounds like a great deal to me, I'd sign up for that.
I dunno to me you have to put it even down the middle. 5 would be you don't really find them attractive but they aren't ugly either. Midway between 5 & 10 would be yes they are good looking. 10 is sexy as all get out. Going the other way midway between 1 & 5 is yeah that person is ugly. 1 being the wouldn't poke it with a stick. Since there are so few numbers on each side going up or down a number is a big deal. The difference between sleeping with a 7 & 8 is yeah that's cool and I'm totally wanting this.
For me there's either attractive or ugly, no middleground in women. I can't think of a female where I thought she wasn't ugly but not really attractive, that description would only fit a man. I can get a sense that a man is or isn't ugly, and when they're not ugly I don't think they're attractive, I just think hey I bet that guy gets more than his fair share.
But going along with the splitting down the middle thing, 4 would be the upper level of ugly. I'd still rather go for the 9.
(April 12, 2018 at 10:33 am)alpha male Wrote:(April 12, 2018 at 10:15 am)paulpablo Wrote: This is just how I work out the out of 10 scenario.
I don't think people go to extremes enough when considering the lower ranking, like 1 isn't just physically a bit ugly or not to your taste, 1 would be like the most physically deformed human on the planet. You only get into the area of any remote attraction at around a 7. In my estimation 6 is someone you'll sleep with for purely sexual needs if you're that type of person, 5 is getting to the area that I'd consider to be out of bounds unless I find myself in prison or something and this woman is a guard and I just need it.
Yeah, uh, maybe you're overthinking this a bit.
And talking about how much masturbation I'd do inbetween sex, probably once a night before I sleep which is pretty much what I do anyway when I'm getting no sex. Ontop of that I know games couples can play that involve no touching that I probably shouldn't go into because it's not area 69.
When it comes to the day of sex I'd just take breaks inbetween the session everytime I think I'm about to finish.
Are you ready for the fire? We are firemen. WE ARE FIREMEN! The heat doesn’t bother us. We live in the heat. We train in the heat. It tells us that we’re ready, we’re at home, we’re where we’re supposed to be. Flames don’t intimidate us. What do we do? We control the flame. We control them. We move the flames where we want to. And then we extinguish them.
Impersonation is treason.