>>194629
>We could argue the armchair psychology and lobster heirarchy "biology" all we like
>which traditionally means grossnasty dude, pretty anime lady.
It seems to me the whole point of the thread is to understand why this is the "traditional" thing, and I don't think it's very helpful to go "no use talking about it."
>>194596 is a bit rough, but he's right; just like women are inherently more valuable than men, pretty women are inherently more valuable than ugly women (in a sense, that's what being pretty means), and you may not like it, and you may think it's a bunch of armchair psychology, but these are very well documented evolutionary truths, and I don't get why people are so stubborn about such a simple concept. Since a woman can only be impregnated by one guy at a time, while a man can impregnate many women in a short period of time, the woman loses a lot by carrying children with inferior genetics, meaning that, by extension, they tend to dislike mating with males they deem unattractive, and that's where the degradation comes from; on the other hand, if a dude impregnates (has sex) with an ugly female, he won't care much either way, since he can just move on. So basically, the perception of the woman as valuable is important for the scenes and stories to be impactful, and this means that ugly women really aren't that great as catalysts of emotion, since, quite frankly, nobody really cares about them, in a way.
I'm really into heavy psychological stuff in my smutt, so writing or playing ugly females sounds kinda fun, in a way, but I can't imagine it working in a degrading sense; more so in stories about love or something like that.
Unless of course we're talking about "ugly" (read, exotic-kinda-strange-looking-at-first) women, and not plain ugly human women.