it almost feels insulting to be told 'oh don't say that', 'oh don't tell yourself that', 'oh you look fine', 'you look normal', with that pitying tone and puppy eyes, when you know for an objective fact, that your face has issues, perhaps serious issues, that you have spent many hours researching about. It's like they are lying to you.
When you start applying this concept when looking at people you will soon realize beautiful people look very alike.. I live in a country full of attractive people and sometimes I feel like I'm looking at the same attractive woman or man one and over again.. it gets boring.
It's usually like that if you find certain physical qualities to make a person very attractive and I can actually relate to that as well because I have a certain type that I find attractive with a certain set of physical traits so naturally those people with those exact traits are gonna look somewhat similar to each other. But I can find others attractive too especially with an awesome personality that really shines through.
Josefine Lea There is only so much that one can aggregate subjectively to the quality of beauty after you have educated to identify attractive traits, as Jhon said in the video, even babies were choosing the most attractive individuals, it is in our genes not in our eyes. About personalities that 'shine through', I really don't see that at all neither, in fact, every day I meet a new individual I sense a remarkable similarity with other people I've met, within same or alike cultures often you will notice it, this is due to an evident loss of individuality for the greater good of the community which is becoming part of the collective. Let's face it, attractive and not attractive people are all the same inside, but in the outside society will make sure the attractive ones stay on top of the game and be rewarded for their inherent beauty traits.
Why Are You Single, How to Lose Weight, the effects of mouth breating and this video showed up all in one row in my recommend. Guess I'll just kill myself then.
Denzel Dickenson could be a way to lower our confidence, increase insecurity and push us to browse the internet more. Shit on them, I started to force myself to nose-breathe and lessen my calorie intake.
I think this information is the most beneficial for the future generation. Teaching others young enough to truly take advantage of it. Adults can make good changes but not like our children and the new generation.
When I was younger (I am 28 now), some people used to say that I was "handsome". And indeed from the age of 18 to about 23-24 I had been getting enough attention from girls (literally some girls would approach me on the street to ask for my phone number). Unfortunately, I was filled with social anxiety, unconfidence and some other mental handicaps which prevented me from having a healthy and sociable life. And as years passed through I gradually lost what has been "handsome" in me and became almost ugly, as I see my reflection now in the mirror. Neither did I fix my mental problems. The moral is (if there could be any in my story) that it's preferable that you have a healthy exterior as well as interior to be able to have lived a full life.
lamsosaucee, actually quite opposite. Hard labour at a factory, depression, loneliness and a kind of neurosis made me look kinda like a zombie or a schizophrenic. Bags under eyes, bad skin on the face, general leanness. A friend of mine sometimes jokes saying that I look like Trevor Reznik.
if someone is on the 'Tism spectrum, they are also more strongly repulsed by wide inconsistency in the face due to every detail popping out like a red coke can. Get one to trip on acid and they'll tell you everyone is ghouls, can confirm
Common Dirtbagz That sounds so dumb. It's like people don't understand what symmetry is. And really, pre-social media and pre-waxy masks of makeup, humans innately just want to fuck and procreate and bond. Pouty lips and "strong" chins add nothing to a relationship or a person's humanity or intellect or usefulness.
Very interesting video. But I always thought "beauty is in the eye of the beholder" was referencing preferences like being attracted to Blondes/Redheads/Latina/Asian/Skinny/Voluptuous. I'm sure people attracted to Emma Watson are not going to be into Pamela Anderson as much.
John R Yes they are. But two very different tastes. I know many guys who love that sex bomb look and think Emma looks like a teenage boy. Then others that think Pamela looks like a street hooker. Preference.
I think not being attracted to someone is different than finding them unattractive if that makes sense lol. I think what you're getting at is preference. Like how you can be straight but think someone of the same sex is good looking without being attracted. It comes down to aesthetics/facial symmetry and that's why plastic surgeons/patients try to attain that. So people with less symmetry are not as attractive to most.
Then explain how some beautiful people are seen as unattractive to some and less beautiful people are attractive to at least someone? There's lots of famous men considered hot that I don't find very attractive like Leo DiCaprio and Ryan Gosling.. Sure they're not ugly and they're fantastic actors but I have seen better looking men. Explain that. Plus it happens often that people find someone attractive due to their personality and confidence or humor.
