We associate good looks with talent, which is why everyone is so shocked and amazed that a frumpy woman like Susan Boyle can sing like an angel.The emphasis on physical beauty even over talent (see: most boy bands, idol singers, 99% of the winners of American Idol) means that most celebrities tend to be sexier than the average bear.Humans as a rule have a tendency to assume that society is the default paradigm, universally applicable to all cultures and people; Western society holds typically Caucasian features to be the highest standard of beauty, for example, and we have the media hegemony to enforce our beliefs on other cultures through sheer exposure. No matter how much the tabloids may try to convince me that Kim Kardashian is a stunning vision, I wouldn’t fuck her with a borrowed dick and Lexi Belle doing the pushing.
Amazingly enough in the real world, models variable and influenced by a ginormous number of factors including personal preferences, cultural upbringing, social class, even ecology.
The archetypal good-looking modern man, for example, is depicted as having a long, lean swimmer’s build and lacking nearly frame was the ideal; body weight was often a class-marker, as the indolent upper class was able to eat richer foods, while the peasants toiled at manual labor (and, ironically, ate a more nutritionally sound diet).
It’s impossible – or so the assumptions go – that perhaps she’s legitimately attracted to him, that attractiveness and desire are about more than just the accepted definitions of good looks.
We get so hung up on beauty privilege, the halo effect, the value of facial symmetry and waist-to-hip ratios and the idea that only 20% of whomever get 80% of the fucking that we tend to ignore things that don’t fit the accepted narrative.
Pablo Picasso wasn’t anyone’s idea of a male model, and yet he cut quite the swath amongst the young women of Barcelona and Paris, conducting affairs with women a third his age.
His passion was addictive; it could carry you away. Maybe it’s the fact that you have so much in common, so many shared hobbies and interests.
I challenge you to visit any Latin club and watch the So clearly if you don’t look like a Greek God, the best option is to be insanely talented, right? Now allow me to spare you the immediate and obvious rejoinder: “So why’s Brad Pitt with Angelina Jolie instead of some nobody, then? Sure, there are millions of women who’d cheerfully murder a hobo for a chance to him…
but how many do you suppose could actually put up with the lifestyle that his career requires?
After all, many of us know someone who punches above his or her weight class, dating people who they – by all rights – should have based on the flawed idea that the only thing that people value is looks.
Whenever we see someone who isn’t conventionally attractive dating somebody who is more attractive we often dismiss the relationship as somehow invalid; clearly he has money, or a high-status job or some other external quality that the more attractive partner desires enough that she is willing to put up with having to toss the cave troll a handy every now and then.
Either you get complacent because you assume that you’re so far out of your partner’s league that he or she would do anything to jeopardize the relationship – and thus quickly find out just how wrong you are – or you become so convinced that your partner is going to realize that they could do better and drop you like a bad habit that you end up subconsciously pushing them away.