I was just reading an article by the anthropologist in the article about love that Astronuc posted in the other thread. I wonder if the ways we use those terms fit into the three categories of lust, attraction, and attachment.
Fisher (1998) has hypothesized that avian and mammalian species have evolved three distinct brain systems for courtship, mating, reproduction and parenting. [66] 1) The sex drive [lust] is characterized by a craving for sexual gratification. 2) Attraction (favoritism, sexual preference, or mate choice) is characterized by focussed attention on a preferred partner, heightened energy, motivation and goal-oriented courtship behaviors. 3) Attachment is characterized by the maintenance of proximity to a mating partner, affiliative gestures and expressions of calm when in social contact with this mating partner, separation anxiety when apart, and parental behaviors such as territory defense, nest building, mutual feeding, grooming and other parental chores.[67,68,69,70]
Each of these motivation-emotion systems, lust, attraction and attachment, is associated with a different constellation of brain circuits, different behavior patterns and different affective states. Each varies according to the reproductive stategy of each species. And each motivation-emotion system evolved to play a distinct role in reproduction.[71] The sex drive evolved principally to motivate individuals to seek sexual union with any appropriate member of the species. Attraction evolved to motivate individuals to select among potential mating partners, prefer particular conspecifics, and focus their courtship attention on this/these individuals, thereby making a mate choice. And the neural circuitry for adult male/female attachment evolved primarily to motivate individuals to sustain these affiliative connections long enough to complete species-specific parental duties.[72]
-- http://homepage.mac.com/helenfisher/matechoice.html#_ftnref1
To admit more of the rational/intellectual aspects of human behavior, if you look at friendships that include sex, I think that lust, attraction, and attachment probably correspond to friendships based on utility, pleasure, and character, respectively. It seems that, instead of three, some of you have two categories: short-term and long-term. Is that accurate? Or is there maybe a third: very short-term?
I can't see myself using
handsome or
elegant very often. I think I would use them to stress that someone looks like a responsible adult, as I might want to tell my little brother at his wedding or something. Otherwise, it means to me something more like stuffy, conventional, or materialistic, i.e. I would say it to 'be nice' while thinking that our values or priorities were probably too different.
I think I would usually use
charming, smooth, and
suave to suggest that someone might be insincere or trying to manipulate me. I'd use these jokingly too.
I usually use
hot, sexy, and words that describe something that tastes good, e.g.
scrumptious, delicious, yummy, when I'm thinking primarily (though not necessarily exclusively) of sex or of someone as being pleasurable to the senses. I think I use them most often in a playful manner, as I might use
hunk, beefcake, or other words that might be offensive if used seriously. If I did use them seriously, it would probably be as the first in a sequence of increasingly less subtle hints or during whatever I expect to follow as a consequence of those hints -- perhaps in extreme cases, it would serve just as a warning not to move because I'm about to jump him where he stands.
Me calling someone a good person is basically another (I imagine less scary) way of saying that I love them -- in the 'I'm glad I met you, I care about you, and I want you to be happy' way, not in the 'so when are you buying me my ring? I'll type up a list tomorrow of all the things you're no longer allowed to do' way. Virtues or character traits, e.g.
kind, sweet, honest, fair, friendly, courageous, funny, etc., add up to me thinking that someone is a good person.
I think beauty is what turns people into poets, whatever form their poetry takes. If I were to call a man beautiful, it would mean that I was willing to make sacrifices or take pains in order to protect or save him from harm, that he was worth preserving, like the beauty in my signature.
Cute is my personal favorite and most versatile word. It's probably easiest to explain each form by what usually prompts its use.
Cute, in the most generic sense : he gets my attention.
Cute, preceded by 'aw' : he makes me smile a sweet, heart-warming kind of smile.
Cute, preceded by 'oh' or 'so' : he makes me smile a sweet, slightly devilish kind of smile.
Cute, preceded by 'oh so' : he is approaching being too cute (see below).
Really cute : he makes me seriously appreciate his cuteness.
Cuteness, as in 'Hello, cuteness' : I think this one is random.
Cutie McCuterson : he has ingested something dangerous and needs to regurgitate it.
Cute, preceded by 'mm' : he is dangerously close to being too cute.
Too cute : he is too cute for me to admit what I'm thinking about doing to him.
Mmm : the resources that are usually used to select the most appropriate form of cuteness to describe him have been redirected to thinking of more things that I want to do to him.
Yeah, I should probably stop there.
I could really use a Teddy Ruxpin right now, I'm going to have nightmares. 
We've unleashed a beast!
Anywho, that's not a knife. Dangit, where's Paul Hogan when you need him?