It’s all about drawing lines
There’s been a mild amount of fuss this last week about a beauty contest for academic girls – Miss University of London.
I’m not going to wade in talking about the death of feminism, or the fact that despite having the most valuable thing of all – education – these girls have chosen to fall back on a contest that essentially relies upon luck. It’s not my place to comment. Nor will I pick holes in the logic of the organisers who call it a ‘refreshing and unprecedented event’…
What I am going to suggest is that perhaps the judges of this event should also be academics. Rather than assessing beauty and ‘personality’, they could have biologists assess cultures of their bacterial flora, or mathematicians compute their curves and lines.
Indeed, why stop at this. There is such a hunger in the media for commentators in general that I think everything should have a mathematician attached to it to provide their opinion. Sports matches, singing contests and reality television shows.
‘Day 32 in the Big Brother House and Sean is stirring his tea in a manner that relates to Pi…’
‘Well, your singing was particularly effective, but your arm movements whilst dancing varied from parallel with a standard deviation of …’
Ben on 
Ty on
The pageant mathematician could be analyzing the symmetry of faces, as well. And there could be a psychologist on hand to analyze the history of the judges to determine why they would prefer one girl over the other.
“Well, Jon- you prefer Contestant 3 because she has dark hair and blue eyes like your mother, who died when you were three and left you with a severe abandonment complex.”
It always struck me as odd that society at some point decided that physical attractiveness would be the most lauded aspect of people. It is the most arbitrary one since most of us (even those heavily into grooming) had little to do with how we look.
To Brandy, AFAIK, society did not choose physical attractiveness. You’ve got part of the idea right (facial symmetry is an important indicator of attractiveness…and health). Taller people in general are better liked, as well, because that indicates both “good” genes and that they’ve had enough food while growing up, which is an indicator of ability to gather food and/or protect yourself. In a fight, bigger is often better, especially when fighting for dominance with other human males. There is also fairly narrow range of hip-to-waist ratio of women that men prefer, and that is the optimal ratio for fertility.
To Adam, I also do not believe that education is a much better indicator of some sort of “merit”. IQ or g which correlates very highly with academic success is as much as 70% (or higher) heritable, essentially “luck”, or at least as much as beauty is. I dunno what the figures are, but I’m willing to bet beauty is prolly around 70% heritable. So, beauty and education, IMO, about the same deal in terms of “merit”. Hard work has about as much to do with one as the other, IMO.
My current hypothesis is that the conditions which indicate good health (clear skin, facial symmetry), lack of disease (clear skin, height, vitality, long hair) and fertility (youthful women, around .7 hip-to-waist ratio) are encouraged by evolution by creating a positive subjective experience which we label attraction. Beautiful women looking at us also trigger approach behaviour (in both men and women), one of the reasons you find them looking at you from the newsstands on magazines.
You might be interested in reading some books about some of the interesting findings from psychology and evolutionary psychology in particular. In particular, “Quirkology”, “Why Beautiful People have More Daughters” or “Mean Genes”. Not everything in those books holds out, but its certainly a very interesting collection of ideas.
I love playing devil’s advocate. Hope I haven’t offended anyone, this is just an area of interest for me.
“I also do not believe that education is a much better indicator of some sort of “merit””
IQ and education are two very different things. You inherit your IQ, but you have to work hard at education… OK, some people need to work far harder than others, possibly because of IQ differences… but what I’m saying, and what I really think is that I’m far more impressed with a contest that does not soley rely on being born.
Take chess. Even someone with a rather high IQ and a knowlege of the rules will often be beaten by someone with experience and practice…
But my point being here is the pretense of academia. As if it in someway factored into the beauty contest. You see their education has told them that shallow and essentially pointless competitions are wrong, and so they try to justify holding such a competition by wrapping it up and using spin… but they’re not even smart enough to do that correctly.
Ah, I see. My bad, thanks for clarifying. I understand you disliked the pretense of being in an academic setting when one has little to do with the other.
To continue playing devil’s advocate: “IQ” could be replaced with “inherited beauty” and “education” could be replaced with “actualized beauty” and your paragraph would still mostly make sense. Basically, I feel that beauty is not 100% inherited, and for women above about 18 or 19, most of ‘em have to work at it. The hottest girls I know do go to the gym, refrain from crap food, are healthier than most others, etc. And you know how long women take to “get ready”. :p
All that said, I want to create a new measure of achievement, the “What you’ve done with what you’ve got” Scale. Basically, its basically whoever’s beaten the odds gets prizes. So, a phd with a 110 IQ gets a prize while a phd with 165 don’t. Or, people who’ve risen to high levels of education or other success in life despite being in unfavourable socio-economic conditions in their youth. That would, I believe, capture our ideas of “merit” better.
as a result of evolution, appearance was probably the first aspect considered, as anybody who’s healthy looks better than somebody that’s having a hard time fulfilling the basic needs of survival. we just never bothered to change it
So we can’t just look at pretty faces? Especially those of us who prefer pretty faces that might actually have a bright mind behind them?
Anyway, I think this might be your sexiest drawing yet, viewed correctly.
Also, I don’t want ANYBODY taking ANY “Biologist asses cultures” [sic].
i do
I have a feeling that the really pretty girls with an actual mind behind them will not be in this competition… two weeks until the end of term… they’ll all be working like demons trying to get their essays in on time.
And thanks for pointing out perhaps one of the best typos I’ve ever created.
It was a “beaut.”
Pretty faces? The majority’s definition don’t really match with mine–especially the definition the fashion industry uses.
That is definitely on of the sillier things I’ve seen lately.
I agree, incidentally: that’s a very sexy drawing.
