You may or may not know this but I am 100% bi-sexual. Me and a girlfriend of mine got into a debate about what is pretty and what is not. So as I often say now, "OFF TO THINK ATHEIST INTERWEBS TO ASK RATIONAL PEOPLE!"
So here I am with a few questions:
I will be at work most of the day but I will be able to read most of your responses on my phone.
Yes, she is beautiful. I would definitely stare with my gob drooling. Beautiful eyes.
That being said: Far too much makeup and I would prefer her breasts to be natural. Perfection may be desirable but I'd rather have real, any day. In any case, she's way out of my league, so I wouldn't spend a lot of time fretting about whether I could even talk to her.
Yes, I looked. Why would you think that anyone wouldn't?
I can't really answer all of the questions as asked, but I can provide some thoughts.
I clicked the uncensored version right off the bat. The black bar is jarring as a compositional element (I know it's not there as a design piece, but that doesn't change the visual impact), and it kind of feels like it's criminalizing something as innocuous as breasts. I understand the cultural inhibition against nudity on a rational level, but viscerally, it just doesn't register properly with me, especially if it's just toplessness. Also, in this case, the areolae are the most natural looking part of her breasts, so it seems a shame to block them out.
There are three contexts in which I can consider this woman's attractiveness:
i) Is she attractive in this image? I have a neutral reaction to it. The pose feels a bit contrived and impersonal. It lacks character. That's not to say I'd have taken a better shot if I was the photographer -- has it's merits, undoubtedly --, but I find there's really something lacking in portraiture in general, these days. It lacks humanity. I don't particularly object to image retouching at the fundamental level, but I am distracted by certain errors and inconsistencies in quality. The two most notable issues are the poorly done area under her left arm/ armpit, and the fact that her face has been retouched with detail, but the hand touching it has, disproportionately, not been touched up at all. The disparity bugs me. There are other minor issues as well, but that would be nitpicking. Most of this isn't the model's fault, but my point is, if this image is supposed to represent sexiness, I feel it's too superficial an effort to really succeed.
ii) Is the woman, herself, physically attractive? Yes. She has nice facial features, she looks like she's in decent shape. Any cosmetic surgery she may have had done doesn't affect my opinion one way or the other. I don't have any problems with people modifying their bodies if those modifications are borne out of their own self image (as opposed to insecurity and conformism). Personally, I prefer things like tattoos and piercings over botox or body implants, but I'd feel a bit hypocritical celebrating one group while condemning the other. I don't have strongly preconceived notions of how her breasts or lips should look, so natural or augmented, they look the way they look. I think they look fine the way they are. From a purely aesthetic standpoint, she doesn't align with my typical preferences, but that doesn't make her unattractive.
iii) Is she, as a human being, attractive? I don't know. I don't know her. There's no one for whom I've ever experienced true sexual attraction without first seeing some endearing aspect of their personality (or at least imagining it if it's just idle fantasy in my head). For all I know, this woman could be vapid, callous and disingenuous. Or, perhaps she could be charming, engaging, and a total sweetheart. She could be any mix of personality traits, but without getting a glimpse of more, nothing really stirs in me. I'm not saying we need to be 'soul mates' or anything, but even if it's just an ephemeral sensation, I need to see some bit of her humanity in order to establish a connection. As I stated earlier, this image doesn't really provoke my imagination to contemplate deeper aspects of who she is as a person. It's just eye candy.
I think she's sexy, but not necessarily "beautiful".
Her eyes and hair are the most appealing things. But her lips and the obvious air brushing of the picture are turn-offs.
And yes, I clicked on the NSFW picture. Her boobs look kind of fake. But boobs are still boobs and boobs are rad.
I should also mention that personality is very important in gauging attractiveness. I mean, if she's mean and stupid, she's going to be less attractive to me.
I agree with you she's sexy but not necessarily "beautiful".
As a teenage male I would say that she is pretty hot. In my eyes there is a difference between beautiful and hot. This woman is definitely hot.
I would say the things that turn me on about this pic is that the woman has perfect completion, her pose, her skin tone, the shape of her face, the shape of the things in the NSFW pic, and the look of her hair.
A slight turn of is her mouth being kind of open but not a substantial amount if that makes any sense.
I differentiate between hot and beautiful with a sort of litmus test... If she looks like you would want to spend just a couple of nights with her shes hot, if you want her to be with you for a long term relationship she is beautiful.
I have to admit that I clicked on the picture. All I saw was her hair and was thinking "it cant be that bad".
Sorry if anything doesn't make sense.. im really tired.
"I differentiate between hot and beautiful with a sort of litmus test..."
I find that the major differentiator between the two is when an otherwise only hot girl actually has a personality. ;)
1. What turns you on about this girl?
She has a pretty face. She's also youthful, and healthy-looking.
