How much are the obsession with looks based on society?

Watch
Guy Secretan
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 6 years ago
#1
If you think about it in nature there would be no contraception so any woman between the age of 16 to 35 who has sex would get pregnant pretty quickly. Also there would be maybe more semi forced sex. There wouldn't be beauty products and colgate toothpaste. But people eventually get so horny that they would have sex. Now maybe a few alpha males would get all the sex but the point is that maybe all the woman would be impregnated apart from the incredibly ugly ones. So maybe in terms of evolution looks are kind of redundant and more a creation of society than anything.
0
reply
Dilzo999
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#2
Report 6 years ago
#2
You do realise that 2 ugly people can have an attractive child where as 2 attractive people can have an ugly child?

Posted from TSR Mobile
0
reply
Guy Secretan
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#3
Report Thread starter 6 years ago
#3
(Original post by Dilzo999)
You do realise that 2 ugly people can have an attractive child where as 2 attractive people can have an ugly child?

Posted from TSR Mobile
No but looks indicate general genetic health.
0
reply
Joinedup
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#4
Report 6 years ago
#4
(Original post by Guy Secretan)
No but looks indicate general genetic health.
What looks good is not stable across cultures or time periods. check out these C17th hotties..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rap...s_of_Leucippus
0
reply
Profesh
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#5
Report 6 years ago
#5
(Original post by Dilzo999)
You do realise that 2 ugly people can have an attractive child where as 2 attractive people can have an ugly child?

Posted from TSR Mobile
You do realise that isn't the correct use of 'whereas' in a sentence?
0
reply
sooyoung*
Badges: 6
Rep:
?
#6
Report 6 years ago
#6
Lol, a world without toothpaste! Are we talking medieval , hunter gather times here? Yeah, probably in those time just having a healthy, strong and well connected partner would have been the most important thing above looks in order to produce surviving offspring. But looks in those days as they do now, would have correlated very well with physical and reproductive healthy and wealth.
0
reply
Guy Secretan
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#7
Report Thread starter 6 years ago
#7
No but I mean in nature everyone would be fighting, shagging etc to some extent our obsession with looks is based on society and the media. Anyone who is fit and healthy would be fair game in the reproductive stakes. Also saying that two ugly parents can have a good looking child is kind of proving my point, In nature not everyone would be good looking/perfect looking.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Have you made your mind up on your five uni choices?

Yes, and I've sent off my application! (150)
54.74%
I've made my choices but havent sent my application yet (38)
13.87%
I've got a good idea about the choices I want to make (31)
11.31%
I'm researching but still not sure which universities I want to apply to (26)
9.49%
I haven't started researching yet (16)
5.84%
Something else (let us know in the thread!) (13)
4.74%

Watched Threads

View All