Join John Adams, world renowned Intl Matchmaker, Monday nights 8:30 EST for Live Webcasts!
And check out Five Reasons why you should attend a FREE AFA Seminar! See locations and dates here.
View Active Topics View Your Posts Latest 100 Topics FAQ Topics Mobile Friendly Theme
Discuss and talk about any general topic.
12 posts • Page 1 of 1
Adama, this is the head of a famous work of art, Venus de Milo. It was believed to be a statue of the detestable false goddess of the Greek pagans, Aphrodite.
I've always thought the face was homely. I was reading about some psychological research that was going on about beauty having to do with a ratio, that certain proportions of the face are thought to be beautiful, the size of the nose as a ration to the width of the face, or measurements along those lines. Those ranked as attractive tend to have proportions that align with this ratio. Also, there is a technique for averaging together a lot of faces into one face. This results in attractive faces. In this sense 'average' faces are more attractive, apparently. What is perceived as beautiful may have a lot to do with little deviation from the mean, mathematically speaking, of the proportions of the average face.
I saw these lines drawn on different faces that were used to measure the proportions. Someone had done this with the Venus de Milo statues face. I always thought she was homely, maybe a 4 or a 5 on a one-to-ten scale. After I saw that, I looked up the state on Wikipedia and elsewhere, and it was described as 'beautiful', not just as a work of classical art, but as if the statue depicted a beautiful women. I don't think her face is beautiful, so I asked the questions. Maybe a lot of men do, and I am in the minority.
She looks kind of like the Statue of Liberty to me, another statue of a detestable false goddess of the Greek pagans, who I always thought was rather homely.
They call this Venus de Milo, but the idea that it is Aphrodite is just at theory. Others have suggested a Nymph. Aphrodite was supposed to be the goddess of love and beauty, and as such was supposed to be the personification of beauty. If this was really supposed to be her, the Greeks may have had a very different standard of beauty-- a plain pudgy face.
I've read in a non-academic source, that Venus de Milo conforms the golden ratio, http://www.facechange.org/secrets-of-facial-beauty/. There must be more to my own perception of beauty than features conforming to the golden ratio.
Men who are considered good looking often have faces that conform to the golden ratio. But I do not consider men's faces to be attractive to me. I don't even know if a man is good looking unless I get some clue of it from someone else. But of course, I can tell from looking whether I consider a woman to have an attractive face.
For me, it seems like women with 'sharper' or 'distinct' features of more attractive than those with rounder features. Maybe those aren't the best words to describe it. Tighter faces are better looking than flabby faces. High cheek bones in some women may be attractive for this reason-- you can see the cheek bones.
Maybe for me attractiveness has to do with the
golden ratio + femininity + 'distinct' features.
That assumes no abnormalities.
One of the reasons for the assumption that it is Aphrodite is that it does conform to what the ancient Greeks are known to have thought that "everyone knows" is a beautiful body - pear shaped. Specifically somewhat boyish but with small-medium tits and a big ass. It is interesting that every culture seems to have a different idea of ideal female beauty. For example, the next Miss Universe will be somewhat tall and barbie-doll pretty with a narrow hour-glass figure. The ancient Romans liked big-boned Germanic blondes. When they talked about a fair maiden with a great body (candida virgo cum magna corpore) they meant it literally.
Do you think that's why they wanted to conquer Germania, to bring back the big-boned German slave girls. Maybe the big boned women with large hips have a better chance of surviving child birth and producing more babies. The big-boned male babies may have made better slaves.
There is probably something to be said for going to a culture where the men dig homely chicks, and finding a woman the locals do not consider that appealing. I think there is something to the idea of universal ideas of beauty. China is a far and distant culture, but they pick a lot of nice-looking women to star in a lot of their movies.
I do find that an Indonesian woman can be really pretty, but if her skin is a bit darker than a certain tone some of the locals don't consider her attractive. But some women I don't consider that pretty seem to be considered more attractive if they have white skin. I also find that they find western/European features to be attractive. In beauty contests, they'll choose someone who looks a bit more western over a more local-looking woman who I think is pretty. But the western features look more exotic from their perspective, and there is something to be said for looking a little different. I never thought the one who gets picked for any beauty contest is the prettiest one.
I don’t think so, but Roman women did pay a pretty penny to buy their blond hair to make wigs lol. It may be that short, dark people just find tall blondes hawt on average.
The Italians and Greeks were probably a bit more like northern Europeans way back when than now. They say Greeks got darker skinned after Alexander the Great conquered those peoples to the east. They interbred with those people. Rome had people from all over the empire who interbred with the Italians over time. Sicily was conquered by Muslims for quite a while, too.