There was a fairly popular and now mostly forgotten but oftentimes insightful and lucid poster on twitter back in the 2016 era who went by the name “menaquinone4” who once made the observation that most beautiful women seem to have dietary and other biological health issues that uglier women don’t really have at the same rates. It was an offhanded comment by him, but it stuck with me because I have noticed it to be quite true over time. While m4’s observation was never further extrapolated on, this essay will attempt to, and most likely successfully succeed at, making some observations at the underlying mechanics at play with regards to this.
Essentially, there is a mechanism of capture that exists for all life forms which basically goes as follows: As soon as an organism has easily definable traits and clearly visible definitions, either in behavior or appearance, the external to that organism will essentially behave in a manner that focuses on that definition and interfaces/puts value in/extracts value from that definition. The organism’s defined traits are captured and then instrumentalized by the external in a manner in which can begin to be detrimental.
This process of capture to the detriment of the organism can be easily demonstrated in the context of most pretty female’s personalities. Because a pretty female gets preferential treatment and is not punished for misbehavior, and gets opportunities solely due to their outward looks rather than their personality or positive internal character traits, it is quite common for most pretty females to have quite abysmal personalities. There is a lack of selection pressure that non-pretty females and most men have to go through in their formative years which is detrimental for the pretty female. The pretty female has been “captured” by the external valuing her prettiness and been, by extension, harmed internally by her defining traits.
A personal example of a runaway selection trait that I have had to work hard and consciously to not be captured by is my own cleverness and social skills. As I am vastly more clever and charming than the average male, and am fairly good looking, I am quite able to get away with poor habits and poor behaviors that would punish me in the long term. If I were not conscious of this fact, as I used to not be when I was younger, it would be very easy for me to lean on these attributes and not develop a rich internal life or proper creative habits. I could exploit my charm and cleverness for the purposes of material wealth, social status, and female attention, and while that would work in the short term, I would not be developing actual skills and talents which are more beneficial in the long term and essentially be “captured” by my externally definable traits, to my objective detriment.
Back to m4’s observation, which is that pretty and beautiful girls have disproportionate rates of psychological and physical disorders as compared to females as a whole, what is essentially going on are runaway selection pressures wreaking havoc on a generational basis. Pretty girls are not all stupid and they do not all have bad habits and bad personalities, some are wonderful people, but the ones who are stupid and do have bad habits and bad personalities are not punished in the same manner that ugly or average girls who are stupid and have bad habits and bad personalities are punished. The pretty girls who are rotten inside still have their physical beauty, and their physical beauty is still attractive to men and allows them to marry and breed.
This fact that beautiful but inwardly compromised women are quite able to find a mate is not a surprise to anybody, but there is more nuance to this observation than most people will realize. Another obvious observation is that materially successful men are the men most likely to marry a beautiful woman, but what is not obvious is that there are different types of men who are materially wealthy. There is wealth that is honestly earned through hard work and wisdom, and there is wealth that is earned through dishonorable behavior. Wealth in magnitude is not the defining characteristic of wealth, but rather the nature in which the magnitude is acquired is the defining characteristic of wealth, and this defining characteristic furthermore pertains to the inward character of men with wealth.
An aspect to this essay’s point which at first seems like an aside but must be explained as it is quite important to the selection pressures at play is the natural sorting mechanisms which apply to human social groups. Generally speaking, like is surrounded with gradients of like, or the same. Lawyers know lawyers, bankers know bankers, blue collar workers are friends with blue collar workers, middle class people have largely middle class friends, white people know white people, brown people know brown people, and so on and so forth.
This apparent digression becomes related to the topic at hand when you apply it in the following manner: Men who make their wealth in a wise and judicious manner rather than through luck or dishonorable means have potential access to lots of beautiful women, but through this sorting mechanism will be generally involved with only the beautiful women who have a rich and wholesome inner life and pleasant personality. The men who have wealth through dishonorable means such as nepotism or corruption will also have access to beautiful women, but because these men have not gained power and influence through internal work, they do not have the wisdom to really value that which is most important in a woman, her personality and internal characteristics which will get passed down generationally along with her visible beauty.
Furthermore, because it is much easier to gain wealth and thus access to beautiful women through dishonorable means rather than hard work and good character, there is a natural disproportionate rate of pairing of dishonorable men with beautiful women. This is an internally negative selection pressure which causes neurotic men of poor character with poor judgment to breed disproportionately with beautiful women who are likewise neurologically and physically malfunctioning in some hidden fashion.
Another selection pressure which must be mentioned with regards to wealth and m4’s observation is that those with wealth can mitigate and suppress the negative externalities of poor behaviors in ways that those without wealth cannot. Mental issues can be hidden through medication, so can allergies or biological issues. The poor and those without wealth cannot afford to use material wealth to make visible problems temporarily invisible, so those who are poor who suffer from the same psychological and physical maladies are more likely to fail out and fail to reproduce than those with wealth.
Back to the topic of capture and instrumentalization, m4’s observation is essentially just that without realizing it. At some point, women who are physically attractive and thus biologically appealing become “captured” by externally powerful but unwise and undisciplined men, then they breed children, some of which grow up to be equally if not even more attractive women, who have poor internal traits and biological issues. Through beauty becoming a defining trait, beauty becomes a liability because it forms a crutch in which maladaptation in other respects is not subject to selection pressures. The beauty, without proper consciousness, outgrows other aspects of personal development, like some form of egregore or golem which attacks its master once it takes on a definable life of its own.
This speaks towards the general importance of ratios and proper balance in everything. There is a conscious effort that those with conspicuously positive traits much constantly be engaged in to ensure that they are not captured and summarily enslaved by those traits, lest they end up like so many of the beautiful things in this world with rotten cores. Ratios and measure and restraint must be maintained if those with abnormal talents and gifts wish to remain free and ultimately preserve those gifts, because eventually psychological and biological problems catch up to any genetic line with physical beauty but not the conscious wisdom to control and balance it.
In the context of beauty and sorting mechanisms which lead to selection pressures, there is most likely a range of beauty (or lack thereof) which is proper to be in, most likely the middle 70 or 80% in the of the whole range of appearance, from the most ugly to most beautiful people in existence. Anything outside of that represents extreme ugliness or extreme beauty, and when you are either extremely ugly or extremely beautiful, sorting mechanisms will essentially ensure you end up in circles of those who are the lowest of criminals/dysgenics or those who get by and make money solely on their physical appearance rather than any admirable or valuable internal characteristics. Once you fall outside of the 70-80% middling range of appearance, selection pressures begin to be runaway selection pressures because you are sorted into extremes of outcome which almost invariably assures mating with maladaptive creatures and thus passing down improper traits, either cognitive or physical in nature, to your progeny.
This essay, like nearly all other essays I have written, is not only applicable to physical appearance or beauty. You can observe runaway selection pressures in things like companies, creative works, and topics of discussion. Once any organism of a sort is obviously excellent in some manner, it runs the risk of being captured and dominated by this excellence and the organism suffering long-term as a result. Once again, this is why ratios and balance and not indulging in the benefits of abnormalities to the detriment of the whole is so important and must constantly be considered and fought against in a conscious manner. Positive traits like beauty are obviously admirable and worth valuing, but they are time-lagged symptoms of underlying fundamentals and not in and of themselves what is good, they simply speak to and point to something that was (and might still be) very good. The beautiful flower is the result of good soil and a good seed placed in the soil and time. If a flower is so beautiful that it is noticed by a child and picked by the child and removed from its soil (runaway selection pressure), it is removed from its source of beauty. Then, it is only a matter of time until the flower wilts and dies and is no longer a beautiful flower.
Post a Comment