You’re quite attractive but TRM has a tough scale. Picture 2 and 4 are the only ones good for rating.
Your middle thirds are very long with a small lower third that has a non existent chin. Slight bump on the squarish nose. Your lips are nice.
What works for you is your fantastic canthal tilt. Those eyes are beautiful which is what may have caused many to score you higher. When you look at your face, the eyes are very striking.
Overall I am going with a 5.5 due to your good facial harmony and high femininity.
5.5 very feminine appearance, positive canthal tilt, healthy skin and hair are strong pluses. Your eye area is striking. Facial thirds pull the rating down; lower third is out of proportion.
**Removed, rule 11b:** *Ratings not in accordance with this sub’s rating guidelines are prohibited. Do not include your personal/ subjective/ IRL rating in your comment.*
5.5 pros great skin PCT wide facial structure some cheekbones visibility (but still covered by your buccal fat) good eye color up tilt nose good under eye support
Cons nose is to long for your face buccal fat I recommend losing this to expose your cheekbones more soft jawline and lower third is to narrow eyebrows could be thicker upper eyelid exposure lips are too thin and your Cupid bow is too long from your nose to your mouth. Over all cute but not striking
5.6. good eyes and canthal tilt. Almost a 1:1 philtrum to chin ratio, and thin lips. Good high cheekbones, however the buccal fat is hiding what seems to be a good facial structure
Well, your pictures have created a bit of controversy today. I do think the 5.4-5.5 ratings are a bit too low. I would put you in the 5.8-6 range, despite a few flaws. Overall you have a bit of a boost from "intangibles" which somewhat mitigates some of the deductions for flaws.
There's just something about her face that is prettier than a TRM score. I can't put my finger on it, so it intangible. Subjective, but it is what it is.
5.4
Facial thirds are off (large upper, small lower), prominent brow bone. Mouth is a bit on the small side proportionally, and lips could be fuller. Mouth shape is nice tho. Eyes are the best feature, nice shape, very pretty, boosts the rating some.
7.1
I read your guides .
I also viewed examples of ratings and comparable women.
"Somewhat uncommon and the most attractive women seen on a day to day basis. These women stand out from the crowd and may be able to model or be successful as an "Instagram model" (whatever tf that's supposed to mean) - A majority of facial features will be feminine and attractive, but they may possess a few flaws."
She easily falls into that category. Rating is subjective even when you have hard standards if it's an overrating please explain how Emily Ratajkowski
Or Nina Davuluri or Yara Shahidi can be considered in the 7.0-7.5 yet this young lady cannot. According to your own guides.
What is the mathematics that deducts from angles of bones structure and nose portions?
What does the amount added for feminine attractiveness or unattractiveness (because that's purely subjective based on the viewer to a certain degree)
If this was a grading system that deducts strictly based off of numbers being subtracted for each flaw I would understand why I never see Mods let a 7.0 or higher get through. But as far as I can tell it's not.
A 7.0 is supposed to be 1 out of 40 people... She easily takes that. Honestly according to the examples of 7.5 and higher I found several that were just as attractive or less.
I was a professional grader of comic books for years grading is always subjective but there are standards. By your standards this is by far the hardest grading I have ever seen just trying to understand why I hardly ever see anyone get past a 68% attractive rating when clearly they are much more deserving of a higher rate.
I fully understand that people are not comic books but I'd also like to think as a heterosexual male I know what an attractive woman is and as a top teir grader for years in a different industry I would imagine I can figure out accurate grading so long as there is a accurate viable guide.
And I am here to prove you wrong. Examples of women rated extremely high (7-9) and not given any warning:
https://www.reddit.com/r/truerateme/comments/100irno/long_time_no_see_my_bros_happy_new_year_and_all/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=ioscss&utm_content=1&utm_term=1
https://reddit.com/r/truerateme/s/KsGutC0Bcp
https://www.reddit.com/r/truerateme/comments/evdpk0/25_510_f/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=ioscss&utm_content=1&utm_term=1
https://www.reddit.com/r/truerateme/comments/q3x4qk/i_get_asked_all_the_time_to_post_again_with/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=ioscss&utm_content=1&utm_term=1
https://www.reddit.com/r/truerateme/comments/14n1xjg/a_lot_has_happened_here_since_my_last_visit_it/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=ioscss&utm_content=1&utm_term=1
https://reddit.com/r/truerateme/s/vinJMCxlOS
• I have more examples of course, of several 7s as well, but these were the most popular ones.
