Beauty?

[Georgavis]

Beauty.....?
you know that saying that beauty is in the eye of the beholder? well, that's partly true. i've noticed that extremely beautiful people are thought by everyone as beautiful, and if youre just okay-looking, then some people may think you are pretty, while some peope won't. and and everyone agrees on if someone is unattractive. so, technically, beauty mostly isn't in the eye of the beholder. know what i mean? what do you think?

 

[Drappa]

I disagree, because there are a lot of people that are generally considered beautiful whom I don't find attractive at all. Same goes for my husband, but maybe we have just odd tastes...

 

[lolly_loisides]

I agree with Drappa. There's a sameness in what is considered classic beauty. If beauty can be defined by a mathematical formula then obviously all those people will look alike - and that's boring.

Diversity is beautiful.

 

[Juliet]

I'm with Drappa, too.
My mother says that if you'll shout loud and long enough that you're beautiful, people will start believing it))) In my opinion, that happens a LOT these days.

Some people like very regular features, some think imperfection is the key to beauty, some think it's the spirit behind the face.

 

[Snowdrop]

I agree with Drappa. I see some of the people referred to as 'beautiful' today and I'm at a loss. I think everyone's idea of beauty is personal and entirely subjective and that goes for both males and females in my humble opinion.

I had this conversation yesterday with a friend of mine, because she couldn't believe that I didn't find Robert Pattinson in the least bit attractive. I think he's vile, she absolutely adores him.

 

[BinkieBaumont]

Cosmetic surgeons have a saying "Perfect the nose and spoil the face" or words to that effect Aussie Actor Alex Demitriades was a case in point

 

[Amy Jeanne]

Post makes no sense. :shakeshead: I say Troll.

But I will say that the more classically pretty ladies on here get far more compliments than others who don't fit the "standard."

 

[kamikat]

I've noticed the same thing as AmyJeanne. When I was thinner, I got lots of comments, but not many now that I've put on weight.

 

[Inky]

I also disagree with the original post and agree with Drappa.

To me "extremely beautiful" is not always extremely beautiful. The standard of classical beauty is cultural. What pleases my eye as beautiful in humanity and art is probably completely different to what you hold as beautiful.

I find quirky faces with peculiar features beautiful. Bette Davis, Joan Crawford, Clark Gable, all were made INTO a golden age standard of beauty, but you'd find many a lovely flaw in their faces too.

 

[LizzieMaine]

When I think of "classical beauty" I always end up thinking of commercial art -- the generic Arrow Collar Men and Breck Girls of advertising, painted and airbrushed to a fare-the-well. Nice to look at and utterly without any distinctive character at all. True beauty, to me, is an expression of personality, not just physicality.

 

[Isis]

Tricky subject, but I think it's very easy to think beauty equals being attractive, which may be the case, but not always. I can see that Brad Pitt is beautiful, but I don't find him attractive in the least, for example. I've read somewhere that the people we get really attracted to are the ones we estimate to be our equals in the look department. I think that make sense, otherwise we would only be attracted to the most beautiful, which clearly isn't the case. Also, an attractive face may cease to be attractive if the person behind isn't. And someone you didn't looked at twice to begin with, will grow on you, if the personality is nice.We are also attracted to different things. I have a rather specific type in men that I always find attractive- at first sight. It's not a look that are considered generally handsome and a man I find attractive may be considered ugly by women with other criteria. And certainly not all my boyfriends have looked like my type, so it's not the sole reason for me being attracted.

Goodness, I'm prattling. Does this make any sense at all?

