nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Less attractive people

urabell

Are less attractive people more attracted to other less attractive people than an attractive person would be? For example in a nightclub setting it's pretty common you'll see two mingers eating the face off each other, are they actually attracted to each other or are they just settling? I know there's a certain level of subjectivity but some people just don't have any aesthetic qualities.

Obviously this doesn't apply to relationships and actually falling in love, I've fallen head over heels for girls that, when it comes to looks just aren't in my league. I'd take an ugly life partner who I could relate to over a wetser with no personality any day, obviously I'll go for the best of both worlds if I can though. When it comes to one night stands though it's all about looks and I won't settle.

TLDR Do less attractive people find other less attractive people attractive or are they just settling for what they can get?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Muise...

urabell wrote: »

There's a big difference between having a preference between Scar Jo and Kate moss and a preference between a cracker and a sweaty hog from coppers.

Same goes for the female comparision of Arnie and Brad Pitt above

sweaty hog is a gender neutral term

that's because it's in the eye of the beholder.

nocoverart

I just want a Woman with good taste in music, but I'm finding this very problematic up to now

Live concerts :pac: nightclubs for a good night out. Oh, and the looks thing... couldn't give a flying fcuk!

Shenshen

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

Well wouldn't you agree there are people whom you personally might not find attractive but you can still tell they are good-looking?

A few, yes.
On the other hand, there are people I don't find either attractive nor good-looking, but others will insist they are. The blue-eyed fellow who played James Bond comes to mind, as does Brad Pitt. Both of them I would call objectively ugly.

Savoir.Faire

The sister of one of my friends is a conventionally unattractive lady. She has spent so much time on the back of a horse, or mucking out stables, that she appears to have taken on many equine features. A long face with a large set of nashers on her, coupled with a large, if athletic posterior.

But dammit, there is something attractive about her. It's more than just her appearance. There is something extremely saucy and foxy about her. I first tupped her after a dinner party last Christmas, and I still call round to her abode for an occasional saddling and jumping of the oxer.

Lyaiera

SV wrote: »

See, this quote is always thrown out there but I don't know any man who has sex with a woman and actually spends the time staring at her vagina during it.

Only the dickheads.

--Kaiser--

Shenshen wrote: »

A few, yes.
On the other hand, there are people I don't find either attractive nor good-looking, but others will insist they are. The blue-eyed fellow who played James Bond comes to mind, as does Brad Pitt. Both of them I would call objectively ugly.

Are you mixing up subjectively and objectively? For Pitt in any case, the fact that he is almost universally held to be attractive would be an indication that he is objectively good looking, that's without getting in facial proportions, mixtures of masculine and feminine features, etc....

Shenshen

--Kaiser-- wrote: »

Are you mixing up subjectively and objectively? For Pitt in any case, the fact that he is almost universally held to be attractive would be an indication that he is objectively good looking, that's without getting in facial proportions, mixtures of masculine and feminine features, etc....

Well, the question I was answering was if I don't know of people who I don't find attractive, but would think of as objectively beautiful.

And as I said, I can think of many such people, but I can also think of many people who are commonly held to be attractive but who I would call objectively ugly - as in their features are neither attractive nor beautiful in an artistic sense. Pitt and the other fellow are just two examples.

I'm a little surprised at the idea that beauty should be democratic and the decision if someone is beautiful or not should depend on the number of people who would call him or her beautiful? Surely beauty isn't about public consens?

BraziliaNZ

I def think unless you're rich or famous you tend to end up with someone around your own level, if you play your cards right and don't settle for the first yolk that comes your way. There will be exceptions with exceptionally funny or charming people too though. I've had this discussion with my partner, if she thinks we're on the same level looks wise, and she reckons we are. I think she's better looking than me but then again women are just nicer looking creatures than men anyway, in my opinion.

strobe

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and all that jazz,

but in general, in broad terms, you'll see two 'less attractive people eating the face off each other in a nightclub' because less attractive people have more chance of 'pulling' less attractive people and can accept that.

Taste is subjective and what one person finds less attractive another may find irresistable etc, but yeah, obviously for the most part the guys and girls that have a tendency to go for 'less attractive' people do so not because they don't find the movie star/ starlett double dancing away in the club more attractive than the 'less attractive' person but because that's who they think they can get.