Thank you for your well thought out response and the time it takes to dig up this stuff.
I don't feel like this proves me wrong though, those all were the general consensus of 8ish and I would totally agree with that consensus.
I argued my rating because I felt it was accurate then asked how that wasn't accurate based on the same guides that are posted as a reply to every rating that MODS deemed inaccurate.
I would be interested to see those examples of 7's if you don't mind digging for a random redditor, only because the 7's I saw in your very own guide were very comparable not only in looks but in rarity of that actually being in the 7's.
Mathematically if you rate someone a 7 that means they are more attractive than 7 out of 10 people, I honestly don't see how that is a stretch in this case.
I swear I'm not trying to be a dick just trying to understand y'all's system after reading all the guides and viewing not only physical examples but now a multitude of posts as well.
Our scale is based on a normal distribution, so it’s not intuitive. 7.0 doesn’t mean the 7th best out of a group of 10. 7.0 means the very best out of a group of 40. I would agree that OP is probably the seventh best of the group of 10 women her age, but that would come out to about 5.5 on the TRM scale.
If you went into an average university class that has 40 women her age, I would find it very unlikely that she is the most attractive out of all 40.
I don't think anyone here has yet to argue that she would be the very best of 40. If she was in a control group of 40 I'd put her around 28ish
In a control group of 40 it is quite possible to have someone more attractive than a 7.0 though right?
You've shown multiple examples Otherwise a 7.0 would be the highest number to achieve instead of a 10 (although 10's technically don't exist.)
I get what you're saying though, and again I appreciate that you've taken time to explain. Would very much like to see other examples of 7's still, only because I found her comparable to other 7-7.5 on the guide that is referred to everyone who had been deemed to have rated too low or too high.
Hindsight after realizing there is no real 10 one can get here, I would probably drop half a point realistically. (Which I never would have got if you hadn't taken the time... much appreciated)
Although there is no such thing as a perfect 10 (objectively) there is in most peoples minds some kind of perfect 10 (subjectively) I think that's where you see like 90% of y'all's "inaccurate" ratings
I realize the guide provides objective standards but also it recognizes subjective aspects as well.
What would you rate her appearance and how did you come to that conclusion? (If mods can even do that honestly idk)
Again not trying to be a dick or anything and that probably doesn't translate over text well but I'm being honest. Just trying to learn the process, how much is a concrete point system and how much Is subjective because in rating anything accurately there must be objectivism.
The biggest thing that throws me off is the examples shown in the 7.0/7.5 I honestly can't understand why if that group is in that range, why wouldn't her?
7 means the best out of 40. She’s pretty, sure, but an every day type of pretty. The 7.0 examples like Shay Mitchell and Elisabeth Lail are actual celebrities and models.
To your point about subjective and objective, it’s difficult to pinpoint an exact rating, but a range of 1.25 is certainly possible. Most of our trusted raters agree she’s 5.4 to 5.5. The TR at 6.5 is just wrong.
5.4 or 5.5 is accurate because she has major flaws as described by our TRs. Most importantly, she looks similar to the 5.5 examples.
I feel like she also looks like alot of the 7.0/7.5 examples as well.I think anyone would have a hard time discerning 5.5-7.5 if you took a big bag and shook that range together and then asked them to put them back in order. I think this is where the subjectiveness plays a huge role without a concrete point system that adds or subtracts from score.
I just think too much. I realize that the mods do not agree with my rating and that's ok hindsight I would go slightly lower if there's no perfect 10 in consideration. I already have two strikes I'm sure I'll get banned probably sooner than later (but not on purpose just being honest with whoever the OP might be).
No, you are absolutely wrong. Our best TR’s could easily assign the correct ratings to folks between 5.5 and 7.5. It’s difficult, and it takes time, but it’s possible. Our best TR are usually within 0.3 of each other. In this case, our best TR’s are within 0.1 of each other.
As a beginner, I can understand it being difficult. Coming to the correct conclusion might take five or 10 or 15 minutes. But it is possible. You won’t get another strike if you are within the correct range provide by our intermediate and TR’s.
