[Paradigm]

This is only possible if the U.S. has achieved cultural hegemony. You'd have to show these studies, Paradigm.

A link found after a quick search

There are many foreign standards of beauty which cannot be explained by Western hegemony. But these basic features are indeed universal.

Even the American beauty standard changes with time. The voluptuous Marilyn Monroe, for instance, is much too broad for today's beauty standard.

People preferred more curves back then, but the proportions, particularly the waist-to-hip ratio(important for child-birth), remained the same.

The same can be said of facial symmetry, especially since body modifications are extremely popular in older intact cultures.

And are bees or other insects victims of Western cultural hegemony when they choose partners with greater symmetry?

[kraychik]

That's what I meant to say, 'waist-hip ratio'. I think the breasts fit into that equation somewhere, too... at a genetic level there is a certain range of 'ideal' ratios between the breasts-waist-hips of a woman that the vast majority of men (heterosexual, of course) prefer. I can't believe any adult in university hasn't heard of this. Doesn't everyone take introduction to psychology or introductory biology? Or read that stuff recreationally, even?

EDIT - Paradigm, if those studies are does by western researchers, the results are unadmissable... for obvious reasons.

[ThereBeDragons]

Paradigm, if those studies were done by western researchers, the results are unadmissable... for obvious reasons.

Do you believe, in general, that all Western research in comparative cultures is invalid?

[kraychik]

I'm just parodying Zyx's ridiculous perspective on everything - all things Western are bad and corruptive and white and imperialistic and unnatural and unfair. My sarcasm was lost on you.

This is funny, your burning desire to catch me saying something stupid overwhelmed your better judgement that I'm way too smart to say anything that stupid. Don't hate me because I make sense, just hate me because I'm not diplomatic in internet forums.

[ThereBeDragons]

I'm way too smart to say anything that stupid.

Even though you may know that you're the smartest man alive, the rest of us aren't born knowing that fact and have to base our assessments on what we read in your posts. I'm sorry I haven't so far been able to come to the conclusion that you're way too smart to say something that stupid.

[kraychik]

You don't have to be the smartest man alive to know that discrediting Western research on the basis of it being Western is... well, unbelievably stupid. Keep trying, though,

[ThereBeDragons]

One doesn't need to be massively dumb to say something massively dumb from time to time, and sarcasm doesn't carry on the internet. At this point I've derailed the topic long enough and as I can't comment too much on the OP I'm out of this thread for now.

[Zyx]

Two trolls above trolling one another.

It's quite stupid. One finds himself smart enough to do sarcasm, the next smart enough to catch it.

A link found after a quick search

This shows nothing, Paradigm. Essentially, Westerners like a golden ratio.

"Symmetry" means a ton of things, too, yet it's nothing to do with the very real "White Beauty Standard" (no longer deserving of its own Wikipedia, apparently.)

Tell me this, are all of these people ugly in their respective countries?

Pic

The fact is, Paradigm, that our culture values straight, blonde hair more than it does dark, curly hair. And other examples exist on how Whiteness is most emphasized as beautiful. Looking into "symmetry" arguments, taking extremely asymmetric people and yadda yadda is a useless tangent to proving a useless, irrelevant phenomenon.

The fact is that most cultures have their own beauty standard, but the U.S.' dominates.

People preferred more curves back then, but the proportions, particularly the waist-to-hip ratio(important for child-birth), remained the same.

No it didn't. At one point the H-frame was most beautiful. At other points, like in the Victorian Era, the b-shape. The ratio has changed a lot. Don't bullshit us.

And are bees or other insects victims of Western cultural hegemony when they choose partners with greater symmetry?

Don't even go there. Some frogs choose mates who can sing the longest and some scientists linked these long singers with more survivable offspring. Don't export your human standards to the animal kingdom and don't just snippet one part to fit your own paradigm.

[Paradigm]

Two trolls above trolling one another.

It's quite stupid. One finds himself smart enough to do sarcasm, the next smart enough to catch it.

Should I issue a warning for this? You've flagged posts for less inflammatory comments about yourself.

This shows nothing, Paradigm. Essentially, Westerners like a golden ratio.

Show me one culture that doesn't like the golden ratio. Past or present.

Tell me this, are all of these people ugly in their respective countries?

Pic

Hard to tell, as I'm not from those countries. However, if their faces show greater bilateral symmetry and approximate the golden ratio, presumably they will be found more attractive within their own culture.

The fact is, Paradigm, that our culture values straight, blonde hair more than it does dark, curly hair. And other examples exist on how Whiteness is most emphasized as beautiful. Looking into "symmetry" arguments, taking extremely asymmetric people and yadda yadda is a useless tangent to proving a useless, irrelevant phenomenon.

No, your rant about straight, blond hair is a useless, irrelevant phenomenon(incidentally, I prefer brunettes). Incidentally, I'm curious, given this supposed emphasis on white beauty, why so many white men in the West are attracted to Asian women.

