Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Is it just me or do women (at least on city-data) have absolutely no sense of humor?
God's sake chicks stop taking it sooooo seriously. Everyone knows that when it really matters personality and character is more important than some ratio. Don't be dumb enough to think guys don't know that. And, this is the fashion and beauty forum, where people are going to be talking about things like this, so if you don't like such "shallow talk" bugger off to some forum that would be more to your tastes (like modern feminist or summik), jeeze louise
I'd be shallow enough to think that the ideal woman looks like the girl below, but can look into the eyes of a guy who's a dead ringer for Jason Alexander and say, "I couldn't care less about your appearance. It's the beauty of your inner man that I am so in love with and will always be in love with till the day I die."
Can guys/gals accept this proposition? Guys, did you get any sort of a "rise" just imagining the girl below saying that to you?
As a guy who used to study Math, I wondered why 1.618? The closest to that number I could get is the square root of pie but that was off. My inkling is that, that number has some relationship to pie which would make sense because pie itself is the ratio of a circle's circumference and its diameter. But I'm not going to waste a bunch of time trying to figure the relationship out.
(1+sqrt(5))/2
c.f. the fibonacci series
and anyway all this is just the same sort of crap as "Bone Law" from those creepo puahate people
As an interesting (I think) aside, Florence Colgate, a local tavern girl in a seaside town, won a contest last year for having, not the most beautiful face, but the most perfectly proportioned face in Britain. See if you can tell her from Christie Brinkley in her heyday.
It's funny how they hailed her as the most beautiful girl in not just Britain but heck, the entire world. When they picked her out of 8000 girls in Britain that happened to know about the study. 8000 out of 30 million women in Britain.
I knew a girl who used to model for Calvin Klein who looked a lot like her (fair skin blue eye blond too but no smile lines). I wonder how she'll match against her.
I always knew beauty when I saw it, but could never figure out why I found our high school cheerleaders usually the epitome of our school's beauty while the girl working in the kitchen was where she was (sorry, Olga )
It turns out science has answered the question: the Golden Ratio of 1:1.618
...
The definition of beauty changes over time, in different places and circles, and from person to person. I don't buy it.
Golden Ratio is an excellent marker for Visual beauty. It corresponds to the built environment with Vitruvius architectural styles which emphasized proportionality that meet these ratios.
The dilemma with golden ratio as human beauty aesthetic is - it is only one of other composite variables that make up beauty to each respective eye of the beholder via other sensate processing (movement/ kinesthetics, voice/tone/articulation, mental acuity, grounded-ness, emotional maturity, sense of self, character qualities et al). I've met some very lovely beauties but after some time getting to know them somewhat, did not really care to spend time with them. Some seem only worth looking at - from afar.
Now there are some naturals who you can't hide. Currently have a female Aldi clerk at one of the stores I sometimes frequent who is an excellent example. Reminds one of the phrase, "a face that launched a thousand ships". Probably early 20s brunette 5'6 130 ish nicely proportioned, and one of those faces that make you want to be an artist or sculptor and preserve it for posterity.
Sticking to just the OPs point - yes, I agree. Visually members of either sex who have the golden ratio in the facial and physical measurements will be found more visually appealing in a two dimensional way.
It is the other more tangible qualities that make or break the level of wanting to be around them. And then, there is always that drawback of the beauty who actually seems to have it all together (intelligence etc), a la Agatha Christie's famous character, Linnet Ridgeway, in Death On The Nile. Most of rest of society will resent /despise that person, due to their own negative character traits.
Or you get the extremes of the recent amateur porn suicide Alyssa Funke. Physically appearance wise her face has probably close golden ratio approximation, but the 'academically' intelligent and psychologically scarred killed herself after the exposure to her community of peers. That is sad.
On the mathematical side it begs the question if two 1.272 people marry, might they produce a 1.618 offspring?
Golden Ratio is an excellent marker for Visual beauty. It corresponds to the built environment with Vitruvius architectural styles which emphasized proportionality that meet these ratios.
The dilemma with golden ratio as human beauty aesthetic is - it is only one of other composite variables that make up beauty to each respective eye of the beholder via other sensate processing (movement/ kinesthetics, voice/tone/articulation, mental acuity, grounded-ness, emotional maturity, sense of self, character qualities et al). I've met some very lovely beauties but after some time getting to know them somewhat, did not really care to spend time with them. Some seem only worth looking at - from afar.
Now there are some naturals who you can't hide. Currently have a female Aldi clerk at one of the stores I sometimes frequent who is an excellent example. Reminds one of the phrase, "a face that launched a thousand ships". Probably early 20s brunette 5'6 130 ish nicely proportioned, and one of those faces that make you want to be an artist or sculptor and preserve it for posterity.
Sticking to just the OPs point - yes, I agree. Visually members of either sex who have the golden ratio in the facial and physical measurements will be found more visually appealing in a two dimensional way.
It is the other more tangible qualities that make or break the level of wanting to be around them. And then, there is always that drawback of the beauty who actually seems to have it all together (intelligence etc), a la Agatha Christie's famous character, Linnet Ridgeway, in Death On The Nile. Most of rest of society will resent /despise that person, due to their own negative character traits.
Or you get the extremes of the recent amateur porn suicide Alyssa Funke. Physically appearance wise her face has probably close golden ratio approximation, but the 'academically' intelligent and psychologically scarred killed herself after the exposure to her community of peers. That is sad.
On the mathematical side it begs the question if two 1.272 people marry, might they produce a 1.618 offspring?
You're right, of course. The beauty of the ratio is only skin-deep.
The truth is this kind of beauty usually destroys a girl's character and personality. They are so fawned over in childhood up through young adulthood that they become almost dysfunctional after being...well..."used", if you know what I mean, by guys who then dispose of them when it becomes obvious they are so spoiled from years of adoration they are impossible to get along with.
It's funny how they hailed her as the most beautiful girl in not just Britain but heck, the entire world. When they picked her out of 8000 girls in Britain that happened to know about the study. 8000 out of 30 million women in Britain.
I went out with my adult children last night and saw at least 6 girls who looked like the one on the video.
How old is this Golden Ratio video? Asking because I saw a documentary about this many years ago.
I went out with my adult children last night and saw at least 6 girls who looked like the one on the video.
How old is this Golden Ratio video? Asking because I saw a documentary about this many years ago.
Yep, this girl is pretty in that natural, girl-next-door way - but I certainly wouldn't call her the most beautiful woman; her beauty is very 'typical' if that makes sense.
To me, someone like Monica Belucci or Katherine Zeta-Jones are much more beautiful.
Also, Audrey Hepburn did not have a perfectly proportional face, but to me she's one of the most stunning women ever. There's a lot more to it than symmetry - there's the eyes, the smile, a certain expression or 'charm' in the face that can make a woman beautiful, much more so than a perfect but dead-eyed Barbie face.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
just imagining the girl below saying that to you? 
)
