Lots of dudes (and pickmes) seem to think it's DeHuMaNiZiNg to categorize men as either high or low value. I've even seen comments that our "binary rating system" makes us "worse than the manosphere" who are at least kind and progressive enough to rate women on a scale of 1-10 /s

Personally, I've always considered the concept of high/low value to be more of a spectrum, so I'd like to propose a ten-point scale of our own.

The range is from -5 to +5

Negative five represents the worst of the worst: the true Negative Value Men (NVM). Serial killers, rapists, sex traffickers, you get the idea. The Ted Bundies, Harvey Weinsteins, and Jeffrey Epsteins of the world.

Positive five represents the best of the best: the true High Value Men (HVM). These men are handsome, rich, self disciplined, have good personalities, respect women, and love their woman deeply. I'm hesitant to provide any examples just in case it comes out later that he was actually a LVM all along (I'm looking at you, Derrick Jaxn)

Zero is the mid-point, and represents Zero Value Men (ZVM). These are men who aren't actively harmful to women, but don't contribute anything of value either.

The phrase "Low Value Man" (LVM) is a catch-all term meaning any man who is a 2 or lower. All negative and zero value men are LVM, but not all LVM are zero/negative value. For example, a guy who isn't actively toxic but plans low-effort dates such as coffee dates or walk dates would probably be a 1 on this scale.

The distribution of men along this spectrum resembles a bell curve, and is ever so slightly skewed to the left. This is what FDS is referring to when we say "most men are low value" because the bulk of the male population falls somewhere between -3 and +2

"Why not just make it a normal scale of 1-10? Why does your ten-point scale have to use negative integers at all?"

...asks the lurking scrote (probably, lol).

I'm glad you asked! Here's the problem with using a 1-10 scale for men: let's say if I set NVM at 1, HVM at 10, and ZVM at 5, it implies that negative value men still have at least some value.

A woman who is rated a 4 on the attractiveness scale might be below average appearance-wise, but is still inherently valuable simply because she's a woman. She might not be "hot" but at least you can be generally certain that she won't go on a testerical rampage and shoot up an elementary school.

For men, it is necessary to use negative integers when ranking them. This takes into account the fact that many men are not merely benign, but are actively harmful to women.

I hope we can start using this rating system on our subreddit, let me know if you have any questions!