Thanks for re-posting, Bill (I accidentally deleted his post, d'oh!!).

I don't disagree with you, especially in cases where there's something distracting (i.e., a wild hair or two, a big zit, etc.) However, in general I think Americans in particular place too much value on physical appearance, and also tend to define beauty too narrowly (a blonde supermodel). Women who are to my mind already attractive (and uniquely so) degrade themselves by trying to force their bodies into that mold (via surgery, cosmetics, fad diets, over-exercising, etc.) American males also tend to overvalue it, so that conversational skills and actually having a personality are minimized (or ignored completely!).

I am very unusual, I think, in placing a higher value on personality than looks. The problem I have with posters or calendars like this is that personality and charm are nil. 100% of their "value" is expressed here in terms of their bodies.

Compare that to "male hunks" like Arnold, Stallone, Depp, etc. They are generally expected to have lots of charm and personality in addition to (or in spite of, even) their muscular appearance. Thus, even in porn somebody like Ron Jeremy can rise to stardom despite being badly "out of shape," whereas his female equivalent would never stand a chance.