Prismatic wrote:That may all be true or not, I have little evidence either way. In any case my observations were only about facial attractiveness, which, as you point out, is only one component of attractiveness.Misty wrote: While nature favors the 'norm', except where mutations of distortion or extremes occur, the norm is the rule and not the exception. People tend to think their own family traits are more beautiful than other people. The 'norm' is variety. Unattractive or people with distortions are usually attractive to someone and marry and are successful sometimes more so than what is considered the norm. While attractiveness is generalized by these observations, people tend to be attracted to others for many reasons. It is quite normal to see a very handsome male or very pretty female with an unattractive person. It is also normal for one to initially find someone attractive or unattractive but after spending time with them they become the opposite. (pretty becomes ugly - ugly becomes pretty)
I saw a documentary on television several years back in which Anthropologists did research on what characteristic if any has the quality of being universally attractive to males. They discovered one female feature that males of all different cultures respond to positively. In fact it could be mostly an unconscious attraction. It should be no surprise that it is the waist-hip ratio of females. The smaller the waist-hip ratio irregardless of other features, the more the attractiveness. Marilyn Monroe had that particular characteristic as well as other movie stars.
On the other side of the coin, there is an universal attractiveness feature on the part of males also. I believe it is shoulder size or something like that.
