The Downsides of Being Beautiful

a reply to: TechniXcality

It's technically possible for females to become pregnant by themselves, but the baby is never viable.

a reply to: Eilasvaleleyn

Lol, evidently I cannot make you laugh. But yes we agree on the subject of beauty

originally posted by: EternalSolace
a reply to: grainofsand

I just mean to say I can forgive a little ugly for someone who can rock my world rather than someone who looks like Aphrodite and sucks.

And that's a fine trade if not much of one at all, and I think we all agree that beauty and a personality is what we are after, sexually perhaps not. Everyone has their preferences you are not wrong for yours

a reply to: EternalSolace
'Rocking my world' as you say is an athletic and visually pleasing woman as far as I'm concerned sexually.
But then, I'm not desperately looking for 'the one'.

a reply to: grainofsand

Granted. It's a subjective topic for sure. Doesn't matter your sex or sexual preference. We each have something unique that will set us apart from one another. 7 billion people in the world, there's bound to be some crossover somewhere.

a reply to: EternalSolace
True and as some in this thread have said, intellectual stimulation is their thing over physical appearance.
That's fine but an obese woman with the most intelligent mind in the world wouldn't cut it for me.
I'm not after philosophical discussion during sex, I only want a visually pleasing proactive partner who can do more than lay there like a lazy pig.

Good grief! Reading this thread is like reading a narcissistic Ann Landers on mind altering drugs column. I think it serves as a great example of the delusional FB mentality our collective society has devolved into. "Look at me...Look at ME!...let me use 1,000 oblique references to how troubled I am as a result of my OWN stunning beauty while at the same time offering you advice in how to talk to beautiful people like ME."

Why is it people feel so compelled to go out on the Internet and define their own self worth in an effort to get others to agree so as to validate their self image? Well, I guess here could be one possible answer:

In some respects it is a form of mental illness.

Identification with the broader “group” of persons who share a stigmatized identity is a key variable that influences how individuals respond to public stigma.28 On one hand, individuals who belong to stigmatized groups may internalize the negative statements aimed at that group. On the other hand, individuals may develop a positive identity via their interactions with peers from the stigmatized group (eg, despite the negative cultural views about homosexuality, gays who have integrated into the gay community have developed a strong positive identity). As a result, they develop more positive self-perceptions.29,30 This assertion has been supported in research on several stigmatized groups, including gay and bisexual men,28 ethnic minorities,31 and women.32 In this study, we expect to show that identification with the group “persons with mental illness” is a protective factor that reduces the likelihood that an individual will agree with public stigma and apply it to the self. We predict that its effect on self-esteem and self-efficacy will be mediated by stereotype awareness, agreement, and self-concurrence. See figure 1.

- Self Stigma in People with Mental Illness - Watson, Corrigan, Larson, Sells, 2007

Source:

Self Stigma in People With Mental Illness

Perhaps some would do well to take note.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk
I think this thread has been highly amusing so far, I guess if it troubles you too much you can always ignore it...or carry on with your social comment rant as that is amusing as well.

a reply to: Eilasvaleleyn

a reply to: TechniXcality It's technically possible for females to become pregnant by themselves, but the baby is never viable.

Sorry, but no. It would be technically possible for a true hermaphrodite if such a person were born with fully functioning reproductive organs from both male amd female tissue, but there has never been a documented case of that. True hermaphrodites have both female and male gonadal tissue encapsulated into what is usually an internal sac, like a giant ovary. They don't actually have a fully functioning, complete set of separate male and female organs.

Although, I did read about something where they're creating some type of synthetic sperm so that women can impregnate themselves without the need of a male, but the baby would essentially be a clone of her mother and it would always be a female fetus. Now that would get kind of scary, especially related to this topic because it would open a door for people to start simply creating "perfect" human beings. Perfect facial and skeletal measurements, etc. Kinda makes one wonder what they would do with the rejects?

