Why Are Black Women Less Physically Attractive?Follow

So your aesthetic sense is f'ucked, as well. Got it.

Well, that's the difference. If it were a blog of "my personal preferences", then there wouldn't be a problem. If you create some "study" to demonstrate that a race is objectively less attractive, then you're just plain wrong, because your "study" will vary depending on who you ask.

I don't want to get into another "poll" debate in another thread. If your study is "which race does the U.S. population find more attractive", then yes, you are correct. You can not poll a handful of random U.S. people and say that somehow demonstrates that ALL black women are less attractive. Besides, the second you mention "mutations", you are no longer doing a study purely off of subjectivity, you are trying to scientifically explain it objectively.

FTFY

If there's a real trend in preferences then it's reasonable to at least explore a reason for it. As much as you may want to deny that there could be anything beyond subjective preference, the fact is that our brains are big ole biochemical machines and have a reason for reacting to stimuli beyond some magical aura of humanity.

I have no idea if there is a set physiological reason for these results or not and I don't much care. I certainly don't have the emotional energy invested in it that you do. But dismissing it out of hand because you insist it can't be true is just silly.

I'm not dismissing it because I'm insisting it's not true. Remember, your study showed that Asians are the least attractive, not blacks. In any case it doesn't matter because the point of it all is that it is totally subjective, hence why one study says "black women are the least attractive" and the other study says "Asian women are the least attractive".

There indeed is a trend, it's "depending on who you ask". That is not objective.

Yes, there are indeed reasons for these trends and there is absolutely no reason NOT to explore those reasons. That's not what I'm arguing against. What I'm arguing against is the belief that a race is objectively less attractive than another race. That is completely different.

There is a reason why white women are more likely to suffer from a eating disorder than a black woman. Stereotypically, black men like more "meat" on women where a white male might consider that "fat and unattractive". This is also why white/asian women with big thighs and butts will stereotypically be more likely to date a black man than an asian/white woman without them.

I have absolutely no "scientific data" to support that, those are just observations from my life. Those are examples of REASONS why people may find one race more attractive than another race. Simply saying, people don't find a particular race as attractive because they are naturally ugly is nothing but prejudice and probable racism and there is no talking around it. If you support that, fine. Just don't pretend that it's anything other than that.

What conclusion can there be other than being prejudice and racist? You are supporting the concept of objectively showing how one race of people is less attractive than another. There's absolutely nothing inherently wrong with having racial preferences, just don't try to explain it with racist studies.



I very well do know that. I'm not sure what planet you live in, but most couples that you see are of the same racial ethnicity. Yes, there exist a noticeable percentage of interracial couples, but most couples (and even friends) are people of the same racial background. That is a fact, so unless you disagree with that fact, then you have no argument.

How can you argue with such simple minded logic and expect him to see beyond this, Joph? Let it go, he's not worth talking to. I can see the fun in baiting varus. I can see the fun in baiting gbaji. I can see the fun in mocking Thiefx. But I can't see how engaging in Alma's mental twists and lack of sense can be of any entertainment value. Just make fun of him and move on, or ignore him altogether.

Oh, I'm done. His well of emotional rage is far deeper than my well of largely apathetic scientific inquiry.

Edited, May 27th 2011 11:04am by Jophiel

How is that "'hypothetically' true in the literal sense?"



So, you're arguing that there is a way to objectively show how something subjective is really objective? I want to see how this is possible. Under that logic, everything is objective and there is no such thing as subjectivity.

If you agree with "scientifically supporting racism", then so be it. Just acknowledge it and move on. Don't pretend that it isn't just that. You can legitimately argue people's preferences, but you can't state anything as a fact.

Just because 55% of your study states that green beans are the worst tasting type of beans, doesn't make it so.



How are you able to test someone who hasn't been previously exposed to a society or culture? In any case, I would argue that everything would be a toss up in a vacuum, hence my argument with Asian Americans vs Asian immigrants.

The simple fact that culture plays such a huge role is evident that it isn't objective. If you want to determine what people find attractive and why, then state that. Don't create this pseudo study on how black women are attractively inferior to all other women. That is racism at it's core.



Yea, sure.. it was my "emotional rage".

I find it funny that when I claim that I don't want to share a room or shower with a guy who might be attracted with me (because he's attracted to other men), I'm called a homophobe, but you wont label a study that claims that black women are objectively less attractive than other races as racist. This further supports my claim of only supporting your own personal agenda at any cost.

You have this really bad habit of claiming others do what you do. Why is that?

In that they could hypothetically survey X number of people, and find that those people found blacks to be less attractive. So, in the most literal sense of the sentence, they'd be saying "Based on our findings, blacks were less attractive [to the population surveyed]." Wherein attractiveness is used to mean "to be found attractive by people."

Hypothetically speaking, if a study conclusively found that blacks were consistently rated the least attractive, then it could say that objectively, blacks were less attractive. Attraction, of course, is subjective, but a trend indicated by their results would be objective. As in, I can objectively say that X percentage of people find blacks less attractive. By their usage, if less people find you attractive, then you're less attractive. Makes sense to me. One's attractiveness is gauged by what others think. Subjective, of course. Very much so.


Listen: I think the test is junk, and the conclusion is worthless. It's got a host of flaws in both methodology and their interpretations. I'm not advocating for them. I do think that it's possible to do such a study though, and to get interesting conclusions. It could hypothetically find that less people find blacks attractive, or whites, or hispanics, or whatever. There'd be a ton of qualifications that'd need to accompany such a statement, obviously. Basically there just needs to be much more scientific rigor.

Edited, May 27th 2011 1:07pm by Eske

There's a huge difference between stating that a population finds race x most/least attractive and stating that a race is objectively the most/least attractive. You can't interject the most important differentiable thing left out.



All you can do, which is what I think you're saying is, you can objectively say that attraction is subjective.



That's the thing, there can never be such a study without objectively defining what is attractive because the results WILL ALWAYS vary depending on the population. Because of that, it will always be subjective. If it were objective, it would be the exact same in every population. That means, if white women are the stated as the most attractive women in the world, followed by South Americans, etc., then every combination of race would have to agree on that in order to be objective.