Everyone I know with whom the topic has ever come up thinks that people whose parents are of different races tend to be attractive.
I know that there have been studies that involved measuring judgments of attractiveness. Have such studies been done which had implications for the claim that multiracial people tend to be attractive?
If so, and if the answer is “yes, they do tend to be attractive,” then what might the reason be for this? I can imagine a few answers having to do with the value of genetic diversity etc, but that’s just speculation on my part. Have people who actually know what they’re talking about speculated about this kind of thing?
Here’s an article referencing one such study. Apparently this study did find that biracial people are more attractive generally than uniracial people. The group who did the study suggests that this is because biracial people are more symmetric, and symmetry is a sign of genetic goodness.
I’m not even sure if it’s true, but if it is, perhaps it’s because multiracials of any given mix are less common than uniracials and thus more unique/exotic. I know that in my experience, my eye is always more drawn to multiracials, and they just seem more compelling (and thus attractive) than boring uniracials.
Also, as a random note, I’m a multi who looks like a uni.
There is a flaw in that study in the way they are categorizing “race.” The study divided the students into four categories: white, black, Hispanic, and Asian. Then they were classified as being either uniracial or multiracial. The problem is that these “races” are purely cultural constructs, not biological. Most whites and blacks in America are already mixed. Black Americans especially frequently have a significant portion of white ancestry. Hispanic is not even a biological term. Hispanic people can have European, African, or native ancestry.
How do you classify what is a multiracial person in America? Someone whose parents came from different artificially constructed groups? A few generations ago, I would have been considered multiracial for having an Irish parent and Jewish parent. You can’t have a scientific study based on a non-scientific basis.
Did you find a flaw in the study, or did you find a gap in the article’s explication of the study?
Do you think symmetry can be given a biological explication, or is it purely a cultural construct?
Do you imagine the people who designed the study found a correlation between a cultural construct and symmetry, or do you imagine they found a correlation between a biological measure and symmetry?
In either of those two cases, doesn’t the study have real significance?
I don’t know how they measured race either. Did you read the study itself to find out?
I Think it’s because some people (not all) have some inherent genetic wiring to like "exotic’ as long as it’s not too exotic. I happen to like slightly "quirky’ features on women, but in moderation. It makes them more attractive (to me) than a symmetrical beauty.
I think the best example of this is the two Arnaz kids. At least when they were in their 20s.
If you look at Lucille Ball and Desi Arnaz and look at their kids. Desi Jr has a lot of the ethnic look of his father but it is “softer” than his father because of the “white” features he gets from his mother.
On the flip side, Lucie Jr has the exotic Latin looked added to her features which Lucille Ball doesn’t have.
I think in general it’s really a preference. I can think of just as many ugly multi-racial people as attractive ones. Of course the ugly ones never make it to TV or movies, but for some reason seem to always be sitting next to me on the subway, even when there are lots of other empty seat available
I just read an article about attraction and it said that if you take many diverse faces and average them, the result is an attractive face. One person’s too long chin averages out with the people who don’t have chins to make someone with a decently strong chin more attractive than either chin donor. Biracial individuals may be benefiting from a similar smoothing, where each racial heritage tempers the more extreme features of the other.
PS
OTOH, I saw two small boy with brilliant orange afros, huge freckles, cafe au lait skins, buck teeth and sharp pointy chins. There is only so much that can be done in one generation.
GUYS. This isn’t about genetics or averaging or exoticism. (P.S. why would they be more average or symmetric? the whole difference-within-populations-being-more-than-differences-between still works the same way to make them asymmetric and non-average.)
Ugly people stay with their own race. Hot people find hot people wherever they can (them being fewer and all).
Or… another view might be there is a barrier to marrying cross-racially, and attractiveness helps people cross it.
All “races” are purely cultural constructs. At least, all racial groups are. I don’t how the study worked, but there’s no real dividing line between multi and uni. It’s a matter of degree. Your description of the method sounds odd too…if a student is ‘multiracial’ then by definition that would exclude them from being uni. I don’t see how you can have a black multiracial person. It would have to be black plus some other racial category. Assuming the results are strong enough though, you wouldn’t have to real subtle and careful with how you did things. 4 arbitrary racial categories may be enough, if genetic blending has a very strong influence on attractiveness.
