Who was more physically beautiful, Adam or Eve?

[meltzerboy2]

Yes, the role of gender stereotypes cannot be gainsaid.

 

[Magnanimity]

I don’t really see how this directly correlates though. Women are pretty much objectified

Ok, let me stop the point right there. I know you went on to make other valuable points, and I appreciate them. But, I invite you and every other interlocutor I’ve had in this thread to pause and consider what would have to be true about the nature of women in order for men to objectify them. If I say that a woman is an object of my desire, what am I saying about her? At some level, there must be something in the woman that attracts me, compels me, engages my desire.

So what is that quality or attribute that she possesses that would make her an “object” of my desire? Maybe we should ask the question more concretely. When Scarlet Johansson walks into a restaurant in L.A. (on a date, say) what is it about her that will turn every head? Why will male (and female) eyes linger on her? What is it about her that compels someone to behold her and not easily look away? Since it is a real part of human experience, it must be named and not ignored. I call it her embodiment of beauty. If you wish to call it something else, that’s fine. But it must be named. Female humans possess a quality that makes them more pleasing to behold, on average, than their male counterparts. Again, as I’ve said ad nauseum by now, if this were not true, female humans would not absolutely dominate an industry whose very essence is the beholding of something that compels you to look at it (the modeling industry).

 

[Lea101]

But, I invite you and every other interlocutor I’ve had in this thread to pause and consider what would have to be true about the nature of women in order for men to objectify them.

You should’ve continued, lol bc I addressed this part. My perspective is that as men have control (patriarchy) in societies, the sex they’re attracted to would be objectified more than men themselves.

Now that women are gaining power and equality, I notice an increase in the objectification of men as well. Even beauty/grooming amongst men are becoming increasingly common now. As this is a recent change in society, this isn’t on the same level as women yet.

At some level, there must be something in the woman that attracts me, compels me, engages my desire

Yes, because you’re straight. I, as a straight woman, would say the same thing towards men. This is sexual orientation.

So what is that quality or attribute that she possesses that would make her an “object” of my desire?

Because you’re sexually attracted to women, that’s why.

Many women’s heads would turn at the sigh of Chris Hemsworth, Henry Cavill, (insert any famous handsome guy).

I think whatever you’re saying here is supporting the fact that most men are straight, rather than saying that women are inherently more beautiful. Because I can use the exact same argument with women and attractive men to say that men are more beautiful, when the reality is that I’m just saying women are mostly straight.

 

[Magnanimity]

You should’ve continued, lol bc I addressed this part. My perspective is that as men have control (patriarchy) in societies, the sex they’re attracted to would be objectified more than men themselves.

Thanks for the engagement, Lea. I don’t see that you made any effort to identify what it is in human females that arrests attention and compels people to behold them and gives them an aesthetic experience, but in fairness to you, I glossed over your points to make my own. So, let me take the time to address what you’ve raised. (No patriarchal tendencies here Lea, I want equality in our back and forth ).

Now that women are gaining power and equality,

I’m not sure what “now that” means. 1982 was the first year that more women received college bachelor’s degrees than men. Since then, the pace has increased year over year putting the figure closer to 60% of all college graduates being female nowadays. This power and equality you speak of is not a yesterday phenomenon. It is now generations in the making giving ample time for any “equality of beauty” cultural phenomena to have developed. And they haven’t, at least not in statistically-relevant numbers that would support your arguments. You merely provide an anecdotal remark: “Even beauty/grooming amongst men are becoming increasingly common now,” rather than any evidence that would support you.

So, let us say then that equality began in earnest in 1982. It’s perhaps an arbitrary year, but since more women than men have graduated from college for almost four decades now, 1982 has some bearing on any discussion of male-female equality (at least in the U.S.). So, we’ve had four decades for men to increase their share in the modeling industry. And yet MvF pay-disparity remains extreme. We’ve had four decades for male make-up lines and hair care salons to develop and grow. To say nothing of the ongoing female clothing/shoe lines that dominate retail sales and have shown no signs of abating. But, despite all this you make a fair point that there is an increase in male participation in the personal care industry. So, you’re right in suggesting that the needle has moved on this issue. But what did it move from? And where is it headed? You seem to think it’s headed toward equality, but there is simply not enough evidence (yet) to hold that position.

 

[Magnanimity]

Yes, because you’re straight. I, as a straight woman, would say the same thing towards men. This is sexual orientation.

