![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
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)
B
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 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)
Let it be said that I, Arkracer, demand more pictures of kittens. -- Arkracer 09:48, 3 December 2006 (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)
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)
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.
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)
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)
I took away a picture of "a cute moment caught at a wedding" because it was not cute. Tell me what you think.
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)
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)
Came here to read about cuteness, and there's that kitten! Ojw 22:57, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
"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)
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)
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)
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)
Some coverage of literature on development and domestication that relate to the neoteny/cuteness/paedomorphy/kinderschema topic:
- Cheers, Pete.Hurd 05:03, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
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)
I'm no good w/ the formatting. anyone wann point me to a tutorial or somethin I'll do it. Oscar Meyer Peener. 06:37, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
Bring it back! That was the best picture EVER!!!!!!
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)
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)
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)
Who chose that picture of the kid in that torture looking outfit? It is a little disturbing looking.
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!
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)
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)
-- Howard the Duck 05:27, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
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)
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)