I can’t quantify this so I didn’t click a poll choice. I think a relatively small number of women are “beautiful” in the sense that they could be on the cover of a fashion magazine. But there are a lot of women that I find attractive who do not have what would be considered classic beauty and wouldn’t necessarily look like a knockout in a photo. I also am attracted to personality as a bigger factor than physical beauty.
(I have also met a few women who are stunningly gorgeous until they open their mouths.)
I found it impossible to answer, because I don’t have a single, fixed definition of “beautiful.” It can mean many different things depending on context.
But isn’t the premise of the Dove 4% thread that it is a problem? I clicked on the link that OP where I learn that “72% of girls feel tremendous pressure to be beautiful” and 11% of girls (and 4% of women) consider themselves beautiful. I don’t know if it’s true (I think it is), but the whole point of the Dove “self-esteem” movement appears to be that a significant portion of women/girls aren’t okay with not being beautiful and that this is harmful.
While I’m not sure how I would define “beautiful”, I think that a key component of it is that it is uncommon. I couldn’t tell you the last time I saw a woman that I thought was “beautiful”. But other people, obviously, define it far more broadly than I would. I am skeptical (to say the least) that a thread like this is somehow helpful. If only because it seems like the problem is the idea that 72% of girls feel pressure to be substantially above average (on a “standard” they have limited control over) and that’s just not realistic.
91 to 100% of all people are beautiful when I first meet them, but it is possible to sink as far down as the 71 to 80% range given enough time and intellectual/emotional ugliness on their part.
To me, this is like asking “What percentage of artworks are beautiful?” - essentially meaningless. The perception of beauty is influenced by so many different factors, from culture to individual biases to time period, that trying to quantify how many of anything meet that standard is impossible. Beauty is truly in the eye of the beholder, and there are almost as many perceptions of what constitutes beauty as there are individuals. I submit as evidence that there is no woman who ever lived that all men would find beautiful and the same holds true of men to women. All I can tell you is that as I get older I find a higher percentage of people to be beautiful in my own estimation.
As it happens, I work in a place where most employees are women. I’d say two out of five strike me as “Beautiful,” by my personal criteria, so i went with that. If the word had been “Attractive,” it would be much higher.
If you want to quibble about what “beautiful” means the number would go up and down, but four percent is ridiculously low.
Its funny, I used to work with one real gorgeous woman and she admitted its caused problems because many people just cant get over it and treat her as an equal peer. Then many men treat her odd and some women get jealous.
And on dating she says most men are too “she’s out of my league” and wont go near her.
Its like most people feel more comfortable with average looking peers.
Oddly that happened to me, a very average looking guy (many women have said I am 'charming & funny" but never handsome).
I was in a dance club and i walked by a gorgeous woman. And I couldn’t help saying : “God you’re beautiful!” to which she responded “Then why can’t I get a date?”- so being at least quick thinking I said, "OK, what are you doing next saturday nite? " and we dated a few times.
Yes, I am well aware of body image issues among women. But here’s the thing – as a woman with body image issues (I’ve almost been hospitalized for anorexia), I don’t see “85% of respondents think more women are beautiful than they give themselves credit for.”
I see “well, the mean is around 6-10% and pretty sharply aggregates values <=30%, that’s small, there’s no way I’m in the range”.
Of course, body image issues are their own thing. Even if the poll had 80% of respondents answering 90% most women with body issues would probably think they’re in that 10%, despite the twisted numerics. That’s what body image problems are. They’re not just something you can logic yourself out of, it requires blood, sweat, and therapy. For instance, people telling you you’re not fat when you have an eating disorder isn’t a bad thing, necessarily, but it doesn’t register. You just learn increasingly elaborate rationalizations “oh, they’re being nice”, “okay, sure, but within my subculture/age group/community I’m the ugly one” and so on.
Even just casual body image issues stemming from societal conditioning are more pernicious. Women compare themselves to people on TV and magazine covers, not try to find whether they’re in the 20% of women found beautiful in a poll of random men.
I admire the intention of the OP, I really do, but these numbers really do not help when you know how women (or honestly, anyone, male, female, or nonbinary) with body image issues thinks, and the negative comments throughout the thread are doubly damaging.
What % of our posters see more than 4% of women as beautiful? Around 85%.
Yes, some comments are… well… anyway. But the intent here is to show that in general, male posters here (and I like to think the posters here are above average in IQ) think that women are more beautiful than women think they are. Nothing weird or subversive.
Yes. And a poll saying that 15% of women are beautiful, not 4%, doesn’t help at all.
Why is this even a thing? Because we (both men and women) have been educated that this is a thing. Because large industries depend on it being a thing.
We might have a genetically programmed beauty rater, but we can resist it. Maybe we men can teach ourselves to react to an entire woman, not just the superficial parts?
I agree with all that. The way the question is asked and the discussion it spun off from strongly implies that ‘beautiful’ means exceptionally physically attractive, not ‘all beautiful because all God’s children’ (or whatever the equivalent secular concept might be) meaning. Exceptional means a small %.
It doesn’t mean nobody else is physically attractive, it doesn’t mean the man judging is stating his ‘right’ to a ‘beautiful’ women and nothing less is acceptable. Also the implication to me is judgement by casual observation. It’s not forming a relationship with somebody attractive and later finding them ‘beautiful’ in a deeper sense.
But other respondents I guess are free to interpret it any other way they want.
