Discussion Would you support legislation to protect the ugly?

[NearlyOver]

Lookism deniers spout platitudes like "looks are only skin deep" to avoid confronting their own bigotry. They argue that people who feel discriminated against (job opportunities, promotions, teacher/peers interactions in school...) are just imagining things. But at least the US once was open about its feelings towards people who're exceptionally unattractive. Law Professor Daniel Hamermesh of University of Texas presents an argument that being looks-deprived costs the ugly significantly over their lifespan.

 

[Caesercel]

It will never happen.

 

[Deleted member 34301]

No because the definition is very subjective. You need to normalize it by race as well, so I guess there would be a lot of debate about what a good objective measure is.

Also this excludes normal looking incels who are mentalcels, high inhib and non NT

 

[IncelCatechumen]

Yes, pretty privilege is, effectively, a thing, and it is related with race, disableness, and poorness.

It shouldn't be possible to discriminate on the basis of looks professionally speaking unless we are talking about corporeal-driven professions (modeling agencies).

 

[Cuckoja]

Yes if it brings me more neetbux

 

[DepravedAndDeprived]

No, for several reasons.
>It's impossible to judge objectively. People will blame their failures on discrimination even more.
>Lookism serves a purpose. This is a bitter pill for incels, and while I agree that the system went haywire due to modern degeneracy, the underlying idea is there for a reason.
>The law would apply to ugly women as well and I don't want foids to have anything.

normal looking incels

 

[PoodankMcGee]

I support genocide of chads and stacies

 

[Of Manlets and Men]

Only ugly men. Ugly women neither need nor deserve protection.

 

[NearlyOver]

No because the definition is very subjective.

What definition is very subjective?

 

[Deleted member 35476]

It will never happen.

 

[Emba]

Biden says it's on the table!

 

[Deleted member 34301]

What definition is very subjective?

The definition of what ugliness is. You need to operationalise it somehow.

 

[cucksaar]

Nah but I also don’t support the pandering towards minorites, women, LGBT etc. Get rid of affirmative action, nobody should be given an advantage because they are deemed as oppressed.

 

[NearlyOver]

The definition of what ugliness is. You need to operationalise it somehow.

This is an ironic comment, considering this forum. There is already a lot of evidence that ugliness is well-agreed upon in communities and even across cultures.

 

[Deleted member 34074]

yes,but like if our opinion matters to SOYciety

 

[Deleted member 34301]

This is an ironic comment, considering this forum. There is already a lot of evidence that ugliness is well-agreed upon in communities and even across cultures.

Yes you can measure ugliness based on survey results. But when you for example need to assess someone's ugliness in court, you can't conduct a study first to employ an unbiased survey. You need it right on the spot, so there needs to be an objective definition, if possible in terms of anatomy, of how to assess ugliness, other than survey-based methods.

 

[Deleted member 17749]

The people who voted anything other than the first yes are Chads.

 

[squirrelsonfire2]

Yes unlike them we actually need protections

 

[NearlyOver]

Yes you can measure ugliness based on survey results. But when you for example need to assess someone's ugliness in court, you can't conduct a study first to employ an unbiased survey. You need it right on the spot, so there needs to be an objective definition, if possible in terms of anatomy, of how to assess ugliness, other than survey-based methods.

I don't think the problem is "assessing" who's ugly--on the spot (in court) or otherwise. But I appreciate the input.

 

[WawelDragon1683]

I support genocide of chads and stacies

 

[Deleted member 34301]

I don't think the problem is "assessing" who's ugly--on the spot (in court) or otherwise. But I appreciate the input.

How would you protect legal rights of the ugly if you can't assess who's ugly?

 

[NearlyOver]

How would you protect legal rights of the ugly if you can't assess who's ugly?

I don't believe "you can't assess who's ugly." I'm not accusing you of it, but many who claim people can't be protected (legally) from appearance discrimination because (the common arguments) too few people would voluntarily take up the label or it's too difficult to confidently categorize people as ugly are being disingenuous. Researchers have been studying perceived attractiveness (high in-and-between cultures agreements, like Trujillo LT, Jankowitsch JM, Langlois JH. Beauty is in the ease of the beholding: a neurophysiological test of the averageness theory of facial attractiveness. Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2014 Sep;14(3):1061-76.) and its social costs/benefits for decades. And evolving technology (like Rojas Q. M, Masip D, Todorov A, Vitria J (2011) Automatic Prediction of Facial Trait Judgments: Appearance vs. Structural Models. PLoS ONE 6(8): e23323) is consistently showing that technology is able to predict with high accuracy how people judge each other aesthetically.

The evidence continues to grow that appearance is NOT merely subjective, that it can have significant impacts on quality of life, and that technology--already remarkably good at it--is getting better and better at judging human appearance.

 

[Deleted member 34301]

I don't believe "you can't assess who's ugly." I'm not accusing you of it, but many who claim people can't be protected (legally) from appearance discrimination because (the common arguments) too few people would voluntarily take up the label or it's too difficult to confidently categorize people as ugly are being disingenuous. Researchers have been studying perceived attractiveness (high in-and-between cultures agreements, like Trujillo LT, Jankowitsch JM, Langlois JH. Beauty is in the ease of the beholding: a neurophysiological test of the averageness theory of facial attractiveness. Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2014 Sep;14(3):1061-76.) and its social costs/benefits for decades. And evolving technology (like Rojas Q. M, Masip D, Todorov A, Vitria J (2011) Automatic Prediction of Facial Trait Judgments: Appearance vs. Structural Models. PLoS ONE 6(8): e23323) is consistently showing that technology is able to predict with high accuracy how people judge each other aesthetically.

The evidence continues to grow that appearance is NOT merely subjective, that it can have significant impacts on quality of life, and that technology--already remarkably good at it--is getting better and better at judging human appearance.

Ah those are good points. So in the first paper you bring up they actually use the distance from the mathematical average of faces in a population. Closer to average is deemed attractive and also elicits a different neural response. It is nice that something like that works well because it would be easy to implement.

 

[Colera]

The ugly ones hate each other and are infamous among themselves. Often, as well as being ugly on the outside, they are also ugly on the inside, just see who "ascends" then makes the turnaround with the incel.

Every incel deserves to suffer, without having any rights. We don't deserve it.

 

[JestER]

I support genocide of chads and stacies

Don't forget normies, jews and soycucks

 

[Deleted member 31122]

The ugly ones hate each other and are infamous among themselves. Often, as well as being ugly on the outside, they are also ugly on the inside, just see who "ascends" then makes the turnaround with the incel.

Every incel deserves to suffer, without having any rights. We don't deserve it.

, what a pathetic cuck

 

[cucksaar]

Every incel deserves to suffer, without having any rights. We don't deserve it.

 

[yeetbender_]

Only ugly men. Ugly women neither need nor deserve protection.

 

[Freixel]

over for 2021cels

 

[nihilum]

over for 2021cels

over for all of us