>>81884155 (OP)5 >= 4 > 2 >1 >= 3 >= 6
6,1 and 3 are all out of the picture cause I don't find them remotely attractive to the point where its hard to compare.
body count on 2 is way too high, I'd feel regularly ashamed being with her no doubt
Of the remaining ones I might willing to sacrifice those 6 bodies since 4 is more attractive and seriously makes bank. Probably wouldn't feel great about it though, but the whole nature of this thing is making sacrifices. 5 is definitely the safer choice though.
>>818879063 is a perfectly satisfactory body count, once I had sex for the first time I got less squeamish about it, unless you have a smaller dick in which case avoiding it makes sense.
t. lost virginity at 20
>>81888528I'd be curious to see what a similar thread would look like with the genders swapped, though body count would have to be swapped out with height cause there aren't really many other hard numbers women care about to the same extent body count matters.
>>81888469funny, I think I find her the least attractive of all. How low would 2's body count have to be for you to pick her over 6?