Quizzes & Puzzles11 mins ago
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by legend760. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
well, looks like a little side tracked conversation has gone on half way through this post, but ill just say what i came here to say, the leg it quick out the door.
beauty IS in the eye of the beholder. All that that really means is, different people view beauty, well, differently. okay okay okay i know, 99% beauty is always going to be seen as good looking on the outside. but this is the way our world works. fact is, like it or not, if your whats seens as a geek, dont go expecting girls (if your a guy im presuming...) to throw themselves at you. if your good looking, then expect it. truth is, looks get you what you want. even if it is a group of shallow friends.
of course, weve all heard our parents say, its the beauty inside that counts. let me correct this once and for all. thats such a full of crap statement, it is now, and it was when my mum said the same to me when i was a kid. at school, you look different, your a freak, even if its not your own fault, its playground common law. and when parents say "its whats inside that counts" their lying to stop their kids getting depressed. (...that didnt work then...) good looking gets you things the easy way, hence everyone wants it.
if your ugly, expect problems. look at my life! although dont actually, cuz im a...erm...well, ya know, a "unique" example, so i dont count.
anyway, beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but everyone knows the unwritten rules about whats concidered beautiful or not (the same sorta thing with fasion really), so chances are, everyones views are swayed by, well everyone else. (good ol' group/social psychology eh?) confused? and lets be honest, who "really" wants to admit they fancy the geeky girl in the corner reading a book? no one! (even if they secretly do! - like me!)
beauty IS in the eye of the beholder. All that that really means is, different people view beauty, well, differently. okay okay okay i know, 99% beauty is always going to be seen as good looking on the outside. but this is the way our world works. fact is, like it or not, if your whats seens as a geek, dont go expecting girls (if your a guy im presuming...) to throw themselves at you. if your good looking, then expect it. truth is, looks get you what you want. even if it is a group of shallow friends.
of course, weve all heard our parents say, its the beauty inside that counts. let me correct this once and for all. thats such a full of crap statement, it is now, and it was when my mum said the same to me when i was a kid. at school, you look different, your a freak, even if its not your own fault, its playground common law. and when parents say "its whats inside that counts" their lying to stop their kids getting depressed. (...that didnt work then...) good looking gets you things the easy way, hence everyone wants it.
if your ugly, expect problems. look at my life! although dont actually, cuz im a...erm...well, ya know, a "unique" example, so i dont count.
anyway, beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but everyone knows the unwritten rules about whats concidered beautiful or not (the same sorta thing with fasion really), so chances are, everyones views are swayed by, well everyone else. (good ol' group/social psychology eh?) confused? and lets be honest, who "really" wants to admit they fancy the geeky girl in the corner reading a book? no one! (even if they secretly do! - like me!)
I very much doubt anyone thinks looks count over personality at all.
What attracts us initially differs from person to person but I expect all have us have been friends with someone of the opposite sex and then harboured a little crush for them once we have realised how brilliant they are, despite not being "physically" your type.
I like buff boys with scruffy hair, tattoos and piercings and funny shaped noses but that doesnt mean every guy I date looks like that. I personally hold it in quite high regard if a man asks for my phone number, buys me a drink and has no expectation for me to go him with THAT night. As for geeks, absolutely love them but I wouldnt look twice at a liverpool football shirt wearing, skinhead ever. If that makes me shallow, then so be it.
What attracts us initially differs from person to person but I expect all have us have been friends with someone of the opposite sex and then harboured a little crush for them once we have realised how brilliant they are, despite not being "physically" your type.
I like buff boys with scruffy hair, tattoos and piercings and funny shaped noses but that doesnt mean every guy I date looks like that. I personally hold it in quite high regard if a man asks for my phone number, buys me a drink and has no expectation for me to go him with THAT night. As for geeks, absolutely love them but I wouldnt look twice at a liverpool football shirt wearing, skinhead ever. If that makes me shallow, then so be it.
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
I read an article in a science magazine once about attraction. It was very interesting. Nothing to do with love by the way.
Basically it made otu that "attraction" was all to do with procreation subliminally, so men were programmed to spread their seed everywhere and women were programmed to get the best genes they could for their children.
So if you rate men on a scale of 1 to 100. Ermmm, lets say Johnny Depp as alpha male 100 and Steve Buscemi as 25.
Then take a woman who was about 25 on the scale, she would still rather be 10th in line to get naughty with Johnny because subconciously its better genes for her babies.
I have really dumbed it down but on a physical level it made sense.
You cannot help who you are attracted to but there are other factors involved, we have got to a point where are lives aren't solely about procreation. I'm not sure I subscribe to the notion but maybe monogamy just isn't natural.
Basically it made otu that "attraction" was all to do with procreation subliminally, so men were programmed to spread their seed everywhere and women were programmed to get the best genes they could for their children.
So if you rate men on a scale of 1 to 100. Ermmm, lets say Johnny Depp as alpha male 100 and Steve Buscemi as 25.
Then take a woman who was about 25 on the scale, she would still rather be 10th in line to get naughty with Johnny because subconciously its better genes for her babies.
I have really dumbed it down but on a physical level it made sense.
You cannot help who you are attracted to but there are other factors involved, we have got to a point where are lives aren't solely about procreation. I'm not sure I subscribe to the notion but maybe monogamy just isn't natural.
-- answer removed --
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles45 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles102 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles103 mins ago
Hyperlinks And Copied Documents
Technology114 mins ago
