A question!
Apr. 30th, 2012 09:52 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
thistlechaserWhile reading through my friends of friends list, I came upon a picture of Courtney Stodden. Not knowing who she is, I googled, which brought me to wiki, but alas her wiki page has been redirected elsewhere, so that was no help. Poking about google further told me that she's 16 and married to an adult male actor.
The reason this random woman drove me to look her up was this picture of her (work safe, woman in very tight dress). My first thought was that her breasts look like they weigh more than the rest of her. My next was that her head is really oddly big. To me, she's seriously unattractive. I don't like that skinny look. I hate her hair. Her legs are like sticks. She is not someone I would pick as a partner.
Am I unusual in this opinion? Let's have a poll and see!
[Poll #1837446]
The reason this random woman drove me to look her up was this picture of her (work safe, woman in very tight dress). My first thought was that her breasts look like they weigh more than the rest of her. My next was that her head is really oddly big. To me, she's seriously unattractive. I don't like that skinny look. I hate her hair. Her legs are like sticks. She is not someone I would pick as a partner.
Am I unusual in this opinion? Let's have a poll and see!
[Poll #1837446]
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2012-05-01 05:46 am (UTC)I can see where certain people could get off to her but she might as well be a lamp post with a couple cantaloupes nailed to it to me.
Curves and heft aren't a bad thing! Like everything in life it's all about moderation and not going overboard with them.
no subject
Date: 2012-05-01 01:10 pm (UTC)*snickers!*
Yes, I like curves and heft, my tastes probably run further in that direction than most folks. I like nice round bellies, on both men and women. Muscles are nice too, but I'd probably pick someone with a belly over some lean muscle-person.
no subject
Date: 2012-05-01 06:15 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-05-01 08:10 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-05-01 01:11 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-05-01 01:51 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-05-01 06:03 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-05-01 08:14 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-05-01 06:26 am (UTC)Man she really doesn't look like a teenager.
no subject
Date: 2012-05-01 01:13 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-05-01 10:57 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-05-01 01:14 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-05-01 11:40 am (UTC)I think this girl has the potential to be very attractive.
If she lost the giant breasts.
I think her head appears too large because the entire proportions of her body are askew. That and poor choice of hair style.
I find "model bodies" to be extremely attractive, however. I do not agree that these should be the standard to which all other women are judged, but I find "stick legs" to be very beautiful, in my opinion, but I get where it doesn't do it for others. I'll come right out and say my 80/20 is going to show here and when it comes to females I will always find the tiniest ones attractive. This girl would still have curves even if she downsized on the chest.
What makes her unappealing to me is how fake she looks. The hair, the boobs, the way she's dressed for her age, all of that. That Pam Anderson Baywatch look doesn't do it for me. That and her tendency to duck face in photographs. I notice her dark roots in some of her shots. I bet she'd be much better with her natural hair colour.
no subject
Date: 2012-05-01 01:20 pm (UTC)I think that's a big part of the issue for me. And, as pointed out above, she's 16, so she still has growing to do! (Poor girl...)
I'm the opposite of you, when it comes to taste in women. I like round bellies and big curves (not to the point of not being able to walk or anything radical like that, but leaning towards overweight for sure). So for me, her (and model types), are the opposite of what do it for me.
no subject
Date: 2012-05-01 12:51 pm (UTC)She has an inherently attractive face and body that looks to have been ruined by alterations. Sad. The breasts look fake as hell, and as someone who has previously had (natural) breasts of almost that size, I have to ask.. how can she stand it? Unless they are filled with helium or something to make them lighter? :P
no subject
Date: 2012-05-01 01:22 pm (UTC)She's 16, those breasts just cannot be natural, I'd think... I've always had large breasts, but in my teen years they looked nothing like that...
no subject
Date: 2012-05-01 01:14 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-05-01 01:23 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-05-01 01:17 pm (UTC)I suspect that, had I not known the story, I would not have found her attractive. There is something off about her, generating a suspicion that must be similar to what the wiser ducks feel when they see wooden decoys floating in the water. It's as if she is a collection of parts that individually make sense on somebody's body, but together it looks like Dr. Frankenstein is reassembling his child bride. But, again, it could be that I'm tainted by knowledge.
