I think “attractive” is a misnomer, since, to me anyway, this implies the whole package, which includes both looks and sexuality. “Good looking” would be a better choice of descriptor.
I know several good looking people who have little sexuality.
Of particular interest, I know two gorgeous nearly-identical twins - one of them is like a Barbie doll but carries herself in an almost asexual manner, while the other (less clasically good-looking) oozes sex appeal. I know which one I find more appealing.
And a long-ago ex girlfriend wasn’t a head-turner by any means, and particularly unphotogenic. If you saw a picture of her you’d say “meh” or “eeugh”. But God she had “that thing” and knew how to work it. This increased her overall attractiveness by vast leaps.
This is what makes Ms Jolie the pinnacle of current female sexyfuntime ladies - she’s got both in spades.
I tend to see attractive vs sexy as text book looks vs what I find rawr-inspiring. I’ve met plenty of people (there are spades of them on the gay scene) that are text book good looking and straight out of the mold of “what a good looking gay man should look like” but I don’t find them in the least bit desirable. Conversely I used to work with someone who isn’t remotely text book good looking (not very tall, a bit on the chubby side, pretty average face) but who I wanted to jump on whenever he was in the room. In his case it was mainly his personality which was extremely powerful and he had a great sense of humour.
I’ve just started dating someone who I don’t think would do that well on the text-book looks scorecard but I think he’s absolutely beautiful.
I kind of think this way about Brad Pitt. He’s obviously very handsome but I just don’t think he’s particularly sexy. Like if you were having sex with him he would stop every couple of minutes to check himself out in the mirror or something. Meh. I know that now I will have about 20 posters jump in here to say how sexy BP is. I just don’t see it - he reminds me of a Ken doll.
I have seen every episode of Seinfeld multiple times, and have no recollection of that. I often miss the first few minutes of every episode, though. Now I’m curious as to what the routine is.
It does sound similar, but I’m pretty sure I’m thinking of something different.
Damnit! Now I’m obsessed. Was it maybe one where he’s talking about how we need pockets because otherwise we won’t know what to do with our hands? And that’s why going to a nude beach/colony sucks?
The first gorgeous but not sexy that came to my head was Carrie Underwood. I agree with gaffa that it’s hard to think of a good example of the opposite because 99.99% of the people in entertainment are attractive. I finally decided on Ginger from The Real Estate Pros; she is sexy to me, but really not all that attractive.
As for the Seinfeld discussion in the thread, it’s part of the standup rountine at the beginning of one of the shows. He’s saying that men would be perfectly comfortable naked, as long as they had two pockets to put their hands in.
Why is it so difficult, uncomfortable, to be naked. It’s because when you have
clothes on you can always kinda make those little adjustments that people like
to do … you feel like you’re getting it together, yeah, yeah pretty good
<pulling at lapels, pockets etc.> feeling good looking good But when you’re
naked it’s like it’s so final you’re, Well that’s it. <no movements> There’s
nothing else I can do. That’s why I like to wear a belt when I’m naked. Cause I
feel it gives me something, I know I’m naked, but you know, <tugging and
lifting belt> I like to get pockets to hang off of the belt that would be,
wouldn’t that be the ultimate? To be naked and still be able to do this <hand
in pocket> I think that would really help a lot.