 

[cherry lips]

Interesting answers. I'd love to be proven wrong, but to me it seems that women's taste in beauty is more diverse than men's. Just compare the male-dominated thread "If you had to pick one girl from the golden era..." with the female-dominated "Girl Crushes" and "Handsome Fellas". Men seem to have a more standard, shallow, homogenous perception of beauty, whereas women have more of an individual take that has more to do with intelligence, charisma and other impressive traits that the man or woman being judged has to offer.
Personally I'm more like a man, atleast when I judge male beauty, which is very rare among my girlfriends, and I have many of those! I enjoy youth, a nude body that's athletic or lean (and all of it's endless parts and details that add upp to sweet perfection), a rosy complexion, bright eyes, beauty marks, thick hair (especially curls) on the head, but a smooth chest and bottom, etc. I don't mind if the boy is less intelligent, interesting, talented, successful, or funny than me, as long has he's easy on the eye and nice to touch.
I also have a feeling that men care more what other men think about their choice of partner, they think it's important that their friends approve of a girlfriend's looks, etc. Woman don't mind if other women don't swoon over their guy, since they know how they feel about him themselves.
Am I right or wrong? I do tend to hang out with guys in their twenties, so maybe this is something that changes with age... I'm not so sure though.

 

[LittleMissToniJo]

Interesting answers. I'd love to be proven wrong, but to me it seems that women's taste in beauty is more diverse than men's. Just compare the male-dominated thread "If you had to pick one girl from the golden era..." with the female-dominated "Girl Crushes" and "Handsome Fellas". Men seem to have a more standard, shallow, homogenous perception of beauty, whereas women have more of an individual take that has more to do with intelligence, charisma and other impressive traits that the man or woman being judged has to offer.
Personally I'm more like a man, atleast when I judge male beauty, which is very rare among my girlfriends, and I have many of those! I enjoy youth, a nude body that's athletic or lean (and all of it's endless parts and details that add upp to sweet perfection), a rosy complexion, bright eyes, beauty marks, thick hair (especially curls) on the head, but a smooth chest and bottom, etc. I don't mind if the boy is less intelligent, interesting, talented, successful, or funny than me, as long has he's easy on the eye and nice to touch.
I also have a feeling that men care more what other men think about their choice of partner, they think it's important that their friends approve of a girlfriend's looks, etc. Woman don't mind if other women don't swoon over their guy, since they know how they feel about him themselves.
Am I right or wrong? I do tend to hang out with guys in their twenties, so maybe this is something that changes with age... I'm not so sure though.

Bravo for saying this!! Obviously talent and success helps, but as far as being really physically attracted to someone, there are some things you can't get away from

I do think that everyone's tastes are unique... I have a thing for Adrien Brody that most of my girlfriends think is bizarre.

 

[LittleMissToniJo]

Tricky subject, but I think it's very easy to think beauty equals being attractive, which may be the case, but not always. I can see that Brad Pitt is beautiful, but I don't find him attractive in the least, for example. I've read somewhere that the people we get really attracted to are the ones we estimate to be our equals in the look department. I think that make sense, otherwise we would only be attracted to the most beautiful, which clearly isn't the case. Also, an attractive face may cease to be attractive if the person behind isn't. And someone you didn't looked at twice to begin with, will grow on you, if the personality is nice.We are also attracted to different things. I have a rather specific type in men that I always find attractive- at first sight. It's not a look that are considered generally handsome and a man I find attractive may be considered ugly by women with other criteria. And certainly not all my boyfriends have looked like my type, so it's not the sole reason for me being attracted.

Goodness, I'm prattling. Does this make any sense at all?

It makes complete sense. If you lined up all of my past lovers, they look nothing alike... some similar features here and there, and a few are more alike than others... but there is definitely a certain type of man that I can see from across the room and just not be able to keep my eyes off of.

If he's a jerk, or has no self-confidence or is clingy or annoying, I do notice I'm less physically attracted almost instantly. They go hand-in-hand.

 

[LolitaHaze]

Men seem to have a more standard, shallow, homogenous perception of beauty, whereas women have more of an individual take that has more to do with intelligence, charisma and other impressive traits that the man or woman being judged has to offer.

