|
evolutionary nonsense (pg. 2)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by AustralianGQ
not that u care of course. |
precisely. my "net rep" means absolutely nothing to me. |
|
|
| Abercrombie |
 |
|
|
| MrJiveBoJingles |
| quote: | Originally posted by Abercrombie
|
:wtf: |
|
|
| Lilith |
| quote: | Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles
If you can find a culture where facial symmetry, clear skin, statistically average facial features, and women with a waist-hip ratio of about .7 are considered unattractive, I'd be interested to know. |
I think a lot of it comes down to how much porous minds soak up the bombardment of advertising and media which depicts the upper median as being the standard which others are judged. In some cases, the upper absolute median being the only desirable mate for people who tend to be material, peer-centric and unable to distinguish or haven't the type of personality to differentiate between what might fit a cultural and social acceptance, rather than any actual purpose. |
|
|
| nchs09 |
| quote: | Originally posted by david.michael
So.............. hot = healthy?
Sheeeit. I'm immortal. |
usually. fat and full of herpeps does not = healthy. |
|
|
| Halcyon+On+On |
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
that theory is completely undermined by the transient nature of concepts of beauty throughout history. there certainly wasn't any "universality" until modern media. |
Would you say that, historically, on the average, it was the upper class elite or the lower class proles known for producing 10-15 children per household? |
|
|
| Halcyon+On+On |
| quote: | Originally posted by DJ Shibby
Cultures in colder climates have been known to prefer larger women. Take Mongolia circa 1300, for example. Skinny women would have been considered gross and unhealthy. |
Did men generally prefer excessively hefty women back then or was being slender, young and healthy still attractive? How would we even know? The majority of recorded history from time periods where the division of the classes was so large (not that it has ever been small) was, of course, well-documented by the wealthy. They determined history.
MrJiveBoJingles, himself, once had a quote in his sig that said something to the effect of History is a graveyard of aristocracies. I think this is a pretty literal example of this concept.
Our concept of beauty may change from time to time, but healthiness will, in general, always be a very potent component of attraction. I'd say it always has been and probably always will be. I think that what changes the most, however, is our standard of what it means to be 'healthy'. |
|
|
| occrider |
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
bull. we go for younger mates coz theyre hotter and firmer with everything still in the right place. |
http://men.msn.com/staticslideshow....umentid=4879931
I would bang Diane Lane into oblivion. Seriously ... no atoms left. |
|
|
| DJ Shibby |
| quote: | Originally posted by Halcyon+On+On
Did men generally prefer excessively hefty women back then or was being slender, young and healthy still attractive? How would we even know? The majority of recorded history from time periods where the division of the classes was so large (not that it has ever been small) was, of course, well-documented by the wealthy. They determined history.
MrJiveBoJingles, himself, once had a quote in his sig that said something to the effect of History is a graveyard of aristocracies. I think this is a pretty literal example of this concept.
Our concept of beauty may change from time to time, but healthiness will, in general, always be a very potent component of attraction. I'd say it always has been and probably always will be. I think that what changes the most, however, is our standard of what it means to be 'healthy'. |
Well, I'm not exactly sure that a culture of horse farmers would have similar documentational "issues" as the roman-catholic mired europeans... but I do agree that history is never exactly what it seems, since we record poorly and with bias; we're also incapable of capturing the essence and milieu of an era and locale with texts... for that we must soak up lots of different sources, and hope they're broad enough to bring together that constellation of information into a united conceptualization.
But, there are certain interesting clues that are fun, and if anything I'd say that what we perceive to be "natural" to us now, would not have in another era or the future. Take fun little clues like the Venus of Willendorf, which for all we know was ancient pr0n. lol |
|
|
| Halcyon+On+On |
| quote: | Originally posted by DJ Shibby
Take fun little clues like the Venus of Willendorf, which for all we know was ancient pr0n. lol |
Are you saying she's not hot now??? :wtf: |
|
|
| diggerz |
| quote: | Originally posted by Halcyon+On+On
Did men generally prefer excessively hefty women back then or was being slender, young and healthy still attractive? How would we even know? The majority of recorded history from time periods where the division of the classes was so large (not that it has ever been small) was, of course, well-documented by the wealthy. They determined history. |
what?
| quote: |
Our concept of beauty may change from time to time, but healthiness will, in general, always be a very potent component of attraction. I'd say it always has been and probably always will be. I think that what changes the most, however, is our standard of what it means to be 'healthy'. |
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... |
|
|
| Xenocreator_PG_ |
She is hot!
and she is fit!!
what else could you ask for?
I bet she's got real tight hemoroids too |
|
|
|
|