Well from the second judgement you can see people have a much larger difference in preference. And I do think Leo is good looking but not the best looking, hence the difference in taste. And personality really do matter of course, since you become repusled by awful people. A 10/10 can fall straight down to a 0/10 if the person is nasty
If you want unbiased opinion on people don't choose famous people, I find some actors attractive and hold them to higher pedestals than others simply because they can do no wrong in my eyes and are perfect in every way in my eyes, but in reality they are porbably just a 6/10 as a regular person
This man just wants to promote his medical office. We are all fed by the media to believe what is attractive as well. 20 years ago, mainstream media didn't care about big butts, and now they are everywhere. Also, blond and blue eyed isn't now just the standard of beauty and facial hair on men is also seen as attractive but before, a clean shaved face was the standard. This is just the media feeding us. Form your own opinions. That is attractive.
Very well put. You clearly have your third eye open, Monica. Good to see. I guess you proved your point because I was certainly attracted to your comment, hence the reply.
Big butts were always popular in black communities. Particularly black American, African countries and Caribbean people. White people and I believe Asian people prefer breasts and before no butt. His theory is wrong just by the simple fact that there are different beauty standards all over the world. And you’re absolutely right, what we consider beautiful is always ALWAYS changing.
I agree, my experience has taught me that beauty is subjective. Two people raised in the same household could have widely varying opinions on who is attractive or not. I'm pretty certain it depends on multiple factors, not just what is visually appealing to some people.
Tana, agreed. Me and my sister mostly agree on what makes a male attractive but her opinions differ to mine when talking about the girls I like haha. The funny thing is, we share the same interests in nearly everything in life and our personalities are very similar too. You could say she's the female clone of me, so what you said is definitely true from my first hand experience.
The comment section sounds like non attractive people trying to make each other feel better. It’s genetically hardwired in are brains. Some of you may have different facial preferences but the vast majority are attracted to a strong jawline, high cheek bones, small nose, symmetrical face, fit body, etc. It’s just nature. Get over it, there are always things you can do to make yourself more attractive.
This doesn't really make sense. Look, I understand some faces are more proportionate than others and thus considered to be more "attractive" but from general life experience that does not mean You are instantaneously attracted to those deemed as such. I for example have seen( as many of you have ) soo many of these attractive men and women on social media, that have not caught my attention for more than a few seconds but have also encountered, what some would say lesser beautiful or average looking people, that I found to be good looking if not even attractive in my eyes, and they didn't have as many followers or didn't get as much attention from people. So I came to the conclusion that yes, "beauty" Is in fact in the eye of the beholder, as I am not as attracted to so called '"beautiful" people, especially not the perfect looking ones. I don't know why, it's just how it is for me.
•Lavi• This is exactly what I was thinking. People like what they like and ultimately you cannot predict what every single person likes, thus "beauty is in the eye of the beholder". You might be able to predict what a lot or most people like but you can't do that for all people. Beauty is not only what others may find attractive but what you find attractive. That's it. Which one you value more as defining the standard, other opinions or your own opinion, is ultimately up to you in the end. No one has given me any good reasons that disprove this idea as of yet and this video certainly didn't make a difference to my opinion. This guy right here completely misses or ignores the point. He is trying to set the tone for humanity as a whole with beauty standards he has deemed the most popular amongst people right now. Whilst doing so, he forgets that the point of the statement itself and that you can't make a sweeping statement like he has in this video about beauty and expect it to account for every single person.
the test was only based on the heads form , as they use very crude outline drawings . people have different sparks in their eyes and different mimic while they comunicate , those 2 play a HUGE role in attractiveness , then theres minor other indicators like skin quality , hair quality and outfit which can modify attractiveness , a VER HUGE role is actually in the hairstyle , every person has some hairstyles and "forms" which either underline their bueaty or undermine it
It's also the persons voice, mannerisms, smells, personality etc that makes them attractive. A lot of the guys I've crushed over are not traditionally considered "beautiful " but their smile and laughter, even the way they dress makes a difference.
Anne Yes but that conventionality still doesn't mean everyone will find a person who has convential beauty to be beautiful/are attracted to them... Other people can be attracted them/ find them beautiful, while others don't think or feel either one.
But at the end of the day we're all gonna end up looking all old and droopy like this guy (if we get that far) so who cares about obsessing over our looks
ecosophist well I don't plan on having a boyfriend or girlfriend anytime soon and if people can see past my looks for my personality then they're worthy of my approval.
