It seems as if this is true for the most part as well from my anecdotal experience. I haven't heard of anyone doing any research on it however, so it could just be a perception which is clouded by my social conditioning. It would make sense that pretty women don't really have to push that hard so they choose not to in statistically significant numbers. Basically I would theorize that there are less pretty women in more difficult disciplines because less try to go into them.
Why is it that you can see guys who look like they could be in GQ who are
- Thread starter blah
- Start date
physicians, lawyers, engineers, etc.? but you never seem to see female models or ones who look like models who are in those professions? It seems like the only females who really push thenselves in life are the less-attactive ones. I go to school in CA and all the highly attractive girls seem to be communications majors whilst the only females who major in engineering or who go to medical school are not that much to look at. I know this sounds superficial, but, I went to school in Georgia before coming out here and it was a similar situation. Has anyone else noticed this?
randywilharm
New member
Lawyer generally try to hide
themselves, and should never
be on the cover of any magazine.
themselves, and should never
be on the cover of any magazine.
It seems as if this is true for the most part as well from my anecdotal experience. I haven't heard of anyone doing any research on it however, so it could just be a perception which is clouded by my social conditioning. It would make sense that pretty women don't really have to push that hard so they choose not to in statistically significant numbers. Basically I would theorize that there are less pretty women in more difficult disciplines because less try to go into them.
CAustin II
New member
Generally speaking, unattractive people often compensate by being competent (or, to put it another way, attractive people often feel that their attractiveness entitles them to forgo competence). That isn't to say that some people aren't both attractive and professionally successful, or that it isn't true that many people are neither, but there is a phenomenon where many attractive people are less motivated to make something of themselves because society tells them that they've already got it.
Because of this, in any competitive and accomplished field of people, you'll generally find more unattractive types than in the general population.
Now, as for the gender thing, there are two major things that I can think of feeding into that. First, how accepted a woman is by society relies more heavily on her physical appearance than it does for a man; in contrast, how accepted a man is by society relies more heavily on his career and income than it does for a woman. Because of this, a physically attractive man is less likely to feel automatically accomplished by being physically attractive than a woman, and is more likely to pursue a competitive career despite this. By contrast, an unattractive woman is in more of a pickle when it comes to social acceptance than an unattractive man, and she may be more motivated to compensate as a result.
But, regardless of factors that might cause a gender discrepancy, I think this phenomenon impacts both men and women, even if it doesn't do so equally (it would be silly to pretend not to notice how geekish guys tend to concentrate in highly qualified careers, and it would require a rather small mass of social experience to have somehow managed to avoid meeting any attractive, accomplished woman in one's life).
Because of this, in any competitive and accomplished field of people, you'll generally find more unattractive types than in the general population.
Now, as for the gender thing, there are two major things that I can think of feeding into that. First, how accepted a woman is by society relies more heavily on her physical appearance than it does for a man; in contrast, how accepted a man is by society relies more heavily on his career and income than it does for a woman. Because of this, a physically attractive man is less likely to feel automatically accomplished by being physically attractive than a woman, and is more likely to pursue a competitive career despite this. By contrast, an unattractive woman is in more of a pickle when it comes to social acceptance than an unattractive man, and she may be more motivated to compensate as a result.
But, regardless of factors that might cause a gender discrepancy, I think this phenomenon impacts both men and women, even if it doesn't do so equally (it would be silly to pretend not to notice how geekish guys tend to concentrate in highly qualified careers, and it would require a rather small mass of social experience to have somehow managed to avoid meeting any attractive, accomplished woman in one's life).
Chapel Of Love
New member
Only the narrow minded male would have such observation.
Chapel Of Love
New member
Only the narrow minded male would have such observation.
It seems as if this is true for the most part as well from my anecdotal experience. I haven't heard of anyone doing any research on it however, so it could just be a perception which is clouded by my social conditioning. It would make sense that pretty women don't really have to push that hard so they choose not to in statistically significant numbers. Basically I would theorize that there are less pretty women in more difficult disciplines because less try to go into them.
