I'm angry at this for some unexplainable reason.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/science/09/04/dating.mating.ap/index.html
This is a joke, right? I mean, this HAS to be a joke. Would CNN really publish something so OBVIOUS?
Thing is, they interviewed a psychology professor from my college (Indiana University). I know this man. Hell, I've seen his study. I just...from the way he designed it, I was really sure that there was MORE TO IT than just confirming that -- big surprise! -- men like beautiful women more than homely ones.
That he's proud with his findings -- or perhaps total lack thereof -- just saddens me. There's so much he could have done with this study, that required no altering of the study whatsoever, that he just didn't do.
Or hell. Maybe he did; I'd have to read the actual paper. But the way the study was designed...specific attributes of "beautiful women" would have been pinpointed, thereby paving the way for the next generation of genetically-engineered uber-women.
...that's kind of scary.
This is a joke, right? I mean, this HAS to be a joke. Would CNN really publish something so OBVIOUS?
Thing is, they interviewed a psychology professor from my college (Indiana University). I know this man. Hell, I've seen his study. I just...from the way he designed it, I was really sure that there was MORE TO IT than just confirming that -- big surprise! -- men like beautiful women more than homely ones.
That he's proud with his findings -- or perhaps total lack thereof -- just saddens me. There's so much he could have done with this study, that required no altering of the study whatsoever, that he just didn't do.
Or hell. Maybe he did; I'd have to read the actual paper. But the way the study was designed...specific attributes of "beautiful women" would have been pinpointed, thereby paving the way for the next generation of genetically-engineered uber-women.
...that's kind of scary.