• Welcome to BookAndReader!

    We LOVE books and hope you'll join us in sharing your favorites and experiences along with your love of reading with our community. Registering for our site is free and easy, just CLICK HERE!

    Already a member and forgot your password? Click here.

External Beauty vs Internal Beauty

E

episkopos

New Member
“Outward beauty depends on the inward beauty. If you are beautiful inside it shows on the outside”

Do you agree? What do you consider beautiful as beauty is relative. Beauty in nature, women, men, etc. I was just wondering.
 
Are you asking if I think aesthetically displeasing people can still be attractive? If so then I would say absolutely the answer is yes. Hell, if it was not so then I would never have gotten a date, much less a mate.
 
I wish short was the worst I had to deal with. Truth be told I was born ugly and have been going down hill every since.

Fortunately some girls like the dwarven look, although I am not holding my breath for Galadriel to come a-callin'.
 
Yes, you shall be set alight by the etherscorn of a thousand sub 5'10" members.

I have Marshmallows and a stick. ;)
 
there is a lot of beauty in nature, but even nature has it's ugly side.. i don't like ugly, but that is subjective. and what is 'inward beauty' anyway?
 
zen said:
there is a lot of beauty in nature, but even nature has it's ugly side.. i don't like ugly, but that is subjective. and what is 'inward beauty' anyway?
Click to expand...

Depends on whom is looking upon the inwards, heart surgeons and gynaecologists.

It doesn't take much for me to annoy a woman according to Beloved.
 
No, we care about the outside :) That Calvin Klein super bowl commercial is on continuous playback in my head.
 
zen said:
Manly - you seem to have a strange view of women... do you know many? :)
Click to expand...

What about the women who only care about the size of his wallet or the men who only care about what's in her bank account? Maybe these things are aesthetically pleasing to those so inclined. ;)
 
zen said:
Manly - you seem to have a strange view of women... do you know many? :)
Click to expand...

I know a lot of women, happily taken by one currently.

I mean in General, biologically speaking. Propagating the species is much more dangerous for women (especially prior to the advent of modern medicine). Therefore, if a woman was (genetically still is) going to have a child she must make sure the child will be worth her life as far as the gene pool is concerned. Therefore, women care about the "inside" moreso than the outside. Sure, being well built and strong is important to a woman, but so is the ability to woo women (suggesting her child will be able to further her legacy), the ability to get food and wealth, and the power to keep it. She wants a strong, attractive child.

A male, on the other hand doesn't have that kind of risk. He just has to impregnate a woman. Therefore men can "play the numbers" so to speak. By impregnating many women, chances are one of the children will live on to further his genes. Men, therefore, care a lot about the outside.

Understand I'm speaking on an evolutionary, thousands and thousands of years level, and not really speaking about modernity, and cultural issues. Genetically speaking, on the whole of human history, men care more about looks, and women care more about a man's ability to provide and be powerful.

Now that I've explained it clearly, it doesn't seem like such a strange view, does it?
 
Manly Reviews said:
A male, on the other hand doesn't have that kind of risk. He just has to impregnate a woman. Therefore men can "play the numbers" so to speak. By impregnating many women, chances are one of the children will live on to further his genes. Men, therefore, care a lot about the outside.
Click to expand...

I disagree with your logic. If it is best for men to "play the numbers," (and from a genetic standpoint I agree with that) then it really shouldn't matter what the outside looks like. Quantity would be more important than quality. Or as my husband's tacky friends would say "They all look the same in the dark."
 
kelstan said:
I disagree with your logic. If it is best for men to "play the numbers," (and from a genetic standpoint I agree with that) then it really shouldn't matter what the outside looks like. Quantity would be more important than quality. Or as my husband's tacky friends would say "They all look the same in the dark."
Click to expand...

Except a less attractive woman would bear unattractive offspring who would have trouble in the "mating market" themselves in the future. Thus men have a 'minimum threshold' of attractiveness. They may look the same in the dark, but their kids wont ;)

This is proven - both men and women's side of my argument - by the fact that people are getting both more attractive AND more intelligent, and that attractive people tend to be smarter than less attractive people on average.

SOURCE
Beautiful people are more intelligent I | Psychology Today

Attractive people have higher IQs: Beauty and brains DO go together! | Mail Online

http://personal.lse.ac.uk/Kanazawa/pdfs/I2011.pdf
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top