Surely natural selection would have just left us with attractive people? I’m average and it sucks that some people are just naturally more attractive (therefore more successful in life, there’s loads of studies on it)
Why? Were we a lot uglier in the past or something and the people today are actually an improvement?
I’m not trying to say unattractive people wouldn’t have had kids at all but surely the amount of attractive people having kids would be greater right? So why are really attractive people a minority?
Attractive people, as you say, are popular from a young age, therefore get favours easily and rise up the ranks quite fast. They learn to be open to life, to invite opportunity, as they have less cause to fear rejection and the unknown. They develop a more entrepreneurial attitude. However! This means that they spend more time climbing career ladders, traveling the world with cosmopolitan life pattern. One day in New York, the next in Cairo or Copenhagen – always moving, never settling down. As a result they get kids much later in life, if they get them at all.
The average factory worker doesn’t go out as much to leave his place of birth. Prefers to stick to familiar surroundings. His choice of sexual partners is more limited, therefore he marries earlier, is more monogamous, and happily clings to that which he has and gets children as natural part of his life. Thus the lower class out-procreates the cosmopolitan class.
@SarahT 558932 wrote:
Surely natural selection would have just left us with attractive people? I’m average and it sucks that some people are just naturally more attractive (therefore more successful in life, there’s loads of studies on it)
Why? Were we a lot uglier in the past or something and the people today are actually an improvement?
I’m not trying to say unattractive people wouldn’t have had kids at all but surely the amount of attractive people having kids would be greater right? So why are really attractive people a minority?
:head_bang Not even going to bother de-constructing what you said. I nearly had an aneurysm just reading your post.
Aryanist?
What we consider beautiful and/or good looking today is heavily influenced by the media and has been for the last hundred or so years. 100 years is no where near enough for natural selection to have that much of an effect, and in all honesty it’s probably less then that due to changes in ideas, for example it was attractive to be a bit plump less then 50 years ago, but now all the models are unhealthily skinny.
Besides the fact that without media involvement people have individual ideas of what’s good looking. What you might like, I might not …
Also if all the good looking people turn around to ugly people and say we will not mate with you, all the ugly people will just mate with each other, allowing ugly people to continue to be a part of this species whether you like it or not. 😉
If you’re good looking it’s not a guarantee your kids gonna come out looking like you either. Or even if they do, that they will be good looking. For example the father might be a very attractive man with a big wide jaw, very wide shouldered and built like a tank, but if these genes pass onto his daughter … not such a good thing for her to have.
It amazing that society hold idiot like this is such high regard :
[ATTACH=CONFIG]85887[/ATTACH]
Alcohol. We’ve all done it, accidentally slept with someone less attractive than yourself :apathy:
That’s a joke by the way; I don’t sleep with people less attractive than me :angel_fly
Apparently I just don’t sleep at all
IMO the really good looking people can have the really good looking people. Through personal experience the really good looking people are really boring in bed. they have spent there lives being worshipped and admired. Therefore they are less willing to let loose and get what they want and truly enjoy it. Just sayin
natural selection only favours attractive ppl indirectly as they tend to give birth more, but directly it favours clever ppl. analogy: which one is more likely to get hit by a train ?
But life tends to be easier for attractive people who often find wealth.
@N1CK 558939 wrote:
Attractive people, as you say, are popular from a young age, therefore get favours easily and rise up the ranks quite fast. They learn to be open to life, to invite opportunity, as they have less cause to fear rejection and the unknown. They develop a more entrepreneurial attitude. However! This means that they spend more time climbing career ladders, traveling the world with cosmopolitan life pattern. One day in New York, the next in Cairo or Copenhagen – always moving, never settling down. As a result they get kids much later in life, if they get them at all.
The average factory worker doesn’t go out as much to leave his place of birth. Prefers to stick to familiar surroundings. His choice of sexual partners is more limited, therefore he marries earlier, is more monogamous, and happily clings to that which he has and gets children as natural part of his life. Thus the lower class out-procreates the cosmopolitan class.
No I dont agree with any of this.
Less attractive people have to compensate their looks by being smarter, more interesting and therefore it can be a massive advantage in their life.
Also You are assuming attractive/ unattractive teenagers stay that way. If any of you keep in contact with old school friends you might notice how many of the attractive kids grew up to be unattractive and vice versa.
@The Psyentist 558955 wrote:
Alcohol. We’ve all done it, accidentally slept with someone less attractive than yourself :apathy:
That’s a joke by the way; I don’t sleep with people less attractive than me :angel_fly
I imagine that’s a challenge.
@Izbeckistan 559737 wrote:
I imagine that’s a challenge.
oh wait, that joke didnt work at all..
@Izbeckistan 559737 wrote:
I imagine that’s a challenge.
@Izbeckistan 559738 wrote:
oh wait, that joke didnt work at all..
Lol, I’m just going to ignore the second comment and pretend that was a lovely compliment ha.
0
Voices
18
Replies
Tags
This topic has no tags