Can I get “philosophical” for a moment and say we’ve been given a raw deal in being taught to make physical attributes a top priority when choosing a mate? I’d say even top 3 is bad. When she’s 50-60 and her boobs and butt aren’t as desirable, you’re gonna need someone that lifts your spirits in ways that transcend looks. Even at a younger age being satisfied physically but not really much in other ways becomes meh. It’s like eating candy all the time instead of proper meals.
Here's the problem though, all we're really talking about when we're talking a person's physical attributes and beauty is genetic health.
You find a person "attractive" because your brain is sending you the message "Hey! This person has good genetic health! Breed with them!" and chances are if they have good genetic health they're going to be of sound mind as well, there's plenty of exceptions of course but I feel this idea that beautiful people are dumb and mean is a lie we tell ourselves to make life seem more fair and balanced.
But chances are if someone's beautiful they're going to be kind and probably pretty smart and if someone's extremely ugly changes are they're going to be mean and dumb.
Again, there are plenty of exceptions, but this is generally the norm, is that fair? Hell no it isn't, but life isn't fair, when are people going to accept that fact?
Though most people are average (hence why we call it "the average"), I'm talking extremes, for the average person it's hard to gauge their personality or smarts just by their looks.
Also, the reason guys like big breasts isn't a cultural invention, it's because it's a sign that a woman will have no trouble breastfeeding babies, that is why tits are so wonderful, not only are they fun to look at but they are literally
life giving things that have helped the human race survive.
And buttocks are meant to resemble breasts as to draw our attention to the vagina, much like female baboons have red asses.
AngularSaxophone
whenever he sees tits on a screen:
