Personal Development for Smart People Forums - View Single Post - Do pretty people have better lives than ugly people?

brendannz · 03-23-2009, 02:10 PM

I think it's impossible to say whether anyone has a worse or better life than you do based on looks.

Really you have to have some way of measuring 'better' like, more money, or more sex, or whatever gives you a better life. If you measure 'better' by these things, then probably good looks will bring you a "better" life. But really there's downfalls to good looks.

Eg. like a really good looking person in a relationship doesn't really know if the person is attracted to them for their looks or for their personality, (the same could occur with money) and also beauty is something that gets worse with age. So you might find at 16 when people are more shallow, that beauty brings great popularity, and so you don't put the work into improving other aspects of life, and make it to adulthood having depended on your good looks which may mean you're underdeveloped in other areas. (Its possible)

Or a good looking person might find that all their relationships are with shallow people, and so don't really have 'meaningful' relationships. (another possibility)

Another thing, there are several, non-good looking lead singers who've done exceptionally well without good looks;

Joey Ramone, Freddy Mercury & Mick Jagger, Meatloaf... Probably lots more..

I think that if you're a male, your looks don't really determine that much about your attractiveness to the opposite sex, or your 'success' with money and such, but if you're a female then looks impact your 'success' in life much more, I think.

So, back to your question, "do pretty people have better lives than ugly people?"
well, 'ugly' and 'pretty' are subjective opinions,
and also 'better lives' is even more subjective.

But it sounds like success in life to you has to do with music, and unless you're planning on starting a boy band, your looks probably won't influence your success too much I don't think.

That which is within is greater than that which is without.. (or something)

03-23-2009, 02:10 PM	#33 (permalink)
brendannz Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Posts: 1,226	I think it's impossible to say whether anyone has a worse or better life than you do based on looks. Really you have to have some way of measuring 'better' like, more money, or more sex, or whatever gives you a better life. If you measure 'better' by these things, then probably good looks will bring you a "better" life. But really there's downfalls to good looks. Eg. like a really good looking person in a relationship doesn't really know if the person is attracted to them for their looks or for their personality, (the same could occur with money) and also beauty is something that gets worse with age. So you might find at 16 when people are more shallow, that beauty brings great popularity, and so you don't put the work into improving other aspects of life, and make it to adulthood having depended on your good looks which may mean you're underdeveloped in other areas. (Its possible) Or a good looking person might find that all their relationships are with shallow people, and so don't really have 'meaningful' relationships. (another possibility) Another thing, there are several, non-good looking lead singers who've done exceptionally well without good looks; Joey Ramone, Freddy Mercury & Mick Jagger, Meatloaf... Probably lots more.. I think that if you're a male, your looks don't really determine that much about your attractiveness to the opposite sex, or your 'success' with money and such, but if you're a female then looks impact your 'success' in life much more, I think. So, back to your question, "do pretty people have better lives than ugly people?" well, 'ugly' and 'pretty' are subjective opinions, and also 'better lives' is even more subjective. But it sounds like success in life to you has to do with music, and unless you're planning on starting a boy band, your looks probably won't influence your success too much I don't think. That which is within is greater than that which is without.. (or something)