How can discrimination on the grounds of physical attractiveness be justified when selecting sexual partners?

Question

Isn't just like racism?

Answer 1

Evolution favors the physically attractive. No, it is nothing like racism.

I am quite sick of the "beauty is in the eye of the beholder" bullshit. No, it is determined by symmetry and the physical manifestation of characteristics that help people determine the sexual "fitness" of others. Yes, you can love someone who is not beautiful. However, when countless psychological studies prove a preference for symmetry and attractive features that portray youth and fertility, the politically correct "beauty is in the eye of the beholder" phrase is utter bullshit.

Answer 2

The whole idea of physical attractiveness is an evolutionary mechanism for understanding "gene quality" in mate choice. Now obviously, the gene quality we're talking about here is very rudimentary, but is also very apparent. All people will find symmetrical figures to be more attractive than those that aren't as symmetrical. Men will find a particular waist to hip ratio to be more attractive than others because it signifies a fertile womb, and therefore a viable reproductive mate. Females will tend to put other attributes into their attraction, such as the "alpha male" personality, which involves confidence and superior abilities.

Oddly enough, racism springs from the same type of system. Outsiders could be harmful, could carry diseases, and could try to take away the resources that you and your family need. So people who "look" different will typically be discriminated against as a matter of instinct. However, some people will find those who look different as a source of new resources. Plus, many people, both men and women, will be attracted to the exotic look because it's beneficial for a high admixture of genes. This will introduce new genes into the population rather than allowing inbreeding in one small group.

It's all strategy you see? And sometimes, as smart as we are, we don't understand our own instincts. It's important to figure out what's at the root cause of our behaviors, rather than immediately trying to deem them as justified or unjustified in that sense.

Craig

Answer 3

Your question, which I have asked myself before (knowing the answer to be 'yes, of course') can raise the question 'When else it is right to discriminate?'

Physical attractiveness is not just about the genetical make-up of people. It is about the way that people express their intelligence/ideas about the world/their accumulated history, their charm/seductiveness-these are expressed physically as well.

A certain level of attractiveness (physically/intellectually) can, sadly, become like a millstone round its owner if most people feel intimidated by it. This may partly explain why people like Marilyn Monroe and Elvis ended up as they did. The recent public opinion towards the exploits of Lindsay Lohan show that people seem even more willing to wish an attractive celebrity to fall off the wagon than ever these days.

So my first point is that physical attractiveness can be a burden to wear in an otherwise unglamorous world as it attracts undeserved envy. It seems to me far more likely, and from my observations, that somebody equally physically attractive will share more mutual respect/empathy and may, indeed, be more likely to look for something deeper, intellectually. Somebody who has, for want of a better phrase, been 'hit with the ugly stick' may just spend all their time seeking increasingly more desperate ways to hold on to somebody attractive and grow to resent their partner's good looks as they could potentially attract a better looking partner than them.

If someone decided that they never want to go out with anyone who isn't white, you could say that is racism or you could say that it is their right to have a personal choice, just as if they always buy vanilla ice cream it would seem strange to say that they are wrong to always 'discriminate' against rum and raison ice cream. The difference may be that people have feelings, unlike ice cream however the fact that your question regards 'sexual partners' regards something far more intimate than most decisions. It is always preferable for somebody to be entirely comfortable with such a decision so to try to impose a quota, like the British government have (also wrongly) imposed on Oxbridge regarding public school/state school entrants, would seem like just the opposite side, albeit far less awful, of the same coin that Adolf Hitler was espousing.

The logical conclusion , if all ' discrimination' was banned, is that every young, clever, attractive, toned girl should be made to go out with old, stupid, ugly, fat men. I wouldn't wish that on females.

However, given the politically correct legal system in the UK I already shudder to think what is frowned upon as an infringement of 'yooman rights' when common sense human rights are constantly undermined by the same legal system.

Answer 4

It does seem unfair, but I don't think it is something we intend to do. We just can't help ourselves. I don't believe we are actually looking for the most attractive person. It's just chemical. When I meet a man and he is very attractive my mind just goes there on it's own. Fortunately everyone has a different idea of what is attractive, so there probably really is someone for everyone. I'm a sucker for man with beautiful eyes and a handsome, kind face. One of my friends is actually in to guys with big noses, another doesn't really seem to care about the face as long as the body is great. :) It's not all about looks though, if a man comes off as the least bit conceited any thought of desire is instantly evaporated away for me. I think if a person is not classically attractive they can still be considered sexually attractive by taking the best physical care of themselves they can and being kind and interested in people.

Answer 5

No it's nothing like racism. Racism is a mental condition. Physical/sexual attraction is a whole other piece of cheese. Unless you are suggesting people should have sex without mutual consent?

Answer 6

Basically, it's human nature !! No it is NOT a form of racism. For example, if you walk into a Nightclub and you kind of scan the clientele, would you approach someone that you don't feel attracted to?? It's chemistry that kicks in, for whatever reasons. If you were to be approached by a person that doesn't appeal to you, is that racism if you say, No thanks?? Or, you may make an excuse ?? Have you analyzed your own actions???

Answer 7

Is it ...what next free choice and all that your either attracted or your not ..its body chemistry .....not racism ,discrimination or anything else ...and since when was there open selecting of sexual partners ....gees..is this new game for the bored ..

Answer 8

Racism and discrimination is so close to personal choice, some people are so scared of being called prejudice or racist or Anti Semitic that they cringe at the thought and would kill to prevent such , P,C, HAD TO BE INSTITUTED BY OUR GREAT GOV, NO ONE ELSE WOULD HAVE THOUGHT OF SUCH Stupidity
Philthe manc, don't you know that is a Nazi way of thinking?lol

Answer 9

No

We are programmed by nature to select the best available from the gene pool in the females/males we encounter

It is not preferance, it is programmed behaviour although what we each find personally attractive varies to some degree

Answer 10

Not racism. You can't force yourself to be attracted to someone out of political correctness. I remember a very nice black guy once asked me out. When I declined he called me a racist. I just told him I am not attracted to skinny red headed men with freckles either. Now if the red head had muscles bulging out of his shirt sleeves that may be a different story.