Quoting:
Men used to be intimidated by my lady, now they understand!
End Quote

Quoting:

Does orientation matter? Beauty trascends all those things... it sometimes applies for sex and affections...


End Quote

Methinks if she were bisexual, I wouldst have a chance...but were she gay all the way, forsooth, she wouldst never loveth me that way :(

Quoting:
A report on Inside Edition today interviewed three women who say that the reason they cannot get any dates is because they are too beautiful. One lady went as far as to say men are intimidated by her beauty. Have these women looked to the mirror lately? If men are intimidated, the reason is the conceit of these women. What are your opinions, men or women?
End Quote

I saw part of that story too.  To me it does come off a bit conceited.  Thinking/knowing you're attractive is one thing.  BUT..you must always remember that not everyone has the same opinion of "good looking".  Beauty to one person may be anything but to another.  Just because you aren't approached doesn't necessarily mean it's because (you think) you're a total hottie.  If you're blond, maybe they prefer brunettes.  If you're a brunette, maybe they prefer redheads.  
Or, as you said--maybe it's because of the way you come across, and not because of the way you look.

Quoting:


So, in your opinion, the title of the report should've been "Too Petty To Be Asked For A Date?"

But really, it's not that these people are conceited, but that they lack modesty (or tact or whatever). I did not read this report or see how these women looked, but, come on, if you possess the looks of, say, Mira Sorvino or "Sylvia Saint," you definitely wouldn't call yourself "average" or "not some guys' type" (it's just never been a part of their life experience and, thus, not a part of their mentality). Maybe guys are intimidated by their looks. Who knows?
End Quote

Not necessarily "petty".  

Being as I have never been a man, I obviously have no gauge as to judging their thoughts or feelings about the opposite sex.  (Best I can tell, if you'll 'put out' you can have a chance with most any of them.. ;)) But again, seriously, I couldn't answer whether a guy could feel intimidated by some girl's appearance.  Maybe, I guess?!?

I had guys that asked me out, and others that didn't.  It never struck me as having a lot to do with being too pretty OR too ugly.  Once I got to be about 18 or so I knew I'd have luck with some and not with others. (as opposed to Marci, circa age 16, when I thought I MUST just be too ugly, fat, or something else to explain why I didn't get the ones I wanted  :-/)  Eventually I figured out that I could luck out one day and not get a glance another.  I really never thought about it beyond that point.  (I was never easy, so I knew it wasn't just because of ANYTHING I could have any control of)

However--it all brings back to my original point which was "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder" .  
Because, in your example--though I'm not familiar with "Sylvia Saint", I do know who Mira Sorvino is, and I would never consider her overly "beautiful". Pretty, sure.  But I, in my opinion, would never think her looks were intimidating at all.  But that's just MY opinion of who/what is "beautiful".  There are women that I'd consider gorgeous, but my husband could look at them and not even find them attractive.

Quoting:


Oscar Wilde: "'Tis Better To Be Good-Looking Than To Be Good..."
End Quote

Quoting:
I'll jump-in for a moment and say:

Many of these Hollywood women are just average, IMO.

The only thing that makes them "beautiful" is tons of make-up and expensive clothes.

End Quote

And don't forget the plastic surgery!   ;)

Seriously, though, I think you're right.  The make up, the clothes, the personal trainers--I remember complaining endlessly in the first months after my daughter was born-"Look how thin Heather Locklear is! (after having her baby)..why can't I look like that?"  I remember my mom telling me at the time that it helps when you have the money to be able to afford someone to cook you the fancy, specific meals that will keep you in shape during your pregnancy/postpartum time.  Not that we can't control it somewhat--but how can we FAIRLY compare ourselves?  
And I do think that celebrities just have options and money available to them that the normal everyday Joe (or Jane!) simply don't have.  And I tend to think that oftentimes, stars ARE just 'average'-- with an occasional total beauty--but with the "accessories" and the roles that make them seem really sexy, gorgeous, etc. can make them appear to be more than they really are.  

I've seen pics of "Hollywood Hotties" without their makeup.  Let's just say that when they are out and about in the morning without having had professional help--they are just normal, everyday women with an extraordinary life.

Quoting:


As long as you are aware that beauty is also a physical thing which science has researched extensively to the point where in can be defined objectively and not poetically. This is what separates symmetrical beauty like Mira Sorvino's from asymmetrical chaff like Tori Spelling.


End Quote

I agree to a point. I still think alot of what is beautiful is subjectinve and fed to us by the media and marketing executives. I think I remember reading (for a history class) that a few hundred years ago skinny people were considered ugly, and it was in style to be fat. Fat back then represented wealth and nobility. I believe it is all by association. If you say or think "beautiful" every time a skinny person is dispalyed, you will soon instantly associate skinny with beautiful. As to what you wrote of the science, could it be that science is just measuring our subjectivness, and that it is not really valid at all because perception can, and does change?

