Repo Man: I disagree.

You can if you like.

Repo Man: Part of the problem is that there is so much agreement on what men find attractive.

If there is, I haven't seen any evidence of it.  I've seen a media that continues to like to set trends- regardless of what we do or don't like though.  I've seen those trends shift arbitrarily, over the last six or seven centuries.

It couldn't have less to do with what we all like.  Not much more to say really.  I think you're basing your idea on a fallacious notion.

Smelly Pirate Hooker: Yes, that's exactly what they look like.

So, Plumber's Crack?

Smackledorfer: (as measured by sociologists looking at spacing between eyes, symmetry, etc)

Most of which the vast majority of people fit in with.  Again, there are ALWAYS outliers.  As much as I find that research interesting (read it myself some time ago) I don't think it proves anything.

For one thing- right, wrong or indifferent- it's really only measuring "beauty" through the slightest fraction of our total perception.

Smackledorfer: For the bulk of people anyone that would score a 9 or a 10 in their personal view is also going to be considered hot by almost everyone else.

In thirty-six years of life, I've yet to see a single example of this.  Again, I'm not talking about a half-hour TV celebrity-obsessed tabloid where they go and interview people about what they think of Cher's new nose job (then throw out anyone whose opinion doesn't either fit the popular view, or supply the necessary "shock value" that a dissenting opinion should), or some other fluff piece, I'm talking about a situation where I know a bunch of other guys, they see a girl, and they all mostly agree she's hot.

Quite the contrary, my experience with situations like this is that it's much closer to "decision by committee", for those of you who've ever heard the joke "what has 100 legs and no brain?".

But if you want to talk about studies of perception, let's talk about how eye-witness testimony is notoriously inaccurate (and in empirically measurable ways).  Facial perceptions will vary, and hell, even major details will be perceived all out of whack by different people.

So people who often can't agree on what a single person they all saw actually looks like are going to agree on an aesthetic assessment of that person's "beauty"?

I've got a time-share in Siberia I'd love to sell you.

I drunk what: so how can i score with the hoes?

If I had to take a guess?  My best advice would be to use a hoe...  just be sure to wear a bonnet.

I drunk what: and then i should vote democrat?

No.  Just ride in a Democrat Wagon.

Smackledorfer: Now you are just lying.

Well, if I am, I've wasted both your time and mine.  I would contend I've little reason to, other than to satisfy your personal need for validation, which I wasn't of course aware of until I read your initial comment.

Smackledorfer: Can you honestly say that a majority of male farkers aren't enjoying what they see?

No, but then I don't hang out with a majority of male Farkers.  The internet's a wonderful thing, but "hanging out" in that particular way is not something it facilitates well.  I think you'd agree.

That said, I'm not really sure what purpose this question serves.  If one demographic doesn't bear out a theory, choose another?  Process of elimination?  Where are we going here?

Smackledorfer: Because I never see those threads filled with people saying the women aren't attractive.

I've seen more than a few threads where the "hotness" of a given person is tossed back and forth.  Oddly enough people often bring up the subject of personal preference.

It's almost like different people like different things.

Smackledorfer: You have a very small minority who pops in to talk about curvy, but that's about it.

I'm not going to say you're lying, because insinuating that is kinda a dead-end when it comes to debate (unless you've got really, really solid grounds to believe it's so- and honestly I don't know you nearly well enough to have that strength of belief).  All I'm going to say is that, once again, our experiences differ, and I'd disagree with that assessment, both in the matters of frequency and quantity.

Smackledorfer: Maybe you aren't lying.

Repo Man: Again, outliers do not invalidate the peak of the bell curve.

Exactly my point.

While we're at it, the curve is made of a lot more than a peak.

Repo Man: thus demonstrating once again how faulty anecdotal evidence is.

Again, I refer you to the fallacy of:

a) defining "beauty" only with a fraction of the totality of human perception
b) assuming that everyone sees people the same way- down to even the larger details- even when searching for a prospective mate isn't part of the constellation of factors affecting those perceptions.

I still think your foundation is pretty shaky.

Repo Man: I'm only talking about physical beauty.

I know.  And it's only a very small piece of a larger issue.

Repo Man: You're focusing on the individual dots, I'm focusing on the big picture.

I think you have that the wrong way around.

Your state of mind changes the way you see things, bottom line.  There are a great many studies which bear this out.

It's not a terribly reliable measure of a thing, as always.

I drunk what: why do you hate women?

The benefits are good and they have a salad bar?

Pics of you in a Democrat Wagon: now.

I drunk what: republicans will bring balance to the force

The force should have been designed with a Kochlea.