As they say, nobody is perfect. Even the most generally-accepted 'beautiful' people have a flaw somewhere, be it physical or characteristic. I don't think I've ever used the word 'beauty' to refer to a person in English. 'Stunning', 'Gorgeous', 'Heart-breaker' are words I use for appearance and apply to the whole picture and not just the visible biological parts. When it comes to personalities I tend not to disclose and use general terms like 'OK', or 'Easy-going', or 'Fun'. If I'm introduced to someone who 'smells' vain and considers themselves 'beautiful' I will say something like, "Wow, you're a stunner" or "I bet you have them queuing at the door". That then will either lead them to being bashful or otherwise. If they play on their looks as part of a conversation and the vanity starts to be tiresome I'll throw something appropriate into the conversation like, "I'm a set phasers to kill kinda guy" or "I was brought up to mind my Ps and Qs". It invariably goes over their heads and at that point I know it's time to move on. If they pick it up and then 'adjust' themselves without fuss, they have my attention. If they get emotional I'll just give a knowing look and walk away.

Rukia, I think you need to look a little more at yourself rather than transfer your lack of success with people onto them as their jealousy or negative attitude to 'beautiful' people. You expect people to shower their affection on you which makes you incredibly difficult to love. You've been doing it so long now that you are actually being starved of positive emotions towards you. Remember, for every ounce of love you crave, you need to give three ounces as two thirds will be wasted, especially in a new-meet situation. Reap what you sow, as it says in the Good Book. And it's not symmetry that drives 'attractiveness', it's how closely a face (and to an extent the body) is proportioned to that of a baby. The closer the ratios, the less likely you are to be raped and more likely to be wooed pre- and post-child rearing, is the way it works in nature. Take Jaclyn Smith (Kelly Garrett in Charlie's Angels). She was rated most 'beautiful' using this ratio method.



(It's a mutation leading to lazy motherhood as she will be provided for and lazy offspring. The mutation passes on and you end up with a caste of 'beautiful' people that are practically inept at pretty much anything you give them to do, and in turn it interbreeds with itself and causes all kinds of problems related to pedigree-ism. Eventually the 'beauty' mutates into something far less desirable and that caste disappears.)

Modern society has pretty much eradicated both of those and potential mates just after a bonk will take one look and think 'nah, too much effort required'. If you're looking for no-strings try blind speed-dating or 'dining in the dark'... or an orgy - all fun and looks not important. It's what you make of it and not other people. (BTW, some of my best friends are stunners...)

Physical beauty is purely subjective. It can be found in all elements of life. "One man's trash is another man's treasure" or "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder" and on, and on. There is no one single category which defines 'beauty' to which all others aspire. As has been posted here, beauty can take on many forms from physical appearance to intellect and beyond.

One person may think another beautiful while another does not. Sexual attraction, as has been proven in numerous studies, can also take on many forms, and these are not limited to procreation as is evidenced by homosexuality. Just because I prefer women does not mean it is necessarily wrong from someone to prefer a different lifestyle (within limits I guess, but even these are subjective and based on societal norms).

For one person to say "I am beautiful" is one thing, but for a person to say "I belong to the group defined as beautiful people" is something altogether different. The former is a statement of self worth; the latter is a statement of elitism.

a reply to: grainofsand

Oh, it doesn't trouble me; much like yourself it rather amuses me. However, I think it important to call a spade a proverbial spade in some cases. This would be one of those cases. If for no other reason than to provide balance to the discussion.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Good grief! Reading this thread is like reading a narcissistic Ann Landers on mind altering drugs column. I think it serves as a great example of the delusional FB mentality our collective society has devolved into. "Look at me...Look at ME!...let me use 1,000 oblique references to how troubled I am as a result of my OWN stunning beauty while at the same time offering you advice in how to talk to beautiful people like ME."

I must admit, at first I did not see the attention-seeking nature of the OP, and was genuinely shocked by the negative reactions that she got. I honestly thought she was bringing up what I have long considered to be a fascinating subject with regard to human perception. Now that I realize what's really up, it's kind of amusing to go back and read the comments. Other than feeling like an idiot for trying to defend someone who was obviously not deserving of it, I am quite amused.

But the topic itself does have merit; people truly are treated differently depending on their physical appearance and preconceived beliefs about certain physical traits. It should not be that way, but it is. It may be hardwired into us at birth to prefer certain physical properties, but we don't have to live that way. We have the choice to appreciate beauty in so much more than a pretty face, and I think it's sad that the message seems to have been lost here.

a reply to: tigertatzen

I completely agree. I think we are all programmed to a certain extent to see beauty in our own way. I think this is based in large on the society in which we live as well as the social circles in which we circulate. Some see it differently than others.