It definitely varies by place and situation, and within place and situation according to taste. It’s silly IMO to call it for example ‘racist’ if a given man finds a much higher/lower % of women of certain racial, ethnic etc groups beautiful than others. I do, I won’t specify further to avoid some shitstorm about something which is really fairly trivial, who besides me has any good reason to care who I find attractive?
Yes? which is almost 4 times as many that Women think they are. And we are talking beautiful. Not cute, or attractive, beautiful. Few people are that good looking.
Look, most women are pretty attractive, as far as i am concerned.
Not a man, so I’m not going to actually vote on the poll.
I don’t see this discussion as being automatically filthy, as some others have suggested. I answered on the other poll, too. I’m, I suppose, a woman of equal opportunity. If I had the opportunity. Anyway. I don’t think it’s horrendous to talk about beauty in and of itself. Any more than it is moral to talk about a good-looking building or table or lampshade. I am not a beautiful woman myself, but I can aspire to handsome or winsome on my good days. Fair enough. That makes me happy. Moving right along.
There has been one, and exactly one woman who I found absolutely beautiful without qualifications. An acquaintance of mine my senior year of HS (though I had known of her for years before). She wasn’t typically flirtatious, she never wore obvious makeup, if any, she wore plain tshirts and jeans most of the time, and she had a sensible wavy short crop. She looked like a lightly country-fried Audrey Hepburn. Her eyes were bright and she just sparkled all the time. We got on exceedingly well, and at times I’ve thought, if we hadn’t been both otherwise occupied with stinky HS guys, and times were a bit more modern, we might have dated. But she was so beautiful to me.
I think quite a lot of women are pretty. Generally not the typical Hollywood-type. But there are all sorts of pretty and cute and attractive and handsome, for women, and that’s something to celebrate, I think. To be fair, I rarely encounter a truly irredeemably ugly woman. And among those, they often have something about them that is interesting. There is a young lady that I sometimes hire to pick up groceries. Her hair is overbleached, her eyes are quite a bit too wide, and nose snubbed over her tiny mouth in the manner of those afflicted with FAS. She is not overeducated. But she gets animated sometimes on our brief conversations, and she suddenly transforms into a stunning little elf. I’m mostly observing shallow physical expressions, I’m sure. But when she gets in that stage, she is so lively inside, like a firefly in a paper lantern–so very attractive, and I’d like to ask her in to play board games or have a drink or something.
I have a few more examples, but it’s late and I should go to bed soon.
No, the problem is not that “women have already pigeon-holed themselves”, the problem is that both men and women are routinely encouraged to rank women by beauty, and to think of beauty as the most important aspect of a woman. This poll encourages that line of thinking.
And that’s why woman are turned off by this poll, without even looking at the answers. I don’t really care what percent you think are beautiful. I care that you mostly value me on my appearance, whatever it might be.
And yes, this points out that there’s a serious down-side to actually being “beautiful”. You get creeps like this who throw you out of the human race because they just want to look at you, and not have that image marred by acknowledging that you are a person.
Those are two different reasons though, so I don’t understand why the first isn’t also couched with ‘maybe’. Or maybe I’m just picking at wording. I tend to think though it’s much more nature than nurture and the ‘large industries’ are mainly symptoms rather than cause.
I’d also say, and this is relevant to a lot of social debates, that in between the idea that some media/internet browbeating or courses in school can change certain basic social behaviors, and the idea they are in our DNA, is the middle but important possibility that they are deeper cultural characteristics. Not necessarily physical, but things that shaming tweets/posts and introductory freshman college course telling people how to think and act aren’t necessarily going to change*. A possibility I’m saying. I don’t know exactly where concepts of (female) ‘beauty’ (from male perspective) lie along the spectrum of superficial cultural, deep cultural, and biochemical, or what combination.
Also I’d note how, despite the bitter enmity of many modern ‘right thinkers’ toward Christianity how often their precepts resemble or at least parallel those in traditional and even particular Puritanical Protestant Christianity. Maybe the US is still a Puritan country, SJW’s and all. ‘We have this original sin of weakness to the lust for physical beauty but we can rise above it and live for our spiritual selves seeing everyone as beautiful, since we are all made in God’s image’. It’s not totally different than the ‘woke’ theme about female beauty.
*some might bring up views toward homosexuality, which really have changed, and arguably because of pushing the new views so relentlessly in education, media, internet. However, literal homophobia has little rational basis in a modern society: heterosexuals have little real reason to care about homosexuality per se. Arguably there’s a rational indirect reason to care about changing the definition of marriage, but still only indirect. In contrast they have the most direct and personal reasons to care about their own selection of mate(s). That’s a real difference IMO in the likely effectiveness of haranguing men how they should feel about female beauty (or women how they ‘shouldn’t’ favor tall men, as many strongly do). Again back to the religious parallel, the ‘hypocrisy’ many woke-type people hate most about Christianity was arguably a combination of the religion making its views (it’s 100% the inner person and their spirit, looks should not matter, in this case) the only fully socially acceptable ones, but most people including active followers of the religion didn’t adopt that view in real life. Why do the woke think the result will be a lot different when they finish ‘educating’ men, from a parallel secular POV, that women’s looks shouldn’t matter?
But she was so beautiful to me.
‘We have this original sin of weakness to the lust for physical beauty but we can rise above it and live for our spiritual selves seeing everyone as beautiful, since we are all made in God’s image’. It’s not totally different than the ‘woke’ theme about female beauty.