Better-looking embrace inequality

http://www.gsb.stanford.edu/insights/researchers-few-bad-hair-days-can-change-your-life

The series of five studies conducted by Neale and Belmi, with participants that included both men and women, has important implications for research on inequality. If you believe you are attractive, you tend to think you belong in a higher social class yourself and believe, accordingly, that hierarchies are a legitimate way for organizing people and groups. You also are more likely to believe people lower down in a hierarchy are there because they deserve to be. The research also showed that self-perceived physical attractiveness mattered more to people’s perception of their social rank than their self-perceived goodness — qualities like empathy and integrity — did.

Good luck ironing out that kink.

They're so stupid it's a laughriot

The lookism people have a point. Both groups.
And a love of competency is natural too. If you have a bad leader, they don’t last long.

This research is the first to draw an explicit connection between people’s perceptions of their own physical attractiveness and their attitudes toward inequality and hierarchies. Among other things, it helps establish how malleable people’s views of inequality are.

No. No they aren’t. That’s the point. You can only boost your looks (SMV+MMV) by 2, 3 points maxed out.

10 responses to “Better-looking embrace inequality

  1. I don’t know about that 2 or 3 points. We have an unnatural skew because many people, through poor diet, clothing, substance abuse, stress, etc are dragged down. You can go from obese, with bad skin and hair, constant stress, poor posture and weakness (3 or 4) to slim with good muscles, clear skin and hair, relaxed body and strong posture (7 to 9) just by eating well and exercising.

    In short: we live at a time when most 7 to 9s are actively lowering their SMV and MMV, and all it takes is a change in habits to improve them.

      • Ah, but desire is an absolute and surely if the average becomes Wall-E-esque, we should not lower our standards to that levels, nor should we assume that someone who is a biological 5 would be exactly the same in a less rotten society. Almost everyone in our society stands to gain a fewpoints.

      • But some twigs are poorly maintained trees. We didn’t make it this far if we’re all genetically fat and ugly. And the “average” today is purely dysgenic.

        Case in point:

        Age 16:

        Age 21:

        Currently get rated by more honest men as 7.5 average, usually get a 7 if they prefer slim or an 8 if they like girls with more muscles. You can’t say at 16 I was JUST a 5.5. At best a 3 or a 4. All cause I was a pig. And to think that underneath every fatty there may be someone who would be a 6 to a 9 if they cleared up their poor habits… You’d never know.

        On the flip side we have the argument of undesirable personalities, though…

      • You are an exception. Puppy fat is to be expected, especially in women, since we need it for pregnancies. Losing such chub as an adult is almost impossible, in the long term. With women, the fat tends to direct to the right places, although some women are cursed with masculine fat distributions. I was reading the other week about the estrogen figure and it isn’t a clear sign of that at all, in fact, it’s quite easy to fake with fashions like a cinched belt. If we are to assume everyone wakes up tomorrow and maximises their looks, by this time next year the scale would have to readjust back down to account for the common standard, it’s like grading on a curve statistically. Although people have potential, they are also in competition, which drags any value down. Why else do you think feminists encourage pretty women to make themselves ugly? They can turn this: http://40.media.tumblr.com/b859ea2509f30d01901a5fc100e0b731/tumblr_ntwl1gT5RY1s9f17oo1_250.png
        Into this:

        The average is neither good nor bad. Hollywood skews the good up, leading to idiots saying There are no 10s, but people who hate themselves skew it down.

      • I think I’m an exception in that I changed, but I think I’m an example as to how much change is possible. And, as I said, physical attractiveness is an absolute. Even in a world where most people are fat, we still value proportion, leanness and muscle. Therefore, the average numerically no longer represents the average in terms of hotness. We are a subpar society. And most fatties stand to improve around as much as I did.

      • That is true, social pressure generally trumps sexual pressure for women. After all, what does it matter if most men prefer you without a hole in your lip or a mangled vagina, if you get honour-killed by your mother or evicted from the tribe?

        Yet more evidence against the standard RedPill idea that male sexuality is completely immutable. Sure, as long as there are slim girls with natural vaginas men will prefer them. But when every available woman is fat and cut, then men suck it up and go for the fat, cut woman with the nicest hourglass, best skin and prettiest hair. Reproduction finds a way. Perhaps one day when over 85% of the population is overweight or obese, the numerical average really will be a 5 in the eyes of prospective partners.

1. Be civil. 2. Be logical or fair. 3. Do not bore me.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s