<p>The quality of boys matters WAY more. What's the point of good looking girls if you're a below average boy?</p>
<p>quality of girls -</p>
<p>uva
U of Mich/upenn
brown
princeton/wash U in St. Louis
harvard/uc berk
rice/columbia</p>
<p>You should throw Dartmouth up on that list... i swear there are no unattractive people here at all.</p>
<p>to myheartisinohio, who said i have problems, no i actually don't have problems...ur just not readin, I said schools with girls someone would be willin to date-if u read between the lines-mean attractive----im not hopin that certain schools would help me, but of course, if u go to a school say darmouth, (with no attractive people, accoring to half_baked) that can't be good...</p>
<p>The only people who pick schools by the attractiveness of girls are dumb frat boys going to ASU, or complete losers who hang out at sausage-fest parties, crack girlfriend jokes (despite not having any) and jerk off three times a day.</p>
<p>nodnard, if u read the d a m n begining of the thread, noone picks school by attractiveness of girls, its another aspect of school that is vital to a good life in college that every guy should consider.....</p>
<p>And I still stand by what I said. You're looking at schools with female populations of anywhere from 2-10,000...not to mention girls going to nearby schools, or girls who live at those places anyways. If you're really THAT concerned...well, read my previous post again.</p>
<p>This is retarded.</p>
<p>hahaha.</p>
<p>and why would the girls be interested in you hm?</p>
<p>If you are a guy that girls would be interested in dating, regardless of where you go, there will be attractive girls who want to date you.</p>
<p>If you are a guy that girls would not be interested in dating, you will have trouble finding a girlfriend regardless of where you go.</p>
<p>quality of girls is VERY important for a school decision...I know that here at W&M, although we have more girls than guys, a good percentage of the girls are not good looking/are undatable. We always say "the odds are good but the goods are odd" about our girls. One of the main complaints here of guys is the prudishness of girls. I guess my only comfort is its not as bad as a Tech school.........</p>
<p>chocolateluvr has said it well.</p>
<p>W&M girls arent very hot in general, i agree.</p>
<p>Just go to Berkeley. end of story</p>
<p>I was going to stay off this stupid thread, but I can't resist...</p>
<p>
[quote]
I guess my only comfort is its not as bad as a Tech school
[/quote]
</p>
<p>You seem to be denigrating Tech school women.</p>
<p>I</a> beg to differ.</p>
<p>(And now I can self-justify posting in this thread because I'm promoting my friends' project)</p>
<p>Erm, if that's the best MIT has to offer...<em>Shudder</em></p>
<p>u of arizona
asu
usc
ucsb
sdsu</p>
<p>
[quote]
"the odds are good but the goods are odd"
[/quote]
Haha, I love that. I'll have to remember that one.</p>
<p>No way is Berkeley a "C", that site has us behind John Hopkins and Case Western! A solid B to B+ is more like it. Columbia is way underrated too, one of my best friends went there. Michigan is good, but maybe not A- good.</p>
<p>From hottest on down:</p>
<p>U of Mich
columbia
UC berk
UVA
upenn
brown
harvard
princeton
wash U in St. Louis
Rice</p>
<p>Bigger schools are better, more to choose from. Schools in urban areas like NY, Berkeley, Cambridge or Philly are better too because there are more bars and clubs with girls from other colleges. Most on the list are from large urban areas actually.</p>
<p>It also depends what you're into, preppy or artsy, white or rainbow, etc. </p>
<p>The schools in the bottom of the list aren't much worse than those in the top, if you said MIT or Cal Tech, then OK...</p>
<p>The girls at Berkeley are pretty brutal. Some are beasts, while most are just below average. There are a few that are hot, but they are in the minority (usually involved in sports/cheerleading).</p>