top of page
Search

Beauty

  • Writer: Lafyva
    Lafyva
  • May 24, 2020
  • 7 min read

Updated: Jul 13, 2024

Maxims or myths of beauty? A meta-analytic and theoretical review.

Common maxims about beauty suggest that attractiveness is not important in life. In contrast, both fitness-related evolutionary theory and socialization theory suggest that attractiveness influences development and interaction. In 11 meta-analyses, the authors evaluate these contradictory claims, demonstrating that (a) raters agree about who is and is not attractive, both within and across cultures; (b) attractive children and adults are judged more positively than unattractive children and adults, even by those who know them; (c) attractive children and adults are treated more positively than unattractive children and adults, even by those who know them; and (d) attractive children and adults exhibit more positive behaviors and traits than unattractive children and adults. Results are used to evaluate social and fitness-related evolutionary theories and the veracity of maxims about beauty. (APA PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)

Physical attractiveness predicts endorsement of specific evolutionary psychology principles



Previous work has shown that observers can accurately assess aspects of personality based on unfamiliar, static faces with neutral expressions (Little & Perrett, 2007; Penton-Voak et al., 2006). Our main results, from Experiment 1, show further that internal features of the face, specifically the areas around the eyes, nose, and mouth, carry enough information to allow accurate judgements relating to physical health, and to four of the Big Five personality factors: agreeableness, extraversion, neuroticism, intellect/imagination (cf. openness).


Imagination is an essential part of intelligence.

Intellect as distinct from Openness: differences revealed by FMRI of working memory.

Big-Five Model



Kissing subconsciously assess a potential partner through taste or smell, picking up on biological cues for compatibility, genetic fitness or general health.

Previous research suggests that women and participants high in mate-value are generally more selective when it comes to choosing a mate and are more likely to place value on both cues signaling underlying genetic fitness/compatibility and on cues signaling long-term commitment and resource-acquisition

The role of bio communicators in unicellular prokaryotic organisms (for example, bacteria) is played by plasmids. However, they are not able to perform all the functions inherent in bio communicators. Plasmids carry out active horizontal gene transfer in prokaryotes. Analogues of plasmids for eukaryotes are viruses. Bacteriophages (bacterial viruses) are not bio communicators (migratory organelles) of bacterial cells, and this is indicated by the fact that they forcibly introduce their genetic material into the bacterial cell. Thus, bacteriophages are bio communicators of various eukaryotic cells (their migrating organelles), which carry out and ensure the regulation of various biochemical processes in bacterial cells and their numbers (from the side of the owner of this bio communicator). According to the above information about the acquired and main genomes, a new definition of the term “phenotype” can be given. The phenotype is a manifestation of the totality of genes obtained by vertical and horizontal channels of gene transfer and the result of their interaction. Therefore, the phenotype is the expression (manifestation) of the genotype. The body throughout life - from the moment of fertilization of the egg (the formation of the zygote) to death, has the opportunity to enrich its genotype due to an increase in the share of the acquired genome. This is accomplished by horizontal gene transfer. Information received by the sensor systems (receptors) of the body about the external and internal environment actively affects the change (enrichment or depletion) of the acquired genome of the body. As a result, the phenotype changes. However, these changes affect only the genes of certain cells of certain body tissues. For example, cells of the central nervous system of humans or animals, the immune system, or liver cells change. If changes affect the germ cells, then new signs and properties will begin to be inherited, from generation to generation.


The scent of attraction and the smell of success: crossmodal influences on person perception

Beautiful people are smarter )


MASCULINITY The appeal of masculine traits is less clear. An early study using schematic faces indicated that masculinized male faces (thick brows, thin lips, square chins, and small eyes) were preferred to feminized ones(Keating1985),but more recent studies using photographic sex continua generally show a preference for feminized male faces(Penton-Voaketal.2004,Perrettetal.1998,Rhodesetal. 2000; but see Johnston et al. 2001). The meta-analysis confirmed that masculinity is unattractive when these manipulated faces are used (−0.47 ± 0.51, N = 12). Perrett and colleagues (1998) suggest that this preference may reflect the perception of more positive personality traits (less dominant, warmer, more honest and cooperative, and more likely to be a good parent) in less masculine faces.

 Sexual Dimorphism Male and female faces diverge at puberty (Farkas 1988). In males, testosterone stimulates the growth of the jaw, cheekbones, brow ridges, center of the face (from brow to bottom of nose), and facial hair. In females, growth of these traits is inhibited by estrogen, which may also increase lip size (see Thornhill & Møller 1997 for a review). Because sexual dimorphism increases at puberty, sexually dimorphic traits signal sexual maturity and reproductive potential (Johnston & Franklin 1993; Symons 1979, 1992, 1995; Thornhill & Gangestad 1996).