2. What turns you off about this girl?
Something about her isn't natural. I don't know if it's the makeup or the pose, or the lighting. But, it doesn't strike me as being merely a photograph of a pretty girl. I feel like I'm being sold something, and I'm not buying it, whatever it is.
Her lips. Her lips could be natural. But, they also look too pouty.
Also, the finish on the photo makes her resemble something out of Avatar.
3. Why is this girl considered beautiful?
She's well-proportioned, both in her face and her body. She has green eyes.
4. Is this girl beautiful?
Maybe. But, she doesn't strike me as someone I could talk to. Maybe I'm reading too much into it.
5. Does the notion of her breasts being covered make you more attracted because you know she is naked in the (NSFW) *Not Safe For Work*unaltered picture(NSFW).
Not necessarily. If she had on a loose fitting, slightly sheer shirt it would be more provocative than the black stripe.
6. Did you click on the NSFW picture? Why or why not?
Of course. I'm a guy. But, I didn't dwell on it for long.
7. Be honest if you clicked on it or not!
This is a trap isn't it?
You must be married.
1. Turn-ons: the contrast of her hair and eye color; the assortment of bracelets would seem to indicate an appreciation of creativity as well as a total lack of concern for what most would consider an appropriate style.
2. Turn-offs: eye color is most likely unnatural; lips are alittle ridiculous (collagen injections); although she is not fat, belly fat has built up enough to expand her belly button a bit which indicates a rather lethargic lifestyle.
3. Because she has breasts and people are lonely... I'm assuming.
4. Beauty comes from a complete picture... not an image.
5. I'm less attracted because IMHO nudity is a personal thing, and when someone reduces themselves purely to an attractive image of their body for money there is no intimacy. It also devalues themselves and manipulates the emotions of others in the pursuit of wealth, which seems kinda inethical to me.
6. No. The internet can be described as a large orgy that your computer goes to romp in every time you connect; clicking on links promising wanking material is the equivalent of not using protection. So I would rather try to keep my computer free of STDs in the giant orgy of computers that is the internet.
As a person who's been working with Photoshop-like tools for years now, and has 'shopped dozens of images (my current projects are images concerning art history for my girlfriend), I have developed a rather peculiar view concerning such images.
So instead of answering the questions in order, let me write a few words from that point of view.
(TLDR version at the bottom of the post)
First of all, I do not find the picture in question attractive at all. I have personally 'shopped more than a dozen images of my friends and I know from my personal experience that this picture has been 'shopped with more than a few layers of skin blurring, airbrushing, shape correction, symmetry of the body and facial lines, colour enhancement, and possibly even a few lines of make-up and added jewellery. In truth, she needn't even wear makeup in reality - Photoshop can take care of that easily.
That having said, I must repeat that I don't find the picture in question attractive, and I am fairly certain that the attractiveness/beauty of the woman on the picture cannot be easily judged because none of you have actually seen the woman in question at all. This is like asking whether Mona Lisa was an attractive woman - has anyone of us ever seen her in person? No, I didn't think so.
However, I understand why this girl would be considered beautiful - people with little or no experience with image enhancement will fail to see just how much this image has been altered compared to the original, and it is indeed true that the alterations have been made to make her look more attractive. I understand this view, but I don't agree with it. Do you consider Lara Croft from the Tomb Raider game attractive? Do you consider Misato Katsuragi from NGE or Motoko Kusanagi from GitS attractive? I understand that some people would, but most people who would say "no", would still say "yes" to this picture, oblivious to the fact that this picture is just as much of a "cartoon" as the aforementioned three. So, in the end, it all boils down to how well you can fool people visually. This is probably the main thing that turns me off about this image - the image producer was most likely trying to fool me into thinking this girl looks the way she, in reality, does not.
Having said that, I must express the other reason why I am not so easily turned on by such things - the thing that turns me on the most is one's intellect, and not looks.
I did click on the NSFW image. In all honesty. I know you might not believe me, but I'm telling you I did. Seriously. :D
And incidentally, her breasts are both fake and heavily 'shopped.
All is, and stays, in my own humble opinion.
TLDR version: 1. nothing in particular; 2. 'shopping and silicone; 3. 'shopping and silicone; 4. I don't know, and neither does anyone who hasn't seen at least the unedited image; 5. No; 6. Yes; 7. I was.
I don't think anybody would recognise her if they saw her before being photoshopped.
But this is what porn is all about, the basic, primitve, instinctive reaction. That is why this stuff sells, to the tune of billions. She is fantasy, and most, not all, men have that reaction. It's jimmied up photos like these that normal women can never aspire to, and can make men very dissatisfied with 'their' female.
It is the smart ones that really understand what is going on, but, men will NEVER stop looking at porn - that's just the way it is.