Further – standards for looks and appearance are extremely strongly influenced by culture and society, including all the biases (racism, classism, colorism, sexism, etc.) within. If someone isn’t attracted to black women, but they are attracted to white women, for example, then it’s quite likely that this is influenced by broader society and culture, which dictates that lighter skin and European features are more attractive, in addition to the general vague (and sometimes not-so-vague) dehumanization that often afflicts societal representations of black people.
FWIW, in my personal experience, once one recognizes how strongly influential the biases of society and culture are, then it’s possible to overcome them and actually change what one finds physically attractive.
Virtually every physical characteristic that might be a liability to someone in dating, can be changed.
The natural state of the human body is to be ripped. All “ripped” even means is having the muscles that are already there be visible through the skin. Having layers of extra weight is an unnatural contrivance that we created through poor diet and sedentary living. Almost every human being on earth is capable of achieving a healthy weight, and, if they want to, to be ripped. There are thousands of dudes walking around in the Philippines who look like Bruce Lee, and they didn’t get that way by exercising, just by walking around a lot and eating less food or cleaner food.
Any face short of the Elephant Man can be improved in appearance with a good hairstyle, grooming, or dental work if need be. (The latter might be tough because some people can’t afford it.)
If you’re short, carry yourself like you’re tall.
You don’t have to be Dr. House to figure this out.
The people who generally care the most about how people look, in terms of sexual attractiveness, are MEN. Men care way more than women. Men are the ones who fetishize body parts, men are the ones who spend infinite amounts of time and energy on the way women look, the way their own penises look, it is MEN who are obsessed with this.
Women have preferences, absolutely, but the way a man looks (talking cis here) is but a part and often a rather subordinate part of what makes him attractive. Women for whom looks are a paramount a feature as they are for men are a minority.
Incels are probably the last group of men who would believe this, though.
This is true, but it’s a bit more subtle than that.l
In addition to being less focused on physical appearance than men, women also tend to value appearance for what it suggests about a man rather than the pure look alone.
In particular, height is something which is associated with strength, and many women like to have a feeling that their man is a strong man. So it’s not that they like the tall look specifically, but what it suggests to them (at a psychological level).
IIRC, at some point in some European society (German, IIRC) having facial scars was considered handsome in a man. Not because facial scars look good in a purely aesthetic sense, but because it meant the guy was a macho fencer/dueler, which was an admirable quality.
Again, this is not to say that pure aesthetics are not also a part of it with women, and not to deny that women are less focused on appearance in general as compared to men. Only that some of this is due to the appearance being driven by psychological associations rather than aesthetics to a greater extent than is the case with men.
So now you’re saying physical appearance matters so much that a person should change all their physical characteristics to fit some “natural” ideal. Just a few posts ago you said physical appearance doesn’t matter.
This, of course, is coming from someone who has already admitted he has never been pegged as ugly or unattractive.
I’ll look for another cite to supplement Velocity’s when I’m able, but why does this strike you as so unlikely? It seems like very basic common sense to me – back when there existed very strong negative stereotypes of work ethic and sobriety for Irish immigrants, they were less likely to get jobs. Why would things like this be so unlikely to affect who people are physically attracted to? If all/most of the beauty magazines and TV ads and such, for decades and decades, write about and demonstrate “beauty” as being fair-skinned, straight-haired, and European-featured, do you really not think this could have a strong influence on who people in the society find beautiful?
Some of it is also about avoidance as well. I once read a Reddit comment by a woman to the effect that many women weren’t so much attracted to tall men as they are repulsed by short men, because it was embarrassing for many women to be seen with a male mate who is shorter than they are. A man didn’t have to be significantly taller than his GF - even just 1-2 inches would do - but he just couldn’t be shorter than the woman, that’s all.
I don’t need an article which “explains it”. There’s no explanation required here - it’s an extremely simple concept.
What I asked for a basis for the assertion, and there’s nothing of the sort in that article.
It doesn’t strike me as unlikely. I didn’t say it was unlikely. In fact, I said “Not that it’s necessarily wrong.”
What I asked for was the basis. It doesn’t seem possible for there to be some basis for asserting that it’s actually true as opposed to merely plausible, which is what you did.
I said: “If you’re relatively height-weight proportional, you don’t smell bad, and you practice basic grooming, you’ve got all the physical attributes you need to do whatever it is that you want to do with the opposite (or same) sex.”
That’s all I’m trying to emphasize. NOT that it’s always necessary to change all, or any, of your physical characteristics, but that it’s possible to do so if you want to. It’s not some insurmountable obstacle. Also, I’ll get back up on my soapbox to reiterate that height is not as important as guys seem to think it is. But, if you feel that it’s important to you to look a certain way, then by all means, you can achieve that goal by putting some effort in.
