Or... why do we think that people who are deformed or different are "ugly."
2006-12-20 12:40:03 · 33 answers · asked by CJ 3 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
ok ugly as in Totally deformed... elephant man... you know.
Not just dark hair when you prefer blondes. Ironic really that all the people who criticised my question for being shallow were making the same assumption.
2006-12-20 14:00:19 · update #1
So natural selection doesn't allow for ugly to be chosen over pretty?
Why do people think others different from them are ugly? You answered it right there- because they are different from them, and that makes people uncomfortable. People don't like to feel uncomfortable, so they find a convenient nitch to place those people in, hence "ugly".
2006-12-20 12:42:35 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
Looks only do not make a person ugly or cute and to some extent it is a relative term based on relationship or its absence. May be you just do not like that appearance. If you think a child is ugly, just ask his or her mom as to who is the cutest, you are the child.
Besides, ugliness is not part of the survival of the fittest equation. If you are cute and want to test this theory just go in front of Mike Tyson for a round of two and see who will nature select for survival.
Also, you may be surprised when a deformed or 'diffrenet' person charm you with his behaviour that you may feel ashamed of your first impression. On the contrary, how many times the behaviour of a cute person repulsed you to the point that you wish you had never met.
2006-12-20 13:10:58 · answer #2 · answered by Ottawan-Canada 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
None of the people I know who have functioning brains contest the validity of natural selection. Ugly is simply a word to describe something that is not pleasing to the eye. It can be very subjective , varying wildly from person to person. It should be noted that two attractive parents can produce offspring which would be generally viewed as ugly and, two ugly parents can produce offspring that would generally be considered attractive. Bottom line is (in simple terms) -ugliness in the absence of physical deformity is not a genetic trait that would be subject to natural selection.
2006-12-20 13:13:25 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Beauty and ugliness are defined by culture to a great extend, not instinctual ways of selecting a mate built into us as they are in animals like birds. Also, I am not in the "there is no such thing as natural selection" crowd :), but I thought I'd give this a shot.
2006-12-20 12:43:23 · answer #4 · answered by thdweb 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Creation scientists DO believe in natural selection. That is only part of the "engine" supposedly according to evolutionists that drive teh evolution engine. The other is mutation. Creation scientists believe in mutatioin, it is observable. Creation scientists believe in natural selection, that is observable. What they don't believe is that this "engine" creates more and more complex information needed to create more and more of a complicated animal or plant. It is always a "loss" or scrambling of genetic coding, never an addition. It is ALWAYS a loss of information. Try making a copy of a copy of a copy of a copy etc.... If the 10 commandments on the zerox machine. You aren't going to get more information, or an extra commandment. What you get is illegible unreadable gobbledy ****. What do you think humans are? They are copies of copies of copies. That's where all the cancer and sickness and genetic diseases come from. We are, generation by generation turning into gobbledy ****.
2006-12-20 12:46:42 · answer #5 · answered by sheepinarowboat 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
We think some people are ugly, because they could be unhealthy or deformed and we need strong children.
2006-12-20 12:54:20 · answer #6 · answered by spir_i_tual 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You have to ask yourself; who is deciding what is to be considered normall or abnormal? In theory, models aren't normal. They are almost deformed. But they are the standard of beauty? It's all personal perception.
2006-12-20 12:48:52 · answer #7 · answered by atticus0621 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
beauty is in the eye of the beholder. the person who has beauty in their eyes will se the world will beauty and all will appear beautiful to them. they will not see deformities or flaws in the appearance of others. their eye will penetrate the body and only see the beauty of the heart
a person who lacks beauty in their own eyes sees flaws and ugliness everywhere. they miss out on the world's beauty and their eye cannot see beyond the body which they become so preoccupied with.
much of the world;s beauty is being wasted away as we speak because we shallow individuals fail to see it myself included very often...the wasting away of beauty is the greatest tragedy we inflict upon nature..always remember that
2006-12-20 13:22:57 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
your question reminds me of that twilight zone episode about this planet where beautiful blond, blue-eyed, tall, perfect body , perfect skin people were considered monsters , and put away from the rest of society just for their ugliness...........while monkey-frog looking people were the cute ones and the ones who ruled.
great episode !
....and perhaps i kind of answer your question in my own special way.
2006-12-20 12:58:02 · answer #9 · answered by peaceful light 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
thats funny ive seen plenty of "ugly" people....by general standards...even to their own belief.... I mean obviously ugly... happy as can be married and with kids.... no probs getting dates etc... while very attractive people sit home, never date and never have kids.
must be inside yayyyyyyyy
2006-12-20 12:55:49 · answer #10 · answered by safarlsun33 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