I agree with what you said here except for the use of the word "shallow". I don't think it's shallow at all, I think it is instinctual. A male's instinct is to reproduce therefore most men will be attractive to beauty that will spawn the best offspring. Women instinctively look for security and with that go for more mental, emotional, personality, and job traits in a man. Many can argue about the modern society and behavior, and I can see how many would feel that way. And I don't think anyone is wrong for feeling that way, for me personally, I just don't see it that way. I think everything goes back to instinct -- especially when it comes to picking a mate. I am a huge believer in the Hunter/Gatherer. Does it make me right, not necessarily. Does it make me wrong, nope to that as well. I guess what it comes down to for me, is don't judge the boys too harshly for their preferences. They aren't as in control of their likes as us ladies are! Hahahaha

 

[Juliet]

If he's a jerk, or has no self-confidence or is clingy or annoying, I do notice I'm less physically attracted almost instantly. They go hand-in-hand.

That's a very interesting point right there, since for most people, if they sneer or purse their lips (in that disapproving way) or frown a lot, thanks to the phenomena of muscle memory, their faces do not completely relax from those looks, causing e.g. a bitter or cruel set of mouth.
That often leads to instantly disliking an otherwise physically attractive person, because of subconscious associations.

 

[RodeoRose]

Post makes no sense. :shakeshead: I say Troll.

Ha, my first thoughts exactly. But luckily this has really turned into an interesting discussion.

I definitely agree with the difference between male perceptions of beauty vs female (generally-- of course there are exceptions, as cherrylips explained).

I, like a lot of vintage girls, it seems, think lipstick, blush, and heavy liquid liner make the female face even more exquisite. Same with hair-- bouffants and perfect curl sets are so gorgeous to me. However, it's always really surprising to me to read on here how many girls' boyfriends and husbands hate that kind of stuff and prefer the "natural" look. [huh] Same thing with fashion models-- I think a lot of those slightly androgynous, swan-necked willowy high fashion models are absolutely stunning (if unattainable looking to the average girl), but most guys I know seem to find them unattractive, too bony and strange looking.

Also, I don't think everyone agrees when someone is unattractive at all! This has been better explained upthread, I know, but to join the chorus, so many celebrities especially seem to be force-fed to us as "beautiful", when I think they're quite plain looking. Aesthetics are such a personal matter; it's the same with everything, really. Just look at the "ugliest vintage dresses" thread... one girl's nightmare is another's dream dress!

 

[sheeplady]

I agree with what has been said. I'm not really sure what Hollywood is perpetuating as physical beauty, but it doesn't meet my standards. When I flip through the television channels and I see such thin girls on the shows targeted towards high schoolers (so thin they must have an eating disorder) it just makes me sad.

I think that a woman is beautiful if she showcases herself with her most attractive features and feels comfortable with herself. Most people aren't born being physical knock-outs- I'm not by any stretch. But I think that any person can play up their features (physical, mental, personality, taste, style) to be a knock-out beauty. I think the ladies here are beauties, inside and out.

Beauty is more a state of mind. Think about the person you know (in real life) who you would describe as the most elegant, kind, and tasteful person you know. Chances are they aren't necessarily "beautiful" by society's standards.

I also think there are a ton more compliments I'd rather get than being called beautiful.

 

[Amy Jeanne]

Ha, my first thoughts exactly. But luckily this has really turned into an interesting discussion.

The wrong forum was trolled! lol

For what it's worth I think Sara Jessica Parker is more attractive than Britney Spears. Just about everyone says SJP is "ugly", but I disagree. She is striking. So I guess we all don't agree on what's "unattractive", right? lol Britney and her ilk bore me.

For men, I find Brad Pitt ugly. His lips gross me out. Peter Serafinowicz is my idea of an attractive man!

I can say the same for Jean Harlow. Allmost everyone I know says she's unattractive and that they don't like her nose. I think she's the most gorgeous woman ever.

 

[crwritt]

Beauty is as beauty does.