Ultimately subjective, but I think there are some biological reasons and not just cultural reasons that shape a person's subjective criteria. I think that's why we can somewhat reach a consensus on these topics excluding some anomalies.
For a simple example, apparently men unanimously prefer women to have about a 45 degree arch to the lower spine/pelvis. It tends to give the appearance of a shapely derriere that kind of sticks out. It's very similar to the kind of effect you get if a woman wears heels.
That's supposedly tied to an evolutionary advantage women have when possessing such physical characteristics naturally that improved their biological fitness during pregnancy.
Also nurture is an extension of nature. Cultural ideas of beauty don't arise out of thin air. There's some kind of natural process that has to be a guiding force behind it. Sometimes cultures might develop seemingly arbitrary ideas about beauty as a result of layers upon layers of abstraction, but at the heart of it was still some kind of motivator which is tied to nature -- it's not arbitrary even though different cultures might branch out in different paths in terms of their beauty standards.
Well we don't all find the same exact things attractive, but it's also incorrect to think that each individual has a standard of beauty that is completely unique from everyone elses and that no two peoples standards are alike. There are a lot of common trends shared preferences. Also there is probably more agreement about which traits are unnatractive than there are about which traits are attractive. While we may not be in agreement about which hair and eye colors are best, we almost unanimously find lazy eyes, obesity, asymmetry, acne, under/over bites, and huge noses unnattractive.
Generally it is good to have an aesthetically appealing face ("golden ratio" symetry) and then there are sexually dimorphic traits that increase sex appeal for each gender like height and broad shoulders for men and hourglass figure, long hair and high cheekbones for women.
It's not that simple
The golden (2/3) rule, symmetry, and.70 waist to hip ratio (in females) are all scientifically proven to be the most attractive features. People with these traits are the most attractive to a human being despite preferences in age, skin color, hair color, and athletic build because they're signs of good genes and fertility. This is why most guys go crazy over Megan Foxx.
But there is a certain amount of subjective beauty out there because having similar likes and personality types and general compatibility trumps having a large nose or snaggly teeth or facial scar or being born with no arms. Men who have been married to their wives for 50 years still view their wives as beautiful because emotional attachment and history causes your view of someone's beauty to become inflated
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but there are some hot people out there who are considered more beautiful than others based off aesthetics alone
Looks ARE subjective. Think of how they shape you through media? They brainwash you to think what a physically attractive person looks like compared to what they could look like. This is due to genetics, not stupid evolution crap they sell you. What you consider attractive may not be attractive to everybody else. The rest is just due to lust as well. Attraction is attraction. But when we add to the looks departments it's mainly about sexual attraction. Who you are most likely to have sex with. Most would get upset if you're not attracted to and liking the same person. What matters is being with the person you're most happy with excluding the looks department.
Looks are subjective to an extent, but there's definitely a component that's objective, like facial symmetry, hip to waist ratio, etc.
Opinion
16Opinion
There are people who are naturally attractive, they might not be aesthetically ideal but they have a quality to them that appeals to the opposite gender. Allure, I'd like to call it.
i don't really understand the poll answers.
is b saying yes you think it's subjective
beauty is subjective. just because lots of people think the same people are attractive doesn't change that. it just means that lots of people have the same subjective opinion.
Based on things that I've noticed, they are subjective. I actually had a crush on a girl when I was in high school that I thought was gorgeous but many other guys thought she was average or ugly. She was tall, skinny and had nice facial structure yet many guys preferred other girls.
Not entirely. There is universal features for both genders that majority of people would consider attractive if present on a person. In addition, even if you aren't attracted to a person you can still identify that this person is attractive.
So no it's not subjective for the most part.
It's both. Like there are people who are just attractive and 98% of people will see them as such. Most people however filter them out as unattainable and thus their standards lower so you might be the top of someones self set standards (even if they are more attractive than you objectively speaking)
It's subjective. Of course there are conventional standards of beauty and for biological reasons, men and women are drawn to certain physical traits in the opposite sex but there's someone for everyone and everyone has different tastes.
A bit of both.
It is largely subjective, but within the context of a social environment that shapes our personal preferences.
There is an element of subjectivity to it, however it is more objective than most people are willing to admit.
That being said, being unattractive is much more objective.
I think its a sliding scale for most people:
https://i.imgur.com/EsOwgTg.jpg
It's about who you find attractive. I find some women attractive that some guys won't touch with a 10 foot pole. I feel the same way about some friends partners.
it is subjective, always was and will be, though some have that something we all find beautiful, it is kinda sad really
There are regional subjective beauty standards but there are universal beauty standards as well. Universal standards are like symmetrical features being a sign of good health and shit like that. Everything else is pretty subjective.
s23.postimg.org/.../...olden_Square_and_Spiral.png
I run not walk from guys who mention this.
Yes to a certain point. There are people that a lot of people find attractive and there are people that few people find attractive. But there are people you might find attractive but your friend does not.
They're subjectived, but highly influenced two things:
1. Features that show health and competence.
2. Our instinct to look for gene compatible people.
It's subjective, because different cultures are attracted to different features.
Looks can reflect who you are but who you are is not reflected in what you were.
Think of this.
What have I become? ಠ_à²
Yep, what may be attractive to one, may not be to another
I think objective because even if you aren't attracted to someone you can still recognise beauty in a conventionally attractive person.
Personality is the first thing everyone watches and our brains are made that to like a person through his looks.
You can also add your opinion below!
Most Helpful Opinions