No it didn't. At one point the H-frame was most beautiful. At other points, like in the Victorian Era, the b-shape. The ratio has changed a lot. Don't bullshit us.

You're the one that's been bullshitting everyone. A low waist-hip ratio is always important in every culture, and it was as true in the 1950's as it is today.

Don't even go there. Some frogs choose mates who can sing the longest and some scientists linked these long singers with more survivable offspring. Don't export your human standards to the animal kingdom and don't just snippet one part to fit your own paradigm.

I went there, because it's true. Throughout the animal kingdom, species prefer greater symmetry in choosing their mates. It's been true in every case that's been studied. In fact, even when it comes to smell, higher levels of symmetry have been correlated with more pleasant-smelling pheromones.

[Zyx]

You've flagged posts for less inflammatory comments about yourself.

I don't know, the posts I flagged were offtopic and generally inaccurately demeaning.

Show me one culture that doesn't like the golden ratio. Past or present.

I couldn't say, but the White beauty standard is different than a critique on ratios.

Incidentally, I'm curious, given this supposed emphasis on white beauty, why so many white men in the West are attracted to Asian women.

This is unfounded. But remember "Black is beautiful" in the 60s? That was a direct response to "White Beauty Standard."

In fact, if we may cite Wikipedia (which, long ago had its own "White Beauty Standard" page.)

Beauty ideals may contribute to racial oppression. For example, a prevailing idea in American culture has been that black features are less attractive or desirable than white features. The idea that blackness was ugly was highly damaging to the psyche of African Americans, manifesting itself as internalized racism.[5] The black is beautiful cultural movement sought to dispel this notion.[6] Conversely, beauty ideals may also promote racial unity. Mixed race children are often perceived to be more attractive than their parents because their genetic diversity protects them from the inherited errors of their individual parents.[7]

True, it points out "mixed" but the fact is that theirs an academic background for asserting White Beauty Standard.

Further, there's Audre Lorde's statements on the mythical norm. Which essentially encompasses this WBS.

A low waist-hip ratio is always important in every culture, and it was as true in the 1950's as it is today.

http://www.diet-blog.com/archives/2007/04/15/female_body_shape_in_the_20th_century.php

Don't forget the flappers or Greta Garbo.

http://www.fas.harvard.edu/~hbe-lab/acrobatfiles/preferred%20waist.pdf

Female waist-to-hip ratio (WHR) is widely cited by evolutionary psychologists as an example of an
evolved male preference. Although many studies have found men prefer a low WHR, almost all have been
conducted with college students. We tested men in a foraging society and found that they preferred high
WHRs. We interpret this as a preference for heavier women, which we think should be common where
there is no risk of obesity. Based on these results and others, we suggest that WHR preference varies with
ecology. # 2001 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

Wikipedia has this to say:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_body_shape#cite_note-15

The waist-hip ratio (WHR) is a person's waist measurement divided by the hip measurement. Notwithstanding wide cultural differences in preferences for female build, scientists have discovered that the waist-hip ratio of any build is very strongly correlated to attractiveness across all cultures.[13] Women with a 0.7 WHR (waist circumference that is 70% of the hip circumference) are usually rated as more attractive by men from European cultures. Such diverse beauty icons as Marilyn Monroe, Sophia Loren, and the Venus de Milo all have ratios around 0.7.[14] In other cultures, preferences vary,[15] ranging from 0.6 in China,[16] to 0.8 or 0.9 in parts of South America and Africa,[17][18][19] and divergent preferences based on ethnicity, rather than nationality, have also been noted.[20][21]

--

I'll admit to not knowing much about symmetry, but it's also not what I meant in my earlier claims. Further, the Islamic culture doesn't regard women as 'ugly' or at least doesn't have the 'halo' that the West has. It's rather 'deep' to claim that the Muslims would regard some women as beautiful and some as ugly, when they wouldn't vocalize as much.

[Paradigm]

I don't know, the posts I flagged were offtopic and generally inaccurately demeaning.

As was your comment. Consider this your unofficial warning.

This is unfounded.

Hmmm...I looked on wikipedia and found this:

The study did report that the pairing between a white man and an Asian woman was the most common inter-racial pairing, but it attributed this not to a preference for Asian women on the parts of the white men, but rather to the preferences of the Asian women. The study found that the men, of all races, in fact had no racial preferences amongst women. Whereas it found that the women of all races strongly preferred men of their own race. It reported that Asian women feel neutrality towards white men to which the study and Fisman attributed the prevalence of the white man/Asian woman inter-racial pairing, in comparison with other pairings. The study cited prior work, including that by Ariely et al. and Mills et al. (see further reading), that had also suggested that women are less accepting of inter-racial romantic relationships than men are.

While this undermines my point about white preferences, it utterly demolishes your point about "white beauty standards."