Quoting:


Their reasoning? That woman would not have much trouble giving birth as opposed to the othersEnd Quote

I guess that makes sense. Natural Selection theory states that those things which are more likely to help a species survive will be seen in greater numbers in the offspring. So, for example, if an insect on a tree is the same color as the branch it is on, it is less likely to be eaten, and hense, it will produce offspring unlike the insect which was a different color and was eaten (unable to reproduce). Multiply a few dozen or hundred generations, and you may only find that species with one color-- the one which helps them survive. What I do not understand about how this relates to what you posted is this: How did they come to the conclusion that women with certain proportions are more likely to give child birth?

Quoting:


As long as you are aware that beauty is also a physical thing which science has researched extensively to the point where in can be defined objectively and not poetically. This is what separates symmetrical beauty like Mira Sorvino's from asymmetrical chaff like Tori Spelling.


End Quote

Um....whatever... ::)


I must just not read enough of those important studies!

Quoting:

I'm a Naturalist :) :D ;D
End Quote

That's not one of those people who likes to walk around naked all day, is it?   ;D

Perhaps the reason big hips are good is it is easier to push the kid out, and hense, have less complications.

Anyways, I admit I have been conditioned to beleive skinny, symetrical women with shapely figures are beautiful. But I try and stay mindful what I really want is someone to grow old with. And I do not think it will matter much then what my mate looks like. Perhaps happiness and what we want are not the same thing.

Quoting:

So you wouldn't mind growing old with someone whom you do not find physically attractive AND be intimate with this one person for the rest of your life? With the lights on and everything? Wouldn't it be better if she was incredible-looking and you could really be honest about appreciating every aspect of her, including the physical? Never mind the emotional, that's a given. I suppose one could have a long-time companion in a true, bonafide Platonic friendship, but if there's no real physical chemistry it cannot go further than that without lying, lying, and lying.
End Quote

Okay Tarzan Boy..I will agree to disagree with your opinion on this entire subject.  For the most part.

However, I found this commment very shallow, and not keeping in mind that if you (anyone) have decided to spend the rest of their life with a person it's because of reasons far beyond them looking good on your arm.  It's called love.

If you don't find them attractive, then what are you doing with them anyway?  Obviously that's very important to some.  While I think that liking the look of someone does have a lot to do with becoming interested in them in the FIRST place, if you aren't happy when you are with them, perhaps you shouldn't be there.  If you can't handle growing old with a person along with their wrinkles, their hairline, or their baby-having waistline, then I'd say that's a really sad and screwed up way to spend your life and no one should bother.

So I'd say John_Seminal has got it quite right. ;)

Quoting:
I've found that if really really pretty women don't have dates there's usually a good reason...
End Quote

PERFECT call, Jonman.  :)

Quoting:
However, I found this commment very shallow, and not keeping in mind that if you (anyone) have decided to spend the rest of their life with a person it's because of reasons far beyond them looking good on your arm.  It's called love.
End Quote

"Shallow"... Hey, I know it's hard to agree with my hypothesis regarding mating and dating, but try to be fair (oooh, I hate using the four-letter word!). Think about it before you cast an all-emcompassing opinion as shallow on anyone.

First, I did state that she and I could be great friends - all things Platonic - for life. That's all I want from such a person. I don't need sex to live, but it would be nice to have it; think: dessert. I've had many great meals which did not include dessert.

Let me ask you this: Why should it be, that when two people make great friends, they're both obliged to be intimate? We should force ourselves to have sex with people who aren't attractive to us? For life?! Sounds kind of twisted. I hope you're not professing this as love.

Let me go back to the food analogy: It's tantamount to forcing oneself to eat dessert when one's stomach is already full from an already-satisfying meal. Pointless. Completely pointless - and it ruins the appreciation of the dessert. It's not like one cannot have dessert with a different meal...

I really don't think I can help with what I am and not attracted to, so this is not my fault. This civilized society is too fixated on sex. I admit it, sex is an awesome element of life, but I am not going to die from the lack of it. It is not a need. No offense, but I would rather go entirely without sex than to try what you imply.

I think everyone should, if possible, be with someone who finds them attractive. Why should I put myself in the false position, and curse her with a person who doesn't like her body? It's not like she could not find a boyfriend and desperately needs me to fulfill whatever notions she may have about herself. The situation John Seminal and you suggest is both unfair and unpleasant for all parties involved.

In conclusion, she and I can have a wonderful friendship. It will never, at any time, become more than Platonic. There is no need to bring a sexual aspect into such a relationship. And that's okay, you know?

Quoting:


"Shallow"... Hey, I know it's hard to agree with my hypothesis regarding mating and dating, but try to be fair (oooh, I hate using the four-letter word!). Think about it before you cast an all-emcompassing opinion as shallow on anyone.
End Quote

I said I found the COMMENT shallow. Read into it what you will.

Before I start in on my opinion about this again, I'll just say we just can't see it eye to eye-and I'll go back to agreeing to disagree.

