Sunday, January 15, 2006

Beauty and Madness

Looks do matter, no matter how we try to deny it. We subconsciously form opinions towards other people based on their physical attractiveness. The tall handsome guy somehow appears more trustworthy and likeable than the short guy with the big nose. The pretty girl that's easy on the eyes is judged to be more intelligent and having the better personality than the homely woman with thick eyebrows. We discriminate based on outside looks. Fair or not, that's what usually happens.

We are attracted to attractive people. Say two women are applying for the same job opening. One of them is a dead ringer for Jessica Alba, while the other resembles Rosie O'Donnell. Assuming they have similar qualifications and did equally well in the interview, who do you think is more likely to get the job? Taller men are also more likely to be promoted to leadership positions since they have the physical attributes of being a leader. During debates, good-looking men usually win over their not-so-good-looking counterparts, go figure.

How do we attribute this mysterious force that compels us prefer nicer-looking people over ugly ones? How do we even judge what is physically attractive in the first place? For instance, when I see Naomi Watts on TV I know she is beautiful and sexy, yet how do I know she is? Who made up these rules in the first place? Why makes a pretty girl 'pretty', and an ugly girl 'ugly'. And why do we instinctively prefer good-looking over the rest.

After all, physical looks are only a by-product of the genes you are given at birth. Our facial features, bone structure, metabolism are some of the cards we are dealt with that determine how well you look later in life. Some people are born beautiful. They have been blessed with great physical attributes. And we look up to them, we place them on a pedestal, reward them for their good looks. Yet we forget that this is mostly a product of genes and physiology.

Years ago, I asked out this very pretty girl. The experience was intimidating because I knew deep inside I was out of my league with regards to her. She rejected me because I was "funny-looking". And I felt bad because I wasn't good-looking enough for her. Years later, it felt kind of silly because there I was feeling intimidated and all, yet her only advantage was in her genes determining physical looks. Genes which you can't control. Somehow she had gotten the superior genes, yet it made all the difference.

Take Jessica Alba or Naomi Watts. We worship them, place them on pedestals, praise them for looking the way they are, treat them differently. Yet they are just like any other person. The only difference is that they look better. Yet this tiny difference makes all the difference. Weird.

Many people I know are self-conscious about their bodies. They make an effort to reshape their outside appearance, to somehow morph their faces through hairstyle or ornaments to improve their physical attractiveness. The perceived beauty on the outside has a huge effect on how people feel on the inside. Self-esteem goes up or down depending on how attractive or unattractive others perceive you to be.

I ask people why they work out in the gym. Why they want to lose weight. And the reply most always is "to look better". Note that they don't necessarily want to be healthier or stronger. They just want to look better, get that extra physical attractiveness point, which will raise the ego, self-esteem, and indirectly make them feel better about themselves. People want to look better on the outside so they can feel better on the inside. Yet attractiveness is largely determined by the cards you are dealt with, so it doesn't work. There is no peace of mind if your happiness is determined by how others perceive of you, and worse if it is determined by how others perceive of you in terms of physical looks.

Despite these sentiments, I still find myself more attracted to physically attractive people. I'm still more liable to find a pretty girl more fun to be with than a less attractive one. Perhaps it is because through some freak of nature, attractive people really have more charm and with than unattractive ones. Or perhaps I am just a victim of my own social conditioning. Any ideas?

7 Comments:

At 8:03 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

My boyfriend and I were talking on the phone last night and we got into the discussion of "looks" and he said, "You're the most beautiful woman on earth!" and I jokingly said to him, "I hope you don't love me only for my looks?" and he said, "When I first met you, the main reason I wanted to talk to you was because you're very beautiful. Later on, after I got to know you better, I fell in love with you because you're an intelligent woman, good person with a big heart. No matter how good looking you were, if you weren't a big-hearted person, I might not have fallen in love." I guess what he's trying to say was that even though good looks are basis for initial attraction, it's not a guarantee for a longer-lasting relationship, personal or professional.

For sensible people, looks are just what attracts us to a person INITIALLY. When we get to know them better, personality(if the relationship is personal) or ability(if it's professional) suddenly becomes the higher priority.

Only people looking to have nothing but good time will stick with the looker inspite of bad personality or bad performance(at work!).

By the way, roehl, you're comment "ironically, the most successful people in the world are usually not good looking. there’s michael jordan who’s black," -- are you saying michael jordan wasn't good looking because he was black? that's racism. be careful!

 
At 1:45 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

>> because of my preference

classic excuse used by racist. the don't believe that expression itself is racist. it's not just ignorance, it's arrogance more than anything.

 
At 5:52 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

there's no such thing as the "best of a certain race", there's only such things as the best that each person wants to give it based the talents he/she has been born with. It has nothing to do with race but it has everything to do with personal determination to succeed in something.

The fact that you said that "race" determines whether one person will be good or bad in one activity means you're racist.

 
At 1:38 AM, Blogger rmacapobre said...

i saw this on oprah. it makes sense to me.

the marraige therapist said that we are attracted/love people who we think will complete us. an inattentive parent will damage a child and will grow up looking for that attention. until s/he finds it. so love is a kind of half empty half full scenario.

half empty: we fall in love because there is something wrong with us. many people have distorted self images. maybe brought about by a traumatic childhood. often people would tell whats wrong with us. and the subject would mostly likely be about how we look. and we grow up with this baggage into adulthood. where we look for and try to own that pretty face. because it makes us feel good about ourselves.

half full: finding that someone is necessary for a person to grow. this explains people who havent been in love or disinterested in finding someone. its because there is nothing wrong with them, that it known, to begin with. this also explains why we see pretty women with ugly men. because pretty people might likely need assurance from betrayal. or they need that constant attention.

 
At 1:50 AM, Blogger rmacapobre said...

being racist is learned. which means we can also unlearn it.

how we manilenos treat people from lets say cebu. or any other place thats not manila. we immediately assume things about them. that their less intelligent for example. i know because i used to be one of those people who thought like that. and we are bombarded with that same message in the media.

of course now that ive been living in cebu for a long time. i have grown to know more about my adopted city and its citizens. all these preejudices/misconceptions go away. ive learned that people here are just as good/bad like people in manila.

i thought once that white people were generally smarter. but having worked with them. i thought that they are just as good/bad like asians, or any other person.

both scenarios require a certain amount of exposure to break away from being racist. aah we know how americans make fun of other peoples accents. lets say the indian accent when indians speak in englsh. but if you only hear americans struggle just as much when they speak french. then it becomes clear. we are all the same. we all have the same potential and limitations.

 
At 6:44 PM, Blogger robdelacruz said...

Good athletes have a certain mystique that somehow makes them more physically attractive. I call this the 'Martina Hingis' phenomenon. In terms of attractiveness, brawns still matter more than brains. That's one reason why the varsity athletes in college get more prestige than the brainy academians.

We prefer strong people over weak due to thousands of years of human evolution and conditioning; when humans needed strength and physicality more than brains in order to overcome our harsh environment.

As humans we have an innate instinct and preferences that were developed gradually over time. The industrial and information age that we are living through now is a speck in time compared to the entire history as a human race. We are still evolving. Centuries from now, our concept of 'beautiful' and 'ugly' will be very different from how we perceive it today.

 
At 8:09 PM, Blogger rmacapobre said...

our concept of 'beautiful' and 'ugly' will be very different from how we perceive it today.

i agree with this statement. a hundred years ago brown skin was not "pretty". or healthy looking women were "pretty". and as recent as a few years ago. curly hair is "pretty" where as now chemically treated dry looking straight hair is "pretty"

go figure ..

 

Post a Comment

<< Home