[MancBoy]

(Original post by SubAtomic)
Is this what you and the OP are looking for? She is nearly brunette

Spoiler:

Show

[frenchfries]

[Torpedo Fish]

(Original post by frenchfries)

She's pretty, although her hair looks black and her eyes look grey, but yeah very nice. Who is it?

[izzyrose]

Hey I'm a brunette and my eyes are mostly green (kind of olive and light green) with a few brown flecks. Many would say my eyes are green <3 x

[Dirac Delta Function]

(Original post by Torpedo Fish)
I really want to go out with a girl who has brunette hair and green eyes, but I am struggling to find one. I assume they do exist? There's nothing genetic to stop this combination of features? I know green eyes are pretty rare anyway, but those who do have green eyes tend to have either blonde or black hair rather than brunette and I really want to find a brunette with green eyes.

So have you ever seen one? Or indeed, are you one yourself.

Thanks

I've known a couple. Both are gorgeous.

[boromir9111]

(Original post by CitizensUnited)
They are impossible to find.

Forever alone ;_;

[x-Sophie-x]

Haha, I'm a brunette and I've got green eyes. I know many like me too! So not very rare at all!

[99luft Balons]

(Original post by frenchfries)

is that mila kunis

[T-Toe]

(Original post by Torpedo Fish)
Well this is an oxymoron, because 'attractiveness' is subjective and to me brunette hair and green eyes is 'attractive', more so than blonde hair and blue eyes.



Being 'fat' or 'ugly' is not necessarily a sign of being unhealthy though. Indeed in the recent past, being fat was a sign of prosperity. The kinds of features that are considered attractive by contemporary society e.g. high cheek bones and excessively slim figure are, at best, examples of runaway neutral sexual selection and at worst are actually pernicious to survival and reproduction.





I don't know, it's just a random subjective aesthetic preference I guess. I don't see why it's any worse than society's obsession with being a size zero, or disproportionately large breasts etc etc.



I've already said that I would not reject somebody I liked just because of their hair/eye colour. These features are just aspects I find initially attractive, not the be all and end all.

And I'd feel horrible, just like anybody else who has been rejected for any reason. Unfortunately people are rejected by people they like all the time, it's just a part of life I guess.

So, so, so many fails

I can't even be bothered to reply to all that nonsense.

[T-Toe]

(Original post by frenchfries)

Yes because every girl with green eyes and brown hair looks like Mila Kunis...

[I<3LAMP]

I'm a brunette- well a mousy brown with green eyes.

Not rare I don't think.

[TheHansa]

If they are rare, I feel like I need to get one as a status symbol.

[99luft Balons]

(Original post by T-Toe)
Yes because every girl with green eyes and brown hair looks like Mila Kunis...

she's so pretty she is going to turn me into a lesbian

[Torpedo Fish]

(Original post by T-Toe)
So, so, so many fails

I can't even be bothered to reply to all that nonsense.

The classic response of somebody with an embarrassing inability to form a coherent logical counter-arguments.

If you think that being excessively thin or having disproportionately large breasts (both deemed attractive features in contemporary society) are products of natural selection, as opposed to sexual selection and societal pressures, you have a very tenuous understanding of the theory of evolution.

[Chucklefiend]

(Original post by T-Toe)
So, so, so many fails

I can't even be bothered to reply to all that nonsense.

As a 2nd year Biology student, I can tell you that everything Torpedo Fish said vis a vis evolution is largely true.

Torpedo fish correctly asserts that many of the physical attributes widely held to be attractive in today's society such as those he outlines i.e. being excessively slim and having disproportionately large breasts are not products of natural selection or indeed markers of 'health'. Being excessively slim has two possible derivations; it could be a result of social pressure to fit the model of 'attractiveness', or alternatively, it could be the result of a genetic predisposition to high metabolism. If it is former it is of social rather than genetic origin, if it is the later it is a product of sexual selection. It cannot be a product of natural selection because for the vast majority of evolutionary history food was scarce and thus a high metabolism was undesirable and therefore penalized by natural selection. Sources of food have been readily available to human populations lucky enough to be born in certain parts of the world for between 100-200 years, a period of time far too short for natural selection to conduct significant genetic change.

