Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site peora.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!cbdkc1!desoto!packard!edsel!bentley!hoxna!houxm!vax135!petsd!peora!jer From: jer@peora.UUCP (J. Eric Roskos) Newsgroups: net.singles Subject: Re: Money vs. Good looks Message-ID: <961@peora.UUCP> Date: Tue, 21-May-85 08:55:18 EDT Article-I.D.: peora.961 Posted: Tue May 21 08:55:18 1985 Date-Received: Wed, 22-May-85 07:36:15 EDT References: <253@unc.UUCP> <270@looking.UUCP> Organization: Perkin-Elmer SDC, Orlando, Fl. Lines: 44 >... but being attracted to wealth, fame, power or position is considered >sinful. In a society that tries so hard (on the surface) to get people >treated according to what they are and what their abilities are, instead of >their genetic heritage, isn't this a contradiction? You've raised a good philosophical point here. Why should people be attracted to "good looks"? Well, this is strange and difficult to determine for all cases, especially when people are attracted to artificial personal attributes; but at one level, at least, "good looks" relate to various primitive physical abilities. Thus, we may hypothesize, women are attracted to large, strong men because they (at least in a primitive society) are good defenders and providers; they can go out and spear caribou, or fight off grizzly bears, or something like that. Likewise, perhaps, men are attracted to women who are best adapted to childbearing. (Note, however, that this is not really "genetic heritage" at all.) Of course, such statements are heretical and sexist today. Women don't need defending, and are good for other things than childbearing; &c. But, then, you've brought up a sort of modern-day equivalent, perhaps a more just alternative to this [notice how it doesn't center around women and bearing children the way the above attributes did]: >Otherwise, it seems to me that ability to do things (and earn money for >it) should be one of the primary attractive qualities, above good looks. It's really a sort of generalization and de-primitivization of the physical attributes; that a person should be attractive because he or she can do good things (and provide for his or her family, in a more contemporary sense, in the process). Yet, people still are attracted to men who are good at fighting off grizzly bears and spearing caribou, and to women who are well-adapted to childbearing. Makes you think, doesn't it. -- Full-Name: J. Eric Roskos UUCP: ..!{decvax,ucbvax,ihnp4}!vax135!petsd!peora!jer US Mail: MS 795; Perkin-Elmer SDC; 2486 Sand Lake Road, Orlando, FL 32809-7642 "Vg'f whfg guvf yvggyr puebzvhz fjvgpu urer... lbh thlf ner FB fhcrefgvgvbhf!"