It is my belief that chaos theory will prove that at least one of my farts will make its way to Africa to cool down an entire village and save at least one life in the process. That is my legacy.
I doubt many will bother to read this but I feel like writing it anyway. While I do agree that there are features & qualities that most will deem universally beautiful, whether conscious of it or not, I think this oversimplifies beauty a bit. If I’m recalling the same study that he referenced (which I believe I am) they did not properly account for facial expression nor eye size, things that strongly influence the way faces are perceived. (I think there is a study indicating children look at faces with larger eyes longer/more frequently than those with smaller eyes.) In the study he mentioned, It was also just assumed that the babies were looking at the more attractive faces because they were attractive, yet there is no way of knowing this is what the babies thought... why the specific faces chosen were considered attractive/not attracted was not fully explained (e.g., were more symmetrical, had x feature etc.?), it was based on the researchers’ subjective opinion of attractiveness & then they assumed that was the reason behind the babies’ gaze. Additionally, I believe they only used straight-on photos, no angled shots (like the drawings he showed) or profile-only pictures. Given how important he said ones profile is in evaluating attractiveness, I wonder if the babies would still look at the more attractive profile/angle, given the decreased visibility of the person’s eyes in the photo.... I really think the attractiveness/visibility of the persons eyes had a sway on where the babies looked. I wonder if one has only so-so eyes but the rest of the face has beautiful features, will the babies still look? Would they look at an average/ugly face, but has beautiful eyes more than other faces? Would they look at an ugly face that is smiling more/longer than a beautiful face that has a neutral expression? I feel like the study could go further & that would be interesting to read about. There are other things I wanted to say but this comment is already long lol
You've made substantial points and I felt the same way, especially for the assumptions on why the baby is focused on one face more than the other. The elderly bloke will know you've debunked his video to some extent and refrain from replying lol. If you're reading this, I call you out sir. Provide us extra info otherwise this study isn't even close to accurate.
The girl is still beautiful. Not everyone has to look like a doll or have European facial features. You can’t just change her kinda Jewish nose into a button nose and say she looks more beautiful. Yes, the maxilla is important when it comes to pretty faces but not every face has to look the same
Stop being mean to me being a Barbie doesn’t mean to be pretty. European faces are not the only pretty faces to exist. What about all the beautiful African, Arab or Indian women? They look nothing like a Barbie. What about all the beautiful women with crooked noses? The ones that look unique and beautiful? Videos like these seem to focus on European features only and tend to call non European features “ugly”
Lol why can't women just accept the fact that not everyone is "pretty in their own way"? It seems only men will confront the truth that a massive amount of us are average looking or just plain ugly.
Brickcellent everyone being beautiful in their own way is a fact. This has nothing to do with women. Everyone has a different taste. You can’t just point at certain facial features and pretend someone can only be beautiful if they have exactly those features. This is stupid and the reason why so many young girls have low self esteem. We are told by media that being “pretty” means having light skin, small button noses and thin bodies. As I said, these are mostly European features and not even all European girls have those features. There’s so many different types of women and they’re all beautiful.
Brickcellent as i said, there’s different opinions. What i said is true and I can give myself as an example. If you don’t see it like that, it’s okay but don’t pretend everyone is like you.
If everyone found the same facial shapes and body types attractive then only those shapes and types would exist. Genetically, over the course of time, characteristics people are not attracted to would be bred out because those considered unattractive wouldn't find love and reproduce. The fact that these various facial features and body types still exist are proof that beauty is indeed in the eye of the beholder. Symmetry doesn't appeal to everyone.
☺smylyface☺ The reason that doesn’t happen is because of genetic mutations and cultural shifts. For example, in the 18th century France there was a device, (that looked like a clothes pin) that women would use to get rid of their “button nose” and make it sloop downwards. Beauty standards change.
that's wrong. facial beauty is the result of mewing (good oral posture), not genetics. most people don't mew, that's why bad facial features still exist
Besides the changing of beauty standards; there’s the simple truth that we might not settle down and form families with a person that has our preferred body type/facial structure..
Some dude called me ugly because I believe beauty is in the eye of the beholder. There is always something to appreciate. Nobody should live their life by what OTHERS think. Everyone is ugly and everyone is beautiful to someone. You choose what to put forward that is beautiful about yourself. Not just physically.