I
imported_Chapel Of Love
Guest
Only the narrow minded male would have such observation.
CAustin II
New member
Generally speaking, unattractive people often compensate by being competent (or, to put it another way, attractive people often feel that their attractiveness entitles them to forgo competence). That isn't to say that some people aren't both attractive and professionally successful, or that it isn't true that many people are neither, but there is a phenomenon where many attractive people are less motivated to make something of themselves because society tells them that they've already got it.
Because of this, in any competitive and accomplished field of people, you'll generally find more unattractive types than in the general population.
Now, as for the gender thing, there are two major things that I can think of feeding into that. First, how accepted a woman is by society relies more heavily on her physical appearance than it does for a man; in contrast, how accepted a man is by society relies more heavily on his career and income than it does for a woman. Because of this, a physically attractive man is less likely to feel automatically accomplished by being physically attractive than a woman, and is more likely to pursue a competitive career despite this. By contrast, an unattractive woman is in more of a pickle when it comes to social acceptance than an unattractive man, and she may be more motivated to compensate as a result.
But, regardless of factors that might cause a gender discrepancy, I think this phenomenon impacts both men and women, even if it doesn't do so equally (it would be silly to pretend not to notice how geekish guys tend to concentrate in highly qualified careers, and it would require a rather small mass of social experience to have somehow managed to avoid meeting any attractive, accomplished woman in one's life).
Because of this, in any competitive and accomplished field of people, you'll generally find more unattractive types than in the general population.
Now, as for the gender thing, there are two major things that I can think of feeding into that. First, how accepted a woman is by society relies more heavily on her physical appearance than it does for a man; in contrast, how accepted a man is by society relies more heavily on his career and income than it does for a woman. Because of this, a physically attractive man is less likely to feel automatically accomplished by being physically attractive than a woman, and is more likely to pursue a competitive career despite this. By contrast, an unattractive woman is in more of a pickle when it comes to social acceptance than an unattractive man, and she may be more motivated to compensate as a result.
But, regardless of factors that might cause a gender discrepancy, I think this phenomenon impacts both men and women, even if it doesn't do so equally (it would be silly to pretend not to notice how geekish guys tend to concentrate in highly qualified careers, and it would require a rather small mass of social experience to have somehow managed to avoid meeting any attractive, accomplished woman in one's life).
It seems as if this is true for the most part as well from my anecdotal experience. I haven't heard of anyone doing any research on it however, so it could just be a perception which is clouded by my social conditioning. It would make sense that pretty women don't really have to push that hard so they choose not to in statistically significant numbers. Basically I would theorize that there are less pretty women in more difficult disciplines because less try to go into them.
CAustin II
New member
Generally speaking, unattractive people often compensate by being competent (or, to put it another way, attractive people often feel that their attractiveness entitles them to forgo competence). That isn't to say that some people aren't both attractive and professionally successful, or that it isn't true that many people are neither, but there is a phenomenon where many attractive people are less motivated to make something of themselves because society tells them that they've already got it.
Because of this, in any competitive and accomplished field of people, you'll generally find more unattractive types than in the general population.
Now, as for the gender thing, there are two major things that I can think of feeding into that. First, how accepted a woman is by society relies more heavily on her physical appearance than it does for a man; in contrast, how accepted a man is by society relies more heavily on his career and income than it does for a woman. Because of this, a physically attractive man is less likely to feel automatically accomplished by being physically attractive than a woman, and is more likely to pursue a competitive career despite this. By contrast, an unattractive woman is in more of a pickle when it comes to social acceptance than an unattractive man, and she may be more motivated to compensate as a result.
But, regardless of factors that might cause a gender discrepancy, I think this phenomenon impacts both men and women, even if it doesn't do so equally (it would be silly to pretend not to notice how geekish guys tend to concentrate in highly qualified careers, and it would require a rather small mass of social experience to have somehow managed to avoid meeting any attractive, accomplished woman in one's life).
