Two legs and a pulse don't meet the standard, apparently.

[beeinmybonnet]

I'm an on-and-off reader of the Swedish science magazine Illustrerad Vetenskap ("Science Illustrated" in English) and in their latest number they had an article about beauty. It was interesting, pretty focused on the whole biological aspect of it, and they presented several manipulated faces that people participating in the experiment had found more beautiful than real faces. Among those, there was an image that showed the most unattractive vs. the most attractive (manipulated) faces in both men and women. This is what scientists came up with:



I... can't say I agree with that. They look far too bland and scary. If I got to have a say on the subject, I'd actually say that this is a lot more accurate:



Or something like this:



Or perhaps this:



I could continue this list forever.
How about you? Do you agree with the article? Why/Why not?