Lol. Why can't women n science be attractive?

a reply to: Ghost147

I think in general, the female scientists I've met have been pretty attractive.

I think a better question is... why are models so unattractive lately...

walking skeletons...

yik... LOL

originally posted by: Akragon
I think a better question is... why are models so unattractive lately...

walking skeletons...

yik... LOL

Lol nice one

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: Nochzwei

LOL...didn't think this one through, did you?

Lol just a stray thought out of the blue

originally posted by: Sublimecraft
a reply to: Nochzwei

Lol. Why can't women n science be attractive?

They can, take Kim Kardashian for example, she has a doctorate in vague and shallow, majoring in stupidity.

That's a bunch of degrees alright

originally posted by: zazzafrazz
a reply to: Nochzwei

I don't think the internet is working out for you.

Am only on the net occasionally, mostly to chk e mails

Aye shes a stunner alright
a reply to: Akragon

What's really amusing is that the OP applied zero scientific methodology to the premiss of this thread about science.

If we're being completely honest the OP has made a semi-valid observation. Some female scientists can be very attractive but more often than not they are very average looking. The same thing applies to male scientists, and really any job that requires a high level of intelligence. I think one of the main reasons is because beautiful people are often very social people with a lot of friends, but the nerds and geeks have more alone time and so they realize that their brain is their most powerful tool because their looks aren't going to get them very far in life. Of course good looking people can be smart if they apply themselves, I just think most of them would rather take the easier route through life.

a reply to: Nochzwei

I think there are tons of beautiful women in math and science....

How ever, I also find them so beautiful because they are smart enough not to fall into this cycle of obsession trying to look so amazingly fake. So many women look nothing like they do with their make up on with it off.......

At least many women of science look like themselves.

a reply to: ChaoticOrder
probably just seem unatractive cause the OP knows they are smarter than him....

originally posted by: NewzNose
a reply to: Nochzwei

Wow. Maybe your inability to find beauty in all people has blinded you. Marilyn Monroe was no skinny minnie.

I was one of the few who never cared what size Marilyn was, I was more interested in her theories regarding Parallel Universes, and her unwavering belief that Pluto shouldn't really be classed as a planet.

originally posted by: bandersnatch
a reply to: ChaoticOrder
probably just seem unatractive cause the OP knows they are smarter than him....

Obviously beauty is a very subjective thing, and for the record I find intelligent females extremely attractive as long as they aren't extremely obese. If they wear glasses that's even better, I love average looking nerdy girls who wear glasses. I'm just pointing out there is some truth to what the OP is saying... of course it is a vast generalization to say all models are dumb or all geniuses are ugly, but we clearly don't live in a world where beauty plays no role.

Maybe they view doing stuff like trying to advance the species and improve life on earth as being a bit more important than looking good for a bunch of awkward guys in lab coats.

originally posted by: ChaoticOrder
If we're being completely honest the OP has made a semi-valid observation. Some female scientists can be very attractive but more often than not they are very average looking. The same thing applies to male scientists, and really any job that requires a high level of intelligence. I think one of the main reasons is because beautiful people are often very social people with a lot of friends, but the nerds and geeks have more alone time and so they realize that their brain is their most powerful tool because their looks aren't going to get them very far in life. Of course good looking people can be smart if they apply themselves, I just think most of them would rather take the easier route through life.

As much as I'd like to mock the OP too, and point out that so many men are easily tricked by make up (I see what a woman looks like underneath her make up automatically, I've noticed many men don't and will confuse beauty with make up).

I am going to pick the less comfortable position here and acknowledge that there is some truth to this.

People who are more widely recognized as physically attractive can end up riding upon that often without even being aware they are doing so.

Having the world around you constantly pointing your attention back to your looks instead of your thoughts can make you eventually give in and focus on that part of your being too. It takes a sort of very strong individualist/sociopath personality to escape that.

Of two people of equal intelligence, the one that has an appearance deemed more "common" will have an easier time being recognized and getting by in intellectual pursuits (education, career) then the one that is recognized as being more or less attractive than usual.

I think this is still true, despite that our current media will pick out especially attractive example to showcase (like in tv reality shows, of doctors and such). Because the people watching such shows and making them popular are not the same part of the public which are teachers and employers in scientific areas.

Those "token" individuals can be found in almost every area of skill- the one the mass public regards, and that is simultaneously less respected within professional circles of their peers.

Whether that is always fair or not, is another question (of great difficulty for people to discuss rationally, I've noticed), but while the ignorant will be drawn towards pretty faces, their competing peers will use that as a weapon against them, with the concept that beauty and brains, or beauty and skill, do not ever exist together.

I guess each of us will do what we want within that paradigm, personally I try to judge each individual with an open mind, as much as I can, to relieve them of that pressure to fall into the current cultural molds.

a reply to: Nochzwei

Women in science being attractive, is nothing like as important as women in science being present in, active in, and crucial to the scientific community. Women in science have achieved great things, and let's be honest, no one ever complained about the fact that Albert Einstein did not have rippling abs, and throw engine blocks around for fun, while using his jawbone to complete woodworking tasks.

I find the entire question entirely valueless, just as any answer which seeks to engage with it on the same level of intellect from which it issued would be.

originally posted by: TrueBrit


I find the entire question entirely valueless, just as any answer which seeks to engage with it on the same level of intellect from which it issued would be.

KInda like:

"Why are people so easily offended?"
"Why do americans over-use and over-react to the word "socialism"?
"Why does the world get more meaningless and boring as you age?"
"What are you really bad at?"
"Is sleep a waste of time?"
"Why do some people believe in God?"
Etc., Etc......

I personally don't find the Chit Chat forum as one to look for truly pressing and important social issues.

I do, however, enjoy the practice of applying meaning... of creating it.
You see, I believe there is no inherent meaning or purpose to this life.
We create that, from our experiences and perceptions,
Which create our experiences and perceptions,
From which we continue to use in evolving our creations of meaning.

A more difficult exercise in meaning creation is using very challenging topics or subjects- ones that are very difficult to apply meaning or value to.

It's along the lines of the exercise of choosing sides of debate that are unpopular, difficult to defend, or completely opposing your own personal stance on the issue.

It's like weight lifting for the brain. Exercise in adversity and opposition for the intellect.



Discussing ones stance on very obvious serious issues, like child labor or rape culture in third world countries is easy-peasy, compared to this stuff!

a reply to: Ghost147
Great post...and lets not forget, it was a lovely lady named Hedy Lamarr who invented "Spread Spectrum Technology".

Yeah, beauty and brains don't mix. /sarcasm

It is largely due to what a women might value. Most women have their hair cut stylishly, have it lightened or darkened, select stylish clothes that fit in a certain way to accentuate assets and diminish flaws. They wear make-up and are quite good at using it in such a way to improve their appearance. They have their teeth straightened and whitened, diet, use tons of crèmes and skin care products. Yep. I'm here to tell you they do. : )

Perhaps a woman who values her work more than her appearance puts those superficial steps on the back burner to spend her energies contemplating more lofty goals.

Anybody who has seen a 'makeover' program, has seen a study of what time and effort can do to a woman's (or a man's appearance, has seen the difference the efforts and procedures can produce.

Not to say there are women who don't do both. Surely there are plenty. But others don't take the time, and doesn't place much value on how she looks.

I think it's all good.

I might add to the ridiculousness of this thread, Im not seeing male scientist calendars on the best seller list.