Advertisement
by Kramanica » Thu Feb 01, 2018 9:13 am
by Luziyca » Thu Feb 01, 2018 9:59 am
by Galloism » Thu Feb 01, 2018 10:48 am
by Constitutional Technocracy of Minecraft » Thu Feb 01, 2018 11:07 am
by Neanderthaland » Thu Feb 01, 2018 11:43 am
Ethel mermania wrote:Bombadil wrote:
He totally wasn't, he was a poster boy for the 'disturbed child' look.
Boy most likely to conduct mass genocide in school yearbook vote.
Dude, you and I both know chicks dig a bad boy.
by Kramanica » Thu Feb 01, 2018 11:45 am
by Northwest Slobovia » Thu Feb 01, 2018 3:29 pm
Alvecia wrote:Northwest Slobovia wrote:Ah, good! Somebody else read the actual paper too!
Unspoiled, paragraphed, and emphasized.
So, for their first "proof", they used an entirely subjective measure of attractiveness from one person, written down after the interviewer asked about the person's politics. Uh-huh. The "results" of that part may show nothing more than that the interviewer had a right-leaning bias. The experimental design is so poor as to render this part meaningless. (Also, that's "data" from the 1970s. Maybe things have changed in fourty years?)
The second "proof" is just as bad. While the method is better, it's a survey of people born just before WW2 -- as the authors note, they were 62 to 73 years old when interviewed -- which isn't a generation known for lots of tolerance for people who looked or acted differently. Also, they find that attractiveness predicts party identification (Republican or Democratic brands) much more strongly than ideology (extreme liberal to extreme conservative), and neither is as strong an effect as eduction or income.
Maybe rather than trying to cherry-pick historical data, the authors could run some surveys of more typical people these days?
I mean, straight off the bat, they could have controlled for some interviewer bias by getting them to rate attractiveness before the interview, at the very least
by The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp » Thu Feb 01, 2018 3:57 pm
by Ethel mermania » Thu Feb 01, 2018 4:40 pm
by Kramanica » Thu Feb 01, 2018 4:43 pm
by Garner Industrial State » Thu Feb 01, 2018 4:53 pm
Constitutional Technocracy of Minecraft wrote:"Stunningly good looking but a communist/fascist" - Where's everything in between communism and fascism?
La Paz de Los Ricos wrote:They wanna be the very best, like no one ever was.
by The Parkus Empire » Thu Feb 01, 2018 6:21 pm
Benjamin Lafayette Sisko wrote:Maybe it's a bit biased? Most rich people tend to be more attractive due to the ability to afford better cosmetics. And they are more often right wingers than left?
by Soritarius » Thu Feb 01, 2018 7:42 pm
Constitutional Technocracy of Minecraft wrote:"Stunningly good looking but a communist/fascist" - Where's everything in between communism and fascism?
by Bombadil » Thu Feb 01, 2018 7:44 pm
Garner Industrial State wrote:Constitutional Technocracy of Minecraft wrote:"Stunningly good looking but a communist/fascist" - Where's everything in between communism and fascism?
I was forced to pick communism. I look pretty good, and my glasses actually improve my style as well as sight. There should be a middle option.
by The Rich Port » Thu Feb 01, 2018 9:35 pm
by Sovaal » Thu Feb 01, 2018 9:53 pm
by The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp » Fri Feb 02, 2018 10:54 am
by The Liberated Territories » Fri Feb 02, 2018 1:25 pm
by The Liberated Territories » Fri Feb 02, 2018 1:26 pm
The Parkus Empire wrote:Benjamin Lafayette Sisko wrote:Maybe it's a bit biased? Most rich people tend to be more attractive due to the ability to afford better cosmetics. And they are more often right wingers than left?
Fiddlesticks, I am broke and the most right wing poster on this board
http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=261zrpl&s=9
by Chessmistress » Fri Feb 02, 2018 2:46 pm
by Berdan » Fri Feb 02, 2018 2:52 pm
by Nouveau Yathrib » Sun Feb 04, 2018 4:25 pm
Republican Corentia wrote:Bombadil wrote:Various studies over the years have shown that a person’s physical appearance significantly colours their life experience, and Peterson and Palmer say these life experiences mould our political views.
“Attractiveness matters. When we are treated differently we begin to perceive the world differently,” says Peterson. “Research shows good-looking people tend to get on better in life because people interact with them differently.”
The study reports this can lead them to have a “blind spot” when it comes to understanding the hardships faced by others – making them more likely to embrace individualism and reject the types of social assistance and welfare aid more commonly promoted by leftwing policy.