Also, I feel like I should derail the conversation in some manner, just so I can make a joke about the topic being tangent to your curves. Maybe the topic of bad math jokes in general is tangential enough to count, what do you think?
Tangent away!
That’s weird… that two of you at least have thought that wuite a sexy drawing… I mean, that’s what it was intended to do, but I didn’t think it would come across that way. Just odd that.
You got the optimum bezier angles. Also your implication let us read into it.
Isn’t Jeopardy essentially a reality show for smart people?
I don’t see where the problem is with percieved beauty of a person. True, I think most models are way to skinny and make up is generally an evil thing, but, we prize beauty over function in many other parts of our lives, so why not other ppl?
I hate how we force “beautiful” values on the young and un-wise, but apart from that, I can’t see an issue.
Beauty isn’t the problem… it’s pretending that it’s not why you’re here… if that makes sense.
I have less problems with an out and out beauty contest than I do with an ‘academic one’.
That said, I have worked with people who got their job through looks and not talent and that was a problem. They were useless, unfit for purpose. Even eyecandy tastes sour when you’re the one having to sweat.
And perhaps I’m just jealous that I’ve never won any such beauty contest…
They hold them for people like you, but nobody shows up, not even contestants.
The problem with Adam entering a beauty contest is that he’d win. He’d piss it in. I’ve shown his pic to some friends and they were all suitably impressed.
So, yeah, no one would show, there’d be no point.
I figured he was a standard British Male. Didn’t know I was in the presence of a Dorian Gr(a/e)y.
:: bows ::
Mod parent +5 for Truth.
/. humour. Enjoy it while it lasts.
I like the taste of sweat…..
So many context where that could be so, so naughty.
“And perhaps I’m just jealous that I’ve never won any such beauty contest…”
And just for that, I’m going to post the portrait I’m working on, once it’s finished. Maybe I’ll even post it to “Hot or Not” or one of those places.
>_>
<_<
*evil laughter ensues*
As promised, a portrait of Adam York Gregory.
I wonder if I did that HTML correctly? Guess I’ll find out in a second…
Well, I guess that’s a “no” then, huh? So much for embedded pictures. Here’s a link:
hmmm… Now I see why no one else would show up….
Who’s that handsome chap staring from a page?
… I’m not that vain really… If anything I’m a little creeped out by an image of myself staring at me. Still, top work Roo, thanks.
Haha, no problem. If anything, I think I’ve aged you bit, somehow, in the drawing (or maybe that’s because it’s the one in your attic). I’ve certainly given you a slightly more serious expression than is typical.
Also, it’s odd to see a drawing so much larger than life-size: I’ve a bit of a resolution fetish, but the web doesn’t care about assigned sizes. It’s really only about half that size.
I’ve re-sized it, just to make more sense.
Ah, that’s better! Thanks.
I came second in a beauty contest, once.
Unfortunately, the high of this was dulled somewhat as the very next day, I had to make general repairs on all my buildings, which cost me £25 per house and £100 for each hotel.
/b
Oh yah, I think I was one of your tenants on Boardwalk at the time.
Hilarious. Thanks for the laugh.
Very funny, a great little read.
I have to say though, the geek in me sometimes does come out when judging a woman and try and figure those angles out and all other proportions.
I dont think beauty is all about looking like a model, infact i think i fancy more people who dont look like models than do.
I think women who look nice and tidy and natrual and all in proportion are great.
Stick insects on the catwalk dont do it for me
Stewey Griffin? Hmm, fascinating. This is more on a general note. Simply put; humans are animals with brains. The “animal” part is how we relate to the birds and the bees; like a male parrot’s color to a female parrot. But we’ve been able to grow and infest with our intelligent brains thus far, so I’m sticking with the latter. But it’s always cool to have both looks and brains:).
[...] The Flowfield Unity on having a mathematician in your back pocket. Or at least within reach at all times. [...]
Proportions being perfect is nice on an artistic level, but not for me. For reasons of my own, I prefer ladies that are ‘bottom heavy’. I am also more inclined to find an ‘overweight’ or ‘obese’ lady attractive, as well as being more positively affected by men with silver in their hair. This former is likely part of the ‘Well-fed = fertile! YAY!’ wiring. The latter…possibly because older partners are less frantic and more experienced. I’m talking strictly from instinct, here. There are conscious reasons I assign to my physical ideals, as well as learned behaviours and responses that have roots in experience (blonde women frighten me, for example, because all of the women that have hurt me emotionally have been blonde).
I also favour individuals with certain genetic hiccups* over others–especially hiccups that relate to pigment, like albinism or dichromia or vitiligo. I also find arachnodactyly and height-related hiccups attractive. This is not, as far as I know, a learned response. I think it’s a branch of ‘exotic = pretty because exotic = genetically different from you in a large way’. Which, of course, is part of the ‘SPREAD THE GENES APART’ instinct.
_________
*I disdain the use of the word ‘disorder’. ‘Hiccup’ seems less insulting to me.
I like that: “hiccup.” I’ll have to remember that. I also like height-related things… I get really nervous around really tall and really short girls. : D
I love the very tall to a point where I find it more sexy for a person to be extraordinarily tall (such as from acromegaly or Marfan’s). I have not had much contact with little people, unfortunately, though I find the physical difference to be attractive despite the fact that I am not sure what kind of ‘attractive’ my brain means.
You’d love this town then. Plenty of genetic hiccups here.
Really? Where are you? That seems odd, a town that has a higher concentration of hiccups. I mean, I know that trans* people congregate in MD and northern CA, so logically I suppose there are places where people of a certain genetic hiccup would also congregate.
*I do consider trans people to fall under ‘genetic hiccup’.