|
This makes sense to me, in an evolutionary sense. Humans, and males in particular, are extremely visual. It is our most highly developed sense. The different generic shapes of the human body are quite distinguishable at a distance, and males use this as a cue to decide whether or not an approaching stranger is a threat (i.e. male) or a potential mate (female). To a lesser extent, this is true for females as well, although an approaching female is less of a threat to her than a male approaching a male. And an approaching male is MORE of a threat to her than a female approaching a male. Knowing the sex of the approaching stranger gives one time to make appropriate preparations for the encounter. So the ability to distinguish sex at a distance is important, and carries strong survival functionality.
The face however, is how we generally recognise the identity of someone. Babies are instinctively drawn to faces. Shown pictures of concrete items (trucks, houses, animals), abstract items (colours or random lines), and human bodies and faces, they will focus first/longest on faces, then on bodies. Very suggestive of this study. Since the face is so important to us from such a young age, and for some very good reasons, it makes sense that faces that please us are going to be the most important to us. And generally, symmetric features, with clear skin, alert eyes, and smiling mouths are going to more pleasing to us.
For me, after the unconscious, instinctive sweep of a woman's body when I first see her (c'mon... it's INSTINCTIVE!!), I do settle on the face (for social reasons as well), but especially if she has a pleasing one.
__________________
The secret to great marksmanship is deciding what the target was AFTER you've shot.
|