Do you think people are objectively beautiful animals? Do you

>>2351348
worst thread of the week

>>2351350
But why? It's an interesting thought.

Are dolphins beautiful? We surely admire them.

>>2351348
I've seen animals try and mount people. They must think we're worth tossing a bone to at the very least.

>>2351348
>objectively beautiful
I died a little inside.

>>2351362
So there's no such thing as objective beauty?

What about a flower vs a rock?

As others point out, beauty isn't objective by any metric. That said, no, humans are boring as fuck, that's why we invented body paint and clothing.

>>2351363
Geodes and crystals are more aesthetically pleasing than flowers.

Nah. Without grooming we all look grub-like and patchy. Mats of hair interspered on otherwise mostly bare skin looks shitty. Also floppy and swingy bits. Most animals have their loose bits tucked away when not in use for more streamlined appearance.

>Also, it seems like the smarter the animal, the less energy it has to put into being beautiful.

Have you ever seen a parrot?

I'd imagine most animals are too afraid of the bald murderers than to even think about our beauty desu
Interesting idea tho

Animals have no sense of self awareness, so no, they probably can't even understand our nakedness.

And I do believe humans are beautiful, but that may be because I sit in front of naked ones for 6 hours a day trying to figure out why this rolls there or what juts out when he/she sits like that, etc. the area where the legs connect with the hip is my favorite part of the positive form, while the hand on the waist creates my favorite negative form, especially if the waist is small.

Animals simply don't carry that kind of beauty. Their fur is in the way, and usually the skin is so loose that I can't grasp muscle or bone definition, let alone fat distribution. Horses are good to draw, though, they're very majestic but don't make the same shapes which I'm enamored with as the human form does.

>>2351348
> objective
> beautiful

gets me everytime