GIRLS: What is the shortest guy you would date?

[CollectivSynergy]

<p>Yes America does have an obesity problem. But when I’m considered obese because I bulked up ~30 pounds for track, there’s obviously an issue. Funnily enough, I dropped almost all of it and according to BMI I’m healthier, except for the weaker back leading to back spasms and a myriad of other injuries that were formerly compensated for by the stronger surrounding muscles.</p>

[Russell7]

<p>*Uhh, sorry. But universal beauty is about facial symmetry (yes, there are other factors such as shape of nose, chin, distance of eyes from other features, etc. – but symmetry is the MOST IMPT. factor).</p>

<p>W/ regard to body shape, the preferences there vary. Some people like the ubder-thin models on the catwalk, others like the SI swimsuit-type, some go for the “J-lo”-type butt, etc*</p>

<p>No it isn’t.</p>

<p>[Beautycheck</a> - summary](<a href=“http://www.uni-r.de/Fakultaeten/phil_Fak_II/Psychologie/Psy_II/beautycheck/english/zusammen/zusammen1.htm]Beautycheck”>http://www.uni-r.de/Fakultaeten/phil_Fak_II/Psychologie/Psy_II/beautycheck/english/zusammen/zusammen1.htm)</p>

<p>

The results of our symmetry experiments show a clear but only weak relationship between facial attractiveness and symmetry: very asymmetrical faces are rated unattractive, but unattractive faces don’t need to be asymmetrical. Vice versa, very symmetrical faces don’t need to be very attractive, and very attractive faces may show remarkable deviations from ideally symmetrical proportions. In summary, symmetry seems only to be a weak factor to explain facial attractiveness.

</p>

<p>Did you get your education on the factors of attraction from a magazine? Symmetry is a weak factor in universal beauty. However, the most important factors in beauty are hardly universal and differ greatly between cultures.</p>

<p>I even did a project for my psych. class analyzing celebrity facial symmetry. If you want, I can post some fairly asymmetric celebrities that are regarded as good looking. I can also post some symmetric faces that are regarded as ugly.</p>

[collegehopeful78]

<p>Berkely Senior Americans do have more muscle. How many buff guys do you see in Asian countries? The rest of the world is filled with tall and lanky men leading to a lower BMI. American women are the but of men’s and women’s jokes in every country. Men are thankful for not being married to one and most decent women are absolutely appalled by the way they treat men. I have heard women from European countries (yes including Ukraine) that they are ashamed of being female beacuse of american women. In countries where there is an over abundance of attrative females (japan-70% of the girls there are nothing less than gorgeous) men are treated well which I think was Russell’s point.</p>

[BerkeleySenior]

<p>

Its not about finding a girl. Its about finding one that doesn’t believe the world and relationship revolves around her. The girls who treat guys the best are usually not the prettiest. But girls with an ugly ducking syndrome are the best in both cultures.

</p>

<p>This is what I construed of your post: You are intimidated by pretty girls because you automatically stereotype them as self-centered narcissists. Logically speaking if a girl is pretty, then she is self-centered. And the reverse is if she is not self-centered then she is not pretty. Do you see the flaw in that logic? You like ugly-ducklings because you are not intimidated by them, yet you are still shallow enough to desire an aesthetically pleasing woman. And somehow your post stems from your so-called “superiority complex”? Right…</p>

[alipes07]

<p>Whats “obese” is mostly subjective, and the fact that the BMI index has stayed unchanged over the Depression, Polio scare, etc. should tell you enough.</p>

[BerkeleySenior]

<p>

LOL!!! These are the same “geniuses” who think women in Asia don’t think about aesthetics or material things as well.

</p>

<p>hahaha. As a half-Asian, I know exactly what you mean by that statement. Men with these incorrect perceptions usually desire to be worshiped by “non-shallow” women, whom somehow only come from Asia or the Ukraine. It’s a bit nauseating.</p>

<p>

There are total LOSERS who ■■■■■ their way through E Europe or SE Asia and think women there are “god’s gift to man”. And not surprisingly, these same LOSERS have nothing but contempt for American/Canadian women.

