No, why would anybody do or think such a thing? It’s not based on the bullshit measurement system of ‘attractiveness’ based on bullshit beauty standards.
It’s based on caring about other people. Though yes, we should have explained that better, we guess.
Please be more clear with that in the future, as your exclusion of “to me” came across as saying it was, or should have been, obvious to everyone or everymany. Thanks!
Beauty isn’t a constant, it’s a function of the person observing, the basic interest of both parties, eagerness for a relationship, and the respective sexualities:
Hypothetically, if someone’s more like a 5 and always on the verge of a meltdown… Like do I– do they get 50% care, love and understanding?
Nah, 5s get 100% too.
Okay, yay! 💙
No, why would anybody do or think such a thing? It’s not based on the bullshit measurement system of ‘attractiveness’ based on bullshit beauty standards.
It’s based on caring about other people. Though yes, we should have explained that better, we guess.
I was only kidding 😳
I don’t care for numeric scales of prettiness either.
Your joke was obvious, btw
Please don’t assume everyone or everymany can understand all jokes in text, thanks.
There’s a reason tone tags exist after all, as an accessibility tool for just this kind of situation.
I didn’t assume. I was telling them that to me it felt obvious.
Please be more clear with that in the future, as your exclusion of “to me” came across as saying it was, or should have been, obvious to everyone or everymany. Thanks!
Okay.
Hope you are doing well.
Beauty isn’t a constant, it’s a function of the person observing, the basic interest of both parties, eagerness for a relationship, and the respective sexualities:
B(O)=O*b_i*E*s