How 'Rating Women' destroys 'Inner Game'

[Johnny Soporno]

There's little I find more obnoxious and creepy these days than hearing someone describe another person with a numerical 'rank' - particularly if they are part of the 'Seduction (a.k.a. Pick Up) Community' in which case, they prepend the letters 'HB' to standings above 7 (for 'Hot Babe') or 'UG' ('Ugly Girl') below 7.

RATING WOMEN (or men, actually) IS DEHUMANIZING and serves NO PURPOSE!

Instead, I recommend what I call 'The Obvious Method'

I believe this is the NORMAL, NATURAL, and AUTOMATIC 'attractiveness' scale which is used in all first-world societies, regardless of gender/sexual preference.

I believe that fundamentally, the TRUE rating-system which normal men and women both use is a four level scale, from zero-to-three.

0 - I WOULDN'T fcuk 'em.
1 - I COULD fcuk 'em...
2 - I'D LIKE to fcuk 'em!
3 - They wouldn't fcuk me.

This is very elegant in that it requires no external guidelines for definition, needn't be vocalized, and is, of course, completely subjective. In fact, it's pretty-much ingrained into everyone from adolescence.

HOWEVER, once you reach a certain-level of experience in life's Game, and you TRULY establish yourself as a Worthy Playboy or Playgirl, you'll realize that there is NO SUCH THING as a category of people who are unattainable.

Oh, there are specific individuals who won't hook up with you, but they might come from the 0 category as readily as the 3's.

So we can, and will, entirely drop the notion of 3's - WHOOMP! Gone.

Now there are only three levels...

Much simpler!

Of course, by the time you've reached THAT level, you've also eliminated all memory of 'sexual desperation' - It's so far in your past, you can't even imagine being hard-up for sexual company, or needing to settle for something less than delightful! In fact, you'd much rather sleep alone that go to bed with someone you're not attracted to....

SO we can entirely eliminate the notion of 1's, and there there were two.

VERY simple now, with only two options: Yes or No...

I WOULDN'T fcuk 'em
I'D LIKE to fcuk 'em

NOW - sometimes a perfect YES will instant drop to an absolute NO within seconds of meeting them...

For example:
Across the room, this one is STUNNING, dressed to kill, perfect lips, great body, bedroom eyes... and you make your approach, and she enthusiastically responds with:
"I'm SO glad you're here, all night long nothing but fcukin' [severly offensive racial slur here] have been hitting on me all night! Like I'd EVEN TALK TO ONE OF THEM!"

And (for most of us anyway, I should hope) this immediately flips the switch, dropping them to a ZERO and we recoil!

Damn shame... but instead of thinking
"Wow, that was an HB9.5! I can be a hypocrite and compromise myself for a 9.5!"
- you see them for what they TRULY are - a zero. NEXT!

There are a limitless number of things which can cause a YES to become a NO - sometime immediately obvious, sometimes insidious, but IF the rating changes, it's time to walk away.

That said, there's also often something which justifies a transition from a NO to a YES! - Because as mature Players, you no-longer need to be bothered with the concept of WHAT OTHER PEOPLE THINK of your playmates... You go to bed with people who turn you on & make you happy and proud to be with them, not because your friends, or even more banally, TOTAL STRANGERS will envy you.

The essence of a 'Worthiness' denies the need for external validation. It is pivotal to establishing the "Worthiness" that they have fully-developed Inner-Game (ie, A Satisfied Sense-of-Self).

Maybe the person in question has changed externally - lost weight, had cosmetic surgery, spend months in the gym, whatever... maybe the person has change internally, recanted from her previous psychotic or otherwise unattractive mindset, and become someone you can enjoy... or maybe YOU have changed and you've become more interested in her and her bodyshape matters less than it did before... but IF that switch changes, GO FOR IT.

No one else has ANYTHING to say about whether the object of your affections is 'hot enough' for you...

Q: "Why are fat chicks like Mopeds?"
A: "Because they're fun to ride on as long as nobody you know sees you!"

Now, at THIS level of Game, you'd NEVER worry about how you'd look in other's eyes - you just do what makes sense and feels right TO YOU - no regrets!

It's YOUR LIFE, and YOUR HAPPINESS, and if you're too weak to follow-up a YES because other people might decide she's a NO, you're an idiot. Right? And NO Worthy Playboy would EVER look down his nose at someone who's HAPPY - 'cuz nothing else matters - THEY'RE WINNING THE GAME IF THEY ARE HAPPY!

Now, I'd like to remind you all, I'm NOT suggesting that you start dating people who don't turn you on - not by any means. There's no happiness in THAT at all.

What I'm ACTUALLY saying is that there's ACTUALLY a very distinct division between someone you wouldn't go to bed with, and someone you'd like to go to bed with, and ONLY YOU can decide on which side any particular person exists.

