EDIT: geez this sub is full of fan boys who know they can’t say anything defending her because I already called them out, so now they just downvote. Grow a pair, answer the question haha.

This subject tends to draw out the worst in people, oddly enough. She has this strange Order of horny men and faux-feminists who will die defending her over I don’t know what. If that’s you, please, put your emotions aside for a second, and look at Sydney Sweeney objectively (ignore the large rack, blonde hair, and smooth skin and LOOK AT HER)… Is she “beautiful”? She kinda has a horse-mouth smile, her eyes are weirdly far apart, she has big ears, and a pug nose. Sexy, sure. But any woman can be sexy if she’s not obese and has Hollywood image juggernaut at her disposal. Koinophilia? Check. Properly proportioned body? Check. Youthful? Check. But is she beautiful? Personally, I’d say no. Just another busty blond that frankly is probably a lovely woman, and she is attractive no doubt… but she’s no work of art.

  • deegeese@sopuli.xyz
    14·
    12 days ago

    OP in his fedora complaining about a girl’s sharp knees.

    Who is this chick and why are you negging her?

    • Pavel Chichikov@lemm.eeOPEnglish
      15·
      12 days ago

      she’s a 27 year old American actress, with major roles in Once Upon a Time in Hollywood with Brad Pitt and Leonardo DeCaprio, Marvel’s Madame Webb with Dakota Johnson, Anyone But You with co-star and Top-Gun Maverick lead role Glenn Powell, and Eden with Jude Lawa and Ana de Armas.

      I am not negging her. I’m just challenging the claim she is objectively beautiful.

      • Scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.techEnglish
        6·
        12 days ago

        Before we kickstart the conversation about her, go ahead and show us a pic of yourself, let’s see how objectively handsome you are. Then we can get onto deciding if she is “beautiful”

        • Pavel Chichikov@lemm.eeOPEnglish
          13·
          12 days ago

          I am objectively a 4/10. She’s way out of my league, she’s definitely attractive, and I’d totally shoot my shot if I ever had a chance (which I never will). But she’s not beautiful. You don’t have to be beautiful yourself in order to appreciate beauty. Please, try to stay focused.

    • BearOfaTime@lemm.ee
      21·
      12 days ago

      So, because I find some Indian women, some Russian women, some Greek women, some Italian women, some Irish women, some non-Indian Asian women, attractive, that’s white supremacy?

      Wow, TIL.

      • Emily (she/her)@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        5·
        12 days ago

        Ok rather than responding in kind with some snarky comment, I’m going to make a good faith effort explain what I mean.

        My statement that “beauty standards are based in white supremacy” is talking about what we, as a whole society, consider attractive. I am not talking about your personal taste, I am talking about the kinds of bodies, faces, and styles that are elevated in society and pointing our their basis in white supremacy.

        Firstly, we need to understand that beauty standards are not some platonic ideal of beauty, they are socially constructed and therefore informed by the society in which they exist. This also necessarily means that current standards are an evolution of historical standards, reciprocally changing as people both influence the standards and are influenced by them.

        That means that if we want to understand today’s beauty standards, we also need to consider them in a historical context. I hope it is not a controversial point to say that most white countries (i.e. Australia where I live, and the US where much of the discussion often centres) were historically white supremacist (if not presently, but that is a different can of worms). Like they openly stated it (i.e. “White Australia” being official policy) and legally elevated whites, this isn’t up for discussion. I would hope it is not difficult to imagine that such a society would also base its definitions of beauty around white features: white skin, white facial features, blonde hair, etc. A cliche example of this would be the historical masculinization of African-American people and their bodies. Pernicious stereotypes like “Jezebel”, “Sapphire”, and more modern incarnations like “Angry Black Woman” are prime examples of this, where black women are given qualities or cast into roles considered, in a societal context, incompatible with femininity or even outright masculine.

        Therefore, to evaluate my claim that beauty standards are “based in white supremacy”, we need to determine whether our standards have substantially deviated from that history. I would argue it has not, that our beauty standards are clearly descendant. To look at the modelling industry as a prominent signifier, even with notional improvements in the diversity of models, the presence of eurocentric features is largely maintained (see 1, 2, 3). That is not to say there isn’t work, particularly from passionate activists, to move on from this history - but we are not there yet.

        Finally, in regards to this entire thread, I want to point out that, due to the global hegemonic nature of whiteness - historically and presently - to some uneducated eyes the premise of my argument here - that beauty standards are not objective but subjective and socially constructed - may be dismissed out of hand. A naive look at other prominent non-white cultures that attempt to recreate the aesthetics of white beauty standards (i.e. skin lightening products in south-east asia) could appear to suggest that they may be formed from an objective standpoint. This is patently and obviously untrue. Other cultures and periods of time had extremely varied beauty standards to those we have today, and it is a blatant case of presentism and ignorance to assume that our particular version is “correct”. We should be skeptical of claims that, unlike so many other aspects of society, beauty standards alone are not impacted by the global history of colonialism and the dominance of white countries globally.

      • BearOfaTime@lemm.ee
        3·
        12 days ago

        Wow, doubling down with personal insults.

        Well I’m convinced folks, OP just played the wild card. Time to go home.

          • Baron Von J@lemmy.world
            3·
            12 days ago

            No they said beauty standards are rooted in white supremacy. Meaning things like modeling agencies prefering they models to have hair styles and textures that are more likely to be found on Caucasian models.

            • Pavel Chichikov@lemm.eeOPEnglish
              02·
              12 days ago

              Lmfao, literally the whole world prefers caucasian models. ever been to Asia? Africa? I have, and everywhere I went the universal obsession with beauty was basically arian women. its nothing to do with racism and everything to do with the fact that objectively those traits are extremely beautiful.

              • papalonian@lemmy.world
                4·
                12 days ago

                In one comment you call someone racist for saying that beauty standards are rooted in white supremacy, and in your following comment you “explain” how Aryan women are objectively more beautiful than women of other races.

                Do you hear yourself? You think that these “studies of beauty” are anything other than horny, objectifying dudes rating women’s bodies. Surprise surprise, those dudes think white women are hotter than non-white women. This is where that other person’s comment on phrenology came from, you’re referencing pseudoscience as if it’s fact.

                And before you call me a fanboy defending whoever the fuck you’re talking about, I’ve got no idea who she is, and whether or not I would find her personally attractive is irrelevant. Your question and the entire premise is weird, and your justification behind it when being called out is rooted in more problematic ideology.

  • Scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.techEnglish
    131·
    12 days ago

    Hold on folks, this is the same troll that said that pornography is evil the other day and we were all sick perverts, and then proceeded to call sex work the same as self harm.

    Troll is trolling, don’t feed. Can’t even decide if they respect women or not. Has one post telling women they shouldn’t be allowed to do sex work and they can’t possibly decide for themselves, then posts this one negging Sydney Sweeney (note how he doesn’t call into question her acting abilities, only her appearance) Obviously has some unresolved issues with women he needs to work on.

    Downvote and move on.

      • Scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.techEnglish
        1·
        12 days ago

        Yeah, best case he’s a troll, worst case he’s a misogynistic white knighter who doesn’t understand at all how to respect women. Either way, don’t got time for that.

    • Pavel Chichikov@lemm.eeOPEnglish
      110·
      12 days ago

      Porn is evil, sex work is self-harm, and I respect the female body enough to know it shouldn’t be objectifying itself for money.

      • xmunk@sh.itjust.works
        4·
        12 days ago

        Sex work is work. If you think all work is self harm then maybe I’ll agree with you on one thing but sex work is work.

        • Pavel Chichikov@lemm.eeOPEnglish
          02·
          12 days ago

          Illegal ivory trade is “work” that doesn’t mean you should be ok with it. “Work” is not a monolith. There is good work, there is bad work, there is work that is good for you and work that is bad for you. Sex work is work that is universally bad.

        • Pavel Chichikov@lemm.eeOPEnglish
          02·
          12 days ago

          It is disrespectful to encourage or even permit a person to engage in self-destructive behavior. you don’t respect women if you want to let them perform sex work. you hate them and view them as objects. you are naive, and you disgust me.

          • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
            3·
            12 days ago

            Permit? Fucking permit? How fucking dare you talk about permitting what people do with their bodies‽

            I’ve known sex workers. I’ve sat in their homes, eaten meals and shared drinks and had deep and long conversations with them. In fact I’ve had long term partners that’ve done it off and on when times are tough. You clearly don’t respect women enough to let us make our own choices even when they aren’t necessarily great. And yeah I’ll acknowledge that sex work often has negative consequences, I learned that from feminist essays written by sex workers but they still believed it should be permitted and I trust them more than a man who feels the need to post about how he thinks some celebrity isn’t beautiful.

            The last thing women need is men deciding what we can do with our bodies.

            • Pavel Chichikov@lemm.eeOPEnglish
              01·
              12 days ago

              Oh I dare talk about permitting people to do things with their bodies. I WILL NOT permit someone to harm another person, even if they want to use their own body to do it. I WILL NOT let another person inject themselves with addictive chemicals that will inevitably cost them their lives. I WILL NOT permit a person to rape someone else, even if its what they want to do with THEIR BODY. Just because its “your body” doesn’t mean you are morally justified in doing whatever tf youw ant with it. Grow up. You’re pathetic.

            • Pavel Chichikov@lemm.eeOPEnglish
              02·
              12 days ago

              people like you, frankly, disgust me. You are selfish and lazy but don’t want to admit it because you don’t have the willpower to change, so to convince yourself you are good and avoid responsibility for your immaturity you to hide behind a manufactured righteous indignation by moralizing autonomy, pretending to care by removing any responsibility you have towards others and towards society. But I see right through your pathetic facade. You don’t care about sex workers, you’re a selfish P.o.S that doesn’t want to care about them, so you disguise your apathy as a twisted form of altruism. Grow up, you imbecilic child.

  • tiredofsametab@fedia.io
    111·
    12 days ago

    I don’t know who that is (maybe if I saw a picture) so I’m not a fanboy, I’m downvoting you for the weird, subjective, and objectifying post.

    • Pavel Chichikov@lemm.eeOPEnglish
      16·
      12 days ago

      I couldn’t care less who downvotes my post ya’ll are just a bunch of internet plebs . I’m more fascinated in the people who say they think she’s gorgeous but can’t say why, and the people who clearly have not given the philosophy of beauty much thought. Naivety is a modern a plague. Smh.

  • CaptainBasculin@lemmy.ml
    9·
    12 days ago

    Not reading all that, Sydney Sleeper is the objectively the worst sniper rifle. A jarate effect doesn’t justify losing the benefits of one-shotting any opponent. Even the classic works way better than sydney sleeper in that regard.

        • Pavel Chichikov@lemm.eeOPEnglish
          19·
          12 days ago

          because she has a huge following, but she clearly doesn’t seem beautiful to me, so I’m curious about this social phenomenon. Do people like her because she seems Right Wing? Do they like her because she panders? Do they genuinely think she’s beautiful? It’s a total head scratcher. Why not?

            • Pavel Chichikov@lemm.eeOPEnglish
              09·
              12 days ago

              it seems like she is. She’s worn American flag shirts and stuff before, has a strong cowgirl background, and after Madame Web was a disaster she did a complete reinvention of her image starting with her Saturday Night Live appearance that emphasized her cup size (pandering to male audiences). Ever since then, she has been essentially reinventing herself as a continual sex symbol.

  • hddsx@lemmy.ca
    7·
    12 days ago

    I think she’s gorgeous. But who describes people as works of art? Thats weird (to me)

    • Pavel Chichikov@lemm.eeOPEnglish
      09·
      12 days ago

      Do you think she’s “gorgeous” or just attractive? There’s a difference. Like, when I look at Bernini’s Apollo and Daphne, or Thorvaldsen’s Christus, they almost bring me to my knees. They are almost metaphysical in their nature, they capture something beyond mere human attraction. Snow-capped Teton’s and other stunning vistas are an example. These things is what it is to be beautiful. Sydney Sweeney does not evoke this sensation in anyone.

  • bane_killgrind@slrpnk.netEnglish
    6·
    12 days ago

    objectively

    There’s no objective answer, attractiveness is subjective.

    You seem really angry people like some person.

        • Pavel Chichikov@lemm.eeOPEnglish
          12·
          12 days ago

          haha clearly I don’t know. but from the few comments who actually tried to address my question, it seems to be a much more visceral thing. I guess rooted more in attraction than anything else. which answers my question in its own indirect way I suppose.