Primitive=ancient=past=back to the basics.
You would probably give me some convoluted psuedo-explanation that is only half true.
Why are you so eager to prove? And put me down? It must be something you lack. Whatever you lack I have.
She’s probably ugly with ugly babies too.
To facilitate survival [there I go again on this] and continuation of the next generation, all humans are endowed with neural circuit to detect whatever is ‘beautiful’ and whatever is ‘ugly.’
Generally what is systematic, symmetrical, orderly, and other programmed patterns and characteristics are instinctively perceived as ‘beautiful.’
As with all aspects of nature, there are degrees variations, deviations and exceptions.
Thus in some cases due to bad connections in the brain, there is a minority of people who are different from the norm [majority] and perceive the opposite from the majority.
Normally a symmetrical face is deemed to be beautiful and in general this is denote the person is healthy.
Despite the counter views, I still believe the easier processing is ultimately related to health because the genes are processing in a healthy & balanced manner rather than producing say a twisted face.
Sufficiently big [not gigantic] nicely form breasts are beautiful because they are a healthy potential of milk supply for the youngs.
There are many features that are programmed to be perceived by the ‘beauty’ neural circuit as beautiful.
These are the fundamentals and instinctual. This beauty instinct trigger the bonding [primary emotion of love] and attraction/desire towards the beautiful object.
However in many cases, modern man has strayed from the instinctual and developed various tendencies to perceive what is beautiful based on the influence of ‘nurture’ and environmental factors.
Whatever [disorders] is perceived as ugly instinctively will trigger the disgust emotions and avoidance neural circuit set.
Thus to understand what is beautiful [or ugly] we need to first fall back fundamentally on the “survival and procreation on the next generation” instinct and its associated neural circuits in the brain that theoretically exist in all human beings.
As typical with nature we should expect variations, deviations and exceptions from the norm [majority].
Then we do research to understand why there are variations from the norms, it root causes, the neural and other machinery involved and the philosophical and other basis for such variations.
Serge Gainsbourg remarked, ‘ugliness is superior to beauty because it lasts longer’. Maybe a thing of ugliness is a joy forever.
It seems obvious why he would think this way, but I tend to agree with him. In today’s society there is an obsession with beauty and a real fear of ugliness.
In biblical terms those noted for physical beauty were often great disappointments. Rebekah was “very beautiful” (Genesis 26:7), but she was also a deceiver and manipulator. Saul was a man of physical beauty, but his disobedience hurt the nation of Israel.
The word ugly comes from an old Norse word ‘ugga’ which translates as ‘aggressive’ and from this comes a sense of violence, but it also means there is much more variety and surprise in ugliness.
The word beauty is sedative, soothing and predictable rather than challenging.
Should women focus on the inner qualities, in order to obtain a gentle and quiet spirit to be truly beautiful or is a ravishing beautiful exterior sufficient to clarify the word Beauty solely on this merit alone, when it would seem people of one culture seldom see beauty in people of a different culture.
‘Beauty is, no big deal, but the lack of it is’…
yet undeniably, ugliness… fascinates.
It was not an insult. It was just a comment that people are going to see different based upon education and emotion. It is a primitive perspective
mannequin warned and temporarily banned.
So calling someone ignorant and uneducated was not an insult…right…
Symterry is not beauty, Harrison ford has an asymettrical face and is rated as handsome.
For those of you into girls, here are some pics
Notice how the point of her hair is to make her face asymetrical, and thus more beautiful.
Here is some symetrical trash 4 u.
If the intent was to insult then it would be an insult. It is not the words or their meaning , it is intent.
So if i call someone fugly alls i gotta do is say “i had no intent to insult” n im good?
Haha! 
I agree with Prismatic that beauty facilitates survival, but just curious if further edification is possible on this topic.
You are deliberately twisting, why? What are you getting out of it? Is it a knee jerk reaction to defend?
Your reply does not merit a comment from me not explaination. Have a fun day.
You should have just said
So?
Beauty represents value.
both are in the eyes of the behonder, but there is no other thing. Than beholding “eyes” - perspectives.