Spot on.</p>

[BerkeleySenior]

<p>

Berkely Senior Americans do have more muscle. How many buff guys do you see in Asian countries? The rest of the world is filled with tall and lanky men leading to a lower BMI. American women are the but of men’s and women’s jokes in every country. Men are thankful for not being married to one and most decent women are absolutely appalled by the way they treat men. I have heard women from European countries (yes including Ukraine) that they are ashamed of being female beacuse of american women. In countries where there is an over abundance of attrative females (japan-70% of the girls there are nothing less than gorgeous) men are treated well which I think was Russell’s point.

You’ve outdone yourself this time. So you think Japanese women treat men better than Americans. Next thing you know you’re going to move to Japan to have women supposedly worship you. Let the nausea commence.</p>

[Russell7]

<p>I’m first generation Ukrainian (and also Romanian). I think that I’d know a little bit more about Ukrainian women than either of you. And if you think that I hold North American women in contempt, you’re wrong. I just stated one problem with American society.</p>

[k_amp_s]

<p>

No it isn’t.

</p>

<p>I beg to differ.</p>

<p>

In this study, subjects were given arrays of photos of 500 faces from people of European and African ethnicity as well as photos of non-human primates (macaques). About a third of the faces were male and the rest were females. The subjects were asked to judge for the most attractive face. The most attractive faces were then measured for symmetry. Symmetry was determined by measuring deviations from the midline, as well as measurements for the distance between the eyes. In total 6 measurements were made to assess bilateral symmetry.</p>

<p>The degree of sexual dimorphism was also measured. The distance between specific points, like the prominence of the cheekbone and ratios of the height of the jaw to the lower face height, lower face height to the face height and ratio of the width of the face to the height of the lower face were made. In all samples, symmetric males were ones who also had more masculine facial proportions and symmetric females had more feminine facial proportions. I’ve put up a figure that shows the highs and lows of attractive faces form their study.

</p>

<p>[PLoS</a> ONE: Symmetry Is Related to Sexual Dimorphism in Faces: Data Across Culture and Species](<a href=“http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0002106]PLoS”>Symmetry Is Related to Sexual Dimorphism in Faces: Data Across Culture and Species)</p>

<p>And yes - while if one has facial symmetry but unnattractive features, one will generally not be considered attractive.</p>

<p>But conversely, if one has attractive features but has asymmetrical featres, one will also generally not be considered attractive.</p>

<p>Take into account - this study on twins.</p>

<p>

Symmetry is a major correlate of physical attractiveness across species, including humans. Investigating the nature of this relationship has been difficult, however, for several reasons, including the facts that variance in symmetry is attributable to more than one source and is often correlated with other variables related to attractiveness. This study assessed the role of facial symmetry in relation to perceptions of facial attractiveness. Some of the natural covariates of symmetry were controlled for by comparing the symmetry and attractiveness differentials between monozygotic co-twins, who are genetically, but not developmentally, identical. The more symmetric twin of a pair was consistently rated as more attractive, and the magnitude of the difference between twins in perceived attractiveness was directly related to the magnitude of the difference in symmetry.

</p>

<p>[Symmetry</a> and perceived facial attractiveness: a mo…[J Pers Soc Psychol. 1999] - PubMed Result](<a href=“Symmetry and perceived facial attractiveness: a monozygotic co-twin comparison - PubMed”>Symmetry and perceived facial attractiveness: a monozygotic co-twin comparison - PubMed)</p>

<p>

Americans do have more muscle. How many buff guys do you see in Asian countries?

