Beauty is in the eye of the beholder

Page 5 of 7 [ 106 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 Next

Previous topic | Next topic

The_Face_of_Boo
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 16 Jun 2010
Age: 43
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 33,452
Location: Beirut, Lebanon.

06 Apr 2018, 3:18 am

Goldilocks wrote:

The_Face_of_Boo wrote:

WallKornexa wrote:

I think of people of media and entertainment of the 50's, 60's, 70', 80's and I imagine them today in stage and they will still be considered good looking. Most of the Hollywood male star actors are between 5'9 and 6'2 which it's the range of height which is considered more appealing to women. It's not their fault or the fault of men that you are too tall. Because if you consider that most stars are short... then normal everyday men are also short. Or do you live in the Dinaric Alps or in Groningen?

It's funny how when a lot of women imply that short men are not attractive no woman accuses them that they're being influenced by the "Oh so evil commercial beauty standards" (male models are also very tall)- suddenly it becomes totally normal and natural not to find short men sexually attractive and even to imply they're at the bottom of the beauty spectrum- but when a male says the slightest thing about beauty you see hordes of women accusing him "oh you are influenced by the the evil commercial beauty standards". Ha.

I find that short/shorter men feel insecure in spite of women. I think many men think of height as being a reflection of their masculinity.

It also depends on your culture. Some cultures like short stocky men believing them to be more sturdy, better farmers and tend to live longer. Some cultures like tall men because they believe it makes them more likely to be excellent warriors and that their ability to tower over women makes them a better protector.

And fat women feel insecure in spite of men? hmm?

The_Face_of_Boo
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 16 Jun 2010
Age: 43
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 33,452
Location: Beirut, Lebanon.

06 Apr 2018, 3:25 am

hale_bopp wrote:

The Grand Inquisitor wrote:

hale_bopp wrote:

^ Height generally isn’t a commercial beauty standard in either gender. Men and women of all heights are played up in the media and lusted over.

How is height any less of a beauty standard than weight?

Height is less obvious on screen. All you have to go by is height in comparison to other characters, but you seldom see shorter male leads paired with taller female leads.

The point was, short men and women are still glamouised and used as examples of “sexy” in the media, as opposed to fat vs thin people.

They are used as "sexy" after hiding their shortness with filmmaking tricks , which means that shortness is an undesirable trait in media. The fact that filmmakers go the extra mile to hide or enhance heights in actors on screen means that it's a commercial beauty standard.

And we all know how TERRIBLE you are in estimating heights of people on screen or in photos. :mrgreen:

hale_bopp wrote:

The_Face_of_Boo wrote:

hale_bopp wrote:

You’re just trolling now. Go and waste your time making fake tinder profiles. I’m going out for drinks.

You're just pissed off because I presented hard science proofs that support my claims.

And it's hard for you to refute that. Enjoy your drink.

I was actually pissed off because you accused me of implying fat women deserve more of a chance than short men, which I didn’t, and having “logic” to which is nothing like what I actually think.

Also “proofs” is not a word.

It's entertaining to piss you off.

So neither proof nor evidence can be in plural form, English makes no sense.

Last edited by The_Face_of_Boo on 06 Apr 2018, 3:34 am, edited 1 time in total.

yellowtamarin
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 5 Sep 2010
Gender: Female
Posts: 3,763
Location: Australia

06 Apr 2018, 3:43 am

The_Face_of_Boo wrote:

So neither proof nor evidence can be in plural form, English makes no sense.

Because it is measured in size, not quantity. Just like you should say "fewer people", not "less people", you should say "less evidence/proof", not "fewer evidence/proof". One type of word has a plural form (quantity), the other doesn't (size).

You can, however, say "pieces of evidence/proof" (quantity).

fluffysaurus
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 3 Oct 2017
Gender: Female
Posts: 3,723
Location: England

06 Apr 2018, 3:45 am

^Both proof and evidence singular and plural.
One piece of evidence-lots of evidence
The proof-lots of proof

_________________
climate change petition, please sign

Petition against Amazon selling 'make downs extinct' t-shirts. And other hate speech paraphernalia.

hale_bopp
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 2 Nov 2004
Gender: Female
Posts: 17,054
Location: None

06 Apr 2018, 4:16 am

The world is rampant with low lives.

The_Face_of_Boo
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 16 Jun 2010
Age: 43
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 33,452
Location: Beirut, Lebanon.

06 Apr 2018, 4:25 am

yellowtamarin wrote:

The_Face_of_Boo wrote:

So neither proof nor evidence can be in plural form, English makes no sense.

In french there's no such thing. They say "gens" which is always plural, there''s the word "peuple" but it's not the exactly equivalent to 'people' , 'peuple' is used more for ethnics or people with a common characteristic ie. le peuple Américain but it can also be in plural form to refer to several groups ie. "Les peuples asiatiques".

As for proof, the equivalent french is countable (les preuves), same of evidence (les évidences).

nick007
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 May 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 28,184
Location: was Louisiana but now Vermont in capitalistic military dictatorship called USA

06 Apr 2018, 5:11 am

white_as_snow wrote:

why do people keep saying that?

fact is that some people are ugly in all eyes. some people are so ugly that nobody will ever want them.

