Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Maxperson" data-source="post: 9486673" data-attributes="member: 23751">Beauty isn't objective.&nbsp; Symmetry is a factor in attractiveness, but does not itself say whether or not someone is attractive, let alone beautiful.That is not objective beauty.&nbsp; People tend to prefer symmetry in faces, but note the wording they use.&nbsp; Tend to prefer. It's subjective.&nbsp; Not everyone does prefer.&nbsp; Not everyone finds the same symmetry to be beautiful.&nbsp; Even when symmetry is perfect, it still remains only one factor in whether someone is considered beautiful or not.What science has found is that more symmetry results in more people rating those faces higher in attractiveness.&nbsp; Not all people.&nbsp; And higher does not equate to beautiful.One person with a perfectly symmetrical face might be rated above average, another pretty, and a third beautiful.&nbsp; Symmetry isn't the end all be all of beauty.&nbsp; Why?&nbsp; Because beauty still remains in the eye of the beholder, and there is no beauty in Julia Roberts for me, and no attractiveness.Consider this.&nbsp; A face is pockmarked and covered in pimples, but those things are perfectly symmetrical on both sides of the face, as are the eyes.&nbsp; The person has no eyebrows, which is also symmetrical as it's even on both sides.&nbsp; Is that person going to be considered beautiful, even though the symmetry is perfect?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Maxperson, post: 9486673, member: 23751"] Beauty isn't objective. Symmetry is a factor in attractiveness, but does not itself say whether or not someone is attractive, let alone beautiful. That is not objective beauty. People tend to prefer symmetry in faces, but note the wording they use. Tend to prefer. It's subjective. Not everyone does prefer. Not everyone finds the same symmetry to be beautiful. Even when symmetry is perfect, it still remains only one factor in whether someone is considered beautiful or not. What science has found is that more symmetry results in more people rating those faces higher in attractiveness. Not all people. And higher does not equate to beautiful. One person with a perfectly symmetrical face might be rated above average, another pretty, and a third beautiful. Symmetry isn't the end all be all of beauty. Why? Because beauty still remains in the eye of the beholder, and there is no beauty in Julia Roberts for me, and no attractiveness. Consider this. A face is pockmarked and covered in pimples, but those things are perfectly symmetrical on both sides of the face, as are the eyes. The person has no eyebrows, which is also symmetrical as it's even on both sides. Is that person going to be considered beautiful, even though the symmetry is perfect? [/QUOTE]

Verification