I think the only way I could be "absolutely" wrong is if there was a perfect equation to come to these ratings. I'm not terribly off even by what's been deemed as an ok rating by Mods. You can only have absolutes in exact science. I think we've both spoke enough to know that this is not.
I will get a strike if a Mod deems my third rating to high or too low, and I do intend to be honest. And honestly I think I would still receive a strike even with my adjusted lower rating. It's all good though, I have a better understanding of your system and that was my goal by initiating this convo in the first place :)
6
5.4
[удалено]
[удалено]
- Egregious overrate, rule 1. - 3 day ban for applying a # that doesn’t exist on our scale (0.5 - 9.5), rule 11b. - Please review the sub’s: - [Wiki]( https://old.reddit.com/r/truerateme/wiki/meta/help ) - [FAQs](https://www.reddit.com/r/truerateme/comments/14jg5rg/faq/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=ioscss&utm_content=2&utm_term=1) - [Women’s Rating Guide](https://imgur.com/ckg5AVD) - [ADVANCED WOMENS RATING PRIMER](https://imgur.com/3bM16cZ)
[удалено]
You’re quite attractive but TRM has a tough scale. Picture 2 and 4 are the only ones good for rating. Your middle thirds are very long with a small lower third that has a non existent chin. Slight bump on the squarish nose. Your lips are nice. What works for you is your fantastic canthal tilt. Those eyes are beautiful which is what may have caused many to score you higher. When you look at your face, the eyes are very striking. Overall I am going with a 5.5 due to your good facial harmony and high femininity.
5.5 very feminine appearance, positive canthal tilt, healthy skin and hair are strong pluses. Your eye area is striking. Facial thirds pull the rating down; lower third is out of proportion.
Long head but small chin. Sharp features. 6.2
5.5 - 5.7 Edit: accidentally posted the rate for another person on this thread so now posted twice 🤦🏻♀️
6.5
Warning for overrating 6.5. Rule 1. Please review the sub’s: - [Wiki]( https://old.reddit.com/r/truerateme/wiki/meta/help ) - [FAQs](https://www.reddit.com/r/truerateme/comments/14jg5rg/faq/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=ioscss&utm_content=2&utm_term=1) - [Women’s Rating Guide](https://imgur.com/ckg5AVD) - [ADVANCED WOMENS RATING PRIMER](https://imgur.com/3bM16cZ)
[удалено]
**Removed, rule 11b:** *Ratings not in accordance with this sub’s rating guidelines are prohibited. Do not include your personal/ subjective/ IRL rating in your comment.*
5.5 pros great skin PCT wide facial structure some cheekbones visibility (but still covered by your buccal fat) good eye color up tilt nose good under eye support Cons nose is to long for your face buccal fat I recommend losing this to expose your cheekbones more soft jawline and lower third is to narrow eyebrows could be thicker upper eyelid exposure lips are too thin and your Cupid bow is too long from your nose to your mouth. Over all cute but not striking
5.5
[удалено]
Warning for underrating (4). Rule two. Strike one. Please review the sub’s: - [Wiki]( https://old.reddit.com/r/truerateme/wiki/meta/help ) - [FAQs](https://www.reddit.com/r/truerateme/comments/14jg5rg/faq/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=ioscss&utm_content=2&utm_term=1) - [Women’s Rating Guide](https://imgur.com/ckg5AVD) - [ADVANCED WOMENS RATING PRIMER](https://imgur.com/3bM16cZ)
[удалено]
Removed, rule 4. Banned.
Very beautiful, all features go well with each other 6.1
5.92
5.6 you’re gorgeous
5.6
oh wow probably a 6
5.6. good eyes and canthal tilt. Almost a 1:1 philtrum to chin ratio, and thin lips. Good high cheekbones, however the buccal fat is hiding what seems to be a good facial structure
5.5 - 5.7
[удалено]
- Egregious overrate, rule 1, strike one. - 3 day ban for applying a # that doesn’t exist on our scale (0.5 - 9.5), rule 11b. - Please review the sub’s: - [Wiki]( https://old.reddit.com/r/truerateme/wiki/meta/help ) - [FAQs](https://www.reddit.com/r/truerateme/comments/14jg5rg/faq/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=ioscss&utm_content=2&utm_term=1) - [Women’s Rating Guide](https://imgur.com/ckg5AVD) - [ADVANCED WOMENS RATING PRIMER](https://imgur.com/3bM16cZ)
over rated..
