|
View Poll Results: Which is your preffered mating race? | |||
Same/Own Race | 33 | 49.25% | |
White(Caucosoid) | 12 | 17.91% | |
Asian(Mongoloid) | 15 | 22.39% | |
Black(Negroid) | 1 | 1.49% | |
Hispanic | 0 | 0% | |
Arab | 2 | 2.99% | |
Other Hybrids (describe the racial mixture) | 4 | 5.97% | |
Voters: 67. You may not vote on this poll |
|
Thread Tools |
2009-08-15, 03:01 | Link #101 | |
Pretentious moe scholar
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Age: 37
|
Quote:
For example, I consider Megumi Natsume to be the most beautiful girl I've ever seen, even after mentally compensating for the fact I'm pretty sure that she's been touched up in Photoshop there. She has a number of traits I find extremely attractive. The caveat? I have never seen her outside of costume. It seem to me like that should matter, but I always just end up thinking "meh, as long as the wig and contacts are convincing, is it really a problem? How is it different from just changing clothes?". |
|
2009-08-15, 03:28 | Link #102 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2006
|
Quote:
But in general, the following traits are considered attractive: Tall Height Long legs Lean Physique Symmetry of Features Double eyelid Almond eyes (females) Prominent nose Narrow face Light Skin (esp. females) Lack of Body Hair (females) It's also possible to judge beauty by what is not considered beautiful: Short Height Stubby legs Obese Physique Asymmetry of Features Epicanthic Fold Broad nose Broad face Prognathism Buck tooth Dark Skin (esp. females) Presence of Body Hair (females) There are also more "subjective" features like eye color, hair color, structure of cheekbones, etc., where people will probably disagree as to what is most desirable. Still, I think among people of European descent there is a preference for light-colored eyes and light-colored hair. Last edited by Lathdrinor; 2009-08-15 at 03:40. |
|
2009-08-15, 03:55 | Link #104 | |
Obey the Darkly Cute ...
Author
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: On the whole, I'd rather be in Kyoto ...
Age: 66
|
Quote:
__________________
|
|
2009-08-15, 04:43 | Link #107 | |
Moving in circles
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Singapore
Age: 49
|
Quote:
Generally, these preferences have understandable motivations, from an evolutionary viewpoint. Women with symmetrical features and clear skin are more likely to be healthy and capable of surviving child birth. That's apparently the same evolutionary instinct that spurs men towards young-looking women. And, apparently, studies have also found that the only universal ideal in the physical beauty of women is their waist-to-hip ratio, which makes evolutionary sense as a woman needs to have wide-enough hips to bear children safely. Unfortunately, pin-pointing the "ideal ratio" is an entirely different matter and, historically, we've gone from the exaggerated hourglass figure of Victorian women to today's thin-as-a-rake supermodels. This essay I found suggests that "healthy, reproductively-capable women have a waist-to-hip ratio of between 0.67 to 0.80. A ratio of 0.70 was found to be the average ideal, across time and culture, regardless of the woman's overall body size and weight". While the essay contains no references to published papers, I don't find it entirely far-fetched. |
|
2009-08-15, 05:11 | Link #108 | ||
.....
Join Date: Jul 2009
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
2009-08-15, 11:14 | Link #109 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2006
|
Quote:
As for whether "whites" are genetically appearance-wise superior, that depends on the sub-population to which they belong. I don't think white people can be lumped together as a homogeneous group. Quote:
Nature makes mistakes. Also, this thread has a lack of picture links, which is odd when talking about physical attractiveness. |
||
2009-08-15, 11:44 | Link #110 |
Obey the Darkly Cute ...
Author
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: On the whole, I'd rather be in Kyoto ...
Age: 66
|
I think it was the "tall" attribute I found odd and set me wondering about the other attributes. I'm not disputing symmetry or other fairly universal traits... that list just seemed very "european"-centric.
__________________
|
2009-08-15, 11:44 | Link #111 | ||
Moving in circles
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Singapore
Age: 49
|
Quote:
Here's the specific quote that directly answers your question: Quote:
In other words, our idea of "beauty" comes from both nature and nurture, just like most of our other beliefs. There is no universal standard, and probably never will be, unless we somehow develop the so-called "monoculture" (highly improbable) I referred to earlier. And, as many people here have already pointed out, physical beauty alone does not determine who you're attracted to. First impressions count, yes, but after that, everything else about that person — his or her personality, thoughts and behaviour — will determine whether or not you like him or her. |
||
2009-08-15, 12:35 | Link #112 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2006
|
Yes, nature and nurture, I agree. But it would be wise to take a less anthropocentric view of physical attraction. There doesn't have to be a human explanation for everything. Humans did not pop out of the evolutionary chain fully formed. We are the products of all that came before us. Somewhere down that line, certain confounding effects might have occurred that, today, biases our perceptions in its entirety.
