TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Chill Out Room
-- evolutionary nonsense
Pages (2): « 1 [2]

I wholeheartedly agree with the results of this study, regardless of any evolutionary benefit

quote:

Originally posted by diggerz what?

In times where it was considered 'attractive' for women to be plump (purportedly), it was typically only the wealthy who could afford luxuries such as 65% body fat. Of course, a lot has changed in the western world since those days, and being fat now is considered sloppy and disgusting for the most part (even if it is so widespread in several areas of the US), our media tells us what is attractive in those terms and what is not.

Well 16th century France didn't have CNN and People magazine - they had society, which was either high or low. As usual, high society set the standards for the little people (the more things change, the more they stay the same?) as far as recorded history would be concerned, because that is, essentially, all that we are able to extract out of history. Who knows what went unsaid amongst the toiling lower class? The only time we saw the lower class truly speaking its mind was when it was putting aristocrats to the guillotine. So was fat truly attractive? It was popular amongst the aristocratic minority, we know, as they were the ones with the resources to chronicle such things. But for the overwhelming majority of other people, was it? All I am saying is that the jury's still out on that one.

Somehow though, I doubt that the standards of classic beauty were abandoned - namely youth, health, symmetry; breeding potential.

quote:

I think good genes and a well-balanced diet are constant factors when determining whether one is healthy or not. 'Beauty' is completely different and biased, i believe in evolution. Intelligent design is bullcrap...

That...has nothing to do with this discussion.

There is a theory that cover the fatness/thinness shift throughout history. It states that when food supply is high, people tend to lean towards thinness. When food supply is low, people tend to prefer heftier mates. The logic is that when there is not much food, having fat supplies enhances reproductive success. When food supply is high, there is no need for this and other considerations come into play. For example, one study asked males either before or after eating which women they found more attractive. They found that men that were hungry preferred heftier women, men that just ate preferred thinner women.

Edit: I think the social class difference is a good point also. Another SES related shift is paleness. In medieval europe being pale was a highly coveted characteristic because it meant that one stayed inside and did not do manual labour, a sign of being rich. Right now, it is not so anymore, at least in developed countries. Although for some reason the Chinese still like women being extra pale.

quote:

Originally posted by venomX Although for some reason the Chinese still like women being extra pale.

the chinese want to be like the westerners and be as "white" as possible believe it or not. They actually hate their yellow skin tone.

quote:

Originally posted by trewqy the chinese want to be like the westerners and be as "white" as possible believe it or not. They actually hate their yellow skin tone.

Not really.... this practice extends wayyyyyy before westerners landed in China.

quote:

Originally posted by Halcyon+On+On Somehow though, I doubt that the standards of classic beauty were abandoned - namely youth, health, symmetry; breeding potential.

The Renaissance "ideal woman" wasn't really one whose health would be seriously impaired by fatness (i.e. they didn't like obese or even highly overweight women, just ones that might be considered kind of "chubby" now).

See, e.g. Rubens or the Venus of Urbino.

And contrast that to something like the so-called Venus of Willendorf. Not that anybody really knows much about how well the Willendorf figurines represent prehistoric ideas of beauty...

I dunno, Jingles. Some guys are into that sorta thing.

Of course. And some are into amputees.

edit: oh man, you took that last part off. Shame on you. hahaha

I figured it was less relevant, since it didn't have to do with "ideal bodies."

quote:

Originally posted by trewqy Beauty does play a part in evolution. They did a study a few years ago on about 40 odd faces in random order and they ask people all over the world to rank 1 to 40 how attractive they are, 1 being the most beautiful. Guess what 97% of the people who took the test had the same exact arrangements from 1 to 40. I cant be bothered to search for the documentary, but its out there somewhere. A sharp nose shows that the potential mate has good inhalation and that is important to a newborn. A bald guy would mean the boy would be bald at a much younger age and a mother would want the best for her boy. Taller men means taller children. Its been proven taller people have better jobs in general compared to shorter folks. List goes on and on..

Yeah, and you forgot money.

The ugliest, oldest fellow on the planet will get most any mate they like if they'd rolling in it.

quote:

Originally posted by trewqy the chinese want to be like the westerners and be as "white" as possible believe it or not. They actually hate their yellow skin tone.

lol, their skin tone isn't actually yellow, and white skin tone isn't really white either...

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Shibby Yeah, and you forgot money. The ugliest, oldest fellow on the planet will get most any mate they like if they'd rolling in it.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.