NationStates

Posted: **Wed Jan 31, 2018 2:05 am**

Trump is proof enough that the study is bogus
and I wonder how specific it is to middle America

Crockerland wrote:
A m e n r i a wrote:Here's the thing about ideologies and atttactiveness...China is a communist nation, but it has the prettiest girls, tied with South Korea. So I guess that's enough to prove my point.

The Chinese don't exactly get to choose whether or not they want communist rule, since the government chooses which parties are and aren't legal.

I'd be more interested to see a broader study looking at correlation of attractiveness to wealth/status things like materialism vs idealism, conservativism vs liberalism and individualism v collectivism without linking it specifically to Republican v Dems split

Posted: **Wed Jan 31, 2018 2:07 am**

I think it kind of checks out, that whole sense that life is just intrinsically fairer overall seems to align with someone being of a conservative mindset in the truest sense (i.e. nothing needs to change) compared to someone being treated poorly who would probably be more likely to argue for change to occur.

Posted: **Wed Jan 31, 2018 2:09 am**

Cetacea wrote:Trump is proof enough that the study is bogus

He's fugly, but a sample size of one isn't very useful for scientific research.

Posted: **Wed Jan 31, 2018 2:11 am**

Cetacea wrote:Trump is proof enough that the study is bogus
and I wonder how specific it is to middle America

USS Monitor wrote:
Neanderthaland wrote:It's a bit of a cliche, I know, but the modern far-right isn't exactly made up of Aryan supermen.

The Nazi leadership wasn't either.

Wasn't Trump relatively decent looking when young, I think you'd be able to say your teens, 20's and 30's can create the mindset that can reach into later uglier years.

I'd be more interested to see a broader study looking at correlation of attractiveness to wealth/status things like materialism vs idealism, conservativism vs liberalism and individualism v collectivism without linking it specifically to Republican v Dems split

The articles do quote such studies on which this was in part based on.

Posted: **Wed Jan 31, 2018 2:12 am**

Donut section wrote:Still close enough.

Hm. I think I see why you say this but just because I call myself the queen of the universe, that does not make me the queen of the universe. With all the class discrepancies and stuff, I would say China is no more Communist than the USA, just more authoritarian.

Cetacea wrote:I'd be more interested to see a broader study looking at correlation of attractiveness to wealth/status things like materialism vs idealism, conservativism vs liberalism and individualism v collectivism without linking it specifically to Republican v Dems split

Indeed, that would be very interesting. Then again, that seems like a rather obvious topic, I am sure there must already be studies on such a correlation. Us humans have a weird obsession with studies... :geek:

Posted: **Wed Jan 31, 2018 2:13 am**

Letwinist States wrote:
Donut section wrote:Still close enough.

Hm. I think I see why you say this but just because I call myself the queen of the universe, that does not make me the queen of the universe. With all the class discrepancies and stuff, I would say China is no more Communist than the USA, just more authoritarian.

Cetacea wrote:I'd be more interested to see a broader study looking at correlation of attractiveness to wealth/status things like materialism vs idealism, conservativism vs liberalism and individualism v collectivism without linking it specifically to Republican v Dems split

Indeed, that would be very interesting. Then again, that seems like a rather obvious topic, I am sure there must already be studies on such a correlation. Us humans have a weird obsession with studies...

From the article..

The researchers took data from the 1972, 1974 and 1976 American National Studies surveys which asked people to evaluate the appearance of others and also explored participants’ political beliefs, income, race, gender, and education.

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.

Posted: **Wed Jan 31, 2018 2:15 am**

Bombadil wrote:
Cetacea wrote:Trump is proof enough that the study is bogus
and I wonder how specific it is to middle America

USS Monitor wrote:
The Nazi leadership wasn't either.

Wasn't Trump relatively decent looking when young, I think you'd be able to say your teens, 20's and 30's can create the mindset that can reach into later uglier years.

