Hello! I have been reading a lot of your posts that have been asking this question and I have noticed some patterns that are a bit inaccurate to finding your aesthetic process. And as a post has been made sharing some anxieties about how I respond to some of your questions, I want to clarify misconceptions I see and introduce a variety of approaches in a long post that describes mine and others' thoughts. The two issues are the hobbies/personality lists and developing your own independence and creativity.
One of the biggest issues I see is that people list out their personality traits, hobbies, and physical appearance to determine what aesthetic they are. In actuality, aesthetics should be independent of this. I am going to be using myself as an example. If I made a post in that style, I'd put that I love playing chess, listening to Chopin, and am pursuing a PhD in Art History. Boom, immediate dark academia diagnosis. But my aesthetic is pastel, lacy, and sweet. And there are thousands of goths who love anime and kawaii people that listen to heavy metal. We appreciate media and hobbies differently from appreciating something aesthetically; good stories we like, professional goals, emotions we feel, and leisure activities don't necessarily correlate with wanting to incorporate it as an aesthetic. We are multi-faceted people who do not have to be like fictional characters and exactly match our appearances with our personalities and interests.
That approach also makes you leave out aesthetics that don't have any associated activities. Vaporwave, weirdcore, and Art Deco do not have activities associated with or ones that we can feasibly do. We won't be able to know you like the last one if you never mention cocktail parties or living in NYC. Especially since all of us are students limited to our homes, we'd pretty much be limited to only aesthetics targeted to our age group and location, like light academia, which is always over-represented in the answers.
The other issue I see is that you guys are not researching and exploring by yourself. I often link the FAQ and Finding Your Aesthetic pages because they describe valuable information that would answer your question and then some. Of course, there is a community component and an ability to find new people, but it will honestly be over-redundant and the beginners' guides will be ignored in favor of shallow and limited answers only pertaining to that aesthetic. I am not ragging on anyone who responds, and those people are essential to our community.
Some questions are also honestly searchable. If you do want an aesthetic that matches your hobbies, simply search for it in the bar. The articles we link are the same exact ones that will show up.
I and the other mods want to encourage a community of self-discovery, independence, and creativity. Receiving simple answers, guides, and names does not do this. There will never be an entire aesthetic that describes you perfectly and it is your job to learn how to find, combine, and refine aesthetics in your own personal way. I provide the links, but this will also be a good starting point for deeper, fuller discussions that not only benefit yourself but also the community by adding information that would in turn go onto the beginner guides.
So, the more what is the more accurate way of asking for your aesthetic would be moodboards and aesthetic lists, which are bullet points of objects/weather/etc. you admire (here is an example) are better gauges of what you aesthetically appreciate and don't take personality, hobbies, or limitations on our environment into account.
And when you teach yourself more about the aesthetic community and take the time to explore, the conversations will be deeper and more fascinating, leading to a stronger community based on equals sharing their own opinions, debating, and helping each other see new perspectives based on their own aesthetics. Researching and being creative will also make your look would also be more individual, unique, and suited to your own tastes, which is the ultimate goal of all of the contributors.
