Handsome men = a rarity

[Isolde]

Yuck, he's too hairy.

 

Hugh Jackman is hideous. I'm sorry. Just--bleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeech.

[Trialbyfire]

Dustin is NOT sexy. That NOSE -- and he is another tiny one. Just a no-go all the way around.

 

Now Hugh Jackman -- there's a hottie.

I agree that Dustin Hoffman has nothing going for him externally. He's a excellent actor though.

 

Jackman's not my type either. I think it's his eyes. They're too small or something. A friend of mine is totally in lust with Jackman. She and I have different tastes because she also finds Lenny Kravitz hot and I would run away from him.

[Storyrider]

Yeah it's called Judaism.

?? I can see what you mean about noses, but heads?

[chrislovestosurf]

people tell me i look like hugh jackman.

 

But anyway, I think girls who have larger than "cute" noses are kind of sexy. As long as they have otherwise attractive facial features.

[Isolde]

people tell me i look like hugh jackman.

 

But anyway, I think girls who have larger than "cute" noses are kind of sexy. As long as they have otherwise attractive facial features.

 

You'd probably like me then. All my features (and my boobs) are big--I look like a freak, but at least I'm in proportion.

[CommitmentPhobe]

Exactly.

My parents MATCH, on physical and spiritual levels.

 

This is why I am so picky.

I want a good match for ME. Not perfection, a perfect match.

 

I just don't understand why more people don't want that for themselves.

 

Most people do want that for themselves.

 

You seem confused. On the one hand you create a thread which inolves a generic sliding scale of attractiveness, and on the other hand you talk about "a good match for me".

 

Isolde, to use an analogy, I'm not a fan of commercially produced pop music these days, I'd give some of those records a 3 whereas other people would give them a 10 or something. Point is it's very subjective, and it's very much the same with looks. Case in point, a while ago I was being chatted up by a girl I thought was average and she wasn't my type. Several guys I knew were there at the time and couldn't work out why I blew her off because they all thought she was a ten. She had perfect boobs, perfect body, blonde, incredibly attractive, but I didn't even notice all that, I just noticed she didn't do it for me.

 

To get back to my point about you, you seem very uncomfortable with your own choices and almost want to frame yourself in these situations. It's no good asking why more people don't want this from themselves when you yourself are perpertuating this myth about sliding scales of attractiveness. What one person perceives another doesn't. What do you want for yourself?

[Tomcat33]

I know I'm a 1-3 so I know my options are very limited. I'll gladly take a similar 1-3 woman. So what if she is chubby or has an imperfect face. If she is a good person, that means far far more to me than this physical stuff which fades anyway.

 

 

Your options are limited!?!?

 

Realisitcally speaking, the majority of people in society fall in the 1-5 category the problem is that we are so inundated by perfection in marketing and Hollywood glamor that we are convinced that is the norm. Sorry people but beautiful people that rate in the 8-10 category are freaks of nature NOT the norm.

 

As soon as we can all accept this the happier we will all be a society.

 

And no you are wrong, a lot of women are a lot more accepting of men that are lower in the grade so long as they have other redeeming qualities where as men, not so much. You read about it every single day here, intellectually capability amounts to shet, career amounts to she, life experience amounts to shet, the only thing men seem to be interested in (according to what we read around here and the "scientific data" found:laugh: ) are:

 

1)youth

2)good looks

 

when you make those two your only standards consider how much harder go you will have at meeting someone who is right for you.

[Isolde]

people tell me i look like hugh jackman.

 

But anyway, I think girls who have larger than "cute" noses are kind of sexy. As long as they have otherwise attractive facial features.

 

Oh, lest you be offended by my dislike of Hugh, he actually is attractive in many pictures. He just exudes a certain "sliminess."

[Citizen Erased]

Hugh Jackman is hideous. I'm sorry. Just--bleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeech.

 

Don't be sorry, I agree.

[runner]

Do any of you know couples where the man and woman are both eye-catchingly good looking?

 

I don't know *any*. If the guy is a 8-10/10 in looks, he almost invariably goes for the cute girl next door.

 

my sister and her husband. love at first sight sort of thing, married in less than a year, two daughters (my bratty nieces), and still going strong after 10+ yrs.

[Trialbyfire]

Just for fun, I'm going to throw in an actor I find attractive. Al Pacino. Okay ladies, go Eewwwww...in unison!

[Tomcat33]

?? I can see what you mean about noses, but heads?

 

 

:lmao: yes yes yes, you are so right what was I thinking of, of course a noggin is a head not nose...!?!? I dunno why I thought that.

 

I was still dreaming of Dustin Hoffman, I have a thing for those prominent nosed jewish boys....

 

Isolde I am sorry I was not trying to offend anyone I really thought he meant nose. Let's move on shall we?

[Citizen Erased]

Just for fun, I'm going to throw in an actor I find attractive. Al Pacino. Okay ladies, go Eewwwww...in unison!

 

Not to be predictable or anything...but eew.

[Isolde]

CommitmentPhobe, you ask some very probing questions.

 

The post started as an overcaffeinated inquiry into why handsome men are so rare, LOL.

 

Then I realized that I was really complaining about the fact that I find so few men really attractive, and that I don't seem to be approached by those I do.

 

I think on some level I am trying to quantify why things haven't worked out for me, and you're right--that's fallacious.

 

I am looking for a good match, nothing more, nothing less!

[Trialbyfire]

Not to be predictable or anything...but eew.

Knew it! I was trying to think of an actor who's on par with Hoffman but does it for me. Talent galore and kick-arse voice control.

