I think he’s attractive. My only concern is that he is more high maintenance than I am. I don’t want to date a guy that is too focused on how he looks.
I mean yeah. That’s what’s in assuming lol. To be fair though, I don’t often wear makeup or do much with my hair so most people are more night maintenance than I am. It’s not an issue, I’m just not into it. I care about my looks but I typically like the all natural look.
It's subjective, of course. From my perspective though, I think alone, he has features that sound attractive in theory, but put together, they are almost too exaggerated, if that makes sense. Sort of like "handsome squidward." Works well in theory, but in practice, it creates an overbearing image.
I think what is throwing me off is especially the lower half of his face. If his lips weren't as thick (although he could be doing a duckface) and his jawline was slightly less chiseled, I think he'd look better. Not a big fan of the earrings/nose ring, but that's an aside.
I mean, yes, but there is a limit to how much. When something is exaggerated, it starts to lose appeal. But hey, I'm a dude-- I'm just operating on speculation after all.
Best comparison I can think of is like (most) guys and their perspective on breasts. Big breasts are considered an attractive trait, right? Well, make the breasts the size of what is almost cartoonish proportions, and it looks bad. There is a limit. Although the limit is subjective, a limit still exists. Regarding lip size/chiseled jawlines, I'd argue this guy has a borderline exaggeration on that loses appeal for his face. He's most certainly not ugly, but I don't think he is particularly attractive either.
Fair enough. Maybe your limit for you (and the women he goes with) regarding what you find attractive is in a range that it's ideal. I suppose that's the subjective part.
Ok. However, a third also voted he was unattractive. Likewise, the commented opinions are about half and half. Attractiveness is all relative in any case, thus making both our opinions respectively valid. One’s perfect 10 may be below average to another.
My point was that it was 1/3rd, meaning that it wasn’t a landslide vote and that some women don’t find him attractive. Thus, you have your opinion of him being attractive, and I totally get that. I think it’s fine. It’s not like he is universally attractive though. There is a degree of subjectivity as mentioned.
There really isn’t an argument here though. Again, neither side is wrong necessarily. Just depends who you ask.
A third voting against is not what I would consider a landslide vote. I will grant that the wording of a landslide vote is vague, so I suppose that much depends on what you consider “literally” a landslide win. That being said, it’s practically impossible to be universally attractive. Universally attractive (as I’m defining it) = seen as attractive to all. The fact there are people saying he isn’t attractive means he isn’t universally attractive. This is irrelevant of how many people say it. Furthermore, there is no person who is seen as attractive to every person in the world. I’m sure there are some who come close, but even those differ in ratings.
The statement saying more the margins of victory would be greater with more women is also without merit. Otherwise, what is your supporting evidence for the claim?
“That’s all that matters.” Depends what the argument you’re making there is. I can’t speak for real life— I don’t know him. To clarify, my argument was never that he wasn’t attractive to most either. I gave my perspective and later an argument that he wasn’t universally attractive or attractive to all, evidenced by the dissenting votes.
Girl's Behavior 
Guy's Behavior 
Flirting 
Dating 
Relationships 
Fashion & Beauty 
Health & Fitness 
Marriage & Weddings 
Shopping & Gifts 
Technology & Internet 
Break Up & Divorce 
Education & Career 
Entertainment & Arts 
Family & Friends 
Food & Beverage 
Hobbies & Leisure 
Other 
Religion & Spirituality 
Society & Politics 
Sports 
Travel 
Trending & News 
Most Helpful Opinions