AnonTalk BBS — Discuss anything anonymously without registration.
Anonymous 7fb3eddb1cca36cfd664bea2b030f11d started this discussion 2 months (2008-10-10 01:02:14 UTC) ago:
Why? Because the vast majority of people look through the same "eyes". Most agree that a hot chick is hot and that an ugly one is ugly. Some have lower standards or have a special fetish, but on the whole, the expression is useless. It's used by ugly people to make them feel better about themselves and feel that there is be somebody out there who will find them "beautiful"…
(I am ugly and still find the expression to be bullshit.)
Advertisement: Play "D I N O * R U N" — possibly the only truly high quality, original Flash game in existence!
Anonymous a7aec5005bab351521cbea78df4a613f replied with this 2 months (2008-10-10 01:14:58 UTC) ago, 13 minutes later (#68,110):
except your point is nullified when some very special person falls in love with your ugly mug; indeed if you had someone you wouldn't find a need to rip on beauty because you would have it close to your heart.
Anonymous 658c296f9eae043a6bbd3c9901bd2bbc replied with this 2 months (2008-10-10 01:42:23 UTC) ago, 27 minutes later (#68,122):
As the saying is poetic, you need to not take it literally. The 'eyes' here represent how one sees another's character, not their physical appearances.
Yes, this sort of phrase is probably used towards those that are not generally considered attractive, and therefore, seems demeening. Still, the merit in the phrase IS correct. People that center on looks as a reason to enjoy someone else rather than their character, well, I feel bad for them. If you (or, whoever) are a good, thoughtful, or otherwise compelling person, I would wanna hang out with you way before I would a vapid, cruel, or ignorant person that was attractive.
Anonymous 658c296f9eae043a6bbd3c9901bd2bbc replied with this 2 months (2008-10-10 01:47:38 UTC) ago, 5 minutes later (#68,125):
@68,122Btw, I should add that the expression from the OP goes hand in hand with 'beauty is only skin deep'. I agree with both…and both phrases should be used by parents to their children, whether less than attractive, or very cute. Someone that learns to trade off their looks is going to live a more shallow, selfish life.
Anonymous 693983a594c3c13c9592749ffdb49cab replied with this 2 months (2008-10-10 02:12:40 UTC) ago, 25 minutes later (#68,135):
The expression hgas only recently become pointless with the media's ability to tell the public who does and does not possess beauty. Just 50 years ago there was no standard for beauty even within a single country, let alone across borders. Now there is a standardized opinion right down to the individual.
Anonymous 658c296f9eae043a6bbd3c9901bd2bbc replied with this 2 months (2008-10-10 02:15:59 UTC) ago, 3 minutes later (#68,138):
@68,135With all due respect, you are smoking crack.
The concept of beauty goes back to Bible times. Whether you think it a fictional book or not, the concept of beauty (and generally, how it is corrupting trait) did exist. At the very least, the men who wrote those books, through divine inspiration or not, recognized it.
Egyptian royalty wore make-up to set themselves apart as well as highlight the traits of youth. I suspect cultures before that one did the same.
Anonymous 693983a594c3c13c9592749ffdb49cab replied with this 2 months (2008-10-10 02:33:14 UTC) ago, 17 minutes later (#68,150):
@68,138I was saying the qualities of beauty have only recently been codified, not that beauty did not exist. What one person called beautiful another would call repulsive in a different village.
© AnonTalk.com 2008