</p>

<p>Oh, please – the % of “buff” American males is relatively small (and I’m saying that as a “buff” American male).</p>

<p>A guy may be able to add on 12-25 lbs of lean muscle by working out - but when we start talking about 5’10" guys who weigh 210 lbs - we are generally talking about fat.</p>

<p>And oh, btw, in some Asian countries like SKorea - there are a good no. of “buff” guys.</p>

<p><a href=“japan-70%%20of%20the%20girls%20there%20are%20nothing%20less%20than%20gorgeous”>quote</a>

[/quote]
</p>

<p>If you believe that – I’m afraid you’ve bought into your Asiaphilic fantasies (Maybe 7-8% of Japanese women are attractive, the rest are slightly above avg to avg to fugly).</p>

[galoisien]

<p>

If women were getting paid less you realize all firms would hire the cheaper source of labor. Its simple economics.

</p>

<p>I don’t think you quite got the economics of prejudice.</p>

<p>Firms are only willing the same amount of talent at a lower price, despite their marginal benefit being more.</p>

<p>Dead-weight loss.</p>

[Russell7]

<p>k&s, that study only verifies that symmetry is a factor, given a correlation between symmetry and attractiveness. It doesn’t say anything about it being the most important factor, especially not more important than proportions and orientation of features.</p>

<p>It’s funny because you mentioned aging earlier, as if it affects attractiveness (which it does). But does aging significantly affect symmetry? No. That’s evidence enough that there are more important factors in attractiveness.</p>

<p>I’ve seen the study before (I think it is the first one that shows up on google). The only study that attempted to determine the actual significance of symmetry is the one that i posted.</p>

[MightyNick]

<p>I have asymmetrical features. But women still find me attractive. So your argument is flawed. :)</p>

[collegehopeful78]

<p>BerkelySenior women don’t worship men anywhere and they shouldn’t. I said that women in these countries treat men like equals. I mean look at women’s standards these days. Women want a guy who cooks and pays for dates. A guy who is gorgeous but doesn’t spend time on getting there. A guy who is sensitive to her emotional needs and problems but doesn’t have any of his own. Look up the term PMS- Princess mentality syndrome. Like I said american women are known to be the worst wives and girfriends. Nothing positive is ever said about them anywhere. Maybe you are in the minority that doesn’t use sex to get what they want.good for you.</p>

<p>And Russell I agree with you that women in other parts of the world are more approachable and friendly. This applies to men and women btw.</p>

[KindlyCuddly]

<p>Collegehopeful78 is likely ugly, boring or otherwise unattractive sexually if he’s pulling that trite “American women” crap. Anyway, the taller the better.</p>

[MightyNick]

<p>

Like I said american women are known to be the worst wives and girfriends. Nothing positive is ever said about them anywhere.

</p>

<p>I concur with that statement. I’ve heard people say that so many times.</p>

[alipes07]

<p>

Collegehopeful78 is likely ugly, boring or otherwise unattractive sexually if he’s pulling that trite “American women” crap. Anyway, the taller the better.

</p>

<p>thanks for contradicting yourself, further proving the point.</p>

[CollectivSynergy]

<p>I think this thread derailed itself twice. I have a feeling this may start getting the nerf stick soon.</p>

[k_amp_s]

<p>

I’ve seen the study before (I think it is the first one that shows up on google). The only study that attempted to determine the actual significance of symmetry is the one that i posted.

</p>

<p>Uhh, the twins study seems to indicate that facial symmetry is the factor which turns a “good-looking” twin (good facial features) into a “better-looking” twin.</p>

<p>Sorry - but all the top face models have near-perfect features and facial symmetry (and depending on what part of the world one happens to be in - opinions can differ as to “near perfect” features).</p>

[KindlyCuddly]

<p>The point being what? That humans have sexual preferences? OMG LIES. </p>

<p>And you’re deluding yourself if you think European or Asian women don’t have any themselves.</p>

[Russell7]

<p>The twin study doesn’t say anything about symmetry being the most important. The only difference between the twins are going to be related to symmetry. Genetics determines the size of the jaw, eyes, set of the eyes, orientation of features, etc.</p>

<p>However, the fine tuning of the development is subject to a bit of randomness. The only variable between twins is symmetry. So the only thing to distinguish between them in terms of attraction is symmetry.</p>

<p>Models have near perfect everything. That doesn’t prove that symmetry is more important than ANYTHING else that is nearly perfect.</p>