I like to use eye color as a classic example. Blue eyes are considered beautiful and attractive. Does that imply there has to be some objective evolutionary benefits associated with blue eyes? No, not really. It could be that the preference for blue eyes is simply a product of the preference for the color blue, which might not have had anything to do with eyes to begin with. What else is blue? Well, water, and one could easily see how an affinity to sources of water would be beneficial for an organism. Ergo, the attraction to the color blue, and blue eyes. A similar argument could be made for hair and skin color. Humans are diurnal animals. We do not like the dark, because we can't see in it, and all sorts of predators come out at night - predators that might have, once upon a time, hunted our chimp ancestors. We thus associate darkness with negative values like fear, danger, and harm. Is it so surprising that this sort of color bias in nature might then translate to color bias when seeking mates? Not really. A lot of this physical attraction thing could just be shallow side-effects of other evolutionary factors. |
2009-08-15, 13:13 | Link #113 | ||
Love Yourself
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Northeast USA
Age: 38
|
Quote:
* Blue eyes have been found to be at an evolutionary disadvantage to brown eyes. They don't adjust to changes in light as quickly as brown eyes. (How big of a deal was this back before the days of artificial lighting? Maybe not terribly important.) * The idea about the correlation with water is interesting, but humans aren't attracted to all things blue or water-colored (nor are other organisms). * Blue eyes are recessive, meaning that in a population of mixed blue and brown eyes, blue eyes will be much more rare (approximately one in four people would have blue eyes). If you agreed with me earlier when I said that humans like rare/exotic things, then that could also explain the attraction for blue eyes. Although I disagree with the notion that blue eyes in general are attractive. I'm turned off by blue eyes, as is my fiancee. The opinions of one man and one woman don't count for everyone, and I know that there are many people who do prefer blue eyes to brown eyes, but... well, that's the trouble with generalizations Quote:
In the past, lighter skin tones were rare due to sun exposure. As society evolved, lighter skin tones were likely associated with power and wealth (those who had the luxury of staying out of the sun, and having others work for them). In modern society, many crimes are committed by people of darker skin tones, just due to the way that races and socioeconomic status developed, and hence many people have an aversion there. It's all learned. Yet another example of that is with people from the Middle East. A few years ago (before the year 2001) nobody paid much attention to Middle Easterners. These days, if you see a guy in a turban or a woman wearing a hijab walking down the street, you'll notice that many people are nervous. This is because an association has been made by much of society between those people (Middle Easterners/Muslims) and terrorists. If very pale people began committing major crimes over the course of a few years, and perhaps darker-skinned people simultaneously appeared less frequently in criminal reports, then a reversal would very likely occur. You're correct in tracing things back, however. Many of these concepts and ideas started from something, but whether it's biological or societal in nature is a bit harder to discern. I tend to think that much of what we observe today originated from societal origins.
__________________
|
||
2009-08-15, 13:28 | Link #114 |
Disabled By Request
|
I won't vote because I have no particular preference toward any kind of race. Whether the girl is European, African, Middle Eastern or Asian, I don't care. What matters is her personality and how well she can think for herself rather than follow certain cultural anxioms like a slave, or be the kind of person who just does what she's told without thinking. That's what happened with me and my ex and it was agonizing for me. Anyways, if someone pointed a gun to my head and told me to choose, I'd either go for my own race (white caucasian as I'm Italian), or East Asian.
|
2009-08-15, 13:33 | Link #115 |
Absolute Haruhist!
Artist
Join Date: Mar 2006
Age: 36
|
I didn't read the entire thread, but here's a bit from me.
Evolution, nature, genes or race won't decide anything, they can only affect your preference to a certain degree. Naturally we are supposed to be picking mates by various genetic clues expressed in different ways from the body. Naturally we are supposed to be picking mates not just by looks, also by smell, which in the modern world, has become lost in an atmosphere of various other smells. People put on perfume, cologne and stuff, combined with many other smells in the atmosphere, our noses are not efficient enough. Scientists say you can tell the genetic health of a person just by looking at a single patch of skin, but beauty and health care products can solve or mask problems easily nowadays. Humans have transcended evolution in making oneself more desirable, especially true with the completely unnatural factor of money. Money makes one more or less desirable.
__________________
|
2009-08-15, 13:36 | Link #116 | ||
勇者
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Tesla Leicht Institute
Age: 34
|
Quote:
Also the light skin and dark thing is so freaking wrong. Look at how many females are getting tan these days. Quote:
__________________
|
||
2009-08-15, 23:16 | Link #120 |
Love Yourself
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Northeast USA
Age: 38
|
No, it isn't. Universal means that every single person alive feels that way. I guarantee you, not everyone feels that way, and we probably don't even need to consider those with mental illness to make that statement.
__________________
|
Thread Tools | |
|
|