Talk:Cuteness/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

You win!

All right, you win, Veinor. Obviously, you're a cat-lover. But you've reminded me that this IS Wikipedia, and it should be fair to both dog-lovers, and cat-lovers (and fox-lovers). I will leave the puppy and the cat on the top of the article, but one question: Which puppy was cuter? Please, anyone! Give me your opinion! Which is cuter and should belong on the top of the article??? I'll be fair! I won't delete the cat! Which puppy is cuter and belongs on the top of the article? Thank you for your opinions. ANNAfoxlover 16:03, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

I never said anything about the cat being cuter. I just was saying that the addition of a puppy at the top on the left introduced severe stylistic problems. Veinor ^{(talk to me)} 00:42, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

B

Okay, thank you. Any more comments? ANNAfoxlover 16:03, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

THE ONE WITH THE COLLIE PUPPEH!!!!!!!!!!!! 75.26.188.31 21:57, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

I have a comment. This discussion does not relate to the content of the article. --Deskana (talk) 23:04, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

I removed the images. They messed up the talk page formatting so much. --Deskana (ya rly) 01:35, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Puppies - You've gotta LOVE 'EM!!!

I have replaced a picture of a kitten with not one, but TWO pictures of some of the cutest puppies you've ever seen! Tell me what you think. ANNAfoxlover 00:31, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

MORE KITTEN PICTURES

Let it be said that I, Arkracer, demand more pictures of kittens. --Arkracer 09:48, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Ha. Well darn it, the cat on the page right now is pretty freakin cute. -Patstuart^talk|edits 07:33, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Both pics are so cute! :D June-gloom 05:21, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Are you a man? ANNAfoxlover 23:38, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

I HATE CATS!!! I guess it's kinda cute, but not as cute as...PUPPIES!!! (By the way, I'm not a man...what man is named ANNA?) ANNAfoxlover 23:40, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Not cute

That baby is not cute. Someone please replace it with something actually cute. From this page it's apparent that there was a kitty and a puppy that have since been replaced with that ugly baby. Anything from http://cuteoverload.com/ would suffice. --RITZ 01:28, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

I agree with wholehearteness and i'm going to change it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Manegarm (talk • contribs)

Maybe, but please don't add a snapshot of yourself in the mirror. BTW, the point of the ugly looking baby is to show that cuteness can possibly be subjective per culture. -Patstuart^{(talk)(contribs)} 18:45, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm not cute, I'm adorable. --RITZ 19:56, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm not talking about you, unless you're a sock of Manegarm (talk · contribs). Patstuart^{(talk)(contribs)} 20:30, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes. Get rid of the hideous baby-creature. I demand a prancing kitten! As a friend said, babies just look like tiny versions of Meat Loaf. --GenkiNeko 14:57, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

---

Why is this categorized under Category:Non-sexuality?--Atlantima 15:59, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

awwww look at the kitty... well i thought cute means adorable but UGLY

this page is very ethnocentric. The listed qualities for cuteness is very subjective.

Agreed. Added the {{limitedgeographicscope}} tag in the hope someone will at least try to overcome the ethnocentrism. --zippedmartin 04:47, 12 May 2005 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but someone will have to point out to me how this article is ethnocentric or geographically limited. -Acjelen 03:53, 18 May 2005 (UTC)

Indeed. The article actually goes to some length to give evidence that the traits described trigger a biological rather than cultural reaction. Many of the characteristics thought of as "cute" extend to other species in the animal kingdom. Psychonaut 04:34, 18 May 2005 (UTC)

Since no one has replied, I've removed the geographical bias tag from the article. Anyway, the tag belongs on the talk page, not on the article page. -Acjelen 13:40, 21 May 2005 (UTC)

I've added a link to a paper which cites some research suggesting that cuteness reactions are cross-cultural. I'll look for some more evidence; the article would probably be better off for some more references anyway, if anyone can find them.... NoahB 16:01, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Not cute: Ringbearer

I took away a picture of "a cute moment caught at a wedding" because it was not cute. Tell me what you think.

