Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP could be talking about men, too, but it’s interesting that everyone automatically assumed this was about women.

I assumed it was women because on this board they are ones to discussing ratings. I rarely hear men on this board boast about their looks.

I absolutely agree with OP - and I’m talking about the men of DC.

Anonymous wrote:Didn’t this topic get raised here at least once a year?! Get over it, OP.

Yeah. This is DCUM’s annual reality check.

I think many in the DC area are stressed out, anxious and generally miserable. This translates as unattractive.

I just attended a prestigious national panel discussion in DC. The three women on the panel were think tankers and academics. None of them had done a thing with their hair and had no makeup on. Yet, they were so badass, so brilliant, so warm yet in complete command of the subject matter and the discussion. I was in awe. They were not unattractive either.

No one cares but you OP. Please move somewhere where everyone is more attractive.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most people are around average-looking. Beauty is more or less normally distributed. Don't let grooming fool you.

But shouldn’t it count for something- doing the best with what you have?

I will admit OP’s sentiments came into my head because of the recent post on How Would Men Rate You (or something like that). There were a lot of high scores but then looking at the real world, everyone looks fine, normal, average. I’ve been going to NYC for work lately and have ended up with the same impression. When I started work in my 20s, I couldn’t believe the difference in how NYC womenpresented themselves and I presented myself. Now at 50, it’s all kind of mushed in the middle.

It's 2024. We are in the middle of an overweight/obesity epidemic. Taking care of yourself matters a great deal. And PP's "don't let grooming fool you" only takes the position that perfect grooming can't make up for a lack of genetics and fails to consider the negative consequences of average or less grooming, when others make an effort.

I think perhaps you are seeing less effort in NYC because culture has changed post-pandemic. Years of sitting in the house in pajamas and no makeup changed us.

I WFH in leggings and no makeup most days. I'm also normal weight and I lift more than casually, so I'm "taking care of myself" in that sense. I clean up when I have professional or social obligations that require cleaning up. What exactly are the negative consequences of me being ungroomed most of the time? Who am I trying to impress at the grocery store?

You are kind of proving my point here...

If your point was that I'm supposed to GAF about you judging me in the grocery store, I wasn't. You think I should wear makeup, I think you should deadlift. Neither of these opinions matters.

Only on DCUM is this an either/or option.

Didn’t this topic get raised here at least once a year?! Get over it, OP.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most people are around average-looking. Beauty is more or less normally distributed. Don't let grooming fool you.

But shouldn’t it count for something- doing the best with what you have?

I will admit OP’s sentiments came into my head because of the recent post on How Would Men Rate You (or something like that). There were a lot of high scores but then looking at the real world, everyone looks fine, normal, average. I’ve been going to NYC for work lately and have ended up with the same impression. When I started work in my 20s, I couldn’t believe the difference in how NYC womenpresented themselves and I presented myself. Now at 50, it’s all kind of mushed in the middle.

It's 2024. We are in the middle of an overweight/obesity epidemic. Taking care of yourself matters a great deal. And PP's "don't let grooming fool you" only takes the position that perfect grooming can't make up for a lack of genetics and fails to consider the negative consequences of average or less grooming, when others make an effort.

I think perhaps you are seeing less effort in NYC because culture has changed post-pandemic. Years of sitting in the house in pajamas and no makeup changed us.

I WFH in leggings and no makeup most days. I'm also normal weight and I lift more than casually, so I'm "taking care of myself" in that sense. I clean up when I have professional or social obligations that require cleaning up. What exactly are the negative consequences of me being ungroomed most of the time? Who am I trying to impress at the grocery store?

You are kind of proving my point here...

If your point was that I'm supposed to GAF about you judging me in the grocery store, I wasn't. You think I should wear makeup, I think you should deadlift. Neither of these opinions matters.

As is the case with most things, socioeconomics matter.

Too affluent to need to work? Those ladies are fit and attractive. They have hired help and invest time in exercising, facials, styling their hair, etc.

Familiar with the east coast moneyed set? They know how to look put together in an understated yet fabulous way.

I know these women. I envy these women. And many of them live in DC, NY, the mainline outside Philly, Boston, CT, etc. Some live in the md and va burbs.

It’s different in the south. Charleston and Beaufort are very comparable to the east coast/New England aesthetics, but the rest of the south puts a sexier spin on it.

But if you’re just looking at the people commuting to dc because they must work, not surprising that they look frazzled and frumpy.

ICYMI: DC has probably the best educated workforce that prioritizes brains over beauty, so we don’t care what the op thinks about our wrinkles or fluffy thighs.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most people are around average-looking. Beauty is more or less normally distributed. Don't let grooming fool you.

But shouldn’t it count for something- doing the best with what you have?