Good Luck! And may you find endless happiness with countless subjectively-beautiful playmates!

Johnny Soporno
Worthy Playboy

[Scorpio]

Can you please edit and re-post this so it's not formatted like an obnoxious e-book sales letter?

It totally cheapens and distracts from your message. As it stands now I won't even read it.

-No giant font
-No bolded, capitalized, underlined, colored, or 'quoted' words.
-No one sentence paragraphs.
-No excited, breathless phrasing!!!!

[seeker5]

Hey, that's a great post. I've never liked the 1-10 beauty rating business myself, and it does seem so fake, so ugh and disgusting.

I really like the rating you've come up, although I'd prefer to use different words myself then the exact words you've used.

I agree with Scorpio, though that your formatting is a huge turn-off to reading your posts, and I personally feel it's more suited for a website, not for a forum intended for smart people.

[jaamkie]

I'm more mystified by "ratings" than anything else. Maybe it's a woman-thing, but meeting new people, either we connect or don't, and either I feel equivalent-enough, or that it's an unequal teacher/student older/younger richer/poorer dynamic. Assuming no other commitments/reasons-why-not, I'll sleep with anyone I feel I connect with, I'm willing to be the teacher/provider or the innocent pet in a friendship, but I'll only get in a relationship with someone I feel relatively equal to. Of course for me "hotness" is a fairly minor component in my appraisal of men, the overwhelming factors are intelligence, kindness, and unselfconscioussness, so maybe numbers only naturally apply to physical appearance?

[Johnny Soporno]

Originally Posted by Scorpio

Can you please edit and re-post this so it's not formatted like an obnoxious e-book sales letter?

Yes, I'll do that for you in a parallel thread. I'll pay careful attention to see how many people respond to it, so I know whether the craftsmanship I put into the emphasis was superfluous.

Originally Posted by Scorpio

It totally cheapens and distracts from your message. As it stands now I won't even read it.

Scorpio, HOW COULD YOU TELL if it cheapens the message, since you didn't read it?

Johnny Soporno
Worthy Playboy

[Rose of Cairo]

I like the formatting of Johnny's post. When I first saw one of his posts, I thought "Ugh! Wtf is that?!". But I was biased against him because I thought he's yet another one of those PUAs that I can't stand.

Now I like this way of formatting. I think it's part of his message, it's just a particularly expressive way of writing. It's definitely less boring than just a huge wall of uniform text.

Yes, we all use the standard formatting, but this doesn't mean that everybody has to conform to it. Aren't we here to learn to make our own decisions?

Hehe, I'm totally in Johnny's corner now, I'm so thankful for this great post. Thank you Johnny.

[Johnny Soporno]

There's little I find more obnoxious and creepy these days than hearing someone describe another person with a numerical 'rank' - particularly if they are part of the 'Seduction (a.k.a. Pick Up) Community' in which case, they prepend the letters 'HB' to standings above 7 (for 'Hot Babe') or 'UG' ('Ugly Girl') below 7.

RATING WOMEN (or men, actually) IS DEHUMANIZING and serves NO PURPOSE!
Instead, I recommend what I call 'The Obvious Method'

I believe this is the NORMAL, NATURAL, and AUTOMATIC 'attractiveness' scale which is used in all first-world societies, regardless of gender/sexual preference.

I believe that fundamentally, the TRUE rating-system which normal men and women BOTH use begins as a four level scale, from zero-to-three.

0 - I WOULDN'T fcuk 'em.
1 - I COULD fcuk 'em...
2 - I'D LIKE to fcuk 'em!
3 - They wouldn't fcuk me.


This is very elegant in that it requires NO external guidelines for definition, needn't be vocalized, and is, of course, completely subjective.
In fact, it's pretty-much ingrained into everyone from adolescence.HOWEVER, once you reach a certain-level of experience in life's Game, and have TRULY established yourself as a Worthy Playboy/Playgirl, you realize that there is NO SUCH THING as a category of people who are unattainable. Oh, there are specific individuals who won't hook up with you, but they might come from the 0 category as readily as the 3's.

So at that point we can, and will, entirely drop the notion of 3's - WHOOMP! Gone.

Now there are only three levels...

Much easier

Of course, by the time you've reached THAT level, you've also eliminated all memory of 'sexual desperation' - It's so far in your past, you can't even imagine being hard-up for sexual company, or needing to settle for something less than delightful. In fact, you'd much rather sleep alone that go to bed with someone you're not attracted to....

SO we can entirely eliminate the notion of 1's, and there there were two.

VERY simple now, with only two options: YES or NO...

NO - I WOULDN'T fcuk 'em
YES - I'D LIKE to fcuk 'em

NOW - sometimes a perfect YES will instant drop to an absolute NO within seconds of meeting them...

