Okay, I'm going to explain something I've been thinking for a while with 2 images (Jessica Simpson and Megan Fox):


I chose the two because, to me at least, Jessica Simpson has a very generic pretty look, while Megan Fox has something extra.
Jessica Simpson has a symmetrical face. She looks on the 'pretty' side because her face is symmetrical and well proportioned. But she's too perfect, in a way. She has nothing unique about her, no distinguishing features.
Megan fox also has a well-proportioned, symmetrical face. But we also subconsciously pick up some minor abnormalities, which actually, I think, make her more attractive than she would be if she didn't have them. Her mouth goes abnormally forward, a bit, and her upper lip naturally protrudes slightly. Her cheekbones, I think, are a bit closer to the centre of the face than most people's are, giving her an almost chipmunk-like quality which looks a bit 'cute'. Her eyes also have something unique about them, maybe that they're naturally a bit horizontally large or slanted outward.
I think in general, someone is attractive if all of her (or his) features are in basically the right places - their eyes are a normal distance apart, their chin is of a normal height, etc. Someone occasionally becomes extra attractive if, on top of good facial proportion and symmetry, they have some very minor abnormality. Some abnormal traits complement a person's appearance, while others hinder it. Maybe which traits those are are subjective, and maybe that's why different people find different people attractive.
|
|
Bookmarks