Monday, 27 April 2009


It has become apparent that it is possible that the qualities 'attractive' and 'sexy' are not synonymous. While they usually go hand in hand, one does not necessitate the other. It is possible to be attractive and not be sexy, and more likely, it is possible to be sexy but not attractive. As is custard with these types of ponderings, I've made a graph.

Now, the first thing I noticed was the large amount of Jews in the purely 'sexy' category. Just something to think about there. Personally I think God decided a while ago that the Jews had been through enough, so he made them naturally sexy. Genetics had made it too late to make them particularly attractive, sadly.

Mick Jagger's looks have rapidly disappeared only to leave him with what can only be described a case of 'stretchy-face jowls' teamed with 'old-man pervertedness'. He is, however, innately sexy. (Apparently there's something about Sexy-Ugly in 'Kissing Jessica Stein'... see Cissy M for more details.)

Tom Cruise I personally find revolting, but some might say he's traditionally 'handsome'... I might say that he's a creepy, power-mad, self-obsessed short-arse. Regardless, he's definitely not sexy. Ok, so it's a crap example, but I'm sure there are plenty of people who are attractive but not sexy.

What I conclude from this graph is Johnny Depp and 1960's Mick Jagger for the win, basically... and your mum's ugly, but she still manages to around. Fancy that!

I would like some recognition for the fact that I didn't mention David Bowie in this post. Until now.

No comments: