upworthy

attractiveness

Pop Culture

Emily Ratajkowski explains why women find Pete Davidson so attractive

"I feel like only other men feel [that he isn't attractive]. Guys are like, 'Wow. What's that guy got?'"

via Late Night with Seth Meyers

Emily Ratajkowski discusses Pete Davidson's appeal.

Pete Davidson, 31, has earned a reputation as one of Hollywood's most prolific ladies' men for dating some of the most beautiful A-list women over the past several years. However, many people don't understand the appeal of the "Saturday Night Live" star. Davidson is tattooed from head to toe. He suffers from Crohn's disease, has done multiple stints in rehab, describes himself as looking like a "crack baby" and only recently moved out of his mother's basement on Staten Island.

But he's also been one of the most popular cast members on "SNL" for the past seven years and co-wrote and starred in the critically acclaimed "The King of Staten Island."


 



 


Here are a few of the high-profile, incredibly attractive, and famous women that Davidson has been seen with over the past few years.

Ariana Grande (2018)


Davidson and the pop megastar revealed they were in a relationship at the end of May 2018 and got engaged quickly. The pair called off their engagement and broke up in October 2018 after just five months together. Davidson made the break-up public by pretending to propose to an "SNL" co-host, and wishing his ex-fiancée all the best. He also claimed on the show that the breakup was "nobody's business."


Kate Beckinsale (2019)



The two were caught kissing at a New York Rangers game in January 2019, but the pair broke up that April because Davidson had to go to rehab and Beckinsale was busy making movies.

Margaret Qualley (2019)


Davidson and the "Once Upon a Time ... in Hollywood" star had a brief relationship at the end of 2019. Her mother, Andie McDowell, called their flirtation "nice."

Kaia Gerber (2019-2020)



After Qualley, Davidson moved on to Cindy Crawford's daughter, Kaia Gerber. Four months later, the couple broke up while Davidson was dealing with addiction and mental health issues.

Phoebe Dynevor (2020)


Davidson and the "Bridgerton" star saw each other for about six weeks, but things eventually soured because Dynevor was geographically undesirable.

Kim Kardashian (2021)


Davidson and Kardashian were spotted holding hands while riding a Halloween roller coaster together, leading some to believe they were romantically involved. However, Page Six sources say they're "just friends." The pair shared a kiss in an "Aladdin" sketch on SNL when Kardashian hosted in October.

In a Monday appearance on "Late Night With Seth Meyers," model Emily Ratajkowski explained Davidson's appeal and it's pretty easy to understand.

"He's a professional," Ratajkowski said about Davidson. "First of all, you should know that about Pete." She added, "Pete—he's got the height. Obviously, women find him very attractive."

"I feel like only other men feel [that he isn't attractive]. Guys are like, 'Wow. What's that guy got?' And I'm like, I mean, he seems super charming," she said. "He's vulnerable. He's lovely. His fingernail polish is awesome. He looks good!" Further, he has a "good relationship with his mom." She concluded, "We love it. It's hard to find them."

  - YouTube  www.youtube.com  

 

Beckinsale recently affirmed a similar statement about Davidson by liking an Instagram post that read:

"I love how every time Pete Davidson starts dating another beautiful celebrity everyone's like 'wtf is happening how did he do this what is this mystery???' and everybody refuses to entertain the possibility that he might have a nice personality."

Evidently, Davidson is a really attentive boyfriend, too.

"My love language, when I'm in a relationship, is I treat the person I'm with like a princess,'' he told Paper. "I try and go as above and beyond as possible," he said, "because that's what you're supposed to do? If you're in a relationship with someone, you're just supposed to make that person feel as special as possible."

The fact that women everywhere are in love with Davidson actually says something pretty awesome. It goes to show that even in the glamorous world of Hollywood there's something irresistible about someone who's funny, attentive, vulnerable, charming, down-to-earth and loves his mother.

This article originally appeared four years ago.

From Your Site Articles
saturday night live
Joy

The unique body language talent that makes people 'consistently' more attractive

It has nothing to do with looks.

via CottonBro Studios/Pexels

A couple falling in love over dinner.

The great poet Rumi once wrote, "Lovers don't finally meet somewhere. They're in each other all along." In these 2 lines, he perfectly expressed the almost indescribable feeling of connection that people in love experience.

This type of spiritual connection may exist outside of the realm of science. However, a recent series of experiments published in Communications Psychology revealed that some people have a unique talent for deeply connecting or "synchronizing” and people find them very attractive.

One of the big giveaways people are attracted to one another is when their minds and bodies magically sync up. People who share a connection on a first date often unconsciously mirror each other’s postures, mannerisms and facial expressions.

A great way to see if someone is attracted to you is to cross your legs and if the other person follows, there’s a good chance they may be interested. People attracted to one another may also experience synchrony in heart rates, respiration, hormone levels and other autonomic functions.

All in all, when 2 people are in the throes of synchronicity, they share feelings of intimacy and cooperation. It’s a very similar physiological phenomenon seen in parent-child interactions.



To find out if synchronicity was tied to romantic attraction, researchers had participants watch a video of a man and a woman on a date. Some of the couples were in-sync and others were out-of-sync. After watching the video, the people were asked to rate their attractiveness and how strongly they appeared to be attracted to one another.

Synchronized couples scored higher in both attractiveness and mutual attraction.

In a second experiment, scientists held a speed dating event with 24 men and 24 women. Each person wore a wristband to track their physiological arousal. They were also asked to tap to the beat of a metronome. Those who synced both musically and psychologically received higher attractiveness scores.

Those with the highest scores were known as "Super Synchronizers" by scientists.



