Are looks really that subjective?.

[Necromancer]

I have many times been partying with a group of male friends and all the time gals call this friend of mine the cutest guy of the group.

 

Really 100% of the time. I really don't think that physical looks are that subjective as some people claim here. I have heard by male posters that women are mostly after the same guys in the group and that might be true from my experience. Not because of confidence/personality rather because of looks.

 

I had to make a post about this subject after the night.

[dbzeng]

Attractive physical features aren't THAT subjective, what is subjective is how you dress up those features up. Whether you have a clean cut look, or a tatted biker look or emo or the jock look.

 

Basically if you are guy you need to have a symmetrical face and a strong prominent jaw.

[MrCastle]

Some things are subjective, some are objective.

 

When it comes to body, a lot is objective. I don't think any man is gonna be turned off by big boobs or a round ass.

 

Also, I always hear the word "symmetry" come up when talking about attractiveness. To which I always say, so what? You can be symmetrically ugly. Just means you're as ugly on one side of your face as you are on the other. Congrats

[miss_jaclynrae]

My girlfriends and I have COMPLETELY different tastes, so yes, it is definitely subjective.

[Necromancer]

Attractive physical features aren't THAT subjective, what is subjective is how you dress up those features up. Whether you have a clean cut look, or a tatted biker look or emo or the jock look.

 

Basically if you are guy you need to have a symmetrical face and a strong prominent jaw.

 

symmetrical face/strong jaw are only genetics. So mostly are out of our hands.

[Forever Silent]

I am afraid there is a such thing known as universial beauty. However, I believe it is not a significant factor when considering other variables associated with dating.

[dbzeng]

symmetrical face/strong jaw are only genetics. So mostly are out of our hands.

 

Yup you are right, that is why looks are the most important thing when initially attracting a woman. Being good looking is not only very rare, it also impossible to improve your facial features without plastic surgery.

[Eternal Sunshine]

No. Some people are objectively good looking meaning that high % of population will find them hot.

[Bob_Funk]

Not at all.

 

Of course all girls say they have individual preferences. But then you see who they actually choose, and you realize it's bunk. "I'm not into pretty boys. I've always dated nerds" (boyfriend looks like Zac Efron with glasses).

 

It's also important not to confuse options with preferences. Just because a girl dates certain guys, doesn't mean they were her first choice. They were just the best looking she could get commitment from.

[Bob_Funk]

My girlfriends and I have COMPLETELY different tastes, so yes, it is definitely subjective.

 

Maybe when it comes to guys who are already exceptionally good looking (e.g. you might prefer Chris Hemsworth over Sean O'Pry, while your friend prefers the latter). But otherwise, nope. No girl would choose Jesse Eisenberg over Channing Tatum.

Edited July 22, 2012 by Bob_Funk

[miss_jaclynrae]

Maybe when it comes to guys who are already in the 8-10 range (e.g. you might prefer Chris Hemsworth over Sean O'Pry, while your friend prefers the latter). But otherwise, nope.

 

ROFL not even.

 

 

She loves men with big burly beards, and dreads, and men who are hairy and even those who are on the thick side. Hippy-ish men, while I... well the men I find attractive varies a LOT.

 

 

 

I guess we both like attractive men, but for us, we base it on the overall appearance and not just the physical traits. Sure, we can both agree that a certain man is "hot" but that does not mean by any means that either one of us would EVER go for him.

[RiverRunning]

 

(boyfriend looks like Zac Efron with glasses).

 

 

 

I laughed so hard at that - it DOES seem to be true. "I like guys who are not conventionally attractive." Turns out to be a guy who is conventionally attractive with, say, a pair of glasses, dreadlocks, a beard, etc. Small, slightly off features. I'd still call most of those guys 'conventionally attractive.'

 

Then again, I really have a thing for Asian guys. And according to most dating sites...that's bunk (I think on OKcupid, Asian men get drastically fewer hits than any other ethnic group). Yes, I like the stereotypical look (which isn't so common for most Asian men) - bit of a heavier build, some muscle definition, height, etc. But I'm also very attracted to Asian men who are slighter in build, shorter, etc.

 

I'd say the vast majority of the female and the male population, however, is interested in conventional appearances. Most of us say we aren't into that 'conventional look' - but most are.

 

But there are also vocal minorities out there. I think they estimate that about 10% of the population prefers overweight/obese partners.

 

FWIW, I'm dating a guy who is a few inches shorter than I am (He's 5'6") and he has a visible deformity. Hottest thing in the world, IMO.

[jakelongot]

For men, 80% of men basically agree on that that classically attractive look for women. Hourglass figure, pretty face.

 

For women, I think it varies much more. There will always be that classic look that is always in style...tall, athletic body, strong chin, etc...

 

But when choosing a mate it is much more subjective to women. A women can think you look good, but won't necessarily be attracted to you. Attractive (at least as far as long term dating) is much more defined by words, actions, charisma, charm, etc...

[carhill]

OP, when I was young I had a best male friend who would later go on to being the doppleganger for Brad Pitt. As soon as the hormones started up, he disappeared into the maelstrom of female attention and I was long forgotten. I remember when we were eleven and twelve he had sixteen/seventeen yo girls hitting on him.

 

To a certain degree, physical appearance is subjective wrt attraction but there are some people who are or appear to be 'universally' attractive, in that a large portion of the people they interact with find them to be attractive appearing. Obviously, none of us will ever interact with the entirety of the billions of people inhabiting the planet but, within the realm of those whom we do interact with, there is subjective and then there's subjective by the majority, or universal subjectivity.

[yongyong]

It is subjective.

When I try to explain this I use a dog as an example (only stupid people get mad by saying 'oh you think women are dogs??)

 

there are beautiful well groomed dogs on a dog show. I just look at it and say it's a beautiful dog but I don't get attached to them personally.

When I see a dog of my type, I just want to hug him, rub his face to my face, smell him etc. I am a eye person too. so I like a dog that has a special eye for me.

This dog is a basset hound....

[iris219]

Here’s the neat thing about women: A woman could look at your friend who everyone thinks is hot, agree that he is indeed attractive, and not be attracted to him AT ALL. It is likely she would be more attracted to one of your less traditionally attractive friends.

 

From your posts, it's clear that you really don’t understand how attraction works for women.

[carhill]

The criteria I like to use for 'attractive' versus 'hot' was, in a roundabout way, provided by my exW, who on occasion could be quoted as saying 'wow, if I weren't married, I'd like to have that cock inside me'.

 

That's how I delineate it, and did regarding my prior example of teenage girls hitting on a pubescent boy, pardon the crudity.

[seachangeoflove]

I

When I try to explain this I use a dog as an example (only stupid people get mad by saying 'oh you think women are dogs??)

 

 

No, it just means your attracted to dogs. Nothing wrong with that as long as you don't hurt a puppy

[Necromancer]

Here’s the neat thing about women: A woman could look at your friend who everyone thinks is hot, agree that he is indeed attractive, and not be attracted to him AT ALL. It is likely she would be more attracted to one of your less traditionally attractive friends.

 

From your posts, it's clear that you really don’t understand how attraction works for women.

 

My personal experience says otherwise.

 

About women? lol, so only women are blessed with this?. I know some women love to think they are better than men, (Not shallow) but common you are not fooling anyone here, at best yourself.

 

Just stop the shaming tactics. If you think i am 300 lbs basement nerd then i must break your water bubble.

 

Being good looking will attract crowds of women, having good personality will not guarantee the same results. it´s clear what weights more.

[Bob_Funk]

All one needs to do is set up two okcupid profiles, one of an average guy and one of a male model. Chances are the average guy won't get a single bite, while the make model will get numbers right away.

[Necromancer]

OP, when I was young I had a best male friend who would later go on to being the doppleganger for Brad Pitt. As soon as the hormones started up, he disappeared into the maelstrom of female attention and I was long forgotten. I remember when we were eleven and twelve he had sixteen/seventeen yo girls hitting on him.

 

To a certain degree, physical appearance is subjective wrt attraction but there are some people who are or appear to be 'universally' attractive, in that a large portion of the people they interact with find them to be attractive appearing. Obviously, none of us will ever interact with the entirety of the billions of people inhabiting the planet but, within the realm of those whom we do interact with, there is subjective and then there's subjective by the majority, or universal subjectivity.

 

Great post. I have a friend like that blessed physically, kudos to him.

 

I have seen how gals treat him with much more respect and how much advantage it is.

[brahmabull117]

Looks being "subjective" is a bunch of politically correct nonsense for people to feel good about themselves

 

 

 

This guy will appeal to 95% of women (Chris Hemsworth from Thor)

 

 

http://cdn03.cdnwp.celebuzz.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/18/chris-hemsworth.jpg

 

 

 

This girl will appeal to 95% of guys

 

 

http://i.imgur.com/7V44m.png

 

 

 

It's subjective to a very small degree, that's it

[Snowman219]

That's because looks are not that subjective.

 

See for yourself:

 

Physical attractiveness - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

For the most part, people agree on who is ugly and who is attractive. Everyone has their own little preferences, but opinions don't deviate in extreme ways from person to person the way some people would have you believe.

 

This is why we see the same type of women on magazine covers. If looks were so subjective, models would come in all shapes and sizes and "attractive women" would have NO dating advantage whatsoever over fat women.

 

Its actually pretty obvious looks are not that subjective OVERALL.

 

The online dating Website eHarmony only matches women with taller men, because of complaints from women matched with shorter men.

 

Got that from wiki...you poor short bastards!

[McMahal]

Like most things in life, the answer is "both" and "it depends".

 

Ever heard, "attractiveness is not a choice"? Look up something called "Cognitive bias", particularly the social biases such as the halo effect or illusory superiority. They explain A LOT of human behavior and thinking, including attraction. Many of our actions are not made consciously, not as much as we'd like to think. It might also explain why people say one thing but in reality they do another.

 

When I see people explaining what they find attractive, I wonder what they're self-esteem (somewhat tied to physical attractiveness) is like because that has a big impact on what they find attractive. For example something I've heard a lot, a girl might not want to be with a fit guy because he makes her feel fat (insecure), even if the girl herself is in good shape. As a result, the girl will go for less fit guys because they do not trigger insecurity, and thus a decent explanation for the common finding of fat guy with bodacious girl. Of course there are other reasons. She might not like the more attractive guys because they might be too busy paying attention to themselves to pay attention to her. A girl might expect only model-quality guys because she feels that is what she deserves (possibly excessively high self-esteem). BTW, I'm only focusing on the girl here because they tend to be the choosers.

 

For example, how people were mentioning dreadlocks and other less common or conventionally unattractive features, there is usually a reason why those things are attractive to that person. Think of them more as symbols that trigger certain feelings (for you psych people you know what I'm referring to). Guys with glasses might be intelligent, thus funner to talk to. Guys with dreadlocks might be artistic or DGAF, thus more creative and exciting. Beards might indicate aggressiveness. Chubby guys are not hung up on looks (see paragraph 3). So on and so forth...

 

Whatever the reason, it comes down to how that person affects how we think of ourselves AKA our self-esteem. We are selfish. Generally selfishness is seen as a terrible thing but it really isn't. I mean selfish as in focusing inward. How people affect our self-esteem is the basis of all of our relationships, not just romantic relationships. This is the subjective part. Why it plays a larger role for women, I do not know. Maybe it really is biology?

 

Studies have shown (google it) when couples are of similar attractiveness they tend to have a happier and successful relationship, though it might be because of how society frowns upon mismatched couples thus discouraging them. Though I take those with a grain of salt. I think in cases where there are large discrepancies between attractiveness, subjectivity really comes into play.

 

To sum this all up, I think there is an objective truth to beauty and attractiveness. Often we think subjectivity = emotionally, but it includes both our logical and emotional natures. Ultimately our subjectivity comes from our experiences in life and distort that objective truth of beauty. I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing but it is something we should be aware of.

[Necromancer]

Like most things in life, the answer is "both" and "it depends".

 

Ever heard, "attractiveness is not a choice"? Look up something called "Cognitive bias", particularly the social biases such as the halo effect or illusory superiority. They explain A LOT of human behavior and thinking, including attraction. Many of our actions are not made consciously, not as much as we'd like to think. It might also explain why people say one thing but in reality they do another.

 

When I see people explaining what they find attractive, I wonder what they're self-esteem (somewhat tied to physical attractiveness) is like because that has a big impact on what they find attractive. For example something I've heard a lot, a girl might not want to be with a fit guy because he makes her feel fat (insecure), even if the girl herself is in good shape. As a result, the girl will go for less fit guys because they do not trigger insecurity, and thus a decent explanation for the common finding of fat guy with bodacious girl. Of course there are other reasons. She might not like the more attractive guys because they might be too busy paying attention to themselves to pay attention to her. A girl might expect only model-quality guys because she feels that is what she deserves (possibly excessively high self-esteem). BTW, I'm only focusing on the girl here because they tend to be the choosers.

 

For example, how people were mentioning dreadlocks and other less common or conventionally unattractive features, there is usually a reason why those things are attractive to that person. Think of them more as symbols that trigger certain feelings (for you psych people you know what I'm referring to). Guys with glasses might be intelligent, thus funner to talk to. Guys with dreadlocks might be artistic or DGAF, thus more creative and exciting. Beards might indicate aggressiveness. Chubby guys are not hung up on looks (see paragraph 3). So on and so forth...

 

Whatever the reason, it comes down to how that person affects how we think of ourselves AKA our self-esteem. We are selfish. Generally selfishness is seen as a terrible thing but it really isn't. I mean selfish as in focusing inward. How people affect our self-esteem is the basis of all of our relationships, not just romantic relationships. This is the subjective part. Why it plays a larger role for women, I do not know. Maybe it really is biology?

 

Studies have shown (google it) when couples are of similar attractiveness they tend to have a happier and successful relationship, though it might be because of how society frowns upon mismatched couples thus discouraging them. Though I take those with a grain of salt. I think in cases where there are large discrepancies between attractiveness, subjectivity really comes into play.

 

To sum this all up, I think there is an objective truth to beauty and attractiveness. Often we think subjectivity = emotionally, but it includes both our logical and emotional natures. Ultimately our subjectivity comes from our experiences in life and distort that objective truth of beauty. I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing but it is something we should be aware of.

 

Worth reading