Friday, 29 June 2007
-
Currently Listening
Self 1
By The Mountain Brothers
see relatedRIDICULOUS
The other day I met an absolutely gorgeous woman at work. She was so nice to look at that the thought of her literally left me dumbfounded all day. Later on that night I told my friend about her and the only thing that I could say was, “Oh my God, she was just so… fine.” My friend laughed at me for using the word “fine” because no one has used that word in over 10 years to describe attractive people. I was fully conscious of the fact that the word of choice nowadays is “hot”, but I felt that “hot” didn’t serve justice to exactly how gorgeous this girl was. “Fine” was a far more appropriate term, and I felt somewhat liberated when I used it to describe her.
In any case, I decided to officially bring back the term “fine” to our vernacular, and, to ensure proper usage of the word, I devised a scheme that incorporates various adjectives into the attractive scale of 1-10.
1.0 – 3.0: These women are known as “fugs”. This is a play off the word “fugly”, which is short for “f***ing ugly”. An example would be, “Kirsten Dunst is a fug.”
3.1 – 4.9: Below average.
5.0: Average.
5.1 – 7.0: Above average.
7.1 – 7.5: These women are “foxy”. They are undeniably pretty, but they’re not stunningly gorgeous. They’re pretty in a “cute” sense. Drew Barrymore and Kate Hudson are archetype “foxy” chicks.
7.6 – 8.5: These women are “hot”. In addition to being “foxy”, they also have rocking hard bodies to go along with their pretty faces. These women tend to be short, young, and kind of stupid. Lindsay Lohan is “hot”.
8.6 – 9.5: These women are “fine”. They tend to be taller, older, and more sophisticated than “hot”. Angelina Jolie, Jennifer Aniston, and Jessica Alba are “fine”.
9.6 – 10.0: These women are so beautiful that they’re “ridiculous”. I know of only two women in the world who I could categorize as “ridiculous”: Kate Beckinsale and Sarah (the girl I love). The word is used exactly how you think it would be used: “Sarah, you are soooooo ridiculous.”
-
recommend
- recs 0
-
share
-
email
- sent 0
Post a Comment
- Back to manilajones's Xanga Site!
- Note: your comment will appear in manilajones's local time zone: GMT -08:00 (Pacific Standard - US, Canada)
Comments (12)
;)
You need to break up the scale even further...like 8.6-9.0 FINE (Jennifer Aniston) and 9.1-9.5 HELLA FINE (Angelina Jolie).
Even though Jolie is "HELLA FINE", I can't stand her!!!
all wrong, all wrong did u do this purposely? hmmmmm....
1-3 are like the women who have turned into zombie monsters, like in The Evil Dead (1983), now, kristen dunn is avg, she has some moment in Spidey 2 where u see some of her appealing body parts, so she is nowhere below avg,
below avg - would be the girl in your class that u the least find attracted to, whether she has twice your facial hair or 3x your muscles.
above avg - is the girl at supermarket that makes you turn your head TWICE usually, no more than thrice. if she is a friend, she could make u do favors for her despite that she has a bf already, but u wouldn't go stealing her because she is not in the next category.
foxy/cute/pretty - tho not the same, but in the same scale level, are the kinda girl that you would date. well for u shy fella, the girl who you wish u have as a gf, such as maria sharapova and ana ivanovic, however because of their professional athelete status, that makes them more valuable and if u aint somebody, u can't have them, some might say these 2 girls are hot because of this.
to me, hot, aka 'my fave-five', - is someone like kristen bell, eva mendez, (lindsay lohan is not on this scale at all, she has joined paris hilton topping the scale of women u want nothing to do with, cause they're stupid and annoying, such a waste of looks, and brain)
extremely fine, aka soooo beautiful, - is like international supermodel aline nakashima, bond girl eva green, kate beckinsale, and the girl i like who is also sarah, what a coincidence, when i read u mentioned this, i jumped out of my seat, well mine is untouchable right now, but probably not for long, i'll find the way, if not, i might just settle with the next category, the ridiculous type,
although there is such a category as rediculously refined, - i haven't met, seen, or heard any real woman that can fit this description, so i'll just put my fantasy girl, she might be just foxy to some, but she deserves the rediculous title, cause she's Asuka Langley Soryu!!
haha i should put this on my page as well :)
interesting scale, manila--and interesting examples! in a way, they made me sad though 'cause i always get 'cute,' nevermore, but that's OK! your examples made me feel better 'cause i disagree with them, especially your 'ridiculous' women, well, kate, i mean. i don't think she's ALL THAT. i'd actually give that title to kristen dunst, your 'fugly,' but to each his/her own. i hope i'll be someone's rediculous one day.....haha. annnnyway i agree with your scale 100 percent. you broke it down in all the right spots!