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.
If beauty were really in the eye of the beholder humans wouldn't put people on pedestal.
There are common traits for all races that are considered attractive or not.
Those are factors that drive evolution.
The problem with scientist is they're not so good at politics when trying to present data, even if the data were 100% true.
No. The physical traits that are considered attractive by one culture, at one point in time, may be quite different from those valued in another place, or in another era. And even within those cultures, or timeframes, there are always people who prefer a different look from what's popular.
Beauty is totally subjective, although some may be influenced by what the people around them value.
No. The physical traits that are considered attractive by one culture, at one point in time, may be quite different from those valued in another place, or in another era. And even within those cultures, or timeframes, there are always people who prefer a different look from what's popular.
Beauty is totally subjective, although some may be influenced by what the people around them value.
Nope, not totally. Even among ANIMALS some traits are universally "attractive".
Strong correlations between attractiveness and particular physical properties have been found, across cultures. One of the more important properties is symmetry, which is also associated with physical health. Large clear eyes are also important. In women, a waist-to-hip ratio (WHR) of about 0.7 ratio (waist circumference that is 70% of the hips circumference), is typically considered very attractive.
Genetic Engineering - Physical Attraction | The Future of Human Evolution | HumansFuture.org (http://www.humansfuture.org/genetic_engineering_physical_attraction.php.htm#11 - broken link)
Again, why are Black women always being "attacked"?
I don't spend my time and energy thinking about things and/or people who are not appealing to me personally, so why are there constantly attacks against the physical beauty of Black women if they are unappealing to you? Why are you giving it special energy? Many Black women find White men as extremely unattractive and are repulsed by the pasty, cottage cheese look of the skin yet you will be hard pressed to find many Black women starting threads about how unattractive they find White men.
Most white men find white women more attractive, and there are a lot more of them. If you took a poll among blacks the results would differ. And if you took a poll in Hollywood, 0% would find fat women attractive, 25% average weight women, and 50% would prefer women who look like they are starving.
Even if the article and it's findings had been the result of legitimate scientific research, it's conclusions would have either been buried entirely or carefully edited so that it would be politically correct.
Frankly no group takes criticism well but there are some findings that can not be refuted and some that can. Parts of southern Africa have an adult HIV prevalence rate well above 30%. There is no one calling for the resignation of World Health Organization officials for publishing these statistics. HIV is also one of the leading causes of death in black women in the U.S. No one is calling for anyone's resignation for publishing these results either.
The issue is that the article and its finding are not the result of legitimate scientific research. That is the one and only issue. You should know that most of the backlash from laypeople has originated in the UK, where this scientist resides. Blacks are between one and three percent of the UK population and yet the University of London Union Senate has called for this man's dismissal. So there is no "even if" that we need to be discussing here. Let's start from the fact that his article is not the result of legitimate scientific research and go from there. If you can put aside your knee-jerk reaction that any black complaint is the result of some racial insecurity and deal with the fact that in this one particular case a man was allowed to publish drivel then we can talk.
Also I'm a libertarian so I have plenty of criticisms of Obama and most are based on his economic and foreign policies. I haven't seen nearly enough criticism of Obama as I'd like to but I must admit I haven't kept up with the major media response enough to know how they were handled. As a libertarian I support this scientist's right to spew nonsense far and wide but he should not be able to use a scientific platform to do so.
Most white men find white women more attractive, and there are a lot more of them. If you took a poll among blacks the results would differ. And if you took a poll in Hollywood, 0% would find fat women attractive, 25% average weight women, and 50% would prefer women who look like they are starving.
I have a black friend who is only attracted to and only dates white women. Yet he totally rejects Hollywood's (and the culture as a whole) standard of beauty as he is only attracted to women who are morbidly obese.
Again, why are Black women always being "attacked"?
I don't spend my time and energy thinking about things and/or people who are not appealing to me personally, so why are there constantly attacks against the physical beauty of Black women if they are unappealing to you? Why are you giving it special energy? Many Black women find White men as extremely unattractive and are repulsed by the pasty, cottage cheese look of the skin yet you will be hard pressed to find many Black women starting threads about how unattractive they find White men.
Again, why are Black women always being "attacked"?
I don't spend my time and energy thinking about things and/or people who are not appealing to me personally, so why are there constantly attacks against the physical beauty of Black women if they are unappealing to you? Why are you giving it special energy? Many Black women find White men as extremely unattractive and are repulsed by the pasty, cottage cheese look of the skin yet you will be hard pressed to find many Black women starting threads about how unattractive they find White men.
The fact that it is common for black women to be repulsed by the appearence of white men yet black men are generally not repulsed (in many cases just the opposite) by white women has more real life implications for black women that this study will ever have.
Also interesting to note that while not all white men feel attraction towards black women, few feel the sense of repulsion that you describe many black women have towards white men.
Frankly no group takes criticism well but there are some findings that can not be refuted and some that can. Parts of southern Africa have an adult HIV prevalence rate well above 30%. There is no one calling for the resignation of World Health Organization officials for publishing these statistics. HIV is also one of the leading causes of death in black women in the U.S. No one is calling for anyone's resignation for publishing these results either.
The issue is that the article and its finding are not the result of legitimate scientific research. That is the one and only issue. You should know that most of the backlash from laypeople has originated in the UK, where this scientist resides. Blacks are between one and three percent of the UK population and yet the University of London Union Senate has called for this man's dismissal. So there is no "even if" that we need to be discussing here. Let's start from the fact that his article is not the result of legitimate scientific research and go from there. If you can put aside your knee-jerk reaction that any black complaint is the result of some racial insecurity and deal with the fact that in this one particular case a man was allowed to publish drivel then we can talk.
Also I'm a libertarian so I have plenty of criticisms of Obama and most are based on his economic and foreign policies. I haven't seen nearly enough criticism of Obama as I'd like to but I must admit I haven't kept up with the major media response enough to know how they were handled. As a libertarian I support this scientist's right to spew nonsense far and wide but he should not be able to use a scientific platform to do so.
Ok, I will put aside personal experiences I've had on this matter. Say for a moment that the piece HAD been legitimate, what do you suppose your own personal thoughts might be? Purely for curiosity's sake. Once again I will admit that I have yet to read the article, so all that I have to say is from hypothetical and personal perspectives.
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.
