Today I want to talk about an idea that has been on my mind, but ill admit that it might be a bit out there. The idea in itself is based off many assumptions of how we evolved as humans and how we will move forward, but nonetheless I wanted to put it out there just because I think it is quite interesting. I ask the question of if, how modern day society’s valuation of what people find attractive, hurts our chance at evolution in the future?
Who someone finds attractive is mostly based on what the society they live in finds attractive. Attractiveness does have some relationship with the symmetry of someones face or body, but for the most part it is determined by what society agrees is attractive. Some quick examples off the cuff are how during the Medieval era, heavier people were seen as attractive due to the idea they had enough money to afford food and how in many Eastern countries, darker skin is less attractive because of its relationship to working outside.
In the west however, tan skin, lean bodies and muscular or healthy bodies are seen as the most attractive. This most likely comes from being outdoors and athletic is seen as healthy and a way to a long life. As human beings on a primal level, we want our kin to survive and have the best chance at success, so we gravitate towards partners that represent that. In the past mating with a strong tall male might mean that your offspring would be big and strong as well, giving the males a shot at the “alpha male” spot in tribes. This ultimately would be beneficial to the tribe and push mankind forward just by surviving, but in recent times we have gone through a stark change.
Physical appearance, size, ect has little to do with advancing our species these days and the majority of people who rule don’t fit in with the typical historical alpha male stereotype. Those who truly rule today possess more intellectual prowess more than physical. So I ask, are we as a civilization moving in the wrong direction if we hold up the current standards of attractiveness in high esteem? Eventually we as a species will be tested with some sort of disease, natural disaster, ect. that will really only be solved by the smartest in the world. Perhaps breeding our race for super minds rather than super bodies/faces is the way forward.
I don’t expect anything to change and there still are technicalities with many people who possess both qualities, but it still isn’t the majority. Also emotional traits such as confidence have a large effect on attracting a mate. It might just be that what we find attractive is instinctual as much as breathing or eating is. We probably lack the ability to control it and liking what you like doesn’t make you a bad person. I am just playing devils advocate on what our world would look like if attraction changed. Inevitably it will move to something else as even in my life trends and fads have come and gone.
Thanks to @Elyaque for the badges
No, attractiveness is just a sign of genetic fitness, so it can never be a threat to evolution. Looks are mostly attractive in females, while social standing and power are mostly attractive in men.
You bring up some really interesting points here. This was one of the musings I was having this morning actually which is why this post caught my attention. But what I feel has the most influence on peoples notions of what's attractive or beautiful is the media and propaganda, to be honest.
I mean if you look at women over the last 60 years or so the image of what's attractive has changed a lot. I mean look at Marylin Monroe in the 50s. She had a lot more weight on her and was much more curvy than the stick thin, starving models of today. But that's what was considered beautiful at that time. And in the past being fat was a sign of wealth, and it showed that you had the resources with which to get there. So why is it that today women almost have to starve themselves just to fit into this idea of what's beautiful? This certainly isn't benefiting them, so who is it benefitting?
I really feel that these images are created for us to believe, but the questions we should be asking are why they're created? And for whose benefit?
I would say that it depends on culture. Different cultures have different laws of attraction. If I may use myself as an example: I am a white South African, thus means that I fall under Western "culture", if I can say it that way. When I was teaching, one little African girl one day said to me with utmost respect: "Whooo mam, you have a bum like an African. It's so beautiful!" She meant to give me a compliment because in her culture, women with big hips are beautiful and the men prefer women with big bums. But to me, it was not a compliment. I didn't see myself as someone with a big bum . To me it felt the same as someone telling me I'm fat. I thanked her for her "compliment" nevertheless. In western "culture", men prefer ladies who have the exact opposite of a big bum as they are attracted to what meets the demand of their eye. Thus I would agree with @waitingforgodot when he says that attraction lies where the person is most comfortable within his social circles. The "nerd" will have a hard time finding a supermodel girlfriend though. Men that are also less attractive or men who have a lower self-esteem will settle for anything with a skirt basically and that is perhaps where the problem comes in which you are talking about when you say "hurts our chance at evolution in the future".
I'm just speaking my minds here, not based on any fact ;)
Both are still an example of physical attractiveness, perhaps im saying as time goes on, mental attractiveness will be more mainstream.
It's still physical yes. I'd like to believe that love will conquer all :P but yes, who knows what the future might have in store. I guess we'll never know
I just want to know why people who are overweight don't try to be healthier. It bothers me a little bit. I understand the whole "love your body" movement. I really do. But why can't you love your body while you work on improving it? I think intelligence is a key in evolving but if your life span is shortened by health issues and other things that could come with being "not healthy" would it even be worth it to trade physicality for smarts?
On that note I think what actually poses a threat to evolution it society itself.
