5 Answers

  1. Initially, it was an instinct: those features that maximized the probability of survival of offspring were beautiful = attractive in persons of the anti-hunger sex. Those that were biologically appropriate: long legs, big eyes, etc.

    Later, however, the social aspect intervened: representatives of the upper social strata seemed attractive. Which is also logical: the chances of survival of a child in a higher social stratum had any more. Therefore, the fashion was “aristocratic pallor” (from the fact that aristocratic women usually stayed at home) and a high forehead + thinness (signs of rickets suffered in childhood-also from lack of sun). And before that, the beauty / handsome man was supposed to be full (the fairy Morgan is described in Arthurian legends: “she was pretty and fat”)…

    In general, this is a certain resultant of the biological and social aspects. And if the biological one changes slowly, then the social one changes quite quickly: pallor is now more likely a sign of”office plankton”.

  2. Each person determines for himself what is beautiful and what is not, succumbs to the imposed opinion of the media, television. Experiences a stronger sexual attraction, or receives aesthetic pleasure from the contemplation of beautiful things.

    But as an artist, it's a little easier for me to answer the question of beauty and aesthetics. There is a standard. This is the golden ratio, and the Da Vinci man. Where each muscle and bone is proportional to the development of the body in relation to height and mass. What is right is perfect. All other particulars and defects.

    Time moves and views change, but the ideal remains unchanged, and sometimes people make a choice in the direction of artificial beauty sacrificing their own health. Going beyond the bounds of reason, degrading further and further.

    It is quite difficult to look at a face by its individual parts or features, since we still start from the general impression, and special features only add uniqueness to the face and endow it with beauty. As an example, Negroid races have a special structure of the face structure, as well as the Asian group, and the standards shift to genetics. They can not be called ugly, although they are very different from Fashion Idols. For them, the ideal is different and is perceived through the prism of their own genotype (although there are exceptions)

    And the answer is ultimately this: there are no ugly facial features, there is an incorrect layout.

  3. It's better to show it.
    Well, this woman is beautiful?

    And this one is beautiful?

    Well, beautiful – that's all, and this is not a stereotype. Well, yes, the right facial features, everything in moderation. Skin – the lighter, the better. Long hair ( for women) is definitely beautiful.
    But the nose looks like a pollock, the lips are like dumplings, or the harya is such that it barely fits into the photo – it's ugly.
    And about the race. Caucasian-well, of course. Mongoloid – Japanese, Chinese, and Burmese women can be beautiful. But there are beautiful Black women? I don't think so.

  4. First, this question should clearly be attributed to the section of psychology. But if we talk about biology, then first of all beautiful faces are those that are more symmetrical, because they indicate human health and the minimum number of harmful mutations. Lush beautiful hair and clean smooth skin, also speak about the health of the person in question. The ideal female age for childbearing is about 20 years. Such men also like most of all. Men also like women with a typical” average ” face for their region, as their brains are easier to process. In short, while I was looking for cheat sheets, so as not to forget any moments, I found an excellent article that describes everything in detail, but unlike me, there are specific names of all phenomena and links to well-known sources. http://rusrep.ru/2007/29/zhenskaya_privlikatelnost/

    I'm sorry that I'm lazy and don't want to finish writing my thoughts. But the article has everything I know, but it's better written. Personally, I almost always know where my beauty preferences came from. Many of them came from my childhood, many after meeting interesting people who caused me a lot of emotions.

  5. Also refer to aesthetics,because it is aesthetics that tries to find answers to your questions.For example, the works of Plato, Aristotle, Kant,and Hegel.

    ……….

Leave a Reply