Sometimes I see girls that I don’t find particularly beautiful and that I know most people wouldn’t bother looking twice, but something that I don’t know what is makes me feel attracted to them, there’s something in my subconscious that finds some of these girls much more attractive than girls that everyone think looks better
Wiglaf Audun that's true although most zinc deficiency is caused by the consumption of sugar, refined carbs and the use of glyphosate sprayed as a herbicide on foods.
Phoebe Louise this is where I would wish to disagree. As the research with babies demonstrated there seems to be complete agreement on the most attractive face. Personal and fashion would influence those further down the envelop. #mikemew
Orthotropics It isn't true for every one though, I must disagree. In that picture, I'd put A, D, and C above B and in real life I don't find conventionally attractive people attractive at all. How do you explain why some people prefer goths over conventional popular girls? Or why people find people from certain races more attractive than others depending on preference? The fact that everyone disagrees on what is beautiful shows that it's in the eye of the beholder.
Shao Yu Mai Wang Its like you're responding to myself and the OP as if we're the same person there. The OP never said that they found face A more attractive, just that people would have done.
Shao Yu Mai Wang aye but what of people of different cultures? For example, there's whole communities of men obsessed with Japanese women, who have completely different facial structure to other cultures. I know that I find women more attractive who have cuter, more petite faces, whereas the majority agree on a more hawk shape, I've noticed. Just from the fact that I don't find face A the most attractive at all is proof on its own against the theory that everyone finds the same things attractive. It just can't work. If you were to admit that there are exceptions to the rule, then sure, but if there are exceptions to the rule then beauty MUST be in the eye of the beholder. In fact, just by you saying that people find more obtainable people attractive is proof against this theory. People psychologically find potential partners who are more obtainable and fit with them in other areas. If this holds true, then beauty is in the eye of the beholder. As is your make up analogy. If someone were to find a goth woman more attractive because if make up and attire to a more conventionally attractive woman, then *in his eyes* she is more attractive due to this. This means that in this case beauty *would* be in the eye of the beholder. And this is all based on the idea that the phrase means on a physical attractiveness scale, when it's meant to encompass a person's entire being. So, to conclude, I'd say that using facial shape as the be all end all of beauty is incorrect. If you're looking to disprove the 'beauty is in the eye of the beholder' saying, you'd have to look at more than just facial shape, because there's more to it than that. To disprove this saying, you'd have to come to the conclusion that everyone agrees on who the most attractive man and woman are on the planet. But as long as there are exceptions to these rules, beauty is in the eye of the beholder, by definition.
Orthotropics so where's the official source of that research with babies? You talk about it in the video, but there are no sources of it at all in the description.
In the baby study I saw, the woman the babies stared at the longest was a Nordic model, with blue eyes, blonde hair, small nose, small pointed chin and larger forehead. The babies were of all ethnicities.
I agree up to a point. Certain type of people are attractive at first sight. But I have found that when you really get to know a person, the not as attractive features seem to become less important, almost unnoticeable, because you like the person for who they are.
+wltrjr At least they don't frequent incel forums, are on the brink of insanity, and have contemplated suicide many times over. You know it's true, so don't deny it.
You’re proof people’s brains work differently. Attraction might be subjective to some level but you have to hit the attractive threshold to be conisdered in the first place.
Sir John Johns No, popularity does not equal objectivity. Years from now the popular chose may even be different. Not only that, but you could easily manipulate the data to form a more "popular" choice. These things would not happen nor be possible if beauty was *not* in the eye of the beholder. Since these outcomes are possible, all this video does is serve to prove that beauty is in the eye of the beholder
+Caoimhín Ó Caoimh His point is that the babies are not judging how attractive the people look, but instead they are judging other characteristics. Your response literally makes zero sense. Physical characteristics that babies believe indicate a caring and protective personality have not been proven to correlate with beauty. Therefore, your comment is meaningless garbage. Quit defending this pseudoscientific insanity as gospel.
