A psychologist posted that result from an attraction study and then removed the post after controversy followed. While the original psychology blog post has been removed, you can see it here. I first learned about this from an opinion on CNN.com about it. I was not surprised about the CNN columnist’s reaction: how dare you, except longer.
The closest he comes to directly criticizing the science is: “I question a methodology that asks random people to judge the attractiveness of other random people without taking into account the influence of background and culture. Without taking into account a Westernized standard of beauty that has not only haunted some black women into buying cream to bleach their skin but prompted some Asian-Americans to undergo surgery to make their eyes more European looking.”
Yes, beauty can vary, but the study (which did not even specify how large it was or where the samples were taken) was about who people (forever affected by background and culture) think are pretty.
He even called it racist. I always thought racism was supremacism by race, not you were not equally or the most liked, therefore you are racist, but I guess his accusation is more meant to shut people up. Disagree? Racist. See? It’s easy.
What do you all think?
No infringement of property rights result in this case, and this is the most important thing. As for the topic itself, what is there to say? How dare people think outside the guide to political correctness?!
Well, this is pretty stupid. Again, he's judging individual preferences that they don't exactly have a choice in choosing. I'm reminded of the Schopenhauer quote, "Man can indeed do what he wants, but he cannot control what it is that he wants." Anyway, the CNN opinion piece seemed to have taken it out of context by saying, "black women are ugly?" Well, according to that study, most of the individuals polled approached that sentiment, sure. They aren't under an obligation to conform to whatever makes LZ Granderson happy.
Heck, I haven't slept with a woman of any color in years because, well, I'm gay. But my sexual orientation doesn't prevent me from simply showing respect for what continues to be the backbone of my community. Women like my mother. My sisters. My aunts, cousins, friends ... the sisters who retwist my locks, fight for equal rights, usher in church or go to work every day in a society where a publication like Psychology Today thinks it's OK to call black women ugly.
Wow, this is an absolute non-sequitur if I ever saw one. It's an overly-emotional reaction sans any substance. That said, I personally don't find anything unattractive about African-American women. There are plenty of attractive black women out there in showbiz. It probably does have a lot to do with culture though.
Scientism is for pious people, it is as empty as all other forms of religion - even with their stern talks at looking at "hard facts". Besides as those of us sympathetic with austrian econ , this ought to be the type of empiricism that seems a bit nonsensical anyway.
Measuring attractiveness in the same exact boat as trying to measure happiness.
I see what they are trying to do. There is an element of "objectivity" in what counts as being attractive. They measure the symmetry of facial features and that has a high correspondence to physical attractiveness. I think of something like aesthetics as being a two-way street--It's not arbitrarily decided, but it is dependent on actual physical factors and then our individual interpretation of those factors.
I did read the study and the guy did conflate the polled population's opinion with actual "attractiveness." Instead of using a phrase like, "It is very interesting to note that, even though black women are objectively less physically attractive than other women..." with something along the lines of "it is very interesting to note that, even though black women are subjectively perceived as being less physically attractive than other women..."
Now if only the columnist could apply this line of reasoning to all forms of subjective preference. It's nonsense to aggregate subjective preferences. "Black women less attractive than other women"... to who??? That's the problem, all valuation is individual and subjective, aggregating preferences just spits out garbage... GIGO.
Clayton -
I wonder if there would have been the same controversy if the study had been based on hair colour, eyebrow shape or any other irrelevant physical feature. The entire concept seems strange, because ultimately, it comes down to: "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder."
Also, I assume he used a limited number of different races, with the use of a sweeping average, one was bound to come last.
I wonder what sample they used.
I've been with black, norwegian, mexican, canadian, white brazilians (southern european type) and mixed brazilian girls, ranging from 4'11 to 5'10, I would say that everyone was quite unique and women and that thing they carry between the legs are awesome.
I've been with some pretty pretty black women, I mean my god. Oh well, can't expect everyone to have good taste.
The thing I learned was that hips are more important than breasts. Breasts may catch your attention at first, but the hips that make the magic happens when the action is really happening. I will never forget when I was with this very pretty but buttless girl on top of me. Her pelvic bone was stabbing me, so painful.
Godamn.
On the topic though, why should it be surprising that a study like this is going bring about emotionally charged responses? Considering the history of black people in this country it should be expected, I mean first if you were considered black then you weren't really recognized as human then even after that all changed you are told from all sorts of studies that you are the least attractive and have a lower IQ as well. Who's going to be ok hearing stuff like this especially if its not their personal experience?
