As a resident of Orlando, I spend a greater majority of my weekends at one of the three theme parks here, which means I am exposed to A LOT of people.
Whether I’m walking between rides or, more likely, standing by myself in line (Ms. Cups doesn’t like thrill rides) I’ll look at the people around me. Which obviously means that I, as a straight male, am going to hone in on the ladies. It was this weekend that I noticed myself thinking “Oh wow, she’s attractive!” way more than I notice myself thinking “Yikes! Poor thing…” And I haven’t just noticed it in my age group either. From adults to teens I’m noticing there are more people out there who are generally attractive than not. The attraction varies too. In fact, most of them are a nice sort of pretty, versus a “holy shit she’s amazing!”
There are a number of factors that play into this I would guess; the main one being that I’m probably only noticing the attractive ones BECAUSE they’re attractive. And another big one is what my opinion of attractive is, but, again, they are a majority of the people I see (maybe I’m just nice :).
Does anyone else notice this/agree with me? Are there more objectively attractive people in this world than unattractive ones?
There is no scientific measure of attractiveness. Its all in the eye of the beholder. Many people today use various products/treatments to improve their appearance. Imo, beauty works on the bell curve.
I find that the older I get, the more people I find attractive. Either my tastes are getting broader, or the contrast with the deterioration I see in the mirror makes me less judgey. I think most well-groomed people are somewhat attractive.
To add to madsircool, many people are superficially “not attractive” but become very attractive once you meet them and realise the depth of their personality.
It’s very hard to objectively compare physical attractiveness; it’s probably impossible to compare psychological attractiveness.
Just revel in the fact that you are lucky enough to live in a place that meets your specific definition of attractiveness.
Impossible to determine through casual observation, because there are wide variances in grooming. Many extremely attractive people look like shit because they dress like shit and have moronic hair styles, not to mention mutilation (tattoos, piercing) and a bitchy attitude. However, one thing is certain. Exactly half the people are more attractive than the other half, by the definition of norming.
Agreed, but even Walmart may not give an accurate representation of the “population”.
There are a couple flaws in how you’ve drawn conclusions:
you were limiting yourself to observations 1) at a theme park, and 2) at a theme park at a given locale
you were (likely unconsciously) not focusing on the “non attractive” people, so thereby favoring the count of “attractive”
The problem for such observation is picking a place to make observations that cover “enough” of the population. Even Walmart will limit you to “those who shop at Walmart”. Conversely if you went to a high end mall, you would only see those who shop at such a high end mall (and may not also shop at Walmart).
Secondly, to be objective, you need to count EVERYONE you see, and categorize them. If you have the option to “filter”, you won’t get an accurate count, and therefore conclusion. Say, for instance, you were the TSA guy who verifies the picture ID with the name on the boarding pass. In this role you would be really focusing on each person (although not with the intent of categorizing “attractive” or not).
Objectively? Well, think of this way: Most people will have children at some point in their lives. Which means that most people are at least attractive enough to someone, for a long enough stretch, to successfully reproduce.
Since people select mates based on physical attractiveness and physical traits are inheritable, it would make sense for most humans to lean more towards attractive than non-attractive. Especially since attractive is a subjective quality anyway, and it doesn’t take all that much to be sufficiently attractive for someone’s tastes.
It is possible that non-attractive people are invisible to you. That’s one of the most common sentiments I hear from self-identified “uglies”, especially those who are women.
I caught myself thinking a while back, "Wow, there seem to be a lot of very attractive women from India, but I sure don’t see a lot of very attractive men from India; am I on to something, here? Or am I being racist? Or – oh, wait; that’s right; I’m heterosexual and male; you could pick literally any ethnicity, and the odds are pretty terrific that I’d say hey, look: some attractive women! And, uh, some men!"
Cost is a barrier to entry for most theme parks, so almost everyone there has disposable income. If you have disposable income, you probably have money for orthodontics, decent clothes, health insurance premiums, a good diet, and comfortable living conditions. These luxuries help beautify people.
Anyone at a theme park is probably also in a good mood. A smiling face generally looks better than a solemn one.
And then finally, I suspect attractive people are more likely to enjoy social recreational activities than unattractive people. If I considered myself ugly and was self-conscious about it, any public space would be a little daunting; my tendency to hermit would be higher than it is now. So the folks that you’re able to see aren’t afraid of being seen, because their looks don’t stigmatize them.
That said, attractiveness is very subjective and depends on how you define it. Is it a state of being beautiful or handsome? Or it is the absence of unpleasant features? If you take the latter view, you will probably find most everyone attractive.
I never said I was conducting scientific research, or even that I was saying I was right…just remarking on my observation. No need to go so formal about it.
Theme parks are definitely expensive, and the cost does prevent a certain amount of people from getting in, but I would think they are generally pretty all encompassing of people from all areas of the country, and even the world.
I know plenty of poor families growing up who scraped together years of savings for a Disney trip, and that’s before I even lived here. The APs account for a lot of people in the parks, but not THAT much. Let’s say at any given moment, 50% of the people in the park (and that’s pretty high I’d guess), that’s still 50% of the group representing the various parts of the country and world. That’s a pretty eclectic group.
It’s so hard to pin down that you can even fake it. If you’re a guy, at least, a trick for appearing more attractive is to be standing next to an attractive lady. AKA the Johnny Vegas strategy.
Suddenly, he looks better. Presumably, he scored his current wife because he was already standing next to someone else who was attractive when they met. Like, I dunno, his former wife.
Although, yes, I know what you’re thinking: How do you land the first hot wife? Not sure. Maybe it’s hot wives all the way down. Or maybe, to start the chain off, you need to talk your hot sister into pretending that she’s your wife for a while.
You have to visit at the right time of year, though. People are more attractive here in the summer.
I’m serious. It’s probably true for most places, but it’s very noticeable in a place like Norway or Sweden. The winters suck. But the summers, although they last for about twenty minutes, can be amazing. So, suddenly, everyone is outside a lot more, and wearing much less clothing than usual. Plus, the weather does certain things to your mood…
I’m in Oslo right now, it’s summer, and I can’t even make it from my house to the grocery store without falling in love a dozen times. It’s not really like that on a rainy day in November.
There was a story told by a prospector from the gold rush days in the Yukon. He said there were women who followed the gold rush, too., for the town jobs. He said there wasn’t one ugly woman in Dawson, but some were just barely pretty.
I think most well-groomed people are somewhat attractive.
