oberhaus;1089421 wrote:That pic is HOT.

hellz yes, from the neck down!

SportsAndLady;1089522 wrote:You would get laughed out of a room. The way you're sounding right now is just the worst.

**** you'd get laughed out of a room full of gay guys sayin that ****.

If there's ever a time for negging this is it

What was so funny? You have used the word "gay" a lot and have a rather pre-pubiscent understanding of what is commonly considered beautiful/hot - really getting increasingly obvious that you are like 12 years old and just jerked it to your first SI swimsuit model. A week or two from now when all your SI pics of Kate are stuck together, you'll start to lose interest and realize she's far from the hottest girl on the planet.

There are, in fact, fairly objective or common traits that you could gauge whether a women like Kate gets blown away in a "top-10" hottest contest or someone like Brooklyn Decker might have a shot. Facial features like a more narrow face with higher/more distinct cheek bones (neither of which Kate has with a more rounded face, which is why the "girl-next-door" look also makes her more ordinary), fuller lips, deepset eyes, etc...Some of which Kate has, but you need all of it to win this contest and it's always decided on the face because while you can argue her body is better than Brooklyn, it's REALLY splitting hairs.

Myself and many also do not care for the bleached blonde look. It does not look natural. She could look way different as a brunette or a red-head, but I'm going by what we have.

There are a few pictures where Kate and Brooklyn look similar, but honestly Kate is not nearly as hot as Brooklyn. Brooklyn could make it into a top-10 contest. You see an unairbrushed Kate there and you might hand her your jacket and then rush off to tell all your buddies about the cute coat-check girl.

I love the fact we have people trying to act like there truly is an objective standard for attractiveness. While generally there is a lot of agreement in this subject, ultimately it comes down to personal preference. You might as well argue what is a better color.

Fly4Fun;1089589 wrote:I love the fact we have people trying to act like there truly is an objective standard for attractiveness. While generally there is a lot of agreement in this subject, ultimately it comes down to personal preference. You might as well argue what is a better color.

"Objective" may be a poor choice of wording, but there are traits commonly held to be a more popular preference:

"http://www.jyi.org/volumes/volume6/issue6/features/feng.html"
"Aside from symmetry, males in Western cultures generally prefer females with a small jaw, a small nose, large eyes, and defined cheekbones"

"Plato wrote of so-called "golden proportions," in which, amongst other things, the width of an ideal face would be two-thirds its length, while a nose would be no longer than the distance between the eyes. Plato's golden proportions, however, haven't quite held up to the rigors of modern psychological and biological research -- though there is credence in the ancient Greeks' attempts to determine a fundamental symmetry that humans find attractive."


http://www.uni-regensburg.de/Fakultaeten/phil_Fak_II/Psychologie/Psy_II/beautycheck/english/prototypen/prototypen.htm
Characteristic features of the female "sexy face" in comparison to the "unsexy face":

• Suntanned skin
• Narrower facial shape
• Less fat
• Fuller lips
• Slightly bigger distance of eyes
• Darker, narrower eye brows
• More, longer and darker lashes
• Higher cheek bones
• Narrower nose
• No eye rings
• Thinner lids

Objectively, yes, I say Decker scores higher. Kate has lower cheekbones and a more rounded face, features that have been scientifically shown to be not as appealing in today's culture:

gut;1089595 wrote:"Objective" may be a poor choice of wording, but there are traits commonly held to be a more popular preference:

"http://www.jyi.org/volumes/volume6/issue6/features/feng.html"
"Aside from symmetry, males in Western cultures generally prefer females with a small jaw, a small nose, large eyes, and defined cheekbones"

"Plato wrote of so-called "golden proportions," in which, amongst other things, the width of an ideal face would be two-thirds its length, while a nose would be no longer than the distance between the eyes. Plato's golden proportions, however, haven't quite held up to the rigors of modern psychological and biological research -- though there is credence in the ancient Greeks' attempts to determine a fundamental symmetry that humans find attractive."


http://www.uni-regensburg.de/Fakultaeten/phil_Fak_II/Psychologie/Psy_II/beautycheck/english/prototypen/prototypen.htm
Characteristic features of the female "sexy face" in comparison to the "unsexy face":

• Suntanned skin
• Narrower facial shape
• Less fat
• Fuller lips
• Slightly bigger distance of eyes
• Darker, narrower eye brows
• More, longer and darker lashes
• Higher cheek bones
• Narrower nose
• No eye rings
• Thinner lids

Objectively, yes, I say Decker scores higher. Kate has lower cheekbones and a more rounded face, features that have been scientifically shown to be not as appealing in today's culture:

This post pretty much sums up how big of assholes we all are here on Ohiochatter...and that's not a bad thing

"commonly held to be a more popular preference"

That's all that had to be said. I did say that "While generally there is a lot of agreement in this subject," but both my statement and your post leave room from divergence.

If I remember correctly, there is a popular theory that what each person holds as "beauty" is a subconscious "average" of all the faces that they see during their life.

While there is a lot people can and do agree upon. At the end there is no right answer but it left up to personal preference.

Fly4Fun;1089589 wrote:You might as well argue what is a better color.

Blue

/thread

oberhaus;1090148 wrote:Blue

/thread

Pink...because blue waffles are terrible

ytownfootball;1090153 wrote:Pink...because blue waffles are terrible

Who said anything about waffles...or pie?

oberhaus;1090215 wrote:Who said anything about waffles...or pie?

Google blue waffle. I fucking dare you. You'll het the joke.

oberhaus;1090215 wrote:Who said anything about waffles...or pie?

j_crazy;1090241 wrote:Google blue waffle. I fucking dare you. You'll het the joke.

Don't do it. You'll never be the same. Some things can't be unseen.

Fly4Fun;1090277 wrote:Don't do it. You'll never be the same. Some things can't be unseen.

should've listened to ya'--that's very disturbing

http://www.documentingreality.com/forum/f149/blue-waffle-infection-really-gross-42939/

It's been years and I still can't get it outta my skull...

Don't like where this thread has went :mad::thumbdown:

rmolin73;1087362 wrote:http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/290789/20120131/kate-upton-askmen-desirable-hottest-photos-woman.htm

vball10set;1090279 wrote:should've listened to ya'--that's very disturbing

http://www.documentingreality.com/forum/f149/blue-waffle-infection-really-gross-42939/

Damn it vball!!!!!!

WebFire;1090305 wrote:Damn it vball!!!!!!

lol--sorry, brother

j_crazy;1090241 wrote:Google blue waffle. I fucking dare you. You'll het the joke.

I know what you meant. Seen it.