“We discovered that the ability to synchronize is stable across tasks and across partners. Some people are Super Synchronizers and Super Synchronizers are consistently rated as more attractive,” Shir Atzil, study author and director of the Bonding Neuroscience Lab and an assistant professor at Hebrew University, said according to Psy Post. “Being sensitive to a partner and attuning to them can help promote romantic bonding. This is because synchronized physiological states can improve regulation across various bodily systems, making interactions more fulfilling and suggesting cognitive and evolutionary advantages.”

To take advantage of synchronicity on your next date, plan some activities that make it easier to connect with someone. Studies show that people’s heart rates and breathing align when they watch emotional films together. This can also happen when listening to music together or dancing. A simple shared task such as doing a puzzle together can also help you sync with your date.

Ultimately, it’s all about building a connection with another person. “When we become aware that ‘we’ are sharing a moment with someone else, it is no longer necessarily the case that we are fundamentally separated by our distinct heads — we could really be be two individuals sharing in one and the same unfolding experience,” Tom Froese, a cognitive scientist from the Okinawa Institute of Science and Technology in Japan, told Discover Magazine.

From Your Site Articles
body language
Family

Scientists launched a robot-judged beauty contest. What could go wrong? A lot.

"Computer computer, on my screen — what's the fairest face you've ever seen?"

Presumably, that's what the folks at Youth Laboratories were thinking when they launched Beauty.AI, the world's first international beauty contest judged entirely by an advanced artificial intelligence system.

More than 600,000 people from across the world entered the contest, which was open to anyone willing to submit a selfie taken in neutral lighting without any makeup.

According to the scientists, their system would use algorithms based on facial symmetry, wrinkles, and perceived age to define "objective beauty" — whatever that means.

This murderous robot understands my feelings. GIF via CNBC/YouTube.

It's a pretty cool idea, right?

Removing all the personal taste and prejudice from physical judgment and allowing an algorithm to become the sole arbiter and beholder of beauty would be awesome.

What could possibly go wrong?

"Did I do that?" — These researchers, probably. GIF from "Family Matters."

Of the 44 "winners" the computer selected, seven of them were Asian, and one was black. The rest were white.

This is obviously proof that white people are the most objectively attractive race, right? Hahaha. NO.

Instead, it proves (once again) that human beings have unconscious biases, and that it's possible to pass those same biases on to machines.

Basically, if your algorithm is based mostly on white faces and 75% of the people who enter your contest are white Europeans, the white faces are going to win based on probability, even if the computer is told to ignore skin tone.

Plus, most cameras are literally optimized for light skin, so that probably didn't help the problem, either. In fact, the AI actually discarded some entries that it deemed to be "too dim."

So, because of shoddy recruitment, a non-diverse team, internal biases, and a whole slew of other reasons, these results were ... more than a little skewed.

Thankfully, Youth Laboratories acknowledged this oversight in a press release. They're delaying the next stage in their robotic beauty pageant until they iron out the kinks in the system.

Ironically, Alex Zhavoronkov, their chief science officer, told The Guardian, "The algorithm ... chose people who I may not have selected myself."

Basically, their accidentally racist and not-actually-objective robot also had lousy taste. Whoops.

Ooooh baby, racist robots! Yeah! GIF from Ruptly TV/YouTube.

This begs an important question: As cool as it would be to create an "objective" robot or algorithm, is it really even possible?

The short answer is: probably not. But that's because people aren't actually working on it yet — at least, not in the way they claim to be.

As cool and revelatory as these cold computer calculations could potentially be, getting people to acknowledge and compensate for their unconscious biases when they build the machines could be the biggest hurdle. Because what you put in determines what you get out.

"While many AI safety activists are concerned about machines wiping us out, there are very few initiatives focused on ensuring diversity, balance, and equal opportunity for humans in the eyes of AI," said Youth Laboratories Chief Technology Officer Konstantin Kiselev.

Of course you like that one. GIF from "Ex Machina."

This is the same issue we've seen with predictive policing, too.

If you tell a computer that blacks and Hispanics are more likely to be criminals, for example, it's going to provide you with an excuse for profiling that appears on the surface to be objective.

But in actuality, it just perpetuates the same racist system that already exists — except now, the police can blame the computer instead of not taking responsibility for themselves.

"There is no justice. There is ... just us." GIF from "Justice League."

Of course, even if the Beauty.AI programmers did find a way to compensate for their unconscious biases, they'd still have to deal with the fact that, well, there's just no clear definition for "beauty."

People have been trying to unlock that "ultimate secret key" to attractiveness since the beginning of time. And all kinds of theories abound: Is attractiveness all about the baby-makin', or is it some other evolutionary advantage? Is it like Youth Laboratories suggests, that "healthy people look more attractive despite their age and nationality"?

Also, how much of beauty is strictly physical, as opposed to physiological? Is it all just some icky and inescapable Freudian slip? How much is our taste influenced by what we're told is attractive, as opposed to our own unbiased feelings?

Simply put: Attractiveness serves as many different purposes as there are factors that define it. Even if this algorithm somehow managed to unlock every possible component of beauty, the project was flawed from the start. Humans can't even unanimously pick a single attractive quality that matters most to all of us.

GIF from "Gilligan's Island."

The takeaway here? Even our technology starts with our humanity.

Rather than creating algorithms to justify our prejudices or preferences, we should focus our energies on making institutional changes that bring in more diverse voices to help make decisions. Embracing more perspectives gives us a wider range of beauty — and that's better for everyone.

If your research team or board room or city council actually looks like the world it's supposed to represent, chances are they're going to produce results that look the same way, too.

Trending Stories