I have known this for a long time, because I have eyes and use them to see with.
In any case, he gives a perfectly simple explanation. On average, black women have more testosterone than other races. Since testosterone tends to suppress features associated with feminine attractiveness, it's a no brainer. (The same reason that black men are often considered more attractive in average).
The reaction to articles like this always amazes me. By default, we should expect to observe different average levels of things like intelligence and attractiveness between races. Why? For similar reasons that we expect to observe different levels of intelligence and attractiveness between families. Genetically, people of similar races are more closely related to each other. To the extent that traits such as intelligence and attractiveness are heritable, it would be a remarkably improbable coincidence if all the averages between races turned out to be equal.
That such aggregated empirical facts have nothing to do with racism cannot be said enough, apparently.
Other people have eyes and use them to see with and believe black women are the most attractive- are their standards rendered invalid?
auctionguy10,
I don't like cheesecake, but I have seen other people enjoy cheesecake. There are certain objective qualities that make a good cheesecake. Of course, some people will like their cheesecake slightly different, but there are common standards that "good cheesecake" approximates.
If those "objective qualities" are actually culturally subjective standards then that would make sense.
"Evolutionary psychology" is airmchair guess work with a pompous title. As soon as I see that term I know not to bother. This reminds me of the video about a "study" finding that men do not prefer big boobs. I saw a news ticker recently about a "study" finding that the size of the black rim around the iris determines attractiveness. The flow of trash never stops.
Caley McKibbin: "Evolutionary psychology" is airmchair guess work with a pompous title. As soon as I see that term I know not to bother. This reminds me of the video about a "study" finding that men do not prefer big boobs. I saw a news ticker recently about a "study" finding that the size of the black rim around the iris determines attractiveness. The flow of trash never stops. I think you're selling evo psych short. Their methodology is sound as far as I can tell. Try reading the book Why Beautiful People Have More Daughters. Clayton - http://voluntaryistreader.wordpress.com | Post Points: 35
What exactly makes evolutionary psychology worthless? Perceptions of beauty are biological, just as many other things. Symmetry of facial features (especially when averaged out) are one such example. You can say, "that's hogwash," but then I have to ask, "what makes something beautiful at all?" If we evolved, then there is probably some type of evolutionary pressure at work in terms of how attractive we find people.
"I wonder what sample they used."
Gero, Merlin, Eric80, Modus Tollens and Nick Griffin
Judging peoples physical attractiveness on their physical attributes = RACISM!!!!!!!!!!
As far as I'm concerned, attempting to aggregate a massive number of subjective preferences based on race is "racism".
I've always found I tend to find black women more attractive in person than when I see them in "media." Hopefully that doesn't make me a bigot...
In any case, I can't help but think photobias might have something do with this. Western socieities have traditionally been predominantly caucasian, and hence the faces we are exposed to from an early age are so. I can't help but think this must have an effect on our aspirations. For instance when I first came to the UK, I think I had a definite preference towards South Asian women, as that ws what I had been exposed to a lot.
Then again, in India, the women, and actresses all try very hard to "look white," applying talcum powder etc. Then again, so many white people try desperately hard to brown themselves with a tan. I guess maybe nobody's happy with who they are
"When the King is far the people are happy." Chinese proverb
For Alexander Zinoviev and the free market there is a shared delight:
"Where there are problems there is life."
Then again, in India, the women, and actresses all try very hard to "look white," applying talcum powder etc. Then again, so many white people try desperately hard to brown themselves with a tan. I guess maybe nobody's appy with who they are
Yes I've noticed this... White people want to look darker, Indians and Africans want to look lighter, East Asians want to look more caucasian...
Maybe there's some sort of subconscious drive to widen the gene pool, heh.
No. Making up some bullshit pseudo-scientific theory that assigns objective truth to a subjective preference reveals the racist motivations of certain people.
James: ...East Asians want to look more caucasian...
...East Asians want to look more caucasian...
Easily the most lamentable part of the list
You can say, "that's hogwash," but then I have to ask, "what makes something beautiful at all?" If we evolved, then there is probably some type of evolutionary pressure at work in terms of how attractive we find people.
That's the whole point isn't it? That what makes something beautiful is completely subjective.
Sure I'd say there's something natural at work in terms of how attractive we find people- but I personally think it has a lot to do with feminine behavior over the look of skin, that's been my experience. You're saying it has more to do with symmetry of facial features, maybe thats just what gets you going.