No. You are not addressing the questions I’ve raised. Presumably, you have no explanation for the reason that females have continuously dominated an “industry whose very essence is the beholding of something that compels you to look at it (the modeling industry)” as I said earlier. What is it within females that arrests attention and compels folks (both male and female folks) to behold them? In other words, please explain the very existence of a modeling industry at all. If women are not inherently possessive of some quality like what we call beauty, why do people (all people, males and females) stare at them? Not all people stare at Henry Cavill. Most men might glance his way and easily look away without a thought. And yet a gorgeous woman walking into a room arrests all attention.

I appreciate the fact that you’re simply trying to reduce this argument to a sexual orientation phenomenon. But in doing so, you don’t even attempt to account for overwhelming female dominance of the modeling industry, the make-up industry, the clothing industry, salons, etc. Perhaps you don’t have an answer, and that’s ok. But unless/until you do try to account for these phenomena, you do not reasonably hold your position that females do not uniquely exemplify beauty among humans.

 

[Sarcelle]

And yet a gorgeous woman walking into a room arrests all attention.

I don’t dispute that at all.

Beauty is a rare quality which is why it is prized.

It is not an intrinsic part of femininity as most women are just average looking.

It is a rare female that can truly exemplify beauty.

 

[Magnanimity]

I don’t dispute that at all.

Beauty is a rare quality which is why it is prized.

I’ll take it, Sarcelle! At this point, I’ll take any points of agreement we can locate in this thread!! Sheesh, I’m worn out trying to defend feminine beauty. Of all the things to have to defend on a conservative, Catholic forum!!!

OK, I’ll calm down now.

 

[Sarcelle]

I just thought of something which may prove you right.

Women have on average more neotenous features than men and neotenous features are deemed more attractive.

I get what you’re trying to say now, so in general I agree with you.

 

[Lea101]

This power and equality you speak of is not a yesterday phenomenon

I didn’t say it was. When we talk about changes in society, even the 1950s are considered recent.

You merely provide an anecdotal remark: “Even beauty/grooming amongst men are becoming increasingly common now,” rather than any evidence that would support you.

That’s a pretty weird statement, not going to lie, since you started without any empirical data?

we’ve had four decades

4 decades isn’t long if we want to look at trends, though. I’m not making the claim that it’s equal now, because we recently started the view males and females on a more equal level than before.

But, despite all this you make a fair point that there is an increase in male participation in the personal care industry

Yup. Also look at culture. Young men in Korea and Japan are more into skincare and beauty than most American men.

But what did it move from? And where is it headed? You seem to think it’s headed toward equality,

I wouldn’t make a bold assertion. It’s too soon for that. Given the increasing presence of the objectification of men in porn, beauty and the entertainment industries, I’m confident enough to say that it’ll continue to increase.

you didn’t really take into account women being reduced to wives and mothers, millions invested to target ‘flaws’ and provide solutions and all of the societal factors at play.

Women, even in past patriarchal eras, were the ones spending the household money. I think this is an important factor if we’re taking about why there are industries geared towards them. They were the consumers, more than men.

When women’s role in societies was to simply attract a mate and have children, emphasis on beauty would naturally be encouraged. It doesnt mean it’s inherent, it just means that it’s strongly valued because other areas (strength, intellect) aren’t as important.

Now that women’s roles are more varied, I expect some change.

You are not addressing the questions I’ve raised.

I responded that it’s because she’s a woman and you’re attracted to them. A beautiful man will compel me in the same way.

What is it within females that arrests attention and compels folks (both male and female folks) to behold them?

So now women are included? Well i guess you would have to prove that women are attracted to women’s beauty, first. I highly doubt all of us would stop and drool over Scarlett, for instance.

My own experience is that when I see a beautiful person, regardless of gender, I appreciate it because beauty is rare and pleasurable. If it’s a man, the factor is that I’m attracted to him. If it’s a woman, the added factor is usually ‘dang, I want to be that pretty’

 

[Lea101]

Not all people stare at Henry Cavill. Most men might glance his way and easily look away without a thought.

Idk dude…I’ve seen straight men comment the weirdest things under attractive men’s posts before.

You’re conflating different types of attention. A man may look at an attractive man and feel jealous, admire his muscle to fat ratio, height, jaw or whatever. A woman may look at him and she’s already lusting, or planning her wedding.

You also seem to conflate men being ‘more visual’ to women being inherently more beautiful.

But in doing so, you don’t even attempt to account for overwhelming female dominance of the modeling industry, the make-up industry, the clothing industry, salons, etc

As for all your comments related to this, I’ve already explained.

it’s nature AND nurture. You can’t ignore one for the other.

I would concede on a point: that beauty is more valued in women (because for a long time, that predicted a higher rate of survival and reproduction), while having resources are more valued in men.