Nothing at all wrong with that, but is silly to pretend it's not true, we all know it is.

(exceptions apply)

UCDVet

There have been many studies on physical attractiveness; and the idea that people don't share the same standards is absurd.

Oh sure, given three smoking hot women....men are going to disagree over which one they prefer. But given one smoking hot woman and two ugly chicks, everyone is going to agree.

Beefy78

Frank Skinner did a piece on this about how good looking people live under the illusion that ugly people fancy ugly people. Of course they don't. I mean they might like someone and might love someone but I'm sure they probably would have preferred them to be more attractive.

So the OP must be a looker.

I'm not a good looking bloke and I've always found this difficult to reconcile. I'm convinced there's a stunner out there waiting for me but it is getting less and less likely.

Crooked Jack

miss no stars wrote: »

Put Cara Delevingne next to someone who's short, fat, has bad skin, a big forehead & chin, crooked nose, pokey eyes and a measly mouth and tell me there's no such thing as an objective standard for attractiveness.

Sure, people will have differences in who they're attracted to visually, but overall some people ARE more attractive than others. If no such difference really existed, people like Cara wouldn't be rolling in it.

miss no stars wrote: »

If your brother looks like this he could make a lot of money:

Ugh, that's horrendous. She looks like a skull with lips. I dont know why she's rolling in it but I do know there are lots of rich/famous ugly/weird looking people.

stoneill

The amount of fat sweaty hairy ugly women knocking about who are pregnant just goes to show that blokes will ride anything.

Czarcasm

UCDVet wrote: »

There have been many studies on physical attractiveness; and the idea that people don't share the same standards is absurd.

Oh sure, given three smoking hot women....men are going to disagree over which one they prefer. But given one smoking hot woman and two ugly chicks, everyone is going to agree.

You don't think that someone could find both Mila Kunis and Adele physically attractive then?

Of course they can. The two extremes aren't necessary, and objective standards are based on general consensus - they tend to be more rigid, whereas subjective standards are based on personal ideals - they tend to be more fluid.

Judging other people's subjective standards based on what you think are objective standards (really your own subjective standards) is never going to work, and science and psychology can do all the studies it wants, and they can reduce physical beauty to a mathematical equation based on a very small sample set, but really they'll never be able to explain why one person might be physically attracted to someone that another person might think "Christ No!!"

BraziliaNZ

Czarcasm wrote: »

You don't think that someone could find both Mila Kunis and Adele physically attractive then?

I genuinely find it hard to believe anyone could find that Adele attractive. Awful looking yolk.

sbsquarepants

urabell wrote: »

. I'd take an ugly life partner who I could relate to over a wetser with no personality any day, obviously I'll go for the best of both worlds if I can though. When it comes to one night stands though it's all about looks and I won't settle.

Wetser? Is that an actual saying?:D
I'm baffled as to why you'd have higher standards for a one night stand than a marriage btw, but sure each to their own!

miss no stars wrote: »

Put Cara Delevingne next to someone who's short, fat, has bad skin, a big forehead & chin, crooked nose, pokey eyes and a measly mouth and tell me there's no such thing as an objective standard for attractiveness.
.

I'd never heard of her, but a quick google image search has left me feeling quite queasy - i'd go so far as to say she's a minger!

Wibbs

bnt wrote: »

You do know that sociologists do research on this kind of stuff, right?

Example: Computer Graphic Studies of the Role of Facial Similarity in Judgements of Attractiveness

From the Abstract:

(emphasis added)

Yea that's very interesting stuff. When I read of it first I looked back at exes who I had really clicked with and to a woman there was that facial similarity(god luv em:D). They didn't look like me of course, but if you overlaid the faces and scaled them up or down the proportions of things like nose length eye spacing etc would match quite a lot.

Shenshen wrote: »

Surely beauty isn't about public consens?