no subject
Date: 2012-05-01 01:26 pm (UTC)I think your duck example is dead-on. She just doesn't look natural.
no subject
Date: 2012-05-01 03:17 pm (UTC)The feeling you're describing is referred to as the "Uncanny Valley." The phenomenon is basically a quirk of human perception: we identify with things given human-like qualities. Simple robots - machines on wheels, humans have not much affection for. But give the machine a few human-like qualities, and you get Wall-E. We are entranced. Make it more human, and we like it more...until it gets a bit too close. If it emulates humanity near perfectly, but with just a thing or two noticeably artificial, we are absolutely creeped out by it. This sudden dive in likability/relability as artifice approaches indistinguishable from real & alive is termed the "Uncanny Valley". Most theories I've heard as to the origin of this perception quirk has to do with identifying corpses. Real, but with just a touch of artifice...Exactly what I think of when I see any picture of this girl.
no subject
Date: 2012-05-01 03:49 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-05-01 06:59 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-05-01 07:35 pm (UTC)There was a (TV tropes?) page about Uncanny Valley and furry artists, it was very interesting. Artists who are less skilled can get away with drawing furries, because they won't run into the Uncanny Valley effect -- if the muzzle is a little too short, well, it's a animal/human mix, so there's not One Right Way of drawing it.
Once I had posted something wondering why so many artists take ONLY furry requests, and someone had linked me to the page to explain.
no subject
Date: 2012-05-01 07:55 pm (UTC)Admittedly it's a lot harder to mess up a nonhuman drawing. Assuming your nonhuman is very nonhuman looking, at least, I can't imagine vulcans would escape. Some of them though it might just be preference, and they're just no good at drawing western cartoon, realistic or anime humans. (I'm one of them. I -can- manage humans, or humanoids, but less human-looking things are so much easier)
no subject
Date: 2012-05-01 08:13 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-05-02 03:14 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-05-02 04:37 am (UTC)"Most Artists Are Humans, but unfortunately humans are fairly hard to draw. This has a lot to do with the principles behind the Uncanny Valley theory. We know what people look like. We see them every day. If an artist's human characters look too weird, those characters won't be appealing.
But, oddly, there doesn't seem to be much of an Uncanny Valley equivalent for animals, let alone extremely stylized characters. After all, there aren't any Furries running around in the real world (at least not to our knowledge). This means that there isn't any right or wrong way to draw cartoon animals, so it's impossible to be close but not quite there. "
no subject
Date: 2012-05-02 07:13 am (UTC)Much belatedly,t hank you for link! Now to stay awake and read it. ..or read it tomorrow. Either way, TV tropes is dangerous. *braces self, dives in*
no subject
Date: 2012-05-02 04:38 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-05-01 03:32 pm (UTC)The hair though is terrible. :)
After that, I took a look at the guy she's with and said "Oh, hey, I recognize that actor!" *facepalm*
no subject
Date: 2012-05-01 03:50 pm (UTC)I'd love to see her with a more natural hairstyle too, yeah.
no subject
Date: 2012-05-01 06:15 pm (UTC)Appearance aside, though. The whole situation just boggles my mind and really saddens me. At 16 there's no way she could possibly have any idea what she's gotten herself into. The adults around her, the ones who should be looking out for her, have done little more than push her ever closer to the inevitable cliff's edge. They're all in it for themselves - her husband is probably over the bloody moon that he's managed to nab an underaged trophy wife for a few years, until he gets bored with her, her mother might have netted a crapton of money, but at what cost? It will not end well. There is no possible way it could. Physically, that poor kid's body is going to fall apart way earlier than it would have needed to. She'll spend so much money, time, and effort trying to keep it looking the way she (and everyone around her) wants it. Which is really sad, since she's still a teen - she's got years of looking great to go, without "improvements." But I can't even begin to imagine what all this is going to do to her mentally...
no subject
Date: 2012-05-01 11:20 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-05-01 11:22 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-05-02 05:10 am (UTC)I tried not to read too much into her age. For one thing, I cannot be certain if she dresses that way all the time. (Although she was apparently walking out of Target in that picture, which seems absurd.) Maybe she dresses somewhat normally or differently most of the time.
no subject
Date: 2012-05-02 01:23 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-05-04 06:46 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-05-04 03:04 pm (UTC)