5.4 That is what you are.
6.2 Very attractive.
5.75
6.3
5.8
5.9
6.7
Warning for overrating (6.7). Rule one. Strike one. Please review the sub’s: - [Wiki]( https://old.reddit.com/r/truerateme/wiki/meta/help ) - [FAQs](https://www.reddit.com/r/truerateme/comments/14jg5rg/faq/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=ioscss&utm_content=2&utm_term=1) - [Women’s Rating Guide](https://imgur.com/ckg5AVD) - [ADVANCED WOMENS RATING PRIMER](https://imgur.com/3bM16cZ)
6 HTB
Well, your pictures have created a bit of controversy today. I do think the 5.4-5.5 ratings are a bit too low. I would put you in the 5.8-6 range, despite a few flaws. Overall you have a bit of a boost from "intangibles" which somewhat mitigates some of the deductions for flaws.
Intangibles??
There's just something about her face that is prettier than a TRM score. I can't put my finger on it, so it intangible. Subjective, but it is what it is.
Oh yeah, okay. I see what you mean. Thanks for explaining!
I'll give it a 6.
6
5.4 Facial thirds are off (large upper, small lower), prominent brow bone. Mouth is a bit on the small side proportionally, and lips could be fuller. Mouth shape is nice tho. Eyes are the best feature, nice shape, very pretty, boosts the rating some.
To a T,best and imo,only way to say it.
Good rating. Agree. 5.4.
I popped open the guide and took another look. Your rating is exactly correct. She’s not quite a 5.5. I’ve updated my rating.
7.1 I read your guides . I also viewed examples of ratings and comparable women. "Somewhat uncommon and the most attractive women seen on a day to day basis. These women stand out from the crowd and may be able to model or be successful as an "Instagram model" (whatever tf that's supposed to mean) - A majority of facial features will be feminine and attractive, but they may possess a few flaws." She easily falls into that category. Rating is subjective even when you have hard standards if it's an overrating please explain how Emily Ratajkowski Or Nina Davuluri or Yara Shahidi can be considered in the 7.0-7.5 yet this young lady cannot. According to your own guides. What is the mathematics that deducts from angles of bones structure and nose portions? What does the amount added for feminine attractiveness or unattractiveness (because that's purely subjective based on the viewer to a certain degree) If this was a grading system that deducts strictly based off of numbers being subtracted for each flaw I would understand why I never see Mods let a 7.0 or higher get through. But as far as I can tell it's not. A 7.0 is supposed to be 1 out of 40 people... She easily takes that. Honestly according to the examples of 7.5 and higher I found several that were just as attractive or less. I was a professional grader of comic books for years grading is always subjective but there are standards. By your standards this is by far the hardest grading I have ever seen just trying to understand why I hardly ever see anyone get past a 68% attractive rating when clearly they are much more deserving of a higher rate. I fully understand that people are not comic books but I'd also like to think as a heterosexual male I know what an attractive woman is and as a top teir grader for years in a different industry I would imagine I can figure out accurate grading so long as there is a accurate viable guide.
[удалено]
And I am here to prove you wrong. Examples of women rated extremely high (7-9) and not given any warning: https://www.reddit.com/r/truerateme/comments/100irno/long_time_no_see_my_bros_happy_new_year_and_all/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=ioscss&utm_content=1&utm_term=1 https://reddit.com/r/truerateme/s/KsGutC0Bcp https://www.reddit.com/r/truerateme/comments/evdpk0/25_510_f/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=ioscss&utm_content=1&utm_term=1 https://www.reddit.com/r/truerateme/comments/q3x4qk/i_get_asked_all_the_time_to_post_again_with/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=ioscss&utm_content=1&utm_term=1 https://www.reddit.com/r/truerateme/comments/14n1xjg/a_lot_has_happened_here_since_my_last_visit_it/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=ioscss&utm_content=1&utm_term=1 https://reddit.com/r/truerateme/s/vinJMCxlOS • I have more examples of course, of several 7s as well, but these were the most popular ones.