As a younger man (I am ashamed to say) I would look at a girl whom I found unattractive and think to myself 'ugggh'. Now I find myself looking at a similar person and imagining all the wonderful traits they have. Back then there were 'ugly' people and 'beautiful' people...in my opinion. Now there are only beautiful people (for the most part), but who exhibit beauty in different ways. Oh sure, there are still 'ugly' people, but these people have changed in my definition. A truly ugly person is one who views themselves as superior to others based on things like appearance, wealth and or social standing.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

I actually wrote a paper on the subject in college. I did a lot of interviewing of my peers and observation before I wrote it, and it was truly shocking to me how many people equate physical appearance with their perception of success and social standing, attainment and overall good fortune. People truly believe that if a person fits the "standard" of beauty, that person automatically has an easier life, more opportunities, more available resources...as if simply by being physically attractive he or she has a leg up in life that others do not have. How did things like honesty, integrity, work ethic, honor, intelligence...all of the most admirable traits you can list...take a back seat to physical appearance?

I would be beyond insulted if I were ever to find out that anything I accomplished was due not to me working my ass off for it, but because of the way I look. That's offensive as hell to me. I don't think that has ever happened to me, but if it has, I'd rather not know because that just makes me angry. You are absolutely right, people who view themselves as superior or belonging to some elite caste open only to the phenomenally attractive are indeed truly ugly. And people who encourage that type of nonsense and even pander to people like that out of some sense of implied servitude due to their perceived lesser attractiveness are ugly too.

originally posted by: tigertatzen

I must admit, at first I did not see the attention-seeking nature of the OP, and was genuinely shocked by the negative reactions that she got. I honestly thought she was bringing up what I have long considered to be a fascinating subject with regard to human perception.

I am with you on that. I didn't (and still don't) consider the topic of the thread to be the author of the OP and their personal experience with this phenomenon - whether he/she is attractive or not, an interesting personality or not, vain and attention seeking or not.

I think it's normal to refer to anecdotes and personal experiences when describing your feelings and thoughts on a subject,
but that doesn't mean the subject of the conversation is now "you".

Only in retrospect (little sleep, lots of champagne, dancing to french music played on a synthesizer, and 18 holes with five pounds of mud on each foot... ) that I can see that many of the comments sent my way were actually references to the author of the OP, and their particular attitude about the topic, which was sort of being confused as being mine.

To clarify- when I speak of the difficulties of things like the "halo effect", I don't mean "nobody likes me because I'm beautiful and they're jealous" . ( the OP's stance?)

I found, when younger, the halo effect really means that even when people get jealous, even when they percieve you got a benefit you didn't deserve more than they, they still like you.
You get forgiven for a lot, people are more likely to forget tomorrow. Not having friends, or people trying to be your friend, is NOT the problem, nor the particular difficulty I was refering to.

I was refering to the difficulty of seeing and feeling these people around you go through the ups and downs of those types of feelings- of feeling envious and angry one minute, affectionate and happy the next - wanting to be with me, but also hating some of the things they experience when with me in social situations. This felt, to me, very painful.

The advice so repeated in this discussion - just don't care what others feel or think, all that matters is what YOU think,
seems totally unrealistic and invalid.

NO, this phenomenon doesn't rely upon what you think- you can truly think your type of appearence is unattractive, and that will not change the subtle and often subconscious ways others will react to you.
If you personally find dark hair and eyes, short muscles and curvy body type beautiful,
but the society you live in currently values light hair, blue eyes, long limbs,
People will treat you as good looking if you have that type of look. Even if you find yourself ugly!
Take that further, to the symmetry and waist-hip ratio, etc. and what you think or know about you becomes totally irrelevent.

-And really... can any of you honestly claim you don't care about other people at all?
I mean, sure, it is a sort of popular way of bragging, but even when we say that, it is sort of understood it is an exaggeration - you are not a psychopath, right?

I have not figured out how to turn off empathy. Maybe I haven't tried hard enough. Those closest to me have tried to help me feel less because they see such sensitivity causes me all kinds of difficulties in life (even beyond this particular topic).
But I can't seem to not care, to not feel, to make such a strong separation between myself and others that their feelings and emotions truly don't matter to me.

I am sure I am not alone in this. I don't buy the tough talk people write on the internet. A lot of bluster and bravado.

