Jezebel 
Enter your username and password.
-
posts about #eyeofthebeholder more → 
How Do We Define Beauty?
Some Of The "Sexiest Men Over 50" Are Not So Sexy
New York, 4:57 PM
Fri Dec 11
71 posts in the last 24 hours
Tip your editors:
Editor-in-Chief:
Anna Holmes
| Twitter
Deputy Editor:
Dodai Stewart
| Twitter
Senior Contributing Editor:
Tracie Egan
| Twitter
Contributing Editors:
Anna North
| Twitter
Sadie Stein
| Twitter
Reporter:
Irin Carmon
| Twitter
Editorial Assistant:
Margaret Hartmann
| Twitter
Contributors:
Rich Juzwiak
Email | Twitter
Latoya Peterson
Email
Jenna Sauers
Lizzie Skurnick
Interns:
Katy Kelleher
Twitter
Weekends/Commenter Moderator:
Hortense
| Twitter
| posts about #eyeofthebeholder more → |
How Do We Define Beauty? |
Some Of The "Sexiest Men Over 50" Are Not So Sexy |
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
10/07/09
10/07/09
see: mauritania, where women who are 300 lbs are the ideal because it shows that they come from a family that can afford food.
here, women who are tan, toned, and thin, with straight teeth, a manicure, pedicure, etc are all the rage because it shows that you have the time and money to work out, and the time and money to either go somewhere exotic to get a tan, or buy one at the tanning salon. all the other trappings of the American standard of beauty cost a crapload of money too.
in victorian england, pale women were prized because it showed you were wealthy enough to be able to hire people to do all the outdoors work. soft hands showed the same thing.
it seems to be just about universal, this thing where beauty is pretty much what marks you as upper class.
10/07/09
10/06/09
10/07/09
10/06/09
Then of course, you have the issue of colonization and class and it's lasting effect on the standard of beauty-white is seen as right so lighter skin, longer hairs, small noses are revered. In the case of class, lighter skin signaling that you don't work in the fields and a heavier figure signaling that your wealth i.e feeding your family isn't a problem. Wherever you go I think it's safe to say a dominant standard/ideal influences what people deem to be beauty but the standard doesn't have to be stagnant.
10/06/09
10/07/09
So this low nose vs high nose argument is about preference -- but I'd be willing to bet that if someone with the preferential feature but was otherwise less structurally attractive was put next to someone who was more structurally attractive it's the person with the flawed but otherwise perfect face that would be considered more beautiful.
10/06/09
10/06/09
10/06/09
10/06/09
10/06/09
But I dunno, maybe I just have a weird conception of beauty vs attractiveness. It weirdly extends to actors: like, I can generally find an actor attractive, but they're only beautiful to me in certain roles. Anyone else make this distinction?
10/06/09
10/06/09
It's actually fairly easy to explain: symmetry. They are mathematical proportions, like height from nose to top of mouth, cheekbones to eyes, etc. It's some ratio, I forget the exact number now, but it was the exact same number regardless of race, gender, ethnicity, etc.
Fascinating stuff.
10/06/09
10/06/09
10/06/09
ETA: I actually just overlaid the diagram on a photo of myself and I learned that I do an awesome job of shaping my eyebrows.
10/06/09
10/06/09
10/06/09
10/06/09
10/06/09
10/06/09
Furthermore, a study like this is highly problematic to begin with. Saying that definitions of beauty are different because of geographic location does not make sense - recognizing that there are different cultural images that play into conceptions of beauty does make sense. I've actually read a decent amount of research on cultural images of beauty/sexual appeal in Brasil, and there's actually quite a few historical factors at play, including a historical fetishization of the figure of the mulatta and a more recent idealization of features considered to be Japanese.
And on a lesser note, I'm betting that when these articles used the label "North American" they were referring only to Canada and the United States. Mexico is also part of North America, but Mexico has an entire other history of cultural ideals of female beauty.
These sorts of studies only ever seem to draw overarching and overgeneralized conclusions about culture and gender. That doesn't help understanding in anyway. The two articles referenced make it seem like there's some innate preference for certain features. Maybe the study is better - maybe they took into account the historical and societal factors at play (and there is a lot of research on them, so it's pretty disreputable if it didn't) but these articles are pretty rotten.
10/06/09
10/06/09
According to Reuters, the study was only conducted in Brasil. So it makes no sense that they would be touting it as a different standard of beauty without conducting the same study in the place they're comparing it to.
10/06/09
It was really, really interesting, though, because after awhile you get to learn an aesthetic. You get to see the ideal woman through the eyes of someone else, and you would get a clearer vision of what you really considered attractive. As I did it more and more, my girls started to change and transition and I started intentionally building in "flaws." It turned out that I found flaws more attractive than the absolute perfection we were usually going for.
10/06/09
10/06/09
10/06/09
10/06/09