Your arrogance is misplaced and unjustified I'm afraid.

(Original post by T-Toe)
Yes because every girl with green eyes and brown hair looks like Mila Kunis...

Who said they did?

[T-Toe]

(Original post by Chucklefiend)
As a 2nd year Biology student, I can tell you that everything Torpedo Fish said vis a vis evolution is largely true.

Your arrogance is misplaced and unjustified I'm afraid.



Who said they did?

Oh please feel free to share because I can argue right back.

Also, I don't recall him solely mentioning evolution.

Displaying a picture of Mila Kunis as a contribution to a ridiculous thread says enough.

[MissMuffin95]

Who is that girl and why does a picture of her keep coming up?

[T-Toe]

(Original post by Torpedo Fish)
The classic response of somebody with an embarrassing inability to form a coherent logical counter-arguments.

If you think that being excessively thin or having disproportionately large breasts (both deemed attractive features in contemporary society) are products of natural selection, as opposed to sexual selection and societal pressures, you have a very tenuous understanding of the theory of evolution.

Oh I can argue right back but quite frankly I'd be waste my time. I can't take a person who is actively searching for a colour combination seriously.

-_- Do you really think the majority of society want malnourished and deformed figures as partners? You my friend are quoting extremes which I think is completely irrelevant. The point of the matter is, your obsession has to stop or else you will never find someone.

Do you really think society's standard of beauty was plucked out of thin air?

And please don't misuse the word oxymoron.

Edit -Also, it's not what you're saying that's largely the issue, it's why you're saying it.

[T-Toe]

(Original post by Torpedo Fish)
Torpedo fish correctly asserts that many of the physical attributes widely held to be attractive in today's society such as those he outlines i.e. being excessively slim and having disproportionately large breasts are not products of natural selection or indeed markers of 'health'. Being excessively slim has two possible derivations; it could be a result of social pressure to fit the model of 'attractiveness', or alternatively, it could be the result of a genetic predisposition to high metabolism. If it is former it is of social rather than genetic origin, if it is the later it is a product of sexual selection. It cannot be a product of natural selection because for the vast majority of evolutionary history food was scarce and thus a high metabolism was undesirable and therefore penalized by natural selection. Sources of food have been readily available to human populations lucky enough to be born in certain parts of the world for between 100-200 years, a period of time far too short for natural selection to conduct significant genetic change.

I think you'll find that I am not responsible for the posting of that photo. I presume whoever is posted it to demonstrate that girls with green eyes and brown hair do exist, thereby answering the OP's question.

Ridiculous as this thread may be, it didn't stop you from clicking on it, reading it and contributing to it's increasing absurdity, did it?

Lol OP fail.

[Torpedo Fish]

(Original post by T-Toe)
Oh I can argue right back but quite frankly I'd be waste my time. I can't take a person who is actively searching for a colour combination seriously.

Well you're wasting your time rambling on about nothing, so why not use that time to actually address the points?

(Original post by T-Toe)
-_- Do you really think the majority of society want deformed figures as partners?

No I don't, and I never said anything that even slightly resembles that.

(Original post by T-Toe)
your obsession has to stop or else you will never find someone.

Obsession? It's a personal preference, nothing more.

I'm sure you have your own personal preferences and opinions on what makes somebody attractive. And consciously or subconsciously you look for these attributes in potential partners when you meet people.

In short you're a hypocrite.

(Original post by T-Toe)
Do you really think society's standard of beauty was plucked out of thin air?

No, but neither do I think that it's exclusively a function of natural selection and I've outlined why in previous posts.

(Original post by T-Toe)
And please don't misuse the word oxymoron.

I didn't. What you were saying was, in the context, a contradiction. You were taking a hypothetical person who possesses features that I find attractive and labeling them unattractive based on unspecified arbitrary features. You seem to think that your opinions on what makes somebody attractive are somehow intrinsically more valuable than anybody else's.