What do I think? I thought it was cute, so I added it. You can say, you don't "think" it's cute and I will defend your right to your opinion. But I question your moral imperative to "declare" something is or isn't cute. Unless of course you have a Ph.D in the science of determining what is and isn't cute. Otherwise, my opinion is that your opinion isn't worth any more than mine. --Mactographer 09:51, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Huh? ANNAfoxlover 16:06, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

I've got to admit it, but that picture IS cute. It's much cuter than the koala. I'm going to add the image back into the article. 71.38.211.49 18:23, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

It's not even "caught" at a wedding, the table is obviously staged for little kids. I'd say "cute picture portraying kids at a wedding" if anything. On an unrelated note, it's certainly not as cute as kittens and puppies. —Wikibarista 22:05, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Wikibarista, I hate to burst your bubble. But I TOOK that photo, and I was AT the wedding. That table was part of an Iranian style wedding. (It was my first.) Apparently they put all that stuff on a short table as part of their ceremony ... but I don't remember why they do it. But in any case, it was one of the photographers hired to document the event. So I can assure you it was NOT a faked photo. As for whether you think it's "cute" or not, that's another matter. --Mactographer 06:46, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I think you mean "kittens and PUPPIES", right? A•N•N•Afoxlover PLEASE SIGN HERE, ANYONE! 23:59, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Cuteness and domesticity

The article seems to suggest that the cuteness/neoteny of wolves led humans to domesticate them. One article I found on the subject suggests instead that training wolves was successful because they retain juvenile characteristics. This is a somewhat different argument, and wouldn't be relevant to the discussion here, I don't think. I'll keep looking to see if I can find anything else. Here's the article in the meanwhile....[1] NoahB 17:40, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Here's a fairly authoritative looking blog with scientific references which discusses a link between cuteness and neotenous behaviors for which domestic animals might have been bred. That looks promising. I will incorporate it into the article. [2] NoahB 17:47, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Please be careful. I will be changing the article, but paedomorphosis, progenesis and neoteny are all physiological in nature. They refer to the physical maturation of animals. It does not account for "playfulness" or any other augmented mental state. Thanks --Waterspyder 22:15, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Lorenz article

I haven't actually read the Lorenz article myself; it is summarized in the Gould article. I hope I haven't mischaracterized it...if I have, hopefully someone will correct me....NoahB 29 June 2005 12:57 (UTC)

Aaaaghh!!!

Came here to read about cuteness, and there's that kitten! Ojw 22:57, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

Cute and Touch?

"A simple way to define cuteness is this: an object is cute if it instills in humans a desire to touch it."

This might be a simple way but it seems too broad a definition. There are many things which humans may like to touch that are not necessarily cute. For instance, I like to touch fleece because it is soft--baby skin is also soft but does that make fleece cute? Also, a person may want to touch someone they are attracted to or feel affectionately towards for reasons beyond cuteness. If I am cold I would like to touch something warm, and so on. Sometimes I desire to touch things out of simple curiosity: in short, we are a tactile species with many reasons for desiring to touch things.--Yak314 15:08, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

Instilling a desire to be touched might be too general, but I guess you can define cuteness as this: "an object is cute if it instills in humans a desire to cuddle it."--Ryz05 22:23, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

You know, a year later I was wondering where that statement went. If I was trying to explain what "cute" was, say to someone who was learning English, that's the best way i've seen it explained. So I'm adding it back in. Squidfryerchef 02:29, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Fatness

So I'm curious. I had the theory that fat animals are cute because, at some point in human evolution it was beneficial to hang onto fat, defenseless animals for later consumption. Like a gateway to domesticity through feeding and eventually eating defenseless and malleable animal babies. So I'm thinking, has this been someones' doctoral thesis yet, or do I have to make it my doctoral thesis? In some cultures it is more acceptable to find something cute and also eat it. I think the developed world has the unnatural perception in this case. Thoughts? Lotusduck 22:25, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

That's nonsense. Fat animals are cute because they are fuzzy and when they become fat, they are squishy, and soft. Fat humans are gross because they are mostly hairless, and being fat just makes them into a smooth ball of grotesque flab.

Not that nonsensical. I also seem to remember that in some cultures, fatness is regarded as positive, unlike in most Western countries. Why that is I can't entirely figure out, but it may well have to do with an ancestral preference for healthy (i.e. well-fed) or even wealthy mates. Lotusduck, here's your doctoral thesis! JREL 12:23, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

The reason being fat is considered positive in some cultures was because it represented wealth, wisdom, and strength. Rich people often had a lot of food, servents, and never had to do any phyiscal labor. Thus, this resulted in being fat. It's disgusting now because it is a sign of bad health and lack of fitness.--Hellogoodsir 22:47, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

I would say that, according to my understanding and also the article as it is, fatness is considered cute because it's an infant-like trait. I'd try to think of a different doctoral thesis topic. Although the sexual attraction to fatness (that is, curviness) in humans is likely related to the past desirability of fat as an evolutionary benefit, particularly in order for women to have successful pregnancies. As to fatness in animals, I'm. . . well, I'm a little grossed out by your use of the word "malleable," but that's neither here nor there. Were animal babies ever eaten? It seems impractical to eat an animal before it's fully grown. We do it now as a luxury, but I can't imaging this trend evolving for survival. I really think the idea that it's a trait shared by baby humans is a strong point. Also, many people find cows and sheep cute. . . probably because of the large eyes and docility of cows, and the roundness and fuzziness of sheep, yet we eat them anyway. Other cultures eat animals that we may have domesticated, which is different.--69.123.177.197 02:46, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Lotusduck says: I'm not sure you understand the premise of my idea. Before humans domesticated animals, it wouldn't be a waste for a human to eat a baby, because the idea of raising it was not something that humans practiced. Even today a wild human encountering a baby bear would have to either leave it alone or, if it had no parents, kill it before it got very big. Now we don't eat animal babies but at one point we didn't domesticate animals, and then later, as you say, it is more efficient to let an animal grow before eating it. Would not cuteness and fat content of animals play into the start of humans domesticating animals? 66.41.66.213 20:44, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Kinderschema / Fox farm =

Some coverage of literature on development and domestication that relate to the neoteny/cuteness/paedomorphy/kinderschema topic:

• [3]
• [4]

- Cheers, Pete.Hurd 05:03, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Kitty?

Where did that adorable kitten go? The image of a kitten with the caption of, "A kitten shown here exhibiting cuteness" is one of the most hysterical wiki-things I've ever seen. --137.22.1.33 15:23, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

The feline in question sadly passed away, so it was thought fitting that it's image be removed JayKeaton 18:19, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

WHAT?! NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ...I cry for it, silently.

Yup, you could make it immortal...think about it--59.144.193.214 12:28, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

there's a giant white space in the middle of the article

I'm no good w/ the formatting. anyone wann point me to a tutorial or somethin I'll do it. OscarMeyerPeener. 06:37, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Noooooo! What happened to the picture of the kitty?

Bring it back! That was the best picture EVER!!!!!!

But look at the widdle puppy! Awww =) 71.64.197.166 23:58, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Rottweiler

Is there common agreement among everybody but me, that a rottweiler is the epitome of cuteness? Bertilvidet 13:27, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Nein! The miniature Schnauzer is the cutest dog! Look at that little mustache! --62.136.136.85 14:53, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

short article, lots of pictures

This is a fairly short article compared with the amount of pictures it has. It might be better to remove some pictures so the article doesn't appear too clogged up. --Ryz05 02:48, 17 March 2006 (UTC) Agreed, the girl has been removed. She wasn't really cute anyway, sort of strange looking actually JayKeaton 18:16, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Aaaawwwwwwww..... --Coldplayer 02:51, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

giant pandas and paedomorphism

The article seems to suggest that giant pandas are paedomorphic, which I´m not sure that they are... They apparently have perfectly normal, full grown body proportions, typical of bears in general, or they have not? They have, however, big black "eyespots" or "eye frames", that may psychologically, to humans, work as if they were big eyes, i.e., works more or less as if were paedomorphic, but is just "cute". Well, I suppose, if there are evidence solidly establishing pandas as paedomorphic, I do not know, and I think that would be good to be cited in this or in panda´s article. --Extremophile 04:43, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Pandas are paedomorphic because their adult form look like their baby form, with the black eye patches and everything, though the body proportions might be different. If humans are paedomorphic, then the adult form would have huge eyes like they do in anime.--Ryz05 _t 19:27, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Does this imply that being attracted to anime characters may be a sign of pedophilia? Shawnc 15:06, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Bahahaha at the above comment! Yeah, it is a sign of pedophilia, especially when said anime character has huge breasts. </sarcasm> Onsmelly 05:43, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Disturbing

Who chose that picture of the kid in that torture looking outfit? It is a little disturbing looking.