A blind person might. Blind people tend to not have a lot of options when it comes to partners because lots don't want to deal with their disability & looks are completely irrelevant to them since they cant see

_________________
"I don't have an anger problem, I have an idiot problem!"
~King Of The Hill

"Hear all, trust nothing"
~Ferengi Rule Of Acquisition #190
https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Ru ... cquisition

xxZeromancerlovexx
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 24 Jul 2010
Age: 31
Gender: Female
Posts: 3,915
Location: In my imagination

06 Apr 2018, 1:05 pm

People have their own definition of ugly. I don't really see anyone as physically ugly. I view the way people treat other people as ugly. What about average people you see on a day to day basis? Are they ugly all because they don't look like a supermodel? Some people have medical issues that influence their appearance yet the deserve to be treated nicely just as much as a supermodel.

I'm not ugly but I do have my flaws (frizzy hair, overweight, I have a skin condition on my arm called keratosis pilaris and I can tell that men do not look at me as a supermodel because of those things) and if those flaws make me ugly then what were all of my ex-boyfriends thinking when they dated me? I'm not sure what they were thinking because I'm not a mind reader.

_________________
“There’s a lesson that we learn
In the pages that we burn
It’s written in the ashes of the fire below”
-Down, The Birthday Massacre

white_as_snow
Velociraptor

Joined: 2 Dec 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 479

10 Apr 2018, 12:22 pm

kraftiekortie wrote:

Very, very few people are so ugly that NO ONE would "want" them.

I haven't seen such an "ugly" person here on WrongPlanet.

i am that ugly.

white_as_snow
Velociraptor

Joined: 2 Dec 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 479

10 Apr 2018, 12:28 pm

bunnyb wrote:

Yeah, Stephen Hawking was such a drop dead gorgeous guy, explains why he got married twice....

But seriously, why do so many guys on here seem to think beauty can only be an external thing? Someone was bragging the other day that they get dates with models like it was a measure how successful they were with women. Obviously appearance is majorly important to that person which possibly explains why he's still single.
Haven't you ever met someone with a beautiful mind? If all you see is the external and base your assessments of a person on something like that, it's pretty sad.

oh please, guys who look like hawking has 1 in million chance on getting laid/getting a gf. hawking was smartest man on earth and rich as hell...if he was not he would be alone his whole life.

beuatiful do not matter if you look like me, i am so ugly that nobody cares how my inside is. thats the problem. sure not all women want a hot guy, but 99 % of all women want a decent looking guy or half-ugly guy...but what women wants a REALLY REALLY ugly guy like me? 1 in million chance, and that 1 in million will not happen since i have no money and is not famous like hawking.

white_as_snow
Velociraptor

Joined: 2 Dec 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 479

10 Apr 2018, 12:30 pm

blooiejagwa wrote:

I was told by many many people, when I was married, that my XH was ugly, yet I found him the most gorgeous person in the world.

Even now I have to force myself not to think that.

So beauty is definitely in the eye of the beholder.

your husband may be ugly but he is not level 100 ugly like me.

LaetiBlabla
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 31 Dec 2015
Posts: 981
Location: Earth

10 Apr 2018, 12:34 pm

Let's dissect an eye to see if beauty is therein

white_as_snow
Velociraptor

Joined: 2 Dec 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 479

10 Apr 2018, 12:36 pm

hale_bopp wrote:

white_as_snow wrote:

why do people keep saying that?

fact is that some people are ugly in all eyes. some people are so ugly that nobody will ever want them.

Because it’s true. There is so much more to attraction than looks.

Sure, as a society average, some people are more “beautiful” than others, but it’s really not the be all end all.

I’m nit into generic hot men. They just don’t do it for me. A lot of other average women feel the same.

but fact remains that some people are so ugly that they will be single their whole life because nobody wanted them.

check my flaws:

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=357107

why would ANYONE want a guy with that many flaws? :roll:

white_as_snow
Velociraptor

Joined: 2 Dec 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 479

10 Apr 2018, 12:49 pm

xxZeromancerlovexx wrote:

this is ugly:
viewtopic.php?f=6&t=357107

fluffysaurus
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 3 Oct 2017
Gender: Female
Posts: 3,723
Location: England

10 Apr 2018, 1:37 pm

white_as_snow wrote:

hale_bopp wrote:

white_as_snow wrote:

why do people keep saying that?

fact is that some people are ugly in all eyes. some people are so ugly that nobody will ever want them.

Well, I accept if that lot's all true then you're ugly (no offence meant), it is a long list of flaws. It must be really hard to motivate yourself on those that you might be able to improve somewhat with so many things stacked against you. I don't think it means you will definitely always be alone and that no one else will ever love you, I just agree that it must be very difficult to keep putting yourself out there.

I don't see any correlation between how much real love people recieve and how physically attractive they are, I just observe that the process of finding love looks to be a lot easier the more standard you are as a person, in looks and personality. I guess the odds are with them.

_________________
climate change petition, please sign

Petition against Amazon selling 'make downs extinct' t-shirts. And other hate speech paraphernalia.

The_Face_of_Boo
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 16 Jun 2010
Age: 43
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 33,452
Location: Beirut, Lebanon.

10 Apr 2018, 2:53 pm

I see that most people agree what's beautiful and what's not, and that's not even on humans looks, but also in product designs and architecture....etc. This is indisputable.

I don't know how this can even be deniable, but oh well....WP produces saints even way more than the Vatican.

Page 5 of 7 [ 106 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 Next

Jump to:

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder Post Reply New Topic

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder