Why do boys want good-looking girls?

Page 14 of 15 [ 236 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 11, 12, 13, 14, 15  Next

LePetitPrince
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Mar 2006
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,464

06 Jun 2008, 1:03 pm

bla bla bla ....typical talk of an old man who's trying to picturing us that his generation was less shallow and our generation is all bad. Beauty didn't change dramatically since the past , Princess Nefertiti of Egypt is described as beautiful in the egpytian scripts and her statues tell us that she is beautiful according to our present standards. The statue of Achtarout ,the goddess of beauty and love in the Phoenician mythology , is a statue of a beautiful woman. Aphrodite , the goddess of beauty , doesn't look an ugly woman according to statues

Not a long time ago,Marilyn Monroe was considered one of the sexiest symbols of beauty. We can't say that she's ugly according to our 'present standards" , I am sure that zekmoe knows that very well.

It is known that obesity was considered a beauty in the medieval age , usually the ones with the "Beauty standards have changed during the Homo Sapiens history" theory ALWAYS use this wrong example.

In fact, there's no proof that men in the medieval age preferred obese women, there was one painter Peter Paul Rubens who used obese women as models for his paints , maybe he had some fetish for obese women but it doesn't proof the general preference of the men of his era.
Many other paintings by other painting disprove this theory:


Image

do they look obese? NO


and this the painting of a spanish artist in the medieval era:

Image

This painting was considered a symbol of beauty on its time

Does she look obese? Does she look ugly? No no


and this :


Image


Are they obese? Are they ugly? no no

It's true that the beauty standards were that much different in the past? NO


It's true that these models didn't have fake big boobs but we can't say that we can't see their beauty.




As for zekmoe post, a lot of things changed since his times , in the early past , marriages were mostly based on arranged marriages and women were financially dependable on men , women didn't have the power of the sexual selection that they possess them now in the serial monogamy system. The woman was pressured by her family or by her financial need to pick a particular mate regardless of her instincts.
Nowadays, since women have restored their natural role in the natural selection , mating selection have returned in a great extent to its real natural rules , as it should be.


The ability of determining beauty was evolved in our DNA , it's not that subjective as zekmoe trying to picture it , a beautiful woman or man is usually seen beautiful by the greater majority of the people around them.



twoshots
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Nov 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,731
Location: Boötes void

06 Jun 2008, 2:08 pm

ManErg wrote:
Robrukas wrote:
Physical beauty is a biological indicator of both fertility AND good genes.


What total utter rubbish! Please could you share the research that shows the correlation between fertility and beauty - probably not, because there isn't any. For starters, physical beauty is subjective and although members who share the same cultural conditioning will have similar ideals of beauty, different cultures define beauty in a totally different way.

On the other hand fertility is objective and measurable. There are lots of people with fertility problems. If you went to a fertility clinic do you really think the clients would be uglier than average? And you don't have to walk far down any city street to see some horrendously ugly slob couple with half a dozen kids.

If you really look at whats going on, you find that Hale Bopp is correct - It's all a mystery with human beings. Our primitive brains are conned by visions of beauty (eg anorexic super models) that are actually less fertile and even less healthy overall. Psychological health is as important as physical health, unfortunately physical appearance is little indicator of inner health. There are plenty of messed up pychos who are nice looking. And ugly saints.

A question: of those with the best genes always win, how come there are any with so-called inferior genes still left? If big curves on a women offer some advantage, how come we still have millions of women with small curves? Perhaps because nature truly needs diversity, not uniformity.

It never ceases to amuse me how many people assert the nonexistence of evidence for other people's positions when their experience in a field is clearly superficial at best. There are scientists who support the idea that beauty is simply a matter of selection which is wired for based on fertility etc. It could hardly be said that it is set in stone determined, but the hypothesis definitely exists. Why, I just typed "beauty fertility" into google scholar and the first article I got had an abstract containing:
Quote:
The results suggest that (1) beautiful female faces are not average, but vary from the average in a systematic manner, and (2) female beauty can best be explained by a sexual selection viewpoint, whereby selection favors cues that are reliable indicators of fertility.


_________________
* here for the nachos.


twoshots
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Nov 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,731
Location: Boötes void

06 Jun 2008, 2:58 pm

LePetitPrince wrote:
...

Aha. But how do you explain, this?
Image
(24,000 BC – 22,000 BC)

I will propose a refutation of this evidence later on


_________________
* here for the nachos.


Zane
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2008
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 347
Location: Tempe, Arizona

06 Jun 2008, 3:10 pm

Chris wrote:
I do not understand why people buy Windows computers when Macintosh computers look nicer and are much more user-friendly.


You might be to young to remember the 90's but they were dominated by Microsoft. Living in Seattle, I grew up on PC's. I have said it once and I will say it again Microsoft is more professional an specifically targets the business demographic not the college kids or the trendy scene. Bill Gates newest design is created to help restaurants for goodness sake.

PCs automatically back files up so in the case of freezing up or loss of power you will have all data saved. For an additional 3-400 dollars MAC will provide you with a time portal.

PCs are constantly updating thus I can get a fully loaded computer for 1k as opposed to a basic system for 1.5k.

Steve Jobs is an as*hole. Never met him but have grown up watching his interviews, reading about his business ethic, and enjoying PC's superiority. Truth is PC's are for the elite. Those who know, use Linix and a PC. If it was not for the I-Pod franchise MAC would not be here today.

In their defense MAC has far easier and just as efficient media designed software and dominates the market as far as user compatibility goes. Also you get what you pay for and they are by no means a bad company.


Chris wrote:
i do not understand why people drink coffee in the morning when all you get is a bitter aftertaste.
Easy, it gets you high. Caffeine is a wonderful drug. It amps you up and forces you to move. You receive a nice euphoric effect. Bitter after effects are nothing compared to a nice caffeine fix.




Chris wrote:
Why are men so concerned about having girls who are hot?
And finally little buddy here is your answer.

Social expectations + Biology = Why we do what we do.

Biologically:

Larger breasts = fertility

Hour Glass Figure = fertility

Socially: Obesity is out and fit n thin is in.

I am sure she is a fantastic girl. I have many Fat friends. But they are my friends and I would never date them. They are unattractive.

I work out 3-4 days a week. Why? To stay healthy, live longer, enjoy all of the amazing benefits.

To me fat "chicks" are disgusting. I find it very unhealthy. I am not saying bigger girls are "ugly" at all. In fact Scarlotte Johanson, Marylin Monroe, and Betty Page are all fantastically beautiful women.

What I am saying is watching as "fat people" in general eat another McDonalds burger or guzzle down their Circle K "Big Gulp" (containing three serving min) or anything else along those lines I become very, very, very disgusted.

It is one thing if my 5' 8" 130-145lbs ass eats a burger. I earned that right. But when that 200+ lbs woman decides to sacrfice health over glutony I say good riddence.

Diabetes isn't a disease its population control. Too much sugar is NOT HEALTHY.

Sorry didn't mean to go on a tangent.

Long story short:

When you are young it is all about IMAGE.

When you get older it becomes more about choosing who you associate with.

If you are happy chasing chubbies then have at it. As all my friends like to say "fat chicks need loving too"

-Zane


_________________
"The world is dying; time to suit up"


Zane
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2008
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 347
Location: Tempe, Arizona

06 Jun 2008, 3:13 pm

twoshots wrote:
LePetitPrince wrote:
...

Aha. But how do you explain, this?
Image
(24,000 BC – 22,000 BC)

I will propose a refutation of this evidence later on


In those times (24,000 BC – 22,000 BC) only the ritch and wealthy could afford to sit on their asses and eat. Thus fat people were a sign on wealth and superiority.

They did not have Mc Ducks and Taco Hell. Just whatever was left after the farmers market.

Today fat people = lazy.

End of story. Its true. Working out gives you less stress, a faster metabolism, and an understanding of how truly horrible obesity is.


_________________
"The world is dying; time to suit up"


twoshots
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Nov 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,731
Location: Boötes void

06 Jun 2008, 3:20 pm

1) In those times, it was a hunter gatherer uber primitive society. It may be stretching it a bit, but speculations that they were rather egalitarian by the standards of any society we could compare them to which might involve a "wealthy" class exists. Then there's the fact that life was nomadic, there was no wheel, no domestic animals (save dogs maybe), and it's hard to picture anyone sitting on their ass.

2) Begging the question. The actual variation in human perceptions of beauty based on cultural conditioning is precisely what is in question here.


_________________
* here for the nachos.


Zane
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2008
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 347
Location: Tempe, Arizona

06 Jun 2008, 3:25 pm

twoshots wrote:
1) In those times, it was a hunter gatherer uber primitive society. It may be stretching it a bit, but speculations that they were rather egalitarian by the standards of any society we could compare them to which might involve a "wealthy" class exists. Then there's the fact that life was nomadic, there was no wheel, no domestic animals (save dogs maybe), and it's hard to picture anyone sitting on their ass.

2) Begging the question. The actual variation in human perceptions of beauty based on cultural conditioning is precisely what is in question here.
Nope. Since the dawn of man kind there has always been a top dog. And of course I can't prove it because I don't own a time machine. But any logical human being can see past and realize we (humanity) are not as complicated as we seem to think. (stupid inferiority issues)

PS: Who do you think Noah was?


_________________
"The world is dying; time to suit up"


Last edited by Zane on 06 Jun 2008, 3:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.

ManErg
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Apr 2006
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,090
Location: No Mans Land

06 Jun 2008, 3:30 pm

twoshots wrote:
LePetitPrince wrote:
...

Aha. But how do you explain, this?
Image
(24,000 BC – 22,000 BC)

I will propose a refutation of this evidence later on


I don't think anybody living today can truly explain it. Never mind the body, what's happening to the head???


_________________
Circular logic is correct because it is.


ManErg
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Apr 2006
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,090
Location: No Mans Land

06 Jun 2008, 3:35 pm

Zane wrote:
Nope. Since the dawn of man kind there has always been a top dog.


Who cares about 1 dog when there are 5 billion or so in total? You know where most of our ideas of 'top dog' come from? The 'alleged' top dog, most of the time. They control the weapons so we have to agree with their nonsense through to today where the control the media so anti-top dog ideas can't even exist. Top dog is an emporer with no clothes.


_________________
Circular logic is correct because it is.


Zane
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2008
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 347
Location: Tempe, Arizona

06 Jun 2008, 3:43 pm

ManErg wrote:
Zane wrote:
Nope. Since the dawn of man kind there has always been a top dog.


Who cares about 1 dog when there are 5 billion or so in total? You know where most of our ideas of 'top dog' come from? The 'alleged' top dog, most of the time. They control the weapons so we have to agree with their nonsense through to today where the control the media so anti-top dog ideas can't even exist. Top dog is an emporer with no clothes.
Yeah right on. I believe this also. I am a firm believer in individuality and promoting the idea of a new race "Humanity" as opposed to separating us all into categories and I believe people need to keep most of their "opinions" to themselves and instead nurture their spirits.

But I ask you this, if you were able to acumulate the means to provide an end. If you ManErg found the way to show us all the light and guide us into "elightenment". In short if you brought world peace to humanity. Wouldn't that make you top dog? Above everyone else and against all odds want it or not you would become top dog. There would be statues celebrating you and people would never forget your name...

Top dog has a bad rep. Lately our top dogs have been war mongers and greedy rich people.

All that aside, I still stick to my guns. Ancient times are not reliable enough to take for fact.

What we should do is allow individualism. I do not find fat women attractive. That does not mean I go out of my way to let them know this. It just means I believe in health over gluttony.

I have that right just like you all have the right to chubby chase.

-Zane


_________________
"The world is dying; time to suit up"


LePetitPrince
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Mar 2006
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,464

06 Jun 2008, 4:14 pm

twoshots wrote:
LePetitPrince wrote:
...

Aha. But how do you explain, this?
Image
(24,000 BC – 22,000 BC)

I will propose a refutation of this evidence later on


I remember well the history teacher explained about it at school, It symbolize fertility ,motherhood and nutrition (women's breeding functions) , breast and tummy are extra sized for that reason. She's not a goddess of beauty.



LePetitPrince
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Mar 2006
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,464

06 Jun 2008, 4:19 pm

Quote:
Diabetes isn't a disease its population control. Too much sugar is NOT HEALTHY


Diabetes I is caused mainly by genes.



LePetitPrince
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Mar 2006
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,464

06 Jun 2008, 4:24 pm

I have a question to all guys and girls who don't believe that beauty detection is biologically-based:

When you got wet dreams or you have wet thoughts? Do you see unattractive/fat girls/skinny/shorty guys in your wet thoughts/dreams? Or you see some sexy individual?



merr
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Oct 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Female
Posts: 515

06 Jun 2008, 4:49 pm

Zane wrote:
Diabetes isn't a disease its population control.
Cold-blooded. Hey, I'm not attracted to chubby men either but how could you say that? That's sick.



The_Cucumber
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 May 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 514

06 Jun 2008, 4:57 pm

Hmmm.... oddly enough my reasoning behind asking the girl I went to prom with had almost nothing to do with her physical appearance. It was more along the lines of her being as shy and socially inhibited as I am.... something that would have caused serious problems had it not been for her more talkative best friend.

I may still have the base biological attraction towards your stereotypically attractive girls. However then my logical side kicks in and reminds me that she probably won't understand a word of what I say, and certainly won't have any interest in my philosophical nature (unlike my prom date but that's not the point), two things any long term relationship requires. And in my opinion any relationship that can't last isn't worth having.


_________________
The improbable goal: Fear nothing, hate nothing, and let nothing anger you.


KingofKaboom
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Oct 2007
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,471

06 Jun 2008, 5:03 pm

Hmm Why do girls want good looking boys?


_________________
Tacos (optional)