As for waist-hip ratio, I found this:

Some researchers have found that the waist-hip ratio (WHR) is a significant measure of female attractiveness. Women with a 0.7 WHR are usually rated as more attractive by men from European cultures.[13] Such diverse beauty icons as Audrey Hepburn, Marilyn Monroe, Sophia Loren and even the Venus de Milo all have or had ratios close to 0.7, even though they all have different weights and heights. In other cultures, preferences appear to vary according to some studies,[14] ranging from 0.6 in China,[15] to 0.8 or 0.9 in parts of South America and Africa,[16][17][18] and divergent preferences based on ethnicity, rather than nationality, have also been noted.[19] [20]

Note: In the studies referenced above, only frontal WHR preferences differed significantly among racial and cultural groups. When actual (circumferential) measurements were made, the preferred WHR tended toward the expected value of 0.7 universally. The apparent differences are most likely due to the different body fat storage patterns in different population groups. For example, women of African descent tend to store their fat in their buttocks more than women of other groups. Therefore, their WHR as viewed from the front may appear to be much greater than when viewed from the side. The inverse may be true of women of East Asian ancestry. Therefore, African men appear to value a woman's small WHR in profile and Asian men may place more value on an exaggerated frontal WHR compared to European men.

[Zyx]

While this undermines my point about white preferences, it utterly demolishes your point about "white beauty standards."

This is the source.

Columbian Professional Students trying speed dating . . ..

Plus, WBS is not 'my' point, but a point in academic feminism.

As for waist-hip ratio, I found this:

I do not know why I let you drag me into these things.

That's interesting, even though it's rather roundabout. The body shapes are clearly different and this perfect ratio clearly is more coincidental than 'natural.'

Further, what would you say of the Khoisan? A people who probably sexually selected steatopygia.

(Some nudity)

[kraychik]

Zyx wrote:

This shows nothing, Paradigm. Essentially, Westerners like a golden ratio.

"Symmetry" means a ton of things, too, yet it's nothing to do with the very real "White Beauty Standard" (no longer deserving of its own Wikipedia, apparently.)

I'm not sure what the golden ratio has to do with the link Paradigm posted. Did you even read the article, or were there too many words in there for you? Regardless, it's common knowledge that symmetry is a universal component of attraction across humanity. There is tons of evidence for this in extensive and thorough cross-cultural studies (doesn't everyone know this, at least anyone who's done at least a couple of years in university?). The attraction to symmetry isn't exclusive to Westerners, if you didn't know that, now you do. I don't know what the "White Beauty Standard" is, nor do I care. It's obviously some fake term used by quasi-sociologists to reaffirm their prejudices. It's totally the type of word that I'd expect to be in your arsenal of anti-white/anti-Western hate-speech, so it's unsurprising that you use something so meaningless.

The fact is, Paradigm, that our culture values straight, blonde hair more than it does dark, curly hair. And other examples exist on how Whiteness is most emphasized as beautiful. Looking into "symmetry" arguments, taking extremely asymmetric people and yadda yadda is a useless tangent to proving a useless, irrelevant phenomenon.

I must've missed that fact somewhere. Since when does our culture prefer straight, blonde hair over dark, curly hair? Intelligent people know this isn't true. If you're going to make such a bold statement, do you care to provide any evidence at all to support it? Anecdotally, there are countless examples of Western sex symbols with hair that isn't blonde and straight. Maybe you're mistaking High Hefner's preferences for those of the rest of us? Your disregard for the heavily supported position that symmetry is a cross-cultural component of attraction just illustrates your ignorance on this subject.

The fact is that most cultures have their own beauty standard, but the U.S.' dominates.

More accurately, differing cultures have differing aspects of attraction, separate from the universal components of attraction that Paradigm referred to: symmetry and particular ratios between body parts (realities that you dispute).

No it didn't. At one point the H-frame was most beautiful. At other points, like in the Victorian Era, the b-shape. The ratio has changed a lot. Don't bullshit us.

What the hell is the H-frame? What the hell s the B-shape? More made up terms, obviously.... belonging to the same toolbox that contains the "White Beauty Standard". Stop using nonsense terms and people might take you seriously.

Don't even go there. Some frogs choose mates who can sing the longest and some scientists linked these long singers with more survivable offspring. Don't export your human standards to the animal kingdom and don't just snippet one part to fit your own paradigm.

His joke was totally lost on you.

[danholo]

This doesn't make any sense. If you are pretty, you SHOULD be wearing a hijab, to keep the men away. Ugly people have no problem. And, Muslimanka, if that is you in the image... do not wear that piece of crap. Please do not cover your hair.

[Ombrageux]

I believe it is the reverse, ugly women are not required to wear the hijab.

[Sephardi]

The hijab wastes potentially beautiful women that I might have had sex with in the future.

The hijab is a horrible thing.

[Bosanac]

Beauty shouldn't even come into it.

If you make tawhid and believe in the teachings of the Qur'an and the Prophet, then you should be wearing a hijab no matter what you look like.

Again, if you're not religious... then obviously you wouldn't wear it. Simple.