Yes and no, i think having a fit physical condition is attractive all over the world. Even in countrys were a small tummy is attractive as sign of wealth. Having muscles is never unattractive, is it?
attractiveness is based largely (not entirely of course) on the position an individual finds himself in the social domninance hierarchy. Compare the situation of nerds today with the 90's - computer scientists are maybe not regarded directly as "sexy", however they now earn by far the most money and have terrific career prospects, which leads to a high position within the hierarchy. Thus, if you are a nerd today there has never been a better time for you to find a mate in today's society.
As for physical attractiveness, I suppose technology will figure out how to make people simply more attractive by advancements e.g. in anti aging or hormone therapies. Maybe soon everyone could look like a model with some fixes!
Yeah I would totally agree that the social ladder has a very large effect, like I said I was just throwing the idea out there. I would say in some ways dating through social dominance is probably the middle ground between dating for intelligence and physical superiority.
Some sort of disaster probably will happen and maybe sooner than we might even think. Population is rising really fast and our planet won't be able to support all the people when it comes to hunger and thirst. Who knows, maybe it's the path of our evolution to become smarter and not stronger. We can't know for sure because we can't see the future :)
u r right sir really some place and some people have own ideas and some sociaties see tan skin, lean bodies and muscular or healthy bodies..but this is not thing for choose as a great person...calaber24p sir
really ur articles are good i have also read ur artcles about armies and some others are great sir ur work is good
Very well written article @calaber24p i totally agree with your thoughts.
a good article with good thinkig and some ur opinion is also follow us sir
Good post! I'm going to follow you to see more post like this and for support us!
What concerns me is the amount of c-sections required as children seem to be getting bigger and bigger in more developed countries. Without technology as in the case of a natural disaster, those communities are screwed.
Thank you for the good article! Very reasonable points...
"Those who truly rule today possess more intellectual prowess more than physical."
Are you sure? They're doing a piss-poor job of it. The West seems highly dysfunctional atm.
Maybe we'd be better off with more Alexanders and Napoleons.
I think thats quite a relative concept and cannot be answered in a sentence or too. It is relative because your question contains the word ''attractiveness" and the word "evolution" asking about the possible implications of their connection. Atttractiveness in my POV constists of two parts. The genetical one, and the cognitive one. The first one relates to all the inborn genetical information that pretty much defines what should be considered attractive. Based on the evolutionary logic, we are programmed for survival and reproduction and it is logical that we are bound to get attracted to other humans with the accordingly characteristics (curvy bodies for women, muscular appearance for men etc.)
The cognitive part deals with the human cognition as the ability of humans to believe in common beliefs/stories and cooperate to accomplish goals that would not be possible without the large scale cooperation. In other words it relates to the ability of every human to get convinced to believe any story that is presented with a...smart way ;p (money,religion,nations etc) So that is also how the attractiveness factor is influenced. When you are everyday bombarded with different type of body beauty standards (thank Capitalism for that), whether you like it or not you are subconsciously affected by them.
So you cannot be really objective about the definition of attraction since you are already a subjective POV!
About the evolution and how the Those who truly rule today possess more intellectual prowess more than physical I believe it can be explained by the fact that prosperity and survival at a collective level relies more on the intellectual part and the social skills than the brute force and possibly the appealing apperance. In other words, when it comes to a mass scale, it is inevitable that the geeks and the nerds will obtain higher places because of the huge necessity of cooperation that arises and their ability to usually perform better than the mainstrem attractive alpha males.
So in the end I dont believe that the attractiveness factor poses a real threat to the evolution because both concepts are quite relative. Anyone can be attractive, no matter how he/she looks. Its just that our genes seem toguide us subconsciously and most people fall for it.
great thought... agreed
Just something to think about....
"Those who truly rule today possess more intellectual prowess more than physical"
...but this has always been the case! ...not just today.
Alexander the Great was short and fat,
Geghis Khan had mongol features meaning he was no giant,
Napoleon was short and bald.
All of the above were leaders of the biggest armies the world has ever known and none of these guys were athletes.
"So I ask, are we as a civilization moving in the wrong direction if we hold up the current standards of attractiveness in high esteem?"
...possibly moving in the wrong direction but it's nothing to do with the looks of those we chose to frolic with. Quite the opposite, perhaps it has more to do with overpopulation which means there's a whole lot of action going on for everyone!
I would argue that a combination of brawn and brain is best the case scenario. But that is just an opinion. As you said, it is survival of the fittest, whether it is life or death, or just societal acceptance. After all, the job of parent is to make sure their child is well prepared for the world. A choice of a partner is the first step.
Muscles means strength and physical dominance, brains guarantees intellectual superiority in an age which tech runs the world, EQ means being a well adjusted human being who is confident and a people person. Once again a combination is best, if possible.
In the end, it all comes down to individual choice. People like who they like.
meep
I think our ideas of attractiveness mostly come from programming and the 'marketing' consciousness of ... the New World Order? Something dark. It is a very complex issue, I think... who we find ourselves truly attracted to. For myself I have found as a young person that following the instincts of my programming (for one, my mother's ideas vs. my own choices) was always a mistake.
Hi @calaber24p am a newbi in steemit. i have follow you and upvote you. help me to follback me and upvote 😀😀😀 @abu.amann