Cultural ideals and things like weight and muscle mass are subjective alright SS, but there does seem to be an underlying beauty index. Symmetry is one, funny enough more "average" bland faces with no obvious features are considered more attractive. The role and effect of gender hormones on male and female faces make them more or less attractive depending. IE testosterone in males increases things like skull and jaw size, it's a more male trait, so men tend to show preferences for small jaws in women. Big eyes, full lips and all that more juvenile look show more female hormones at work. A particular hip to waist ratio is also near universally seen as attractive in women, regardless of the overall weight the culture sees as attractive. IE the prehistoric extremely obese statuettes, the Venus de Milo, Marilyn Monroe, Kate Moss all hover around this ideal. Wide shoulders, narrow hips is a similar thing going in in male attractiveness too.

Crooked Jack

I'm a chubby, balding and frankly, unappealing looking creature but each one of my girlfriends has been an absolute stunner. Not just in my eyes, other people have asked me, intending no offence, how...just, how.
Now with that said I've managed to fuck each and every one of these relationships up, but, they happened.
I think it has something to do with confidence, Im very confident when Im drunk. They probably cant believe this swamp creature is actually chancing his arm with them and somewhere deep down admire his balls (which helps, seeing as I intend to end up slapping them repeatedly against her chin).
Of course, sober Jack wakes up the next day with this vision beside him and while having no idea who she is or how she got there, is pretty pleased. Thankfully, first impressions are pretty strong, so from that point on the girl is living under the impression that Jack is this confident, funny, assertive character all the time.
Slowly, that impression gives way to the stark reality, standing naked and ashamed, unsure of wether to use his hands to cover his droopy bosoms or tiny penis, in the cold light of day. However, by that stage Jack has gone deep snatch diving with her more times than he can remember, which comforts him, in the shallowest possible way.

I cant remember the question.

Faith+1

Crooked Jack wrote: »

I'm a chubby, balding and frankly, unappealing looking creature but each one of my girlfriends has been an absolute stunner. Not just in my eyes, other people have asked me, intending no offence, how...just, how.
Now with that said I've managed to fuck each and every one of these relationships up, but, they happened.
I think it has something to do with confidence, Im very confident when Im drunk. They probably cant believe this swamp creature is actually chancing his arm with them and somewhere deep down admire his balls (which helps, seeing as I intend to end up slapping them repeatedly against her chin).
Of course, sober Jack wakes up the next day with this vision beside him and while having no idea who she is or how she got there, is pretty pleased. Thankfully, first impressions are pretty strong, so from that point on the girl is living under the impression that Jack is this confident, funny, assertive character all the time.
Slowly, that impression gives way to the stark reality, standing naked and ashamed, unsure of wether to use his hands to cover his droopy bosoms or tiny penis, in the cold light of day. However, by that stage Jack has gone deep snatch diving with her more times than he can remember, which comforts him, in the shallowest possible way.

I cant remember the question.

Jasus you can't be that bad :eek:

Crooked Jack

Faith+1 wrote: »

Jasus you can't be that bad :eek:

Nah I'm only messin, I'm a ride. The only bad thing about being as good looking as me is that I cant fuck myself.

H3llR4iser

BraziliaNZ wrote: »

I genuinely find it hard to believe anyone could find that Adele attractive. Awful looking yolk.

She's certainly not the most attractive woman around; Then again, bring her to a the average nightclub and suddenly she's not only one of the most attractive women around, she's one of the thinnest too...

UCDVet

Czarcasm wrote: »

You don't think that someone could find both Mila Kunis and Adele physically attractive then?

Of course they can. The two extremes aren't necessary, and objective standards are based on general consensus - they tend to be more rigid, whereas subjective standards are based on personal ideals - they tend to be more fluid.

Judging other people's subjective standards based on what you think are objective standards (really your own subjective standards) is never going to work, and science and psychology can do all the studies it wants, and they can reduce physical beauty to a mathematical equation based on a very small sample set, but really they'll never be able to explain why one person might be physically attracted to someone that another person might think "Christ No!!"

I'm sorry - but people are deluding themselves...

If you want to argue that beauty is 100% subjective...I'll concede the point. Okay, it is subjective.

But that doesn't imply that, collectively, almost everyone agrees. There are attractive people and there are unattractive people - and we can all recognize that instantly upon glancing at someone. We just like the idea that, no matter how ugly someone might be, someone is going to find them beautiful.

Go on a site like HotOrNot or RankMyPhotos and find a girl with a score of 9.5 or higher and a girl with a score of 3 or lower.