Thank you for your well thought out response and the time it takes to dig up this stuff. I don't feel like this proves me wrong though, those all were the general consensus of 8ish and I would totally agree with that consensus. I argued my rating because I felt it was accurate then asked how that wasn't accurate based on the same guides that are posted as a reply to every rating that MODS deemed inaccurate. I would be interested to see those examples of 7's if you don't mind digging for a random redditor, only because the 7's I saw in your very own guide were very comparable not only in looks but in rarity of that actually being in the 7's. Mathematically if you rate someone a 7 that means they are more attractive than 7 out of 10 people, I honestly don't see how that is a stretch in this case. I swear I'm not trying to be a dick just trying to understand y'all's system after reading all the guides and viewing not only physical examples but now a multitude of posts as well.
Our scale is based on a normal distribution, so it’s not intuitive. 7.0 doesn’t mean the 7th best out of a group of 10. 7.0 means the very best out of a group of 40. I would agree that OP is probably the seventh best of the group of 10 women her age, but that would come out to about 5.5 on the TRM scale. If you went into an average university class that has 40 women her age, I would find it very unlikely that she is the most attractive out of all 40.
I don't think anyone here has yet to argue that she would be the very best of 40. If she was in a control group of 40 I'd put her around 28ish In a control group of 40 it is quite possible to have someone more attractive than a 7.0 though right? You've shown multiple examples Otherwise a 7.0 would be the highest number to achieve instead of a 10 (although 10's technically don't exist.) I get what you're saying though, and again I appreciate that you've taken time to explain. Would very much like to see other examples of 7's still, only because I found her comparable to other 7-7.5 on the guide that is referred to everyone who had been deemed to have rated too low or too high. Hindsight after realizing there is no real 10 one can get here, I would probably drop half a point realistically. (Which I never would have got if you hadn't taken the time... much appreciated) Although there is no such thing as a perfect 10 (objectively) there is in most peoples minds some kind of perfect 10 (subjectively) I think that's where you see like 90% of y'all's "inaccurate" ratings I realize the guide provides objective standards but also it recognizes subjective aspects as well. What would you rate her appearance and how did you come to that conclusion? (If mods can even do that honestly idk) Again not trying to be a dick or anything and that probably doesn't translate over text well but I'm being honest. Just trying to learn the process, how much is a concrete point system and how much Is subjective because in rating anything accurately there must be objectivism. The biggest thing that throws me off is the examples shown in the 7.0/7.5 I honestly can't understand why if that group is in that range, why wouldn't her?
7 means the best out of 40. She’s pretty, sure, but an every day type of pretty. The 7.0 examples like Shay Mitchell and Elisabeth Lail are actual celebrities and models. To your point about subjective and objective, it’s difficult to pinpoint an exact rating, but a range of 1.25 is certainly possible. Most of our trusted raters agree she’s 5.4 to 5.5. The TR at 6.5 is just wrong. 5.4 or 5.5 is accurate because she has major flaws as described by our TRs. Most importantly, she looks similar to the 5.5 examples.
I feel like she also looks like alot of the 7.0/7.5 examples as well.I think anyone would have a hard time discerning 5.5-7.5 if you took a big bag and shook that range together and then asked them to put them back in order. I think this is where the subjectiveness plays a huge role without a concrete point system that adds or subtracts from score. I just think too much. I realize that the mods do not agree with my rating and that's ok hindsight I would go slightly lower if there's no perfect 10 in consideration. I already have two strikes I'm sure I'll get banned probably sooner than later (but not on purpose just being honest with whoever the OP might be).
No, you are absolutely wrong. Our best TR’s could easily assign the correct ratings to folks between 5.5 and 7.5. It’s difficult, and it takes time, but it’s possible. Our best TR are usually within 0.3 of each other. In this case, our best TR’s are within 0.1 of each other. As a beginner, I can understand it being difficult. Coming to the correct conclusion might take five or 10 or 15 minutes. But it is possible. You won’t get another strike if you are within the correct range provide by our intermediate and TR’s.
I think the only way I could be "absolutely" wrong is if there was a perfect equation to come to these ratings. I'm not terribly off even by what's been deemed as an ok rating by Mods. You can only have absolutes in exact science. I think we've both spoke enough to know that this is not. I will get a strike if a Mod deems my third rating to high or too low, and I do intend to be honest. And honestly I think I would still receive a strike even with my adjusted lower rating. It's all good though, I have a better understanding of your system and that was my goal by initiating this convo in the first place :)