I see so many forums and topics revoling around this thing and it's often hyped up, but isn't it rather simple?
Looking from biological perspective, we as humans usually tend to be attracted to those that essentially are of higher value, whatever that subjectively means.
But generally...
If you're a girl, then looks, status and power play the primary role.
If you're a man, then looks is king, all else are additional things.
It sounds mean and not right, but that's how it is.
Agree or Disagree?
I see your perspective, and I tend to agree.
Subconsciously, we are seeking the continued survival of our species. (I say subconscious because most people are not aware of the things that make them be.)
Women want security. The security needed to raise and provide for their children. They also want masculinity, or size. This is viewed as a means of protection. A larger male can successfully defend and protect both mother and child as opposed to a smaller, more feeble suitor. The 4 inch rule is evident.
Men want child bearing hips. Voluptuous breasts (assuming the woman to be healthier and more suited to feed the child by comparison) and, of course, an attractive face.
One critical factor is dissimilar attraction. We are naturally inclined towards features dissimilar to our own. For example; women with brown eyes might have a knack for men with blue eyes, and vice versa.
This is very biological. Attraction is obviously so incredibly multifaceted in modern culture.
As an artist and idealist, I am personally extremely picky in the size, shape and face of the type of woman I am attracted to. And, in many cases, I am attracted to women similar in hair color, eye color and complexion to myself. I admire my own genetics, but I'm equally aware of dissimilar attraction and how it plays a role in my own preference.