Now ask 100 guys to pick which girl they'd rather see naked. 95 or more of them are going to all agree that they want to see the 9.5

Shenshen

The more I read in this thread, the more I'm wondering if "The Full Monty" had been anywhere near as big a success if it had been about average-looking female strippers...

There does seem to be much more focus on "attractive to the majority" in the male posters than I would ever have noticed from my female friends.

And "attractive" does seem the mean "attractive to most of my mates". A very odd concept.

Czarcasm

UCDVet wrote: »

I'm sorry - but people are deluding themselves...

If you want to argue that beauty is 100% subjective...I'll concede the point. Okay, it is subjective.

But that doesn't imply that, collectively, almost everyone agrees. There are attractive people and there are unattractive people - and we can all recognize that instantly upon glancing at someone. We just like the idea that, no matter how ugly someone might be, someone is going to find them beautiful.

Go on a site like HotOrNot or RankMyPhotos and find a girl with a score of 9.5 or higher and a girl with a score of 3 or lower.

Now ask 100 guys to pick which girl they'd rather see naked. 95 or more of them are going to all agree that they want to see the 9.5

Orrr, I could go on one of the thousands of bbw sites, thinspiration sites, body dysmorphia sites, and they too would have their own subjective ideas about what they consider attractive and what they dont. General consensus when it comes to beauty and attraction? No such thing.

Even in this thread alone we were only a few posts in when names like Cara whatshername and Brad Pitt were thrown around, and it was a case of - Nope, nope, etc. Even at the mere mention of Adele one poster probably lost his breakfast, whereas I would find her very attractive.

Potatoeman

I guess its subjective but things like confidence play a huge role. I had a friend in college that would approach every girl in a club until one accepted his advances. It was always funny when it was a friend of someone that rejected him.
I find that most women rather than approach directly stand close and try to make eye contact but signals can be hard to read. I guess if you put yourself out there more you have far better chance no matter what you look like.

Muise...

Thread title should be changed to "Less visually attractive people".

We have four other senses, people.

Tone and timbre of voice, smell and feel and taste of skin and hair and lips are a huge part of attraction. (useless in nightclubs, I'll admit.)

Then there's the element of surprise, when someone you didn't notice much before smiles and says something brilliantly clever or funny or lovely and you melt.

Potatoeman

He was playing the numbers game. I had to admire his confidence and his handling of rejections.

Seachmall

Potatoeman wrote: »

I guess its subjective but things like confidence play a huge role. I had a friend in college that would approach every girl in a club until one accepted his advances. It was always funny when it was a friend of someone that rejected him.
I find that most women rather than approach directly stand close and try to make eye contact but signals can be hard to read. I guess if you put yourself out there more you have far better chance no matter what you look like.

That reminds me of a story in a book I just finished. The author is interviewing psychopaths in Broadmoor (the high-security psychiatric hospital in the UK) and one of them ("Jamie") tells him about how he used to pull on a night out

'When we were kids,' Jamie chimes in, 'we'd have a competition. See who could get shot down the most on a night out. You know, by girls,

[...]

the bloke who'd get the most by the time the lights came on would get the next night out for free. 'Course it was in your interest to rack up as many as possible, weren't it? A night on the piss with everything taken care of by your mates? Sorted! But the funny thing was, soon as you started to get a few under your belt, it actually got ****ing harder. Soon as you realise that it actually means jack****, you start getting cocky. You start mouthing off. And some of the birds start to buy it!'

I've noticed similar things.

Confidence, and maybe a bit of cockiness, is definitely a turn on for (some) lady-types.

Shane-KornSpace

Id say i would be a 4 on a scale of 1-10 for looks.
That being said, I dont find myself attracted to other 4's.
From about 6 and up, I would show interest.
Bare in mind that a 6 to me might be A 2 or a 10 to somebody else. It varies

thick_skin

Shane-KornSpace wrote: »

Id say i would be a 4 on a scale of 1-10 for looks.
That being said, I dont find myself attracted to other 4's.
From about 6 and up, I would show interest.
Bare in mind that a 6 to me might be A 2 or a 10 to somebody else. It varies

I know what you mean , im also decidedly average looking but it doesn't mean I don't want to get near women who are out of my league

as ive gotten older ive realised however that I need to be more realistic and aim for those within my range