@Izbeckistan 559674 wrote:
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.
Obviously a misrepresentation of the argument. How much you accomplish in life is not only a matter of [A] intelligence but also of character.
Now your character is obviously influenced by your place within the peer culture at an early stage of life. Many girls like you? You will feel flattered, empowered self-esteem, used to being helped and welcomed when approaching others. When you smile at people, they smile back. You learn to expect positive things when meeting the world. Therefore you will be more open minded to facing new risks. And you will be comfortable with girls.
People who are unattractive, in contrast, are used to rejection, being submissive to the group as opposed to leading the group. They have a smaller range of potential sex partners and as a result may develop a negative self-image. Some powerful officials I know are being bullied by people lower on the ladder than them. They said they respected me a lot because I didn’t allow myself to be messed with. I said: “Then why do you allow yourself to be messed with? You formally have more power than those bulling you.” The explanation was that they were more used to staying in the background ever since their teen years. Matter of teenage popularity influencing character, not intelligence. Also such people are more uncomfortable with girls. And travel East to meet them.
Some people develop talents as compensation, but then still such people have a “I’m not worth her” mindset deep inside.
If you ascribe to the 1-10 rating scale that some people use and you approach it from a statistical perspective 68.2% of people will fall within the first standard deviation and then 95.2% within the second and basically everybody within the third.
Applying this to attractiveness, about 70% of your people are within a 3.5 to a 7. So that is more than half the people who are average looking and then 13.6% of the people are from a about a 1.5-3ish and another 13.6% of the people are from that 7.5 up to about a 9.xx and then you’ve got some good lookers who fall within the 3rd standard deviation, like 9.5+. After that there are like 1000 people on the planet who are Victoria’s Secret model or Adonis calibre, these people hit the genetic lottery and obviously will self select to try to pass on these favorable genes.
Obviously attractiveness doesn’t follow a perfect bell curve like intelligence but if you think about it objectively there are very few perfect ten’s out there. There a lot of factors that can be controlled more by the individual such as exercise and diet or clothes and style so people have some ability to control their looks, but if you’ve got an ugly face you’ve got an ugly face but they don’t perform a vasectomy on you just cause you’re ugly so ugly can propagate if they want, and therefore they do.
just my $.02
@Gylfi Sigurðsson 558944 wrote:
Aryanist?
I was recently reading some article about a German exhibition of what Hitler had classed as “Degenerate Art” (but had not simply had destroyed, but had been hoarded. Maybe they intended to sell it elsewhere, or were just short of benzine). There were also some examples of what the Führer did consider acceptable. The article itself is not even linking too as it was apallingly written and confusing, the author (who presumably was supposed to be an expert on these things) having made a bad mistranslation of some of the original German sources; even worse than my German (which is why I prefer Dutch, its easier.)
One painting was of 3 nudes ; this turned out to be one of the approved pictures in the Nazi regiime. What was more interesting wasn’t even that some nudity was tolerated (I had expected it to be, as even bad régimes have bread and circuses), but these young women, although tall, were a bit on the larger, fuller figured side than the stereotypical Aryan blonde woman of the late 20th/21st century.
Attractive people looking attractive our clothes and makeup. but attractiveness doesn’t follow a perfect bell curve like intelligence. and is not compulsory every good looking people is good heart.
Haha, you think attraction is purely down to looks. You couldn’t be more wrong!
Confidence helps, charm helps and hey, if you know NLP, hypnosis, cold reading, handwriting analysis etc then you’re pretty much set.
Being rich also helps.
0
Voices
18
Replies
Tags
This topic has no tags