Because perspectives group, to survive and gain power and procreate, their standards blend and combine and become what the unwashed think of as ‘objective truth’ or ‘universal standard’.
(like how a group of folks comes up with a story they all like and then decide it is the point to all being)
Beautiful…
Interestingly, the Fibonacci numbers show some noteworthly mathematical specific features:
Due to the relations to the previous and the following number growth in nature seems to follow an addition law. The Fibonacci numbers are directly associated with the golden cut. The further one progresses subsequently, the more the quotient of successive numbers approaches to the golden cut (1,6180339887…) - for example: 13:8=1.625; 21:13=1.6153846; 34:21=1.6190476; 55:34=1.6176471; 89:55=1.6181818; 144:89=1.617978; 233:144=1.6180556; … and so on). This approach is alternating - the quotients are alternately smaller and bigger than the golden cut (golden number, golden ratio):
The Fibonacci numbers are the sums of the „shallow“diagonals (shown in red) of Pascal’s triangle:
There is symmetry almost everywhere in that picture. The woman is very syymmetrical. Her face would be more beautiful if it was not covered. his covered face is nevertheless beautiful, because everyone knows how the face looks like if it is not covered. But what if she has only one eye? 
Symmetry is not the only but one of the most important aspects of beauty. Others are shapeliness (well-proportioned aspects or things), certain geometrical figures, beings consisting of structures that are based on certain mathematical numbers (e.g.: the Fibonacci sequence or the golden cut).
Bullshit. She looks worse with her face covered.
Covering half the face, It’s a common trick pple use to make themselves look pretty.
Symmetry is not beautiful by itself but only when it is conditioned upon evolutionary factors such as survival, procreation, and the likes.
In addition some features are conditioned and relative to either male or female. What is beauty [aesthetic] to the male may not be beauty to the female and vice-versa.
Males find the higher hips to shoulder ratio more beautiful and sexy while the female will favor a higher shoulder to hips ratio. The hips to shoulder ratio in general has evolutionary advantage to mankind in terms of procreation and other advantages. A female with very small hips, thus smaller hips to shoulder ratio will likely to face birth difficulty in general.
Symmetry in the physical bodies of the male or female denote general [not specific] health of the person and thus has first impression significance. The physiological elements are controlled by two separate hemispheres in the brain. Any defects in one side [sign of non-symmetry] and thus an imbalance function in the brain. Wherever there is a significant difference between the two sides of the physical body, then there is a likely possible of something is wrong and the person is not as healthy as the average person.
Thus asymmetry is a sign and warning for the opposite sex or others to be careful and investigate further in making decisions that are relevant to the matter.
The above issues are instinctual and most people in the modern era do not bother about instincts and intuitions any way.
Any one into photography or art?
Re the aesthetic elements of photography or art [general, not modern], what is beauty in this fields are driven by evolutionary and survival elements.
The Rule of Thirds
digital-photography-school.com/rule-of-thirds/
In photography as in art [general] one must follow the Rule of Thirds generally to ensure one’s photograph is considered to have aesthetic [beauty] value.
This is directly linked to evolutionary elements of survival and the position of they eyes to hunt from food and dealing with enemies, etc.
By obeying the Rule of the Thirds, the main subject[s] are placed in alignment with the position of the two eyes and thus there is no stress and extra effort of the eyes to move from its normal position.
Subject in the Middle - A Taboo
In contrast, in general [there are exceptions, portraits, etc.] it is a serious Taboo to put the main subject in the middle. This is because the main subject in the middle forced the two eyes to focus into the center and away from its normal position and thus make one very uncomfortable if the focus need to be kept for a long time.
Level Horizon
If the horizon in a photograph is not level, then the photo is marked down in terms of aesthetic.
A level horizon is pertinent to facilitate hunting in the savannah or plains to assess the position of the prey [food]. An unlevel horizon in a photo can give many a headache as the brain has to use efforts to right it.
Note there are exceptions to the above, but they are besides the point.
So, what is beauty to humans is conditioned upon survival, procreation, and the continuation of the next generation of humans.
There is no intrinsic beauty by itself.