Quoting:
I think the trick is to get your body to do it before your brain has a chance to protest.
End Quote

Dunno why, but this reminds me of Billy Crystal's character from "When Harry Met Sally". Now that was a good flick about relationships.

Hey Tarzan boy, what would you rather want, to have a great friend to spend life with, or a so-so friend who is really hot. I guess that is what it boils down to. For me, I would pick someone who is warm, kind, loving, nurtering, funny, and to hell with looks. When I am 50, I doubt looks will matter that much. What will matter is the temperment and personality of your mate and how they help raise the children.

Don't hate me for what I am about to say next, but I thought that woman who beat her kid at the wallmart had a nice rear (as that is all we could see from the video) but I would not want her raising my child nor would I want to have to live in a house with her for the next 50 years.

Quoting:
Here's a side not some may find interesting.  
I read a Seattle local story about a guy who moved rrom Seattle to LA.  He said the women down there were more beautiful and lots of them, not only that but that the woment were more genuine and friendly and willing to date.  
Point is this- Hot looking women in Seattle are more self valued than in LA, therefore raise there stakes much higher, hot LA woman are commonplace and therefor much more avalable.
Attitude makes someone easier to ask out, not looks.

An opinon I have of woman and looks.  Looks is short term value, I can see a woman and think she is the gorgeous, but it can take her opening her mouth to utter an incomplete sentance for me to lose that attraction to her.  Conversely I have met woman who have not turned my head but after getting to know them better have found them very attractive.
End Quote

Well said. I agree 100%. Very attractive women with concieted attitudes do nothing for me. It is the easiest way for me to lose interest in a gal if she thinks she is better than everyone else, especially if she is mean and rude about it. I believe real love develops over years, where attraction is a temporary thing. I guess lust is like a wind (okay, I will not go there).

Quoting:


Lust is the reason why most of us are here - unless you're a clone! ;)

I'm guessing only the beautiful are capable of being conceited and mean and rude. Not the ugly people. No, not them. It is not in their nature to reject others. Is it a bad assumption?
End Quote

I think I wrote attractive women who are concieted, mean and rude are the ones I would not want anything to do with. I guess I should have said that anyone who is concieted, mean and rude, rather than saying just attractive women. I do not want a mate who is gonna nag and tear me down. No way.

BTW, what do you consider ugly? What about attractive?

Quoting:


Life is of short term value too ;)
End Quote

Quoting:


Lust is the reason why most of us are here - unless you're a clone! ;)

I'm guessing only the beautiful are capable of being conceited and mean and rude. Not the ugly people. No, not them. It is not in their nature to reject others. Is it a bad assumption?
End Quote

Quoting:
I'm guessing only the beautiful are capable of being conceited and mean and rude. Not the ugly people. No, not them. It is not in their nature to reject others. Is it a bad assumption?
End Quote

Yes, I'd say it is a bad assumption: all people are capable of being conceited, mean and rude.  It's probably a fallacy to assume that beautiful people (of either sex) who are conceited are so because they're beautiful... they could be like that anyway (or you might just have caught them on a bad day).

My daughter was watching an interview with a couple of the S-Club girls last week - admittedly a forum guaranteed to show them off in their best light - and I have to admit I thought something along the lines of: "it isn't fair that someone that gorgeous can possibly be that nice as well - there has to be a counterbalance somewhere..."

Phil

Quoting:


I have to admit I thought something along the lines of: "it isn't fair that someone that gorgeous can possibly be that nice as well - there has to be a counterbalance somewhere..."

Phil
End Quote

Quoting:


No. Just plain healthy people. I am not talking about surgeries, media, or how girls must compare themselves to each other (and those examples I made because I want to point out people who are recognized by most of us). There have been anthropological studies in where researchers have taken photographs of beautiful men and women (i.e. physically fit, symmetrical-types) as well as photographs of lesser-blessed people and had them shown to various peoples around the world  (including indigenous tribes) - and they all came with the same conclusion. The beautiful human specimens were chosen time and time again over the alternative. The indigenous people's responses were great. The males saw pictures of different body types and they all chose the one with the narrow hips and proportional bust-line. Weird. Their reasoning? That woman would not have much trouble giving birth as opposed to the others... I had to keep reminding myself that these men had not been exposed to television or magazines or newspapers or movie stars...
End Quote

I think you mean "wide" hips.  Not "huge" "fat", just relatively wide compared to the rest of the body except maybe chest capacity.  And the reason is simple - bigger opening in the hips, easier to pass a baby - and preferably a baby w/a big head (brains).

Thanks for bringing up this research, though.  While beauty is subjective to an extent, well, I just said it.  To an extent!  There are many whom 95% would consider attractive and others whom 95% would consider unattractive.  (Perhaps I should emphasize - "gorgeous" vs "hideous".)  It's just the truth, unfortunately.  Doesn't mean you have to like only the gorgeous or hate only the ugly, it's just the truth when it comes to mates.  The real problem is when it trickles into everyday interactions.  Those who are avoided by both sexes for any purpose cuz they're not attractive enough.   >:(