Seriously, you think that helps?

Yesterday, a talk with my son and a post on a great, great blog got me to thinking about one of my as yet uncompleted great contributions to society: an algebraic equation that would predict the likelihood a person would get a disfiguring facial piercing or an excessive number of them.

Now, there are people who know me well enough to know that I am completely incompetent with math of any kind. They should also know that not knowing what I’m talking about hasn’t stopped me in the past.

The idea for this mathematical tool began with the observation that many folks who have a lot of facial piercings seem to be not all that physically attractive to begin with. Think it over. Do you see a lot of really attractive people with multiple facial piercings? Me neither.

Doctor. Smart. Nothing sticking out of her face.

Doctor. Smart. Nothing sticking out of her face.

The other factor I think should be brought into the equation is intelligence. Can you recall the last time you were at the doctor’s office, and the doctor came in with the equivalent of a machine bolt sticking out of her cheek? Me neither. Now consider the last time you saw a worker in a Wal-Mart or a convenience store with one eyebrow pierced 7 times.

So, heres what I’ve got so far. One factor in the equation has to be physical attractiveness on a ten point scale. Yes, its shallow and subjective, but it works because even though you and I would rate people differently, the math would generally trend in the same direction.

Walmart pre employment screening, or liability release for face piercing?

Walmart pre employment screening, or liability release for face piercing?

The other major factor, intelligence, is a bit of a struggle. Perhaps the best way to do it is the difference in a persons IQ score from 100. A sub 100 score would increase the odds of a piercing, over 100 would be just the opposite.

I struggle with this though because we don’t often have an IQ test along with us to administer to people. I know, we probably should, and maybe you do. I’ll step up and admit I am a little lax in that area. Do we go back to a simple and very subjective ten point scale that a person could apply to evaluate someones intelligence through their employment? Maybe it should just be a number based on the general impression of the persons smarts. Think their IQ is a 90? Its a 90. Are they the smartest person you’ve met? 120.

The final factor is age. Lets face it, grandpa isn’t the one getting those

Not attractive, not smart. Old. Hmmmmm....

Not attractive, not smart. Old. Hmmmmm....

piercings that stretch a hole in his earlobe you could put a fist through. So I think if you multiply whatever you get out of the attractiveness and intelligence equation by the persons age you’ll get a number that tells us the likelihood of bad facial piercings. A high score indicates that a person probably doesn’t have any shrapnel poking out of their face. The lower the score, the less likely it is that you’re going to want to be behind them in line to go through a metal detector.

I also believe this same formula, once complete, will be able to predict if a person is likely to get a tattoo on the side of their neck. Lets face it, nothing says “I won’t be climbing any further up the corporate ladder” better than a neck tattoo.

One thing I haven’t figured out, and I haven’t figured out much, is what purpose this formula will serve once I work it out.

2 Comments on “Seriously, you think that helps?”

  1. lwayswright says:

    Well, for me it served the purpose of giving me a good laugh for the day. So, I would say mission accomplished!

So, what's on your mind?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s