Man, talking about children vs. adults makes SO MUCH SENSE... Children prefer "pretty" faces, because they look nicer and trustworthy and they do not know any better. I've been once on a video about some triplets, rghey were women. The narrator called them beautiful several times, but the comment section was divided. Their faces were ok, but they looked like oily burned plastic dolls on most of the pictures. Another thing is cultural standards: if you ask white males to rate chinesse women, most of them would say that all/most of them are beautiful. But if you ask someone who has lived among chinesse people for a longer period of time or is chinesse, they will tell you that half of them were ugly. There is also a buzzfeed video with koreans in it (I guess). people were telling that they're pretty, but they were not. They were average looking and one of them was really ugly, but they STILL said otherwise. I guess people are just blind.
Orthotropics what do you mean "over the next 6 months this will become apparent" ? How could you know that ? This needs to go viral, yes, but most people who are going to find this are teens or young adults, so the particular group who wants to be treated in your office to gain best facial results. You on the other hand don't want to treat them, as they are more complicated to treat and need longer periods of time to change. I'd recommend you giving some alternative doctors who are also more face focused and do palate expansion in adults or at least somehow get the maxilla up and forwards.
Thanks old man for making my tiny journey on Earth, full of anxiety and body dysmorphic feelings of not feeling good enough.. This place really isn't our home, this place is uncomfortable hell. Some of the nicest, most amazing people don't have a "beautiful/media" earth shell. ..so this place is scary honestly
EmbraceWithin best indicator is going out and seeing if you ever get looks. People tend to only pay attention to others who stand out. But sometimes even that won’t be enough to tell someone how they truly look. Body dysmorphia is a thing.
I hate hypocrites saying some people with a deformed face are not ugly, but beautiful (and then get tonnes of likes). I do have a preference for pretty faces, it's innate, and I don't lie. They ARE ugly, BUT they have a beautiful soul, they are very strong to deal with what an unfavourable face brought them, and they are definitely more preferable than people who look pretty but have an evil soul. We just have to learn that beauty in the soul is far more important than beauty on the face.
What I gathered from this video is, when it comes to attractiveness there is a prototype which statistically is considered the most preferred type, however it doesn't mean it would appeal to a particular individual because people have different tastes. But even then, these individuals wouldn't be able to deny that the conventional beauty archtype is not attractive. Example: Superman might be the most powerful comic book hero and a lot of people will agree to it but still they will have their own favourite heroes who appeal to them more.
Yes but haven't there also been studies that show that people are more attracted to those who have faces that have some similarity to themselves. There was a study that showed composites of a person's face with their own and people usually were more attracted to the composite than the original. And men with blue eyes are more attracted to women with blue eyes. I'll comment links if I can find sources. I'm not sure if it is because we are looking for faces that are comfortable and familiar or if we are trying to make sure our own genes are visible in our offspring. Other studies have found that the most average faces are to most attractive. After taking composite photos of many women the more images added to the photo the more people consider the photo to be of an attractive woman. Avg eye size. Avg mouth size. Nose, face length, and width. Finding a person like that outside of a computer simulation is almost impossible. Symmetry is a marker of health, but subtle asymmetry can also be beautiful. I'd say that you just have to look around to tell that beauty can be subjective. How many times do you see people drooling over someone and you have no idea what they are finding so attractive about them? And same time adults can be conditioned to accept a certain standard of beauty or recognize certain markers of beauty. Just look at magazines and how beauty changes through time. And how standards very by country.
He gives a balanced argument based in logic and facts. People in the comments just respond with emotion and exceptions to the rule. Some people just don't want to be convinced. Have fun with your lies.
If you pay attention to the main actors in movies, tv, etc., you will notice that they almost always have a protracted mandible that lines up with their nose, wide smile, and wider-set eyes, especially women (eg. Margot Robbie). This seems to be the ideal. Further, the antagonists will often not fit into this standard. They'll have retracted jaws, narrower eyes, flatter cheeks, narrower jawlines (eg. Michael Emerson in Lost). I see this over and over. No wonder the majority of people don't feel they 'measure up,' as it were, to this beauty standard.
well, movie makers are no dummies. They know what people want. handsome/beautiful = protagonist , ugly = antagonist that's the formula they have to follow, if they want the movie to be a hit, and make tons of money.
In the comments: people completely missing the point of the video. A good personality makes you more attractive but Prof Mew is talking strictly about physical attractiveness in isolation. Like obviously you're going to get on better if you have a good personality AND a beautiful face, rather than just a good personality and a homely face.
My wise grandfather told me all women are beautiful some more then others and then said "Sometimes though beauty is only a light switch away". The man was an engineer for BMW and really good with numbers.