“All attractive people are not conservative and not all unattractive people are liberals,” said Peterson. But he added: “Attractiveness gives a person a small push in the conservative direction.”
Link-a-dink..
It's science people.
I would argue that privilege, of which attractiveness can be a factor, is what leads to this idea that the world is pretty decent and fair place so there must be something wrong with these welfare scroungers. I am not unattractive in that I'm 6.2, with green eyes and somewhat dirty blond hair.. I certainly notice I get better treatment in general, I get smiled at more, I can smile myself into an upgrade.. I get listened to at work..
..but what say the dark denizens of NSG, that endless pool of human understanding and wisdom?
"These results were compared with the Wisconsin Longitudinal study which focused on the physical characteristics of more than 10,000 high school students who were rated by others on their level of attractiveness.
They said a connection between an individual’s physical attractiveness and political beliefs could be revealed. They found that attractive people faced fewer hurdles navigating the social world and were more likely to be conservative due to the blind spot theory."
>high schoolers
Reminder high schoolers, left-wing or right-wing, still haven't experienced much of the world yet.
Diopolis wrote:I'm quite right wing, but I lean more towards producerism, neo-mercantilism, and christian democracy as a form of economics than austrian school- most of my conservatism is grounded in extreme social views rather than economics(up until Trump I would've been more comfortable with the democrats economics plan). I've received a lot of comments about how attractive I am.
I propose the alternate version- conservatism is about conformism more than liberalism. People who break society's rules(even if unwritten) get the short end of the stick- whether that's homosexuals, drug users, or any other dramatic example you care to name- and no sympathy. I can see physical attractiveness tying into that pretty easily.
Ethel mermania wrote:USS Monitor wrote:
What point is that supposed to make? If you're posting it on the assumption that people will see it and go, "Oh, wow, Trump looks better," you shouldn't have bothered.
It does show a better looking fellow on the right than left.
Melina is much better looking than hillary is as well, though tbf to hillary she was quite the babe in law school.
by Diopolis » Sat Feb 10, 2018 1:09 pm
Nouveau Yathrib wrote:Republican Corentia wrote:"These results were compared with the Wisconsin Longitudinal study which focused on the physical characteristics of more than 10,000 high school students who were rated by others on their level of attractiveness.
They said a connection between an individual’s physical attractiveness and political beliefs could be revealed. They found that attractive people faced fewer hurdles navigating the social world and were more likely to be conservative due to the blind spot theory."
>high schoolers
Reminder high schoolers, left-wing or right-wing, still haven't experienced much of the world yet.
And yet the years during and immediately following high school profoundly affect people's political leanings and partisan identification. Relative support for the Democrats or the Republicans in the US among different age cohorts is correlated with the popularity of the parties when they entered adulthood.Diopolis wrote:I'm quite right wing, but I lean more towards producerism, neo-mercantilism, and christian democracy as a form of economics than austrian school- most of my conservatism is grounded in extreme social views rather than economics(up until Trump I would've been more comfortable with the democrats economics plan). I've received a lot of comments about how attractive I am.
I propose the alternate version- conservatism is about conformism more than liberalism. People who break society's rules(even if unwritten) get the short end of the stick- whether that's homosexuals, drug users, or any other dramatic example you care to name- and no sympathy. I can see physical attractiveness tying into that pretty easily.
The anti-SJWs would like to have a word with you on that...
I've noticed that the more attractive guys in my immediate social network with a similar background as me are more likely to be nominally Christian. These are the people you see participating in church groups who have larger, more vibrant social networks and have more of a presence on social media.
I've definitely grown into my looks since I first joined NSG several years ago and have noticed myself shifting to the right philosophically, even though I still identify with left of center ideas and policies.
The Parkus Empire wrote:Benjamin Lafayette Sisko wrote:Maybe it's a bit biased? Most rich people tend to be more attractive due to the ability to afford better cosmetics. And they are more often right wingers than left?
Fiddlesticks, I am broke and the most right wing poster on this board
http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=261zrpl&s=9
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: A m e n r i a, Aadhirisian Puppet Nation, Cinnaa, Corporate Collective Salvation, Dumb Ideologies, El Lazaro, Emotional Support Crocodile, Ethel mermania, GMS Greater Miami Shores 1, Ifreann, Imperializt Russia, Mardesurria, Nu Elysium, Schwessen-Hellfohen, Stellar Colonies, Turenia, Vassenor
Advertisement