Team, I’m going to respond directly because I do understand the desire for clearer information. There’s nothing unreasonable about wanting tools that make choosing a provider easier. But somewhere in this thread, your argument stopped being about weight as a metric and turned into a debate about whether you are right. That shift matters, because it’s where the conversation slipped from accuracy into ego-protection.
You’ve repeatedly framed this as, “Men can estimate weight; why pretend otherwise?” But no one here is questioning whether men can spot a 50-pound difference between two women. That’s not the point, and it’s not the skill relevant to the discussion. The actual issue is this: weight is an unreliable proxy for appearance, even when the number is correct. That’s not an emotional argument. It’s not about protecting women’s feelings. It’s simply how bodies work.
Two women at 140 lbs can look radically different depending on muscle mass, distribution, bone structure, water retention, hormones, training history, camera angles, or whether they lift four times a week. Recognizing a general “size” tells you almost nothing about aesthetic fit. When you expand your ranges (“okay then 25 lbs… okay 30… okay 50”), that’s a sign of trying to rescue the structure of an argument whose foundation isn’t holding. That’s classic confirmation bias: widening the interval instead of admitting the metric itself doesn’t behave the way you want it to.
That’s where the psychology comes in. The insistence isn’t about accuracy... it’s about certainty. Weight feels like a clean, objective datapoint. It feels like control. It creates the illusion of narrowing risk, even though the number itself misleads more than it informs. That illusion is powerful. I get why you’re drawn to it. But clarity and the feeling of clarity are not the same thing.
You’re accusing me of making assumptions, but my perspective comes from lived experience, a fitness background, my years in this industry, and the patterns confirmed by multiple men in this thread. Meanwhile, your responses keep comparing women to athletes whose stats are literally published and standardized. That’s a textbook male-pattern expertise leap: two totally different domains presented as equivalent.
And here’s the part you’re circling without realizing it: your defensiveness reads less like logic and more like internal friction. Almost as if you’re attracted to women outside the “ideal” you think you should prefer and the number becomes the battleground instead of the preference. As for the hair-color comparison: most women are not switching blond to red to brunette every six weeks.That assumption is yours, not mine.
So here’s the distilled truth. Weight fluctuates frequently, misleads more than it clarifies, ages poorly on a static profile, does not predict tone, shape, or silhouette, and gives the illusion of control, not actual accuracy. That’s probably why TER doesn’t use it. Not to hide anything but because the data would be fundamentally unreliable.
If TER ever creates a nuanced body-type system, it would nice to have actual physique AND composition descriptors that reflect how a woman looks in real life. Categories like toned, petite, sculpted, average, curvy, voluptuous, full-figured, or BBW communicate exponentially more than a number ever will. AND body-composition descriptors: muscle-dominant, soft athletic, hourglass, pear-shaped, bust-dominant, glute-dominant, slim-thick, linear, or compact athletic, tell you where someone carries their mass, how they’re built, and what silhouette you’re walking into. Those metrics track attraction far better than “150 lbs,” which could describe ten completely different bodies depending on muscle, proportion, and frame. If we’re talking about data that actually helps clients make informed decisions, physique categories will always outperform a static, easily misreported, quickly outdated number on a scale. And that, I’d support it immediately. But weight alone? It won’t give you what you think it will.
But at this point, you’re no longer discussing though, you’re defending. And when someone shifts from learning to winning, the conversation stops being productive. So I’ll bow out here. Your ego seems to need the last word more than this thread needs the illusion of accuracy.