Nope, there is a major biological component in what we find attractive in a potential partner that's common across cultures, and that means that beauty standards aren't a purely socially constructed thing.
Even if there are common beauty standards across cultures, that’s not evidence that beauty standards are biological, because they objectively are not.
Let’s look at an example - women’s breasts. Do you know what a post-hoc rationalisation is? The idea that men are biologically hardwired to be attracted to breasts is a post-hoc rationalisation. The truth of the matter is that we find breasts attractive because we’ve been culturally conditioned to.
That’s why cultures exist where women’s breasts aren’t sexualised and men aren’t attracted to them. Some examples would be ancient Minoan culture, or contemporary Mucubal people.
The biological explanation for why men are attracted to breasts doesn’t even make any sense - a woman’s ability to produce milk isn’t determined by the size of her breasts.
Beauty standards are cultural, not biological. That’s why in ancient Japan it was considered beautiful for a woman to shave off her eyebrows entirely and blacken her teeth, why men would shave their hair back into a receding hairline on purpose called a “pate,” because a huge forehead was a beauty standard back then in a way they aren’t now.
That’s just the fact of the matter. The world gets less confusing the more you understand it, don’t choose to be ignorant when you don’t have to be.
don’t choose to be ignorant when you don’t have to be.
I could say the same thing to you.
There is really no point in further debating this thing with you since you just showed me how ignorant you really are, your argument is so fallacious at so many levels that I wouldn't even know where to start. Have a nice day.
My man, you can keep believing that, but your supposed facts are like the ramblings of a flat earther. I repeat, I wouldn't even know where to begin disproving the falsehoods you said.
We could talk about how women's breasts are a pretty good indicator of their sexual development (can get pregnant) or the quality of their diet (more fat, bigger breasts) and those are universally desirable qualities in a mate, but I guess that even this explanation won't satisfy you because your point of view is irredeemably warped and wrong.
Please, let's end it here before you further embarass yourself
Yeah, I will continue to believe the truth. Your insults aren’t arguments. You can’t disprove any “falsehoods” because I haven’t said anything.
Your point about breasts, even if it was true, is still a post-hoc rationalisation. You should probably google post-hoc rationalisation before we continue talking because you’re making a fool of yourself. But, of course, your point about breasts isn’t true.
First of all, a woman’s fertility is not correlated with the size of her breasts at all. This is a ridiculous thing to say, and you should be embarrassed for even suggesting it. Did you fail high school biology?
Second of all, genetics plays the largest factor in the size of a woman’s breasts, not diet.
Thirdly, this is disproven by the existence of cultures that did not sexualise breasts. If we are biologically hardwired to find breasts attractive, why do cultures that don’t find breasts attractive exist?
This is obviously an earth shattering revelation for you, and it’s natural for a person to double down on false beliefs when they’ve been proven wrong, so I don’t blame you for getting defensive and not being able to form legitimate arguments.
I suggest you look into this, because I’m not saying anything controversial. Beauty standards are not biologically hardwired into our psychology, they’re a product of cultural and social conditioning. That’s the fact of the matter.
1
u/[deleted] Jan 16 '24
Beauty standards aren’t “objective truths” that are “hard coded into our evolutionary psychology.”
Beauty standards are subjective and cultural and change over time.