For example:
Across the room, this one is STUNNING, dressed to kill, perfect lips, great body, bedroom eyes... and you make your approach, and she enthusiastically responds with:
"I'm SO glad you're here, all night long nothing but ****in' [severely offensive racial slur here] have been hitting on me all night! Like I'd EVEN TALK TO ONE OF THEM!"

And (for most of us anyway, I should hope) she immediately throws the switch, drops to a ZERO and we recoil. Damn shame... but instead of thinking "Wow, that was an HB9.5! I can be a hypocrite, and compromise myself for a 9.5!" you see her for what she TRULY is - a zero. NEXT!

There are a limitless number of things which can cause a YES to become a NO - sometime immediately obvious, sometimes insidious, but IF the rating changes, it's time to walk away!

That said, there's also often something which justifies a transition from a NO to a YES! - Because as mature Players, you no-longer need to be bothered with the concept of WHAT OTHER PEOPLE THINK of your playmates...You go to bed with people who turn you on & make you happy and proud to be with them, not because other guys will envy you.

The Essence of a Worthy Playboy denies the need for external validation. It is pivotal to establishing the "Worthiness" that they have fully-developed Inner-Game (ie, A Satisfied Sense-of-Self).

Maybe the person in question has changed externally - lost weight, had cosmetic surgery, spend months in the gym, whatever... maybe the person has change internally, recanted from her previous psychotic or otherwise unattractive mindset, and become someone you can enjoy... or maybe YOU have changed and you've become more interested in her and her body-shape matters less than it did before... but IF that switch changes, GO FOR IT.

No one else has ANYTHING to say about whether the object of your affections is 'hot enough' for you...

Q: "Why are fat chicks like Mopeds?"
A: "Because they're fun to ride on as long as nobody you know sees you!"

Now, at THIS level of The Game, you'd NEVER worry about how you'd look in other's eyes - you just do what makes sense and feels right TO YOU - no regrets!

It's YOUR LIFE, and YOUR HAPPINESS, and if you're too weak to follow-up a YES because other people might decide she's a NO, you're an idiot. Right?
...And NO Worthy Playboy would EVER look down his nose at someone who's HAPPY - 'cuz nothing else matters:
THEY'RE WINNING THE GAME IF THEY ARE HAPPY!

Now, I'd like to remind you all, I'm NOT suggesting that you start dating women who don't turn you on - not by any means. There's no happiness in THAT at all.

What I'm ACTUALLY saying is that there's ACTUALLY a very distinct division between someone you wouldn't go to bed with, and someone you'd like to go to bed with, and ONLY YOU can decide on which side any particular person exists.

Good Luck! And may you find endless happiness with many subjectively-beautiful playmates!

Johnny Soporno
Worthy Playboy

[MidasGirl]

0 - I WOULDN'T fcuk 'em.
1 - I COULD fcuk 'em...
2 - I'D LIKE to fcuk 'em!
3 - They wouldn't fcuk me.

I like this. We women have the same rating for men too, we just seem to know it naturally though. Nobody taught us, it's natural. Why is it men have to be told everything?

In fact I think we make this distinction within the first 30 seconds of meeting a guy. Though I'm not sure I've ever rated anyone in category 3. Maybe Brad Pitt but I'm still working on it.

[seeker5]

Hey Johnny, I liked this formatting. Went through your post again and I enjoyed it more, and it was easier to re-read it holistically then the other type of formatting.

[Scorpio]

Originally Posted by Johnny Soporno

Scorpio, HOW COULD YOU TELL if it cheapens the message, since you didn't read it?

Like I said, because the formatting makes the post look like a cheesy, hype-laden, over-the-top sales letter.

I can't help it, I'm instinctively turned off by any message presented this way. And it makes me automatically assume you're just here to sell something and you're cutting and pasting your email newsletters into forum posts, or something like that.

Also, I find the 'sales letter' phrasing irritating to read, it's not just the way it looks.

[Daffy Duck]

Different strokes, I guess. I generally don't like the "sales letter" writing style but I think it works well for Johnny's posts.

Anyway, interesting post Johnny!

[Johnny Soporno]

Originally Posted by Scorpio

Like I said, because the formatting makes the post look like a cheesy, hype-laden, over-the-top sales letter.

Ok. I reposted it into its own thread thusly: How 'Rating Women' destroys 'Inner Game'

...but the moderators conjoined the two threads (destroying my marketing research!) so now it's here in this thread - so feel free to read it and see if you get value from it.

Johnny Soporno
Worthy Playboy

[Sanity Panda]

The first formatting suits you. The voices come across much more than in the second one.

[SomeRandomGuy]

I also found myself not wanting to read the posts that were formatted with large fonts, different color fonts, bolding, etc. I have pushed past that and read some of the posts, and found that I did agree with some of the material. I suppose you can put me in the camp of those for who the format of the posts make an immediate negative impact on perception.