Group: alt.seduction.fast · Group Profile
Author: dmandman Date: Mar 9, 2007 23:42
On Mar 10, 4:35 pm, Richard Steven Hack
sbcglobal.net> wrote:> On Wed, 07 Mar 2007 22:36:12 -0800, dman wrote:
>> She was kind of a midget, well by my standards. She was 5 feet
>> nothing. Which leads onto another discussion of "beauty"... what
>> difference does height make? To me that is an important part of what
>> makes up "beauty"
>
> Well, one of my favorite hotties is Andrea Corr, who's only 5'2".
>
> Hell, Salma Hayak is tiny - but damn near perfectly formed.
>
> Height is nice when everything else is nice. Look at Nicole Kidman, six
> feet and fairly thin, but still hot. Or Charlize Theron, who's tall but
> less thin.
>
Six feet sounds close to perfect.
> I occasionally see here in San Francisco some really short Asian girls,
> maybe under five feet, but many of them are still incredibly cute.
>
> I mark this down as a individual preference which really doesn't translate
> into a general cultural criteria for beauty.
>
> If you're so good with women that you can truly afford to pick and choose,
> then I suppose one could use such criteria to decide who's best for you.
> But I'd be inclined to put such considerations on the back burner and give
> greater weight to personality and basic human qualities. Let the T & A
> fall where it may...Why pass up a potentially great woman because she's
> short or an A-cup?
Knew an awesome girl who had less than an A-cup! Seriously she and a
friend of mine went into a big discussion of who had bigger boobs....
and that other friend of my is a guy! And I suspect he had the bigger
ones... and he is not overweight either! He is just completely normal,
that is how small her "boobs" were.
Also I wouldn't reject a women purely based on a few minor points of
her appearance, but the fact is we do find some women more attractive
than others and I'm curious to hear others opinions on this.
| 
