Where to find the prettiest girls?

Post Reply New Topic

That's a very reasonable request. But since the Google results are flooded with pages that claim "everyone knows that men are more visual", but do not provide details on actual statistics or cite studies, it's gonna take some time to dig up some detailed research. Since I'm at work, I'm gonna hafta do that later.

But I can say that I know many guys who are not visual at all, and at least one girl who is extremely visual. That's only anecdotal evidence, granted. But it does show that being male doesn't automatically mean you HAVE to be visual, and vice versa. People in general are very different, and the moment you start talking about people in a statistical sense (as genders in this case), it's easy to lose track of that.



NT = Neurotypical [person]. Someone with a "normal" neurology, specifically not on the Autistic spectrum. It's used derisively sometimes, though it's usually a neutral term.

It means neurotypical, and not on the spectrum, but that's interesting an question philosophically... I will bring it to that forum.

For me, visual attractiveness isn't everything, as I favor calculus and physics ability way more. Yes, it still matters, but it's secondary to the ability to perform in the same classes as I do.

After a few days, I'm not having any luck finding an accessable study on the web about this, so I figure it'd be the responsible thing to do to withdraw my point as stated. Though I clearly remember covering this point in my course on Psychometrics, a reminiscence hardly replaces hard statistics. I suppose the best I can do is argue my point like this:

While you can say men are more physically violent, more direct, more information/solution-oriented, etc., and women are more emotionally violent, more indirect, and more sensitive to emotional content... these are a matter of averages. There are a great many men and women, who individually, are exceptions to the trend. As we discuss more and more traits, it is increasingly certain that you will be an exception to at least ONE trait. (Even if you are a violent, direct, info-oriented man, you could be shorter than most women. It is quite rare to find someone of a gender who is gender-typical for all possible traits.)

That is why we have to be careful about saying "If you are a girl, you are like __X___, and if you are a guy, you are like __Y__." Gender especially is a sensitive issue, and not exhibiting a trait associated with the average guy/girl can become a source of shame. Moreover, it paints the science behind these statistics as more exact than it actually is. Even when a trait is STRONGLY attached to gender (e.g. having wide hips or having chest hair), there are still many people who are exceptions. We should be sensitive to that.

A number (maybe 20?) of years ago, I saw the actress Emma Thompson on a late night talk show. The host must have complimented her on her looks & she said (and I'm paraphrasing), "When I was a little girl, I once asked my mother 'am I pretty?' And she just told me 'pretty is boring - go read a book.'"

For INTERESTING girls, try looking in the library. (And you'll probably find that quite a lot of them are pretty, too.)

Many of the women in the computer science / math department at the school I intend to transfer to next semester are very attractive.

Well what are you defining as prettiest? Be careful what you do send your attraction toward. The cheerleaders and sorrority girls tend to have the most looks but also tend to have the worst personalities and s@#$ the most bricks when they're around someone different. I'd avoid them at all costs. The art kids are probably the most open.