Not ALL models are pleasing to the eye
Debate Rounds (3)
I will say no more...
Firstly, I view models in the context of professional fashion models. Next, I wanted to clarify that the phrase "pleasing to the eye" is defined better as being aesthetically pleasing. As negative, I have the idea that all models ARE pleasing to the eye. In society, what is 'aesthetically pleasing'? I define 'aesthetically pleasing' as being good to the eyes. Manmade constructions can be considered aesthetically pleasing. Software designs can be considered aesthetically pleasing. Now, in a sense when objects can be good to the eyes, I fail to see how any human cannot be considered aesthetically pleasing. In fact, in the sense that the large population can see at all, identifies the fact that humans, in general, are (as I defined) 'aesthetically pleasing'. This is even more specifically so in the context of models (who many consider to be the upper tier of good looks in human world).
Next, the context of models 'not' being pleasing to the eye is highly controversial. In the concept of occupation- if the model is not pleasing to the eye, how is it possible that they are a model? What exactly are they modelling? Having an occupation isn't the same as volunteering- being a professional model (the scope of the debate) is impossible if there is no agency to hire you for modelling. Thus, what is the point of a model 'not pleasing to the eye' when advertising? The discouragement of a certain product in advertising through the use of a horrible model is impractical as there are other ways to bring it down- which begs the question- is there a professional model who isn't aesthetically pleasing?
Note: The following paragraph is simply a clarification of the term rather than an argument.
Lastly, models (this, obviously, does not include ex-models) are only professionally a model during the time which they are paid for by their employers. In other words, outside of a model's working hours, should not be included in this debate as technically and theoretically they are not practically 'models' within those hours. This is much similar to school. You do not see teachers lecturing students that are not within their blood relation outside of a school environment. This is because these teachers do not have the authoritative power. Therefore, this same principle should be applied to the concept of modelling- models should not be 'models' outside of their working hours but they are, however technically, still models. Similarly, ex-models are not to be included in this debate.
GeorgiaAshley forfeited this round.
JackyBWong forfeited this round.
Here is a link to show you some models, to prove that in fact, not all models are pleasing to the eye.
My sincerest apologies but I am extremely busy at work and so therefore can not write anymore in this particular round.
JackyBWong forfeited this round.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by utahjoker 3 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||1||0|
Reasons for voting decision: 2 forfeits compared to 1
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.