I agree but I personally have fancied someone who was considered ugly and had short comings in the lower third of the skull, forehead, and nose. They also looked different to anyone I had previously been attracted too.
Dryst Krab there are so many different aspects to people that one single aspect like facial development is not going to be the ultimate decider. However if you had another version of your partner who had all the same aspects except for one, that he had healthy facial development it would be highly unlikely that he would be worst and likely more attractive however how much more attractive is more subjective and to the eye of the beholder
You cannot keep using these outlyer cases as a "debunk". Yes, maybe 1 out of 100 people you find attractive are not conventionally attractive, but that makes no odds in the grand scheme of things.
Ok so people here in the comments are saying how beauty IS in the eye if the beholder but there are some characteristics that make up a good looking person. And for those saying that you have seen girls with ugly guys with bad structure , lets just put it like this... those girls are desperate.
Amel Boudia beauty Is everywhere. Even if someone believes that than he can be easily proven wrong by showing them that non europeans also find each other beautiful.
The World is Eurocentric, sadly. That’s why they think Europeans are the only attractive people on earth. I personally find Asian males very attractive.
Europeans might have "attractive features" (whatever that means), but they´re boring AF like you can´t even hold a conversation with them, they´re always moody and have no sense of humour.
Actually, beauty is still in the eye of the beholder. Even if we're all wired to see the same thing as beautiful, beauty only exists within our perception. Outside of ourselves, people are not actually beautiful or ugly. They simply exist in whatever form they're in, and our perception makes them ugly or beautiful.
yes beauty and ugliness is objective while still in the eyes of the beholder at the same time because it is relatively objective,if you are ugly,just accept it, attractiveness and taste is mostly subjective,a husband can still find his wife attractive even when she is so fat,fatphobic is justifiable and more reasonable also, just because it takes personal statement to decide something is beautiful or not,it doesnt prove that beauty is subjective,for example math was first founded by a person,does it mean math is subjective? does it mean 1+1 is subjective? does it mean 1+1 can be 5 then? no!
@@Cabdirxamaan_Garanwaa252 maths is pretty objective. Why do stupid people feel so certain when writing dumb stuff? I guess that is a mystery we will not solve.
Forward grown faces = healthy faces = attractive faces. Our genetics are driven towards forward grown faces because it implies a larger airway. This all comes down to survival. People with longer faces are unattractive because it implies a damaged and small airway. Our genetics determines beauty, not your consciousness.
If someone is found attractive by majority of people then they’re attractive. Everyone has a type but they can still tell if someone is attractive or not. Some people may find Dolan twins ugly because they don’t like their bicycle seat shaped jaws but can still tell they attract a lot of girls and some may find Kpop boys ugly because they like more masculine men but at the same time can tell they’ve got really pretty faces. So some people are just beautiful but it’s more of a matter of which type of beauty they prefer.
I dont have words to say thank you enough for how much I feel better with myself and others and more beautiful than I ever was!! God bless Mew family!!
Some “ugly” people have found love and they’re very happy. Besides, if you’re so-called ugly, then you weed out all the people who only like you for your body or your face. Strong relationships go way deeper than mere looks. I don’t know about you but I’ve definitely been attracted to guys who were not, “attractive.” There have also been guys who were supposedly “attractive” who I was not attracted to at all. I don’t know if I’ve conditioned myself to be more attracted to gives who would be attracted to me, but whatever it is, I do not believe that this “universal” standard of beauty is as universal as some make it seem. Otherwise, no one without a certain appearance would find love.
Yeah but it's good looks that attract and in my experience if you can't attract anyone then you will never get a chance. I have been alone my whole life and I will probably die alone.
@@christianriddler5063 exactly. They want to blame us for getting rejected all the time, being disrespected everyday, being ostracized, being bullied physically in school, making it hard to study and people just blatantly hating on you. All because of our looks. It does not matter about "your attitude " or "confidence " because when I approach girls even if im confident they still shut me down. (Even if she is in my leage because girls do not like settling or dating in their own leage only if you are atleast a 7). They say you not trying hard enough but I asked about 500 %irls and im 21 and NOT 1 OF THEM SAID YES
You basically just saying to date and fall in love with someone on your league. Of course if you're average looking you most likely be want and attracting people who are the same average looking as you. Majority of people are average looking btw. So it's very common most of time they just be dating each other but it's very uncommon to see a 5/10 man attracting 9/10 woman.
