But that amount of effort would be sufficient to elevate most women who have similar ages, similar BMIs, and a face in the top quartile.
That’s just trivially true, isn’t it? Among women who were already pre-selected to have similar faces, ages and BMI’s to movie starts most of them can be made extremely attractive, with the help of right makeup, clothes, context and so on.
But this is not how people talk about female sexual attractiveness! People, especially women, talk about it as if there’s a significant, native difference in supermodels’ broad appeal.
The difference is that some people happen to be part of this group of women with similar faces, ages and BMI’s to movie starts and some do not. There is no contradiction here.
She’s an outlier, but an outlier in the sense that someone who’s 6′2″ is an outlier, not an outlier like Michael Jordan is an outlier.
I’d say, more of an outlier than being 6′2, less of an outlier than Michael Jordan.
The reason women talk like this
Basically, because society as a whole actively conditions women that their looks is the most important thing about them. This includes some of the factors that you’ve mentioned.
That’s just trivially true, isn’t it? Among women who were already pre-selected to have similar faces, ages and BMI’s to movie starts most of them can be made extremely attractive, with the help of right makeup, clothes, context and so on.
Do they disagree in principle, or just think that it would take an unreasonable amount of effort that most genetically lucky but still “normal” women couldn’t be expected to spend? I can understand their resentment that men get constantly bombarded with those superstimuli and go on to have unrealistic expectations in their daily lives.
There are a few, but it doesn’t seem to be the consensus? In any case, I agree with you that it’s “more egalitarian”, but probably not to a large extent due to the aforementioned unreasonable effort.
That’s just trivially true, isn’t it? Among women who were already pre-selected to have similar faces, ages and BMI’s to movie starts most of them can be made extremely attractive, with the help of right makeup, clothes, context and so on.
The difference is that some people happen to be part of this group of women with similar faces, ages and BMI’s to movie starts and some do not. There is no contradiction here.
I’d say, more of an outlier than being 6′2, less of an outlier than Michael Jordan.
Basically, because society as a whole actively conditions women that their looks is the most important thing about them. This includes some of the factors that you’ve mentioned.
I would think so, but people seem to disagree!
Do they disagree in principle, or just think that it would take an unreasonable amount of effort that most genetically lucky but still “normal” women couldn’t be expected to spend? I can understand their resentment that men get constantly bombarded with those superstimuli and go on to have unrealistic expectations in their daily lives.
The other commenters appear to disagree in principle.
There are a few, but it doesn’t seem to be the consensus? In any case, I agree with you that it’s “more egalitarian”, but probably not to a large extent due to the aforementioned unreasonable effort.