And natural selection does its thing. Beautiful women survive and their genes pass on. The rest of us uglies will eventually die off

A more silly, tongue in cheek answer would be, we’re probably less beautiful since we’re spending all this money to look better, lol

I just can’t see any evidence that this is inherently in women, not in men. And to be fair, we didn’t even define our terms.

If it’s inherent, do we all have to have it? What’s beauty? Etc.

 

[Lea101]

Women have on average more neotenous features than men and neotenous features are deemed more attractive.

One interesting thing some studies as found that attractive people tend to have more daughters. So statistically speaking, women have more attractive features.

So if ugly people were to have statistically more daughters, it’s not far off to say that men have more attractive features.

Same thing for any other trait and the type of children they tend to have.

Although this may be irrelevant, idk.

 

[Magnanimity]

If you can believe it @Lea101 and @Sarcelle, I’m seeing us tend toward a mutuality, if not agreement on some of these issues. I thought it couldn’t happen, but in slowly reading though your last few replies, I think it’s there.

Earlier in this thread, someone criticized my generalization that, on average men are stronger than women and women are more beautiful than men. The basis for their criticism however was that strength/speed are quantifiable attributes, which is perfectly true. The fastest man and strongest man will far exceed their females counterparts, and it’s all measurable (race speeds, weight lifted, etc). However, beauty (as itself a transcendental quality) is not measurable, at least it doesn’t appear to be scientifically measurable. I have no problem with this fact. There are innumerable realities that are not scientifically measurable/quantifiable but are no less real (wisdom, love, good and evil, spirituality, liberty, habit…, the list really goes on and on).

But it’s this immeasurable aspect that trips people up, I think. Lea says that we didn’t early on “define terms” and she asks what is beauty? These are very important points. For my part, I’ve read a fair amount on beauty/aesthetics, especially within a Catholic framework. I know what St. Thomas Aquinas says about it and many others. But, they all seem to come up short when attempting to define it, at least IMO. When you really try to pin down beauty (what it is), the definition eludes you. We can define, along with Aquinas, beauty as that which gives one pleasure when beheld. But, when the question is pressed further, as in–ok, what, specifically, about the object is the cause of the pleasure? the answers come up short. Aquinas points out integrity, due proportion and claritas as the necessary features of a beautiful object. Maybe. It’s that last one that is most elusive and mysterious, I think. Claritas is usually translated as “radiance” in English. Ok…

There is something that seems to radiate from the beautiful female human, which has a compelling aspect to it. Beauty does not tolerate being ignored. It arrests the attention of the observer. The beauty of a woman arrests the attention of any and all observers, the more beauty she possesses, the more heads will turn (and linger). And this is unique to the female gender.

Whatever compels folks to behold males, the aesthetic experience of the observer is undoubtedly not the same. Male humans can have integrity and due proportion, and they may even have some level of this mysterious “radiance” (just as female humans have some level of strength), but they do not/cannot exemplify this mysterious radiance in the way that female humans can. All of the many industries I’ve given above that are centered in displaying female radiance are support for this claim. That’s about the extent of what I’m claiming in all of this.

 

[goout]

This is not unique to the female gender.

Truth, Beauty, and Goodness have their source in, and point to…God. God does not have gender.
All of creation reflects the beauty of God. And human beings are created in Imago Dei. In the image of God. Male and female both. So the beauty that is revealed in God’s creation should be expected to reside in both men and women.

I myself as a hetero male find the beauty of a woman more compelling and “arresting” as you call it.
And my wife is most arresting of all, not because she has some classical attributes that qualify her, but because she reflects that Image to me. (I’m not trying to be schmaltzy here, just make an observation).

 

[Magnanimity]

The uniqueness is contrasted with male humans, not with all of creation or the Ground of all creation. My claim is much more modest.

 

[JulianN]

And the external beauty of female humans is obvious by everything I’ve noted above.

Actually, it’s not. Since men are drawn to beauty, it’s equally plausible that women find themselves in a position of needing cosmetics, fancy clothes, etc. precisely in order to create a physical beauty they do not inherently possess. If women were really so much more naturally beautiful than men, one would expect the cosmetic/hair/fashion industry to be more focused on men, since they would be the ones requiring the additional aids to feel beautiful.

 

[Magnanimity]

one would expect the cosmetic/hair/fashion industry to be more focused on men, since they would be the ones requiring the additional aids to feel beautiful.