[Isolde]

Just for fun, I'm going to throw in an actor I find attractive. Al Pacino. Okay ladies, go Eewwwww...in unison!

 

He reminds me of Leonard Cohen from some angles. I think LC was hot when he was younger.

[Trialbyfire]

He reminds me of Leonard Cohen from some angles. I think LC was hot when he was younger.

Yes, he does!

 

I do agree that he's not hot now but still had it, even 10 years ago.

[Saint Valentine]

50% of people are below average in looks. At least half of those barely pass for being human. Having sex with an ugly person is almost impossible without a fertile imagination. Even so, it makes sense to get really drunk first.

[Tomcat33]

Al Paccino yes I can see the sex appeal.

 

Leonard Cohen, Keith Richards,, and Lyle Lovette, Iggy Pop all those types would not have a leg stand on if they were regular guys off the street. I can see why women find these men attractive due to their fame and the music they write etc but really if we are talking strictly physical appeal those men are really not much to look at.

 

I think of it like this, if I worked with a guy that looked just like Lyle Lovette would I zero him out in a room full of guys and thinka "wow there is something about him" no more than likely not. But a Dustin Hoffman or Al Paccino, yes I would think "hm that guy's got something..."

[Storyrider]

50% of people are below average in looks. At least half of those barely pass for being human. Having sex with an ugly person is almost impossible without a fertile imagination. Even so, it makes sense to get really drunk first.

Are you sure you're in the right line of work?

[CommitmentPhobe]

Y(according to what we read around here and the "scientific data" found:laugh: ) are:

 

1)youth

2)good looks

.

 

The problem with those studies is that they only ever deal with generic norms. That just doesn't work. Take a look just at this thread for example. One person says an actor is hot, another goes ewww. All human senses react differently according to their perception. Is that something that can really be measured?

 

I think it's one thing to understand the human body and how it reacts to things chemically. That in itself is a useful study with transferable knowledge on the way the human body works. It's another thing to try and define attraction in itself. What have we learned from these studies? Nothing that we already didn't know. There's a notion of universal attractiveness, and there's a notion of subjective attractiveness. The later will always override the former because it's what's makes us human. These trends are also different between cultures and over time, therefore it's like measuring an inch of soil in an acre and drawing a conclusion on the rest of the land. The problem is, the studies never have the rest of the land to work with so are invariably weak.

 

I say this as a scientist, I think these studies are a complete waste of money, and if anything should be categorised under philosophy where they'll get softer funding. If I ever get where I want to get in my career I'll certainly be pushing for that.

 

Back to the point, youth, beauty blah blah blah, if this was the case then then why can you walk along any street in any part of the world and witness a number of counterexamples? It's just beyond belief that anyone would buy into it.

[Saint Valentine]

Are you sure you're in the right line of work?

Hawt people will always be screwing like rabbits. Everybody else needs a little help from above. I'm part of that team.

[Storyrider]

Hawt people will always be screwing like rabbits. Everybody else needs a little help from above. I'm part of that team.

I'll bet you handed out beer goggles by the dozens yesterday.

[Tomcat33]

The problem with those studies is that they only ever deal with generic norms. That just doesn't work. Take a look just at this thread for example. One person says an actor is hot, another goes ewww. All human senses react differently according to their perception. Is that something that can really be measured?

 

I think it's one thing to understand the human body and how it reacts to things chemically. That in itself is a useful study with transferable knowledge on the way the human body works. It's another thing to try and define attraction in itself. What have we learned from these studies? Nothing that we already didn't know. There's a notion of universal attractiveness, and there's a notion of subjective attractiveness. The later will always override the former because it's what's makes us human. These trends are also different between cultures and over time, therefore it's like measuring an inch of soil in an acre and drawing a conclusion on the rest of the land. The problem is, the studies never have the rest of the land to work with so are invariably weak.

 

I say this as a scientist, I think these studies are a complete waste of money, and if anything should be categorized under philosophy where they'll get softer funding. If I ever get where I want to get in my career I'll certainly be pushing for that.

 

Back to the point, youth, beauty blah blah blah, if this was the case then then why can you walk along any street in any part of the world and witness a number of counterexamples? It's just beyond belief that anyone would buy into it.

 

 

Finally a man who speaks with property, and not because I happen to agree with everything you said, but because you have done real research.

 

I was being facetious on the idea that men only go for what the study claims, it is basic knowledge that only anyone of mediocre intelligence would see that as a "significantly and rare eye opening" find. Oohhh-ahh! I have a hard time with stats of all things abstract, and trying to quantify personal attraction is about as abstract as you can get. Of course, as you said there are general popular ideals of beauty but attraction is just so much deeper than body parts and whether they fit into a certain generic category of mass acceptance.

 

The funny thing is that the most mind blowing love experiences I've had defied all the idealisms or images in my head. Of course they were within the realms of what I am attracted to but SO NOT what I would picture as an ideal mate if I have to imagine one. When you are free enough to make that kind of connection with someone you really experience something extraordinary.

 

I also find it sad that some men think "chemistry" a cliche or made up term. It's sad because it makes me think they really never experience real chemistry with someone, and that is sort of sad.

[Saint Valentine]

I'll bet you handed out beer goggles by the dozens yesterday.

Santa has it easy compared to me. There might be more drama with the kids, but it's so much easier coming out of the sack than trying to get them into it. It's almost impossible to get ugly people unwrapped, whereas kids will rip the covering off just about anything in record time.

 

Ugly people are hard work, but it's gratifying to see them enjoy some of the privileges that normal people take for granted - even if it's only for one day in the year.