I think taste matures as we grow older like fine wine. We probably do start of from a similar mould but through our experiences our tastes may differ, grow apart, and become more refined. I for one prefer the picture on the left of the two versions of the same girl, and liked C the best. I have a thing for big noses lol and I don't think I'm alone on that one.
Some people don't seem to understand the point being made. He isn't talking about taste. Taste is a conditioned preference. He's talking more about the unconditioned preference we have for faces with a certain shape. Objectively(not subjectively) attractive people are instinctually seen as more fertile and healthy, so that is why they are 'more attractive.' If I'm wrong, please let me know.
What beauty in the beholder actually means is that some men prefer blondes and other brunettes, or that some prefer a tanned skin and others a pale one. It doesn’t mean that having no lips, a double chin and no teeth can be attractive in someone’s eyes.
Something which is ontologically subjective does not remove it from empirically objective scrutiny. Thus, it is entirely consistent for an experience to be within the eye of the beholder, but for there to be objective methods of investigating what and why one finds subjectively pleasant. I can't believe you conflated these two.
You can't say we "we all agree" when not even 100% of the people you polled agreed. On top of that, they have never polled everyone. Also, the baby test has only been done twice and it sounds like it was by the same researchers and always with the "more attractive" face on the same side. Personally I have always been drawn to what many people would call weird faces. I don't find what is considered perfect at all attractive.
The title of this video should be "Why beauty *may* not be in the eye of the beholder". The problem many people will be pissed off may be not so much that they don't agree with scientific studies, but because scientists like to give sweeping statements based on a few studies... A quarter of people (in the study) did not adhere to our supposed biological perception of beauty, and that's A LOT to make a statement that "beauty is not in the eye of the beholder"
I think it also depends on how you see yourself. If your self esteem is low then youll find average or under average people more attractive than someone who is very attractive.
A very stupid interpretation of a fantastic quote. There are beauty standarts and these are not news, learn about s lines in art, face fashion etc.. But it's not about physical beauty. The meaning of the quote is that you CAN find the beauty in anything say "ugly", "imperfect" by expanding your mind
EssTema That is a useless model. If just by "Expanding" your mind, you can come to like anything, then nothing has actual value. It is the same as paper money, which is called Fiat currency (from the Latin, "Let it be"). Paper money has no objective value, unlike gold, or diamonds. But money stands for something, and that something is what we value out of convenience instead of actual content. There is no difference between value that can be found by mental gymnastics and value that isn't there at all. And this very statement " There is no difference between value that can be found by mental gymnastics and value that isn't there at all." Is what brings people to dislike modern art. Just like beauty, if it's in the eye of the beholder, then everything is meaningless unless someone comes and throws meaning at it. And logically, no opinion on beauty is more valuable than another. In the end you come up with an arrogant statement that says "What's pretty and meaningful, is like that because I like it."
Marvelous Quasar Pork Man everything you see around you is not ugly or beautiful, it is you who choose what is beauty. If a born child tend to look more at one face over another it maybe the face is just more interesting to them. Children doesn't have a concept of beauty in their mind it's what they acquire when learn about the world, or the world want them to have a certain picture, saying that geometric perfection is the beauty is false
EssTema Nonsense. It's like you *want* to ignore objective information, like, Symmetry always appears as "Beautiful" in healthy humans. Nobody spends time telling their children what looks good or not. No concept for beauty is needed to trigger the chemical reactions for the response, said response in words is expressed as "Beauty". The structure of the unconscious makes sure of that. You, my friend, do not get to pick what you think looks good. At some point in your life, you look at X painting, or X structure, or X face, and for whatever hidden reason, the thought that it looks good comes to you. You have no control over what you like. The attempt to find a geometrical shape that will look good, unless irrationality ensues, was successful 2300 years ago. The Greeks discovered various ways to represent the Golden Ratio, and even today artists or architects use the Golden Rectangle to make faces and buildings. The reason being, humans find it unconditionally good looking when implemented in secret. Another thing humans find beautiful are Fractals. Or any type of curvature that occupies a space evenly. Society can't do anything except build on these natural principles. Lastly, children don't "Understand" concepts. But they act them out. Child psychologists discovered this like, in the 50s. Information is stored in their tiny, barely functioning brain, whether they want it or not. I mean, think about it: nothing comes from nothing. They need something to remember what they see and how to categorise it, otherwise they'd live for years without being able to learn a thing.