And since this is manifestly not the case (counter-factual), what does this tell you about the world? I observe this radiant quality in females (as we all do) and I see an industry built up to enhance their already extant beauty. What do you see? As in, how do you explain the existence of all the industries and their overwhelming appeal to (and participation in by) females? It’s all merely an accident? Arbitrary? No explanation possible?

 

[Lea101]

One of the issues I have with this comparison is that if a man isn’t stronger than an aveage female, this is usually an anomaly (assuming all other variables are constant). There would be some medical/physical issue.

If a woman doesn’t cause any heads to turn at all (which would be most women if we’re being totally honest), there wouldn’t be anything actually “wrong” with that. Just had some unfortunate mix of genes. The beauty that turns people heads is rare, while male strength is found in almost every man.

 

[JulianN]

I’m not sure you understand what I’m saying. You are, in fact, making my point. If women were possessed of a ‘radiant’ beauty that was so superior to men’s, they would not be the focus of the cosmetic/fashion industry, because they would not need enhancement.

Since men are not the focus of those industries, the argument could be made that they are more naturally beautiful.

 

[Magnanimity]

One of the issues I have with this comparison is that if a man isn’t stronger than an aveage female, this is usually an anomaly (assuming all other variables are constant).

I definitely agree with this—it would be an anomaly.

If a woman doesn’t cause any heads to turn at all (which would be most women if we’re being totally honest), there wouldn’t be anything actually “wrong” with that.

See, I thought you were going to create a mirror-image analogy. But, you carried the thought in a different direction and surprised me. Let’s run the analogy that you first began with a little thought experiment. Imagine a male-female couple where the female is of no special size or physical training (she’s not a powerlifter or an MMA fighter, say). She’s of an average female build and strength. And in this couple we’re imagining, she is actually physically stronger than the male. I think we would all agree that would be a strange anomaly.

But, let’s figure a beauty counterpart to this analogy. The thought experiment could go one of two ways. The first way would run like this: we again imagine a male-female couple. The male is Chris Hemsworth (actor who plays Thor in the MCU). And then imagine his girlfriend is the most ordinary-looking woman you have perhaps ever seen. A true “plain Jane” that most on the street would indeed overlook and pay no attention to. Would that be an anomaly? It would seem so. That would seem a bizarre pairing for a romantic couple. What would make it strange though? Is it that the male human in this coupling seems to possess more radiance (beauty) than the female in the relationship? We would expect Chris Hemsworth to be with a woman who most would regard as at least “pretty,” if not with a drop-dead gorgeous woman. Right? So it’s bizarre in both instances: the couple where the male is literally not as physically strong as his average-build girlfriend & the couple where the male is regarded by most women as exceedingly handsome together with the most average (if not a little ugly) girlfriend. In this latter case, we would almost be tempted to say that he is more beautiful than his own GF. But that doesn’t seem right, does it? It seems off that a Hemsworth male would be with a plain-Jane woman. Is that right?

 

[Magnanimity]

If a woman doesn’t cause any heads to turn at all (which would be most women if we’re being totally honest),…The beauty that turns people heads is rare, while male strength is found in almost every man.

I just don’t know about these statements. It seems they exaggerate in both directions. It seems to me that you’ve undersold women and oversold men. So, full disclosure, I’m single. Not married, not even in a relationship. So it’s likely true that this fact colors my perspective. And, I have to say that when I’m out and about, I see pretty women everywhere. I’m not kidding—they’re ubiquitous. But, as I say, I probably notice this bc I’m looking more than most other males are who are in committed relationships (maybe ). I see beautiful women all the time and everywhere I go. True, they’re not all equally beautiful. A few possess extravagant beauty. Others less so, some even are what we might call “mildly pretty.” But I rarely see ugly, and although I’m overlooking the plain-Jane’s out there, still and all, I’m very serious—whether I’m shopping or commuting to work or out with friends, I see beauty all over the place. As I say, I think you may be downplaying your own gender.

And as for males, I myself am not particularly strong. Not particularly weak either, but I’m likely below average among my peers in terms of physical strength. So I somewhat pay attention to guys around me and in the back of my mind assess what seems to be their strength-level, relative to myself.

But while to say that strength is found in every man is true, strength is not found among males in an evenly distributed way. Not even close. There is a male strength-spectrum just as there is a female beauty-spectrum. Some have a lot, some have a decent amount and some have only a little. But quite a few of my male coworkers like to enhance whatever strength they do have by spending a lot of time in the gym. A small number of my female coworkers are in the gym. So, what do the females try to enhance? Their beauty—with makeup, hair appointments, clothing, etc, etc.

Strength and beauty—these two qualities do seem to have particular expression among the two genders.