First, let me say right up front, I'm not going to crap out on you and end up saying it's "inner beauty" that makes a woman beautiful, even though of course that's the real answer. To me, that's just a cop out, designed to soothe the ruffled feelings of women who don't look so great. Which I can say, because I don't look that great either, even though I'm a man and we're supposed to look gnarly.
My real thought on beauty vs. non-beauty is I don't really care what a woman looks like. I'm not in the market for one anyway, so it's actually a non-issue. And if it came right down to it and I was in the market, of course I'd prefer one with "inner beauty" to physical beauty if I had to choose. Since I'd be in the relationship for the long haul and I wouldn't want to fall for a pretty package full of garbage.
But that's not what this is about, so I won't belabor the point.
As to what makes physical beauty, I read somewhere, and believe it, that the definition has changed over the centuries. It's probably changed just in my lifetime, though I can't cite any examples. Maybe an example would be in hairstyles. If you'd saw a woman with spiky hair, maybe dyed pink, in 1963, it might not have appealed to very many guys. But face it, that's a great look today. Or something like that. I like seeing women with odd colored hair. They usually have the odd accouterments to match, like weird shoes, checkered or striped socks, a mismatched top, and other signs that she's into some kind of sassy fashion.
I'd say it was 25 years ago I was talking about "Earth Women," meaning the ones who looked au naturel, with a kind of hippie, loose fabric look, looking very airy and breezy, with hair straight down and looking distinctive for its non-distinctiveness. I love that look. I loved the looks of the original hippie women, and I love their descendants, the eccentric beauty of all that.
But this isn't just about fashion, it's about the bodily appearance, like the clip art cutie pictured above, virtually in the buff except for some nice undies, mismatched leg-ums, and of course an electrical truss. Could be a dinner bell for a mom to call the kids to eat with, but I think it's something from the truss family. Leave out those items and she's nude, giving us something to behold that we wouldn't see everyday.
We look at her, and if your eye is anything like mine, we notice the breasts. These have long been a mystery to me, how they happen to grow out at a certain age, where all the extra skin comes from, and how precisely they're attached. Think about the extra skin or the extra bodily length, were they flattened out. She has a flat chest earlier on, and if you drew a line from the belly button to the neck, it'd be a certain distance. Now, suddenly, breasts form, and, just to estimate, the line we drew would be maybe an additional 12 inches. How does this happen? Just the going out the top and bottom bits and a stretching of the middle? How they're attached, it's just like any chest except for the stretching. And how they happen to grow out at a certain age, it's in the DNA, you don't have to worry about it. Speaking as a guy, I was worried about certain things of my anatomy, thinking maybe I was passed over, but it all worked out in the end. I was a late shaver, is what I'm talking about.
Are breasts part of physical attractiveness? Certainly they are. Yes.
Then there's the other curves, going down, then the hips, which scientists tell us we're attracted to because of the evolutionary stuff having to do with pregnancy and reproduction. It's funny we're all thinking that even if we're unconscious of it or not in the market to have kids. I've got that in my mind all the time, so when I turn to look at a bottom, let's say, I excuse any lecherous thought as just nature's way. It is definitely remarkable how compelling things are in this area though.
Going down, we have the shapeliness of the legs. Those are great. Then I heard there's some guys into feet. These to me are simply utilitarian. There's absolutely no turn on for me when it comes to feet. Probably, again, because of nature, as mentioned above. Of what evolutionary sexual value are feet, except for her ability to outrun a lion if she's carrying your kid? Then it pays to have good ones.
What about a woman's face? That's where a lot of the beauty is. I saw a good show on the Science Channel about the characteristics of the face and how our eyes scan faces at lightning, intuitive speed. Our brains are crazy smart, it seems to be beyond dispute. Even if we're consciously the dumbest guy in town, our brains are still doing lots of stuff for us in the background.
I glance at women's faces all the time, and some of them really nail it. You know 'em when you see 'em. Beyond that, it's hard to describe what makes a face really stand out. Placement of the eyes, the way the mouth is, etc. It'd take all day to describe, but right now my brain isn't super smart, no matter what I said above.
Then last but not least, there's hair.
No comments:
Post a Comment