Meh. He's only about as good looking as you would expect a trust fund baby with millions of dollars to spend on clothes, stylists, personal trainers, and so on to be.

Which is what I expect the real correlation here is: money.

Posted: **Wed Jan 31, 2018 2:15 am**

Bakery Hill wrote:I'm a communist Adonis with hard left views and even harder abs.

Your post made me think of this video, and not even in a bad way.

Posted: **Wed Jan 31, 2018 2:47 am**

I'm about as skeptical of this study as I am about the one that proved right wingers were less intelligent.

Besides, I'm really left wing and I'm so good looking that I have to wear a paper bag on my head when I leave the house, otherwise I'd distract people and cause road accidents. That's what my mum told me anyway.

Posted: **Wed Jan 31, 2018 2:48 am**

The biggest difficulty I find with this is defining what is right and what is left. The whole Right vs Left distinction originated during the French Revolution, and the actual factions that made up the two sides, changed more often then the French changed their form of government (the French are now on their 5th republic, and also tried out various forms of monarchy).

Especially when you look at extreme views, they often share ideas and beliefs in common. For example, Nazis and Communists are both critical of capitalism, appeal to the working class, suppress political opposition etc.

Really as I see, the right, left and center are political alliances. The question is which groups prefer to form coalitions with. This is easier to see in a multiparty system like Germany. It should be noted that in Germany, the center left SPD has in the past avoided a coalition with the left wing Linke, and the center right parties have gone farther, not only rejecting a coalition with the right wing AfD, but refusing to sit next to them. Even those parties are not as extreme as the MLP or the NDP, which aren't in the Bundestag.

If you look at the American right, they are all called conservative, although they include libertarians, Nationalist-Populists, and the extreme of the far right racists.
(aka Alt right)

Now, I can see the argument that good looking people would be more likely to subscribe to just world theory and be center right conservatives, or libertarians. But those neonazis are conspiratorial and against the status quo as the far left.

It does not make sense to say that the world is just, and to complain that Jews are unjustly running things. So, I don't think that being pretty makes you a nazi.

TL;DR

This makes sense only if applied to center right-center left ideologies, not nazis and communists.

Posted: **Wed Jan 31, 2018 3:00 am**

This makes sense. Although there are "working class Tories" and "temporarily embarrassed millionaires", generally left-wing ideas are more attractive to those who are less wealthy and/or experience social disadvantage because of one characteristic or another. A group that is statistically less likely to have resources and sees the world as organised against them is likely in aggregate terms to have less to spend on making themselves look attractive and less social confidence. Many many exceptions, but when you look at the aggregates I'm not surprised there are trends that are statistically significant to some degree.

Posted: **Wed Jan 31, 2018 3:01 am**

Bombadil wrote:
Cetacea wrote:Trump is proof enough that the study is bogus
and I wonder how specific it is to middle America

Wasn't Trump relatively decent looking when young, I think you'd be able to say your teens, 20's and 30's can create the mindset that can reach into later uglier years.

As a general rule, people get uglier in advanced age, though before advanced age they might get a more "refined" look to them; in my opinion, Trump is on the cusp between "refined" and "uglier". Not that I buy the study—of course not, because this here is just an outlier (and because this is just another meme)—but Trump looks relatively good for his age, and admittedly the non-drinker, non-smoker lifestyle seems to have kept him from looking completely godawful. Clinton, on the other hand, liked his cigars, but gave them and junk food up after heart surgery. Though, on the Republican side, George W. Bush isn't looking as hot nowadays...

Posted: **Wed Jan 31, 2018 3:01 am**

The Cosmic Frankish Empire wrote:
Bakery Hill wrote:I'm a communist Adonis with hard left views and even harder abs.

Your post made me think of this video, and not even in a bad way.

I cringed so hard I pinched my neck, thank you stranger.

