| 
going against conditioning that deep is hard, because often you dont even know it is there. you think you have your own opinion of what is attractive, but there will be some conditioning hiding in there. as for models, someone had to find them attractive for them to become models, so they weren't conditioned.
i would also agree with awakened about not being particularly bothered by the stereotypical "pretty" (slutty) type. provocative clothing is fine, but only when you are actually trying to provoke a reaction, not just wearing it as everyday clothing.
as for what is sexually attractive, we look for basic things biologically, we want a healthy partner so that our offspring will be healthy. hence clear skin, even features, muscular physique, a person at or apporaching full physical health, the way that we would function best. very few people find the super skinny models attractive, or a very overweight person attractive, because they are not the right shape for a human, much like we are not attract to those who are disfigured.
what is wrong with britney spears or jessica alba? they are attractive, even featured, clear skin, physical fitness, the basic things required to give the best chance of healthy offspring.
all the rest of it is just personal preference, and then you get on to the deeper thing of personality. that is where the bitchy hoes lose out.
"So Schrodinger's Cat is not only neither dead nor alive, but might also be sexually aroused by elbows and peanut butter?"
|
