Keira Knightley.com Forums - View Single Post - What is truly SEXY?
View Single Post
Old 27-12-2005, 07:05 PM   Officer #53
DragonRat
Officer
 
DragonRat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: California
Posts: 507
Quote:
Originally Posted by dave
Beauty (Think Rebecca Romijn)
Her face
Her body
Does she enjoy being "worshipped"? A woman who doesn't isn't worthy of it.
Does she screw alot without ever planning to have children? A woman who is pleasure driven may be beautiful, but she is not sexy.
Is it possible that you will ever actually spend time getting to know her?


Sexy (Think Goldie Hawn)
Her Intelligence
Does she dance?
Her demeanor - Does she flirt well
Is she fun to be around
Does she touch me, will she allow me to touch her?
Does she ride a motorcycle and go to the Hot Springs where everybody gets naked?
Does she enjoy children (Sex is, after all, for having children...)
It is possible that you will actually spend time getting to know her.
See, now you're forcing me to introduce my theory on beauty. (And Golden Hawn? Intelligent? That's not the reason Kurt Russell married her.) And Rebecca Romijn is not "beautiful", per se, but rather more so "sexy". Why? (Remember, my theory is only - ONLY - for physical attraction. If people believe in sexiness as a mental trait, and an attitude, then by all means, believe so. I simply offer my attempt at an objective look at physical appearance. Thus, if you argue with me that "That's not what sexy is! I'll tell you what sexy is!" and go on and talk about how this girl you met was nice to you and you found her intelligent and she read books you read and listened to music you listened to, and you could then easily imagine her as supremely attractive - hence, "sexy" - then that's subjective. That's you. That's your falling for a girl like that. Pshaw, I say. Pshaw.)

In my overtly arrogant opinion (as opposed to the humble kind), I believe there to be 4 classifications of beauty (beauty in a catch-all term for what defines the physical attractiveness of a female): 1) beautiful; 2) cute; 3) pretty; 4) sexy.

1) I would proffer the example of Audrey Hepburn (rather than RR) as exemplifying "beautiful". To me, to be beautiful connotes a sense of elegance: not so a haughty, superior attitude, but a fineness; not a petiteness, but a sensible air about her. When I think "beautiful", I think Roman Holiday.

2) "Cute" is a bit more descriptive in its connotation. Being petite, or having a relatively "cute" face would put people in this category. (I'm sorry if I feel the need to categorize people and things; I was raised a scientist.) I know a few people personally, of whom I would think as being "cute". Now, people would argue that cuteness fades away with age, but that's not necessarily true. I would think that, in the thermodynamic sense, types of beauty simply interchange with other types (call it the Law of Conservation of Beauty).

3) Ah, pretty. Natalie Portman. Keira Knightley. These girls are "pretty". The problem with this category is, it's too difficult to truly define what it means to be pretty. It's not exactly cute. It's not exactly beautiful. And, to be honest, they do not exude sexiness the way other people do. But they're attractive, in the way that I would like them around, because they make everything else around them that much... well... prettier. Perhaps it's their smile; but then, I'd be using their smile as a synecdoche of their beauty as a whole. (It's less important to specify, because then you'd end up subjectifying the whole sense of it.) They lack the supreme elegance of the beautiful, but they do not heed the petite air of cuteness. They're more or less in the middle, like a moderate in the political scheme.

4) Finally, I arrive at sexiness. Most people know what's up with being sexy. I think Angelina Jolie is sexy. In this sense, it's also related to beautiful, in which both types tend to emanate their respective attractiveness. Just as Audrey Hepburn oozed elegance, Angelina Jolie oozes sex. It's just that.

Now, these four categories don't really make much sense, do they? Surely some would think the way I classified women, is either demeaning or just stupid. Well, the corollary to all of this is, no woman - in the past, the present, nor future - will EVER exude any more than 3 of the 4 categories. So, with that in mind, it's important to note that many attractive women cannot be lumped into any one of the four; indeed, they exude 1-3 of these categories, but not all 4. (Of course, being 'cute' and 'sexy' simultaneously is a bit ridiculous, unless you're Britney; but then she's just being whorish. And don't get me started on how K-Fed - who really is good for nothing - shot her with a Magic Love Arrow and started a perfume company and rapping career - or lack thereof.) And, if someone does say, "I know someone who has all 4 traits", that means you like the girl. Don't deny it. You're just being subjective in your tastes.

Bear in mind that this is actually the first time I've written down these ideas. So if you see any sense of illogic in them, screw you. Other than that, I hope this helps intensify the further investigation of... "WHAT IS TRULY SEXY???"
__________________
"I like refried beans. That's why I want to try fried beans, because maybe they're just as good, and we're just wasting time." - Mitch Hedberg (1968-2005)

"Football is about if you want to run and fight for each other, if you really want to play that killer ball." - Robin van Persie, Arsenal FC
DragonRat is offline   Reply With Quote