Damn, now that I’m off that soapbox, everyone else seems so much taller.
Just for a very obvious example with regards to societal beauty standards and race, there is an utterly enormous industry of chemicals, tools/gadgets, and wigs/extensions to meet the massive demand for black women to present as having straight hair. Why do you think that is?
Also lots of skin-lightening creams and treatments in places like Haiti, Thailand, South Korea, etc.
Granted, it’s not necessarily because of the West - but if everyone around you pushes a “light skin is prettier than dark” message, naturally, women will opt for lightening their skin.
I think it’s reasonable to believe it’s true – I’m not 100% certain that it’s “actually true”, but based on common sense and logic, and the history of popular standards of beauty, I think it’s entirely reasonable to presume it’s likely.
You’ll also notice that I said “it’s quite likely…” – not “it’s certain”. I think it’s quite likely that many people who don’t find black women attractive (but do find white women attractive) are being influenced by biases in standards of beauty. I’m not sure how this could be proven, but ISTM like an entirely reasonable belief. It seems odd to me that the idea that cultural standards of beauty, including the biases within them, might influence who individuals find attractive, is controversial in any way at all.
Well, no, I’m not a jerk now. And to be honest I never really was one - but only because I noticed that I was starting to develop feelings in that direction and decided to take steps. But yes indeedy, I have felt the siren song of blaming others for their choices as if they owed you something which they don’t. As I mentioned I was friendzoneish* friendship for two decades. After a point about fifteen or seventeen years in, I started to get a little bitter about it. I corrected the issue, but it’s still a thing that happened.
The thing to take away from it is that I’m not an asshole (well, not about this) - which means you don’t have to be an asshole to be drawn to an incelish mindset. Had I been spending time in places where being a psychopath would get me sympathy and approval, I think it’s extremely likely that I could have been guided and persuaded into being a monster. Morals are learned, and lack of morals can be taught - and I’m not egotistical enough to think that I am immune to that fact. Which means that a lot of the people who are incels now didn’t have to be.
(I say friendzoneish because in my case the woman was well aware that I loved her, because I told her, which means technically I hadn’t friendzoned myself. Why didn’t she get shed of me years earler? Her social circle wasn’t big either…)
Yes, the effect of a growing cult of online misogyny with anonymous contributors does not bode well for some men, who might find themselves insulted. I can’t argue with that, but holy myopia.
The existence of this cultishness is terrifying in every sense. There has always been a fear that the nice guy asking you out could be a psychopath or a stalker or woman-hater or he might just have trouble understanding that “no” means “no”, but now, with technological advances, we can visit men’s hangouts dedicated to our disparagement, and see inside their minds. And it’s gross.
This is something I understood in the abstract until I became single in my 40s, and now I understand it in a visceral sense, as a problem that has showed up at my front door, unannounced, twice. All of social convention dictated that I say “Oh hi, come on in.” But I really, really did not want to do that. And in a shocking twist, he was angry and insulted. Or angry about being insulted. I don’t know. Definitely angry, the same anger and passive-aggressiveness that made me not like him in the first place, and which should really get triple the airtime that “height” does when discussing what women like and don’t like. If that should happen.
I understood “quite likely” to mean “more likely than not”.
I think this is almost certainly true. But that’s not the same as your earlier claim.
Phrased this way, it’s almost certainly true, and shouldn’t be controversial in any way.
Your earlier formulation downplayed the possibility that there might be some other cause which might also make people find the one look more attractive than the other. That’s what you need to be able to say “If someone isn’t attracted to black women, but they are attracted to white women, for example, then it’s quite likely that this is influenced by broader society and culture, which dictates that lighter skin and European features are more attractive, in addition to the general vague (and sometimes not-so-vague) dehumanization that often afflicts societal representations of black people.” (emphasis added)
If all you’re saying is that “broader society and culture” have some influence, then that’s non-controversial, at least on my end.
Hey andy, if all you’re saying is just what you’re saying, then I don’t disagree!
In all sincerity, F-P, I’m really not following your objection at all. What are you taking issue with? Were you concerned that iiandyiiii might be attributing all attraction to racial bias?
.
He said that any given person who is more attracted to white people can be assumed to be influenced by the culture etc. This only follows from an assumption that it’s unlikely the person might just happen to prefer white people’s appearance.
I agree that it makes sense that at a societal level there’s some influence, but there’s no reason to assume that other factors might not be just as strong or stronger, so that there’s no way to say that it’s more likely than not that a given individual preference is the result of societal preference.
[Same goes for all styles and appearance preferences. Tattoos, hairstyles, etc.]
to reiterate that height is not as important as guys seem to think it is. But, if you feel that it’s important to you to look a certain way, then by all means, you can achieve that goal by putting some effort in.