Because of this, in any competitive and accomplished field of people, you'll generally find more unattractive types than in the general population.
Now, as for the gender thing, there are two major things that I can think of feeding into that. First, how accepted a woman is by society relies more heavily on her physical appearance than it does for a man; in contrast, how accepted a man is by society relies more heavily on his career and income than it does for a woman. Because of this, a physically attractive man is less likely to feel automatically accomplished by being physically attractive than a woman, and is more likely to pursue a competitive career despite this. By contrast, an unattractive woman is in more of a pickle when it comes to social acceptance than an unattractive man, and she may be more motivated to compensate as a result.
But, regardless of factors that might cause a gender discrepancy, I think this phenomenon impacts both men and women, even if it doesn't do so equally (it would be silly to pretend not to notice how geekish guys tend to concentrate in highly qualified careers, and it would require a rather small mass of social experience to have somehow managed to avoid meeting any attractive, accomplished woman in one's life).
You are simply demonstrating that you have been brainwashed by a society that judges women on looks and your question shows that you have internalised the incorrect notion that pretty women can't be bright and successful professionals and that average looking women by default are more intelligent - which of course is untrue.
Put down the glossy magazines and look around you.
You are the one with the double standard - I am not having a go at you - just pointing it out: we all are affected with what we grow up with but now it has been pointed out to you, you can change it.
Put down the glossy magazines and look around you.
You are the one with the double standard - I am not having a go at you - just pointing it out: we all are affected with what we grow up with but now it has been pointed out to you, you can change it.
Chapel Of Love
New member
Only the narrow minded male would have such observation.
CAustin II
New member
Generally speaking, unattractive people often compensate by being competent (or, to put it another way, attractive people often feel that their attractiveness entitles them to forgo competence). That isn't to say that some people aren't both attractive and professionally successful, or that it isn't true that many people are neither, but there is a phenomenon where many attractive people are less motivated to make something of themselves because society tells them that they've already got it.
Because of this, in any competitive and accomplished field of people, you'll generally find more unattractive types than in the general population.
Now, as for the gender thing, there are two major things that I can think of feeding into that. First, how accepted a woman is by society relies more heavily on her physical appearance than it does for a man; in contrast, how accepted a man is by society relies more heavily on his career and income than it does for a woman. Because of this, a physically attractive man is less likely to feel automatically accomplished by being physically attractive than a woman, and is more likely to pursue a competitive career despite this. By contrast, an unattractive woman is in more of a pickle when it comes to social acceptance than an unattractive man, and she may be more motivated to compensate as a result.
But, regardless of factors that might cause a gender discrepancy, I think this phenomenon impacts both men and women, even if it doesn't do so equally (it would be silly to pretend not to notice how geekish guys tend to concentrate in highly qualified careers, and it would require a rather small mass of social experience to have somehow managed to avoid meeting any attractive, accomplished woman in one's life).
Because of this, in any competitive and accomplished field of people, you'll generally find more unattractive types than in the general population.
Now, as for the gender thing, there are two major things that I can think of feeding into that. First, how accepted a woman is by society relies more heavily on her physical appearance than it does for a man; in contrast, how accepted a man is by society relies more heavily on his career and income than it does for a woman. Because of this, a physically attractive man is less likely to feel automatically accomplished by being physically attractive than a woman, and is more likely to pursue a competitive career despite this. By contrast, an unattractive woman is in more of a pickle when it comes to social acceptance than an unattractive man, and she may be more motivated to compensate as a result.
But, regardless of factors that might cause a gender discrepancy, I think this phenomenon impacts both men and women, even if it doesn't do so equally (it would be silly to pretend not to notice how geekish guys tend to concentrate in highly qualified careers, and it would require a rather small mass of social experience to have somehow managed to avoid meeting any attractive, accomplished woman in one's life).
Chapel Of Love
New member
Only the narrow minded male would have such observation.