Do you believe there is such thing as objectively pretty, objectively handsome or objectively attractive?

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Of course. Most attraction is objective. If there wasn't the world would not have supermodels. Is there and exception to EVERY rule? Yes. But there are decided answers to what is more attractive. Full lips are more attractive then thin, skinny is more attractive then fat, etc. Does that mean you can't be attractive to people if you're on the less popular side of this coin? Not at all. Subjective attraction still exists. It just means you won't attractive to the majority of people. And as always a good personality and confidence can go a long way to making up for these deficiencies.

[Berethor]

Attractive people tend to be popular, but you can have a fetish for unpopular people.

[AngryCarl]

I think symmetrical features are generally considered attractive. If half your face was bitten off by a bear most people would consider you ugly, but of course they would never say so.

[Asker]

mutilated sounds like a better word than ugly for a situation like that

[AngryCarl]

I mean morally there's no difference. Most people don't choose to be attacked by a bear, no one chooses to be ugly.

[jahaims]

Symmetry is pretty universally considered attractive. It's a sign of a healthy gene pool so we are instinctively attracted to it.

[DrPepper12]

Biology and the Golden Ratio (1:1.6) says yes. Beauty can be objectively measured.

[boggboss]

Some people tend to draw more eyes but no

[Dreamclouds]

neah tit is mainly a lie

[Sam12348]

Nope