I mean if even for one person the symmetry of a woman's face has nothing to do with the physical attraction he feels for her, doesn't that mean that symmetry of the face is biologically completely meaningless for him?
All I was saying is that symmetry of facial features, I think, is somehow representative of "good genes" on something like a subconscious level. The same way the curvature in the hips and feminine inclinations are representative of estrogen. Male humans, on a mass scale, are biologically programmed to mostly find these things attractive. There will always be outliers to be sure; I'm only arguing that it is a mixture of "objective" and "subjective" factors. In other words, I'm saying it's a two-way street depending on measurable features of reality and then the individuals' interpretation of those features.
There are other studies that suggest things like beauty are heavily influenced by culture as well. So perhaps there is a conditioning element as well. Who knows.
I do believe conditioning has a whole lot to do with it. Some people are bombarded everyday by images of what is supposed to represent sexuality, other people aren't- and surely that gives different results. I would imagine someone who builds a physiological relationship to watching pornography by masturbing and ejaculating to that kind of stimulus everyday is very much engaged in conditioning that type of behavior as being the factor for what he finds attractive.
But lets say they took their sample from a different neighborhood where they don't find white women attractive at all for example, wouldn't this study be completely upside down and tell us "White women found to be least attractive"? I mean even if it is judging on averages, there were only 3 interviewers who got to judge attractiveness, and who knows how many actual respondents.
But when it comes to why anyone would find this study offensive its because lets say there's a situation where someone reads this study and they think "Wait what? I'm considered the least attractive even though every man I've been has told me I was beautiful?"- and some guy pushing his glasses up says "Nope, its a cold hard fact that you aren't attractive. Those guys are just outliers, and their biological wiring is all messed up." I mean surely its easy to see WHY it can come as offensive, even if thats not the objective.
I mean it doesn't make any sense to someone who's had a completely different experience of reality, and it begs the question whats wrong with these men that have completely different standards for attractiveness outside of waist-hip ratio? Is something wrong with them since they're not biologically wired to have that be their catalyst for feeling attraction? Is it possible that on a mass scale many men have been conditioned as to what they find attractive? The study doesn't really answer anything for me, anyway.
Beauty is subjective, what I may think is beautiful or attractive, may look ugly to another person. Culture also has a great influence to this perception. There are cultures where having a longer neck, or a really small nose is seen as more attractive.
Quite frankly, I have seen 10/10 of every race in person.
Freedom has always been the only route to progress.
Libertyandlife: Beauty is subjective, what I may think is beautiful or attractive, may look ugly to another person. Culture also has a great influence to this perception. There are cultures where having a longer neck, or a really small nose is seen as more attractive. Quite frankly, I have seen 10/10 of every race in person.
This.
Perhaps the scientist could get a job doing market research for an escort agency.
I think you're selling evo psych short. Their methodology is sound as far as I can tell. Try reading the book Why Beautiful People Have More Daughters.
I'm selling it according to what I've seen of it under the name, including this atrocious excuse for research. Aside from the obviously moronic aspect of it being a survey of mainly caucasian males on african attractiveness, the article is an ignoramus's paradise. Older women have lower testerone than younger women. Now I'll smoke some crack and conclude that this means that women become more feminine looking with age. African-american women have on average higher estrogens and are fatter overall, including 30% larger breast volume than all other regionally distinct groups. The only thing this article did was demonstrate how much biochemistry "evolutionary psychologists" study and how much stupidity and ignorance you can fit under the word "science". The fact that this guy authored the book you recommended is enough reason to not read it.
Older women have lower testerone than younger women. Now I'll smoke some crack and conclude that this means that women become more feminine looking with age.
Indeed, it is rather amusing how quickly people jumpt to loud and uneducated conclusions based on the breadcrumbs of knowledge they have regarding complex subjects such as the endocrinal system. Increased testosterone, also I think shows correlation with more libido in both sexes.
Increased testosterone, also I think shows correlation with more libido in both sexes.
Yes, although there are a number of hormones that affect this.
Perhaps the scientist could get a job doing market research for an escort agency
lol
But, that would require producing results that you can take to the bank.
For me, at least, a perfectly symmetrical face evokes a VERY strong feeling of uncanny valley.
Also, I find that black women with curly hair aren't so great, but black women with straight hair are, by and large, far more attractive then most women, especially because of dat ass
Really, measurement of attractiveness varies from person to person. There is no objective standard of "sexy".