Posted: **Wed Jan 31, 2018 3:08 am**

Bakery Hill wrote:
The Cosmic Frankish Empire wrote:Your post made me think of this video, and not even in a bad way.

I cringed so hard I pinched my neck, thank you stranger.

Bloody hell, the guy’s suit is possibly one of the ugliest I’ve ever seen. The fact that he also made a video on the subject doesn’t help either.

Posted: **Wed Jan 31, 2018 3:09 am**

In response to the poll, since none of the above really apply:

Average-ish with an obstinate refusal to lean in any direction.

Posted: **Wed Jan 31, 2018 3:30 am**

Idzequitch wrote:In response to the poll, since none of the above really apply:

Average-ish with an obstinate refusal to lean in any direction.

THAT would be a proper thesis for a paper.

Posted: **Wed Jan 31, 2018 3:31 am**

USS Monitor wrote:
Crockerland wrote:The Chinese don't exactly get to choose whether or not they want communist rule, since the government chooses which parties are and aren't legal.

It's not communist anyway.

It's Only Communism If It Works ®

Posted: **Wed Jan 31, 2018 3:31 am**

Idzequitch wrote:In response to the poll, since none of the above really apply:

Average-ish with an obstinate refusal to lean in any direction.

Yeah. The poll, I don't like very much myself, mainly because it goes to the extremes when it comes to high attractiveness—that being communist and fascist—while the more milder views tend not to have any representation for their appearances aside from "cave troll" and "average", not that the extremes had representation for either of those. I, personally, would have preferred each of the options having "I lean left or are left-wing", or "I lean right or are right-wing", or "I lean neither way", bin the last two options, and add your option in the middle.

On a side note, welcome back, Idz! :hug:

Now go announce your return in TET! ...before the mod-powers-that-be hammer anyone who joins in for threadjacking.

Posted: **Wed Jan 31, 2018 3:34 am**

Trumptonium wrote:
It's Only Communism If It Works ®

By definition, yes. Not the historical reality when seeing all those authoritarian peeps out there. Stalin, Mao, jeez.

Posted: **Wed Jan 31, 2018 3:41 am**

Cetacea wrote:Trump is proof enough that the study is bogus
and I wonder how specific it is to middle America

Let's compare it to his counterparts of age

Posted: **Wed Jan 31, 2018 3:52 am**

I have a dad bod. In my mid-20s. Without being a dad. That means...?

Posted: **Wed Jan 31, 2018 3:56 am**

He is saying in regards to modern liberalism and conservatism and the people who tend to lean one way or the other they tend to be more attractive on the right side of the isle, its not because they are conservative they are attractive actually the opposite, its because they are attractive they are conservative. And the people talking about commies and Nazis are getting off topic as this is aimed at very broad ordinary more mainstream viewing people. And commies and Nazis are both collectivist which this Peterson denounces and he advocates for individualism and is trying to draw based on his research by a team of both left and rightwing individuals (from the research I've done in relation to this study that I originally disagreed with). They are drawing a connection between one's looks, how that affects perceptions of them and possibly others and how that could lead people to more likely think one way as opposed to another. To lean towards individualism versus collectivism. Conservative as in American definition and liberals as in American definition, not classical or in any other terms, from what I gather.

Posted: **Wed Jan 31, 2018 3:56 am**

Dahon wrote:I have a dad bod. In my mid-20s. Without being a dad. That means...?

You're fat and low test?

Posted: **Wed Jan 31, 2018 3:58 am**

The Cosmic Frankish Empire wrote:
Dahon wrote:I have a dad bod. In my mid-20s. Without being a dad. That means...?

You're fat and low test?

These days yes -- I had a merry Christmas and happy New Year indeed -- but what is "low test"?

Posted: **Wed Jan 31, 2018 3:59 am**

This study also is based in psychology mainly for those wondering about how they may be conducting it.. if you didn't already know

P.S. I am not a conservative individual and not attractive

NationStates

Attractiveness trends to the right..