Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!orion.oac.uci.edu!ucivax!gateway
From: llama@eleazar.dartmouth.EDU (Joe Francis)
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Subject: Re: Female human aesthetics
Summary: I second that, mostly
Message-ID: <25557@dartvax.Dartmouth.EDU>
Date: 5 Nov 90 19:23:18 GMT
References: <9011012313.AA11775@rpp386.Cactus.ORG>
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH
Lines: 26
Approved: tittle@ics.uci.edu
Nntp-Posting-Host: zola.ics.uci.edu

In article <9011012313.AA11775@rpp386.Cactus.ORG> John F. Haugh II writes:

>Feminine beauty is something which women wish to attain - it has
>nothing to do with men, just as the "Bronze Adonis" male form is
>something which men pursue and which equally has nothing to do
>with women.  These forms are desirable simply because they are
>unattainable to the average person.  Precious gemstones are precious
>because they are rare - not because they are "beautiful".  Cubic
>zirconia is just as brilliant as natural diamond, if not moreso
>because it is flawless - yet cubic zirconia is not what men and
>women desire.  If beauty were not a precious item which requires
>hard work and diligence to obtain, a new standard of beauty would
>develop which did have these traits.

While I would not go as far as to say the concepts of the perfect male
and female forms are entirely undetermined by women and men,
respectively, the unattainability of the perfect form for most people
is indeed the critical factor in determining what is the perfect look.

As evidence of this, examine the art of Europes past.  The perfect
woman was much fuller figured then.  Why?  Because only the wealthy
could afford the leisurely lifestyle and ammount of food to
achieve the proper appearance.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Read My Lips: No Nude Texans!" - George Bush clearing up a misunderstanding