>>6591387>>6591390>>6591697>>the average woman is a 6/10>>fucking what? the average must by definition be 5/10, because how else would you define the numbers?Besides being a pompous douche bag, you're also about 7th grade in your math, social, and life skills.
* You're thinking of "median", not "average" (mean).
* The average can be literally *any* value between the low and high, inclusive. For example, If 5% of women are 1s, 5% are 2s, ... 5% are 9s, and the remaining 55% are 10s, then the average is 7.75/10. Or if all women are 1 out of a hypothetical 10, then the average is 1/10.
* The statement 6/10 is *clearly* an "intuitive assessment" and indicates that OP believes there is not a "normal" distribution of beauty among women and tends to find most women somewhat above *median* attractiveness.
>> what did he mean by this>> what is an "irregular woman"?>> are "regular women" typically ugly?* Regular is clearly not in contrast to "irregular". Besides the narrow definition of "even" or "symmetrical", another reasonable definition is "normal", as opposed to "exceptional."
* The 10/10 sort that you see oversampled among models and such would be considered "exceptionally" beautiful, rather than "regularly" (or "normally") beautiful.
>> is this similar to elevating "real women" over who are apparently "fake women"?No, this is appreciating a particular kind of beauty. It has a common name, "the girl next door" with a clear, commonly understood meaning in culture.
>> I'm confusedMaybe, but not about this. Your idiotic affectation matches the banality of your wit in the post.
I only even bothered responding because you're being cancer here and it's distasteful.