The Equalitarians are less beautiful:

Essentialism is an approach assuming that people and things have natural and essential common characteristics which are inherent, innate and unchanging.

Essentialism as a philosophy has impact on our differentiation or unification ways while addressing. In this sense, the pronoun we represents a kind of unification while the pronoun you refers to a kind of discrimination or differentiation, which can be referred as a kind of taxonomy used in communication. This paper seeks to present how essentialism is used as the basis of our daily communication and its role in our discriminating and unifying efforts in social, cultural and scientific domains

SCIENCE BRIEFS

Essentialism in everyday thought

Essentialism is the view that certain categories (e.g., women, racial groups, dinosaurs, original Picasso artwork) have an underlying reality or true nature that one cannot observe directly.

Essentialism is the view that certain categories (e.g., women, racial groups, dinosaurs, original Picasso artwork) have an underlying reality or true nature that one cannot observe directly. Furthermore, this underlying reality (or "essence") is thought to give objects their identity, and to be responsible for similarities that category members share. Although there are serious problems with essentialism as a metaphysical doctrine (Mayr, 1991)

To test whether hearing generic language induces social essentialism, we introduced children and adults to a novel category of people—“Zarpies”—via an illustrated storybook, as in previous work on animal categories (28). Each page presented a picture of a single person displaying a unique physical or behavioral property. The characters were diverse with respect to sex, race, and age; thus, the novel category cut across groupings for which people might already have essentialist beliefs. For example, if all of the “Zarpies” were Asian, subjects might apply essentialist beliefs to the group because they generally have essentialist beliefs about race. Because the novel group is so diverse, it would initially appear arbitrary (35); thus, levels of essentialism in the absence of generic language should be low (as confirmed by comparison conditions).

As discussed above, essentialism is not a unitary construct, but rather is comprised of a variety of components (Table 1) that exhibit various degrees of relatedness. Studies in adults sometimes separate these components, examining each component’s effects on inter-group stereotypes, relations, and attitudes separately (e.g.,11,16,125); but developmental research on social essentialism would benefit greatly from moving beyond a unitary concept of essentialism to describe and compare the developmental trajectory of each component. In addition to enhancing our understanding of how each aspect of essentialism arises (e.g., what conceptual biases or cultural input gives rise to each component?), such research will also inform our understanding of essentialism’s relationships to inter-group attitudes and beliefs. This is crucial because essentialism exhibits a complex relationship to inter-group relations. Although essentialism often relates to negative attitudes toward lower-status groups, some components of essentialism can also relate to increased in-group identification, which can have positive consequences for members of low-status minority groups12. Thus, it is critical to examine how each component of essentialism develops in early childhood, and to carefully track the implications of each for members of both high and low status groups. To properly study these questions, it is essential to study a diverse group of children, especially incorporating minority children into research30. By incorporating children for whom the in-group and the socially preferred group are traditionally the same (e.g., majority race or male children) as well as children for whom the in-group and the socially preferred group often differ (e.g., minority race or female children), studies will be able to develop a comprehensive framework of how social essentialist beliefs develop and of the developmental consequences of these beliefs for children from diverse backgrounds.

This chapter has given an overview of how the basic processes that

underlie conceptual development can give rise to problematic beliefs about

the social world. In other chapters in this volume, the authors delve into the

nature and consequences of these beliefs: How their application is guided

by children’s own motivations and need for group belonging (chapter

“Why do children essentialize social groups?” by Diesendruck, this volume),

how these beliefs are manifested in language (chapter “Kindhood and essen-

tialism: Evidence from language” by Ritchie and Knobe) and shaped by

context (chapter “The development of essentialist, ethnic, and civic intui-

tions about national categories” by Feeney et al.; chapter “Contextualizing

the development of social essentialism” by Pauker et al.), and the serious

ramifications of these beliefs for moral reasoning (Heiphetz, Chapter 6),

and intergroup cognition and behavior (chapter “Does essentialism lead to

racial prejudice? It is not so Black and White” by Mandalaywala). Given these

broad and deep consequences, we think careful analyses of how these beliefs

develop are important not only for shedding light on the nature of early con-

ceptual development, but also because they might reveal openings in the

process that could be targeted to prevent their development or shape them

in more positive lights.

ree
Here is an artist rendering of what "society says isn't attractive but actually is"

 
 
bottom of page