I agree. That picture is too creepy to be cute. June-gloom 20:14, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

I agree - isn't this a better example? This used to be the main picture, until the kid replaced it. I thought it embodied cuteness from both the visual point of view, and perhaps the emotional point of view, as in the apparent action of the teddy bear hugging the dog appeared "cute".

That's very cute! :) June-gloom 11:19, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

I don't find any of the pictures in the article cute. I liked the kitten. Even if it isn't alive anymore, it was still an excellent example of cuteness. --Brandon Dilbeck 03:56, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

What in the world's going on with that stupid, idiotic, moron-looking bear? Excuse me. I just looked at that picture and I had to puke out everything I've eaten in my entire life! I even threw up my kidney! That's a super-ugly picture! I HATE CATS!!! Someone show me that puppy right now!

Come on, give me a break. That picture is of a dog that I got after she was shuffled around 3 homes. Puppy love is, unfortunately, temporary. I do dog rescue because when a puppy is no longer cute and cuddly, they are frequently discarded. Animals are not things and they are not property, but they are treated that way. I've put over 20 dogs through dog rescue and that picture is of one of the dogs I kept. She's a special dog and I would like her to be remembered beyond just me. I'm tired of the flippancy and stupdity of the net and I pine for the days when academics and researchers were the only ones allowed on it.

I'm talking about the BEAR being ugly. The Samoyed puppy is very cute. ANNAfoxlover 20:20, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

There bear isn't ugly either. It's got all the qualities of being cute. High forehead, widely spaced eyes, infantile features, oversized feet and hands, widely spaced and small ears. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.6.216.222 (talk) 21:49, 20 January 2007 (UTC).

The bear may be a LITTLE cute but it looks a little um,......WEIRD!!! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.213.139.48 (talk) 03:49, 25 January 2007 (UTC).

What's with the bear's paw? It looks like a three-eyed alien smiling. EEWW!!! 71.213.139.48 03:52, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

pretty cute sad the dog isnt alive anymore tho 168.205.124.142 (talk) 19:02, 19 October 2023 (UTC)beefyishere88 15:03, 19 October 2023 (EST)

I wouldn't say "wierd". "Creepy" - that's the right word. That bear is creepy, because it looks as if it's about to smother that dog to death in its sleep. --RITZ 06:28, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

AAAAAAAAA!

What happened to the two puppies I put on the top. Someone replaced it with that moron-looking kitten. Who did this? I DEMAND an answer,... NOW!!! ANNAfoxlover 02:58, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Um, please remain civil and remember that you do not own the page. Veinor ^{(talk to me)} 03:48, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Don't worry, ANNAfoxlover, I've found the images and placed them back on the article. I hate cats, too. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.210.196.236 (talk) 20:19, 30 January 2007 (UTC).

I think that the multiple images, especially on opposite sides of the page, hurts the page stylistically much more than it enhances it with respect to content. Veinor ^{(talk to me)} 20:24, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Bizzare Sentence

There is a really bizzare sentence, "This is most famously the case in Japan, where cuteness is a national obsession known as kawaii." Kawaii is the Japanese word for something which is cute....so this is like saying "This is most famously the case in Japan, where cuteness is a national obsession known as cute." It dosen't make sence. I can't handle bizzare grammerness like that so it would be great if someone would sort it out and make it make sence. Cerevox 01:36, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

I think the sentence is trying to say that the Japanese obsession in question is known in English as kawaii (which is in turn the Japanese term for "cute"). —Psychonaut 03:35, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

The talk page must be cute too...

--Howard the Duck 05:27, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

The good reason that the anon requested

The images are just POV inclusion with POV captions. Per WP:NPOV and WP:NOR the images are not appropriate for the article. I will now take them out again. Cheers.

Now 'anon', how about you give some good reasons for inclusion? My reasons were in the edit summaries, but you didn't put any reason to put back in, telling me to instead give a reason. Completely ridiculous. The Behnam 22:38, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

I agree. Even though that puppy was SO cute! A•N•N•A hi! 23:25, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Well now it's reached a point where no pictures are allowed. I uploaded a picture that perfectly matched the first & second paragraph, namely small body, large head, large eyes, small nose, and The Benham decides to say it's NPOV. Even if not that picture, the article could use *a* picture to go along with it. --MikeSolo 10:35, 19 April 2007 (UTC)