Why is everyone so butt hurt. This is scientific fact. This is why some people are considered universally attractive. This is why there is always the hottest guy and girl in high school. The majority of the people will agree on which is the hottest and which is not
How To Vegan I think the left looks way better than the right. The right looks like someone laid her down on her stomach and batted the top of her head down so she looks like a damn mouse haha. I can't see how it's supposed to look better. It's way too short. My art teacher would lecture me on proportions of I drew something like her because he wouldn't believe how circular it is.
Well, show me one person, throughout history who ever had any real impact on society, whether its in politics, science, finance, anything, who was actually pretty? Everyone, from great leaders to captains of industry, are all ugly. (Apart from models or actors). So i think this Mew thing is less important than you would like it to be. If you dont want to be a model, then who cares? Secondly, if beauty is much less about genetics and much more about the correct position of the tongue (as Mew says), then what difference does it make how your partner looks? because your children need not necessarily look like him (or her) as long as you make sure your childs tongue is in the right place, they'll have nice faces.
tentimetex to name a few, Nikola Tesla, Thomas Edison, Cyrus The Great (Persian known for creating the largest Empire of the world in his time), President Rutherford B. Hayes, Hunter S Thompson, Rupert Brooke, Johannes Brahms, Mark Twain, Richard Francis Burton... Soon Ching Ling, Charlotte Bronte, Jane Goodall, Princess Diana, Audrey Hepburn (yes an actress, but also spent much of her life working with UNICEF), I could go on but with a little Googling I’m sure you can find more for yourself...
tentimetex oh, and I happen to find Elon Musk quite handsome, and he’s probably one of the most brilliant minds of our time... Let’s also not discount the charming good looks of Carl Sagan and even Michio Kaku... Jane Goodall (who I already mentioned above) happens to be one of my heroes, and she is a beautiful human being... And though many actors, musicians and artists may not contribute inventions, scientific discoveries or political philosophies to our world, let’s not forget that many of them lend themselves to things much “deeper” and more socially resonant than simply “acting”, “singing”, etc... Paul Newman, for example, was a beautiful man who also happened to be one of the most prominent philanthropists and activists of our time...
Did you look up all these people on google to see how they looked? Wow! good job! :-) But whats your point? Even if there are obviously nice looking people (according to Mew) who have achieved (And i was foolish to say ''show me one..''), that does not discredit my main point, does it? (which is that irrespective of the way you look, at the end of the day it is what you DO that counts). Although Mew has the bonus luxury of appealing to the vanity of people, even though he is 'officially' coming at it from a 'health' perspective in order to further his theories. I'm sure someone like Mew would be quite critical of a lot of the people on your list, and that is MY point exactly. People are misinterpreting what he is saying or running with it in the wrong direction and being very critical of other people (im not saying that you're doing that specifically). And i made two points not just one. What do you think of my second?
I only clicked on this video to scroll through the comments to see if anyone else noticed that the girl in the thumbnail was the girl in the Avicii music video and I didn’t listen to anything he was saying in the video and I don’t know why people are mad.
We should aim to become more beautiful regardless of where were are at right now. The beauty of the face from what I understand from watching this channel is important for our health.
Robby The beauty of your face may help your psychological health but not directly your physical health. The beauty of the face only indicates how healthy an individual may be.
Thats true because a lot of our beauty is dependent on our parents and pregnancy. If the fertility of either our father or mother or both is low then the child wont be optimal.
Katie Waity Actually, it does directly impact your physical health. If your face goes downward enough, your airway starts to become smaller. Eventually, it can lead to sleep apnea. Another direct impact on health is crooked teeth, tooth crowding, and malocclusion. Also, these facial features generally correlate with bad habits, and those bad habits can have a direct impact on your physical health. Also, we learn habits from our parents. If we "inherit" bad looks from our parents, despite optimal conditions, this could have very well been because we copied their bad habits.
Interesting study, I'm a character artist and I've found that when trying to make a 'realistic' (less than perfect) model, people will have all sorts of different things they like/dislike about it, so when asking for critique I change one thing, but everyone I ask always has a different opinion. Of course, if something looks far too off from what we consider ideal, it's a lot easier to notice, but those subtle differences have a huge effect on the look and personality of a character.
