I notice that there are not many ‘gorgeous’ people out there, but there are a lot of attractive people of various description.
I’ve seen a picture of you, from the old SDMB picture gallery. You are much more attractive than ‘mediocre’.
I notice that there are not many ‘gorgeous’ people out there, but there are a lot of attractive people of various description.
I’ve seen a picture of you, from the old SDMB picture gallery. You are much more attractive than ‘mediocre’.
Aw, shucks. My husband seems to think so, and that’s all that really matters, I suppose. I’m not a traffic stopper but the guys that have been with me have been really, really into me. So I think for a specific type of man I’m probably just what they want.
I guess when I say ‘‘attractive’’ at only 10% I should clarify I don’t mean I’m only attracted to 10% of the population. I think my view of what’s attractive is broader than most. There’s ‘‘kinda cute’’ and ‘‘adorable’’ and ‘‘smokin’ hot.’’ But when I think of movie-star good looks, I think maybe 10% of the human population qualifies.
I’d be surprised if 10% of the human population qualified for movie-star looks… but I’ve noticed that WAY more than 10% of the human population is attractive. Movie-star looks are only one rather-narrow way of being attractive.
Then again, I remember an incident in the cafeteria when I was in electronics school, when my friend and I noticed an attractive woman at a nearby table, but as we overheard her prejudiced, angry, unpleasant conversation, her attractiveness went from “a lot” to “none at all”. Physical looks may hook people, but they won’t keep them.
Yup.
It’s not something I notice much. Maybe I should do a surreptitious survey next time I’m out and about.
Oh, I dunno. I see lots of people with movie-star looks like this.