Anyway, we've spent the evening and day with our friends, and we talked about this subject last night.
My friend is a school teacher, to the equivalent of first and second grade.
She said she observed in herself the tendency for the halo effect, and is very vigilant with herself now, in how she acts with the children. I asked how she became aware of it in her own behavior, she said it was because she read about it.

So sometimes, just reading about this effect, becoming aware it happens, is the big changer for a person, to help them adjust and be more fair in their dealings. Maybe not everyone, but for some at least. She reinforced my opinion that there is value to discussing openly this subject in public, instead of keeping it taboo.

Granted, it is difficult to address if the people in your environment find you good looking.
But that is why us elders who are no longer in that state, but have past experience with it, almost have a responsibility (I feel) to address the social issues involved with it.

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
Good grief! Reading this thread is like reading a narcissistic Ann Landers on mind altering drugs column. I think it serves as a great example of the delusional FB mentality our collective society has devolved into. "Look at me...Look at ME!.."

I am not sure I agree with your assessment, for the same reason I described above- for some reason, when there is discussion of this subject, it can repeatedly be observed that a fairly large proportion of the participants, will respond with a focus upon the speaker (writer) personally and trying to evaluate their beauty or intelligence, which distracts from the topic.

That doesn't mean that effect was desired or intended by the speaker or writer!

In almost any topic we discuss on forums, we get a large proportion of replies that are NOT what we hoped for and would prefer, and even if we know from experience that will happen, we can still try again, hoping that there will be a portion who will discuss the topic.
We also stick in personal anecdotes, experiences, feelings, on all these topics, and it is usually understood that isn't an invite to "look at ME" personally- it is a flow of thinking and exchange, which allows the listener to follow how the idea evolved in your head and why. But the idea, (not the person) remains the topic.

Maybe I am wrong, but I have the impression this subject is more prone to participants making it "personal" about each other, than some other topics.

a reply to: Bluesma

Oh believe me, my comments were not directed at the OP, not exclusively anyway. This thread is replete with the same type of behavior. It is called self-concurrence. There are examples of other types of behavior as well, such as attempting to identify with someone in a perceived higher social standing and then attempting to validate he / she is in fact in the same social standing. Sadly, these types of behaviors have become all too frequent with the advent of the Internet. People have a perceived self assessment which does not fit with their actual real life self. They in turn use the internet as a way to validate this perception because they are unable to validate it in real life.

The disturbing part of all this is when someone intentionally places themself on a pedestal (which doesn't exist in their real life) and then actively identifies with people who aspire to the same perceived level. It's a reverse psychology of sorts..."I am among the beautiful people, but I can identify with you lowly people and I share your pain (of not being like me)." This, in an attempt to gain concurrence with their own elevated view of themselves. They are, in essence, creating an audience for themselves where one does not exist. The fundamental underpinnings of the FB culture is a classic example of this type of behavior.

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk

For one person to say "I am beautiful" is one thing, but for a person to say "I belong to the group defined as beautiful people" is something altogether different. The former is a statement of self worth; the latter is a statement of elitism.

My first response in reading these statements is - the first is a statement of evaluation according to your own individual values and preferences.
The second is a statement of evaluation according to the current values of the collective you are a part of.

Though I support and encourage all people to develop their own preferences and ideals, and think it is vital to developing our individual will and awareness,
I think we cannot close our eyes and pretend collective values, morals, ideals... inherited or acquired, do not exist.
There always are, and to acknowledge them does not systematically indicate one adheres or embraces them.

for example:
I do not like computer games myself, yet it would be a lie to deny that computer games are currently very popular and a large part of the population reacts in certain ways to them.

If a person has the sort of appearence that is currently considered valuable by the society and culture they live in, they would be lying or delusional to deny that fact. Doing so says nothing about their personal assessment and individual values.

On the contrary... I find that acknowledging such cultural or collective influences has the effect of gaining some distance , in a way one can observe without identifying with. It opens the door to the question - do I feel this way, or is that just my cultural conditioning/reflexes arising?

Without the recognition those exist, you can't even begin the separation.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

LOL - that may be true in some cases, but why are you even concerned about this evaluation and assessment of the individuals participating in the discussion?

It's like the usual accusation of "shills" - why even try to discern who is a shill or not?

Why not just discuss and analyze the messages- and not the messagers?