I will admit OP’s sentiments came into my head because of the recent post on How Would Men Rate You (or something like that). There were a lot of high scores but then looking at the real world, everyone looks fine, normal, average. I’ve been going to NYC for work lately and have ended up with the same impression. When I started work in my 20s, I couldn’t believe the difference in how NYC womenpresented themselves and I presented myself. Now at 50, it’s all kind of mushed in the middle.

It's 2024. We are in the middle of an overweight/obesity epidemic. Taking care of yourself matters a great deal. And PP's "don't let grooming fool you" only takes the position that perfect grooming can't make up for a lack of genetics and fails to consider the negative consequences of average or less grooming, when others make an effort.

I think perhaps you are seeing less effort in NYC because culture has changed post-pandemic. Years of sitting in the house in pajamas and no makeup changed us.

I WFH in leggings and no makeup most days. I'm also normal weight and I lift more than casually, so I'm "taking care of myself" in that sense. I clean up when I have professional or social obligations that require cleaning up. What exactly are the negative consequences of me being ungroomed most of the time? Who am I trying to impress at the grocery store?

You are kind of proving my point here...

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most people are around average-looking. Beauty is more or less normally distributed. Don't let grooming fool you.

But shouldn’t it count for something- doing the best with what you have?

I will admit OP’s sentiments came into my head because of the recent post on How Would Men Rate You (or something like that). There were a lot of high scores but then looking at the real world, everyone looks fine, normal, average. I’ve been going to NYC for work lately and have ended up with the same impression. When I started work in my 20s, I couldn’t believe the difference in how NYC womenpresented themselves and I presented myself. Now at 50, it’s all kind of mushed in the middle.

Sure, it counts, in the sense that you can be more "attractive" in a subjective sense.
But in terms of ratings, which usually pertain to objective beauty, I don't think having a great haircut makes up for bad bone structure.

Yeah, but you don't want bad bone structure and a bad haircut to boot.

Anonymous wrote: You have to remove a point for: swollen lips, oversized fake tatas, too skinny, fake nails, botox, fake hair, fake tan, fake eyelashes, too much makeup, dressing 10 years younger than they should

Minus the “too skinny” (which is subjective) and Botox, you don’t see that many UMC women in the DMV, particularly in higher end neighborhoods such as Upper NW, Chevy Chase or Bethesda, with these. The private school and country club moms would look down on fake nails, too much makeup and obviously fake boobs.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most people are around average-looking. Beauty is more or less normally distributed. Don't let grooming fool you.

But shouldn’t it count for something- doing the best with what you have?

I will admit OP’s sentiments came into my head because of the recent post on How Would Men Rate You (or something like that). There were a lot of high scores but then looking at the real world, everyone looks fine, normal, average. I’ve been going to NYC for work lately and have ended up with the same impression. When I started work in my 20s, I couldn’t believe the difference in how NYC womenpresented themselves and I presented myself. Now at 50, it’s all kind of mushed in the middle.

Sure, it counts, in the sense that you can be more "attractive" in a subjective sense.
But in terms of ratings, which usually pertain to objective beauty, I don't think having a great haircut makes up for bad bone structure.

But aren’t you (or someone) conflating the two when we compare DC women and say NY? Sure other places like UT have a lifestyle devoted to fitness and more sunshine in LA. But I don’t believe DC ends up with people with bad bone structure. We ended up with people who don’t prioritize fashion, sure.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most people are around average-looking. Beauty is more or less normally distributed. Don't let grooming fool you.

But shouldn’t it count for something- doing the best with what you have?

I will admit OP’s sentiments came into my head because of the recent post on How Would Men Rate You (or something like that). There were a lot of high scores but then looking at the real world, everyone looks fine, normal, average. I’ve been going to NYC for work lately and have ended up with the same impression. When I started work in my 20s, I couldn’t believe the difference in how NYC womenpresented themselves and I presented myself. Now at 50, it’s all kind of mushed in the middle.

Sure, it counts, in the sense that you can be more "attractive" in a subjective sense.
But in terms of ratings, which usually pertain to objective beauty, I don't think having a great haircut makes up for bad bone structure.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's time for a reality check. Most people living in the DMV are not attractive. DC and Maryland are especially bad. If the standard scale is 1-10, DMV residents automatically lose 2 points, with NWDC and MD losing an extra point. There are many threads in which DCUMers self-rate themselves as 7/10 or above. Statistically speaking, you are multiplying the already small odds of being attractive with the even smaller odds of being attractive in the DMV. From here on out, let's agree to be honest and adjust our self-ratings.

Speak for yourself. I used a website called Pink Mirror when I was dating because I was curious if I was being too picky. My face is indeed a 7. I have other factors that probably push it up, if anything. Lots of wealthy women found this website because they were looking for a nanny. Wealthy people tend to be more attractive, because HNW people can have their pick. It’s not weird to me at all. I expect many of the women here to be better looking than me, sure to selection bias.

Then why don’t we see this in the real world. We can come up with zip codes with HNW and then we should see more attractive people. That’s not true though.