Alright so I know that attraction is based on what captivates another person's senses and that the attraction builds up more by how developed their aesthetics are (toned body, symmetrical face, clean cut) like think of a shiny object that is displayed in the glass, that would be the same as person A checking out person B at face value but what if you aren't intimidated by people of different colors? I mean how people easily have a infatuation with a person from the opposite shade of color, what if your eyes perceive that person's color as something else? Is it possible that you can distort your senses? If I see an attractive person from a different shade of color, they would still be attractive but how it would be any different if the person was an unusual shade of color like for instance--Blue like an avatar or Green like a Martian, would you still fuck the person and see them differently? I'm all for interracial but I just don't quickly go "OMG that person is hot" but what makes him/her hot? I just like to question shit that's all. Discuss.
You've asked a lot of questions here, but I'm not really sure what your main point is. Could you clarify?
This post is just asinine. He asked you for a clarification of the overall idea behind the questions.....
It's not an argument. He's asking you to clarify the thoughts you want to discuss. If you can't even elaborate on your initial thoughts or better define them how do you intend to start an interesting discussion? CKTony, I don't want to put words in his mouth but he doesn't understand your idea(and neither do I) so how could one ever go about discussing it?
Your beginning premise is ambiguous. Are you speaking of purely physical attraction? Emotional? Intellectual? You can't compare human attraction to a "shiny object" that sticks out and catches our attention. Blue hair catches my attention, but I'm certainly not attracted to it. This leads me to believe you're mostly basing attraction on physical appearance. This is already flawed, since attraction has multiple facets to it, and looking at one as opposed to the combination will lead to an infinite cycle of opinions. Then we might automatically assign different characteristics to them than we normally would based on their apparent race. Considering that different races are structured differently in both the face and body, we could possibly be even more initially intrigued due to the opposing characteristics, although it may not be consciously apparent. Yes, but we're not usually aware of it. I can't think of any specifics off the top of my head, but our assumptions lead us to presume too much. There was a study done that showed we don't need to see exact images to assign an interpretation to it. Specifically placed points can lead us to see another image - think smiley faces. They're like blueprints of a larger design, and if it's a common enough sight for us, we may automatically recognize it as something else. Babies use this to learn from faces. They don't initially recognize a face, but look around it, and look at different spots on the face until they gradually learn to focus on the eyes and nose. Sorry if that's a bit confusing, it's been a long time since I read the study in my psychology textbook. Since this would vary from person to person.. personally, I don't think I could fuck a blue or green woman (or man ). But it really depends on getting to know her, and shit, her body might be bangin! Over a population, average characteristics are considered more attractive. Evenly placed eyes, a centered and average-size nose, normal lips, rounded face - these are traits common among those considered to be "beautiful." In essence - the more average you are, the more appealing you will be to more people. I still don't understand your main point, because this is mostly basic psychology.
For the first point, I was mainly talking about physical attraction and not intellectual or emotional. It would be the same as a person checking out a beautiful women because both are fascinated from what they're seeing. I'm basing this on both individuals and not a whole gender. If you want to talk about the remaining facets of attraction, then let's go. For the third point, what characteristics would these be? The fourth point wasn't confusing at all, humans do indeed presume but it's only valid if there's anecdotal evidence to support their stance. The information is interesting though, it's amazing how each individual perceive images differently from one another but I love would to find out the reasons why it attracts them. I'll probably find an article about this. I like the blueprint analogy, I remember people's faces more than I remember their names. I don't know if that has to do with something. Why wouldn't you be able to fuck a blue or green person? I want to hear this. Who created these standards? If you have some articles, feel free to post them.
My fiance is not the typical attractive guy. He has a lot of acne all over his body and he's got some odd bodily proportions. But strangely enough, I like those about him too. And besides, he has a beautiful pair of icy blue eyes, thick light brown hair, plump pink lips, and a really handsome facial structure. What can I say, he's mah boo.
Stereotypes. Anecdotal evidence is typically unaccepted as valid evidence thanks to the ability to easily misconstrue it. Most valid presumptions come from a history of patterns. As I previously mentioned, attraction is based on being average. I forgot to mention similarity though - physically similar individuals are likely to be more attracted to each other. Think about how often you see a hot guy or girl with an ugly one. It would just be too weird for me. Maybe if I closed my eyes? I'm not sure what you mean by standards; average is simply the average proportions among studied populations. No articles man, just came from the textbooks used in my psych classes.
What I meant is empirical evidence based through knowledge or observing, anecdotal is hyperbole pseudo-science that doesn't have any scientific data. My fault for mixing up the two. But how can one surely know that his presumption can be false, stereotypes are based on a certain group demonstrating common behavior but yet they are individuals that don't perpetuate it. Doesn't culture have a influence on this? Like for example, compare what Hollywood perceives as hot now then compare to what was hot in the 1950, standards have changed. The person who picked the lesser aesthetic one may choose based on the personality effect, perhaps this can be attraction towards different qualities they have. People on a whole can't be average because every single of them has unique qualities that distant themselves apart from others. Guess what I'm trying to get was what if your not intimidated by looks?
They're absolutely comparable. Aesthetics affect objects as well as people. People are often objects of our desires. And objectification aside, we all know that physical attraction is a common denominator as far as why we're drawn to certain people and not others. Clearly we have preference for both objects and people that display symmetry, shaddy is right about that. You spoke about different shades of color...but consider the many different cultures and ethnicities of humans around the world. We may not be able to comprehend a single word of someone else's language, and though we come from vastly different lineages, we are entirely sexually compatible and capable of creating offspring. Kind of amazing isn't it?