PDA

View Full Version : Beautifulpeople.net: Dating Eugenics?



Loki
Thursday, June 9th, 2005, 07:53 PM
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/4602547.stm

The Big Brother beauty contest

By Georgina Pattinson
BBC News
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/shared/img/999999.gif

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/40606000/jpg/_40606900_gp203.jpg
Georgina put herself up for peer approval with this picture

Beauty may be in the eye of the beholder but a new website has taken networking to Darwinian extremes by banning ugly people.

Beautifulpeople.net is an online club which admits only the most beautiful people - through a vicious selection process.

Applicants enter a profile and picture, which sit on the site for 72 hours. Fully signed up members - opposite sex only - are then invited to vote on the applicants' attractiveness.

Most people don't make it any further. Since launching in April, the UK site has been contacted by 30,000 hopefuls. Only one in 15 have got through. Given the site is a thinly veiled singles club, this is dating eugenics.

"Being accepted on to the site is the beauty equivalent of entering in to Mensa," claims Greg Hodge, the marketing director. But he rejects suggestions that he is promoting an unrealistic view of beauty. Yes, it's elitist - but that's what people want, he says. And every avenue in life discriminates against some in favour of others.

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/shared/img/o.gifARE YOU BEAUTIFUL ENOUGH?
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/40606000/jpg/_40606902_swingometer203.jpg
Like any other network agency, it charges a fee
Nearly 30,000 applicants have tried to become a beautiful person
The swingometer (above) indicates your approval rating
Rejected applicants are told to try again
Applicants must be 18 or over



"All we do is give an accurate representation of what society's ideal of beauty is. You are voted in by your own peers."

He cheerfully admits the site is not politically correct but points out that apart from dating opportunities, the chatrooms are filled with people discussing Iraq and Tony Blair.

Putting yourself forward for, ahem, approval, can be a rollercoaster ride of strident highs and confidence-sapping lows, as I found out. Once I have submitted my profile (including the picture and personal details such as weight), I nervously wait to be judged. Members can vote enthusiastically ("Yes! Certainly!"), cautiously ("Hmm, Yes, ok") and brutally ("No! Not at all!"). A swingometer reflects the prevailing opinion, from green (subtext: drop dead gorgeous) to red (subtext: have you no shame, Quasimodo?)

Ahnenerbe
Thursday, December 8th, 2005, 09:06 PM
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/4602547.stm

Beauty may be in the eye of the beholder but a new website has taken networking to Darwinian extremes by banning ugly people.

Beautifulpeople.net is an online club which admits only the most beautiful people - through a vicious selection process.

Applicants enter a profile and picture, which sit on the site for 72 hours. Fully signed up members - opposite sex only - are then invited to vote on the applicants' attractiveness.

Most people don't make it any further. Since launching in April, the UK site has been contacted by 30,000 hopefuls. Only one in 15 have got through. Given the site is a thinly veiled singles club, this is dating eugenics.
"Being accepted on to the site is the beauty equivalent of entering in to Mensa," claims Greg Hodge, the marketing director. But he rejects suggestions that he is promoting an unrealistic view of beauty. Yes, it's elitist - but that's what people want, he says. And every avenue in life discriminates against some in favour of others.



"All we do is give an accurate representation of what society's ideal of beauty is. You are voted in by your own peers."


He cheerfully admits the site is not politically correct but points out that apart from dating opportunities, the chatrooms are filled with people discussing Iraq and Tony Blair.

Putting yourself forward for, ahem, approval, can be a rollercoaster ride of strident highs and confidence-sapping lows, as I found out.

Once I have submitted my profile (including the picture and personal details such as weight), I nervously wait to be judged. Members can vote enthusiastically ("Yes! Certainly!"), cautiously ("Hmm, Yes, ok") and brutally ("No! Not at all!").

A swingometer reflects the prevailing opinion, from green (subtext: drop dead gorgeous) to red (subtext: have you no shame, Quasimodo?)

QuietWind
Thursday, December 8th, 2005, 09:56 PM
Interesting site and interesting concept. Honestly, who cares? Why do people feel the need to gain acceptance from an exclusive on-line community? There are plenty of beautiful people out there without needing to pat yourself on the back because you paid a fee and suceeded in getting voted in. Sounds like a plce for people with self esteem and ego issues. Are they joining because they are tired of meeting ugly people and they want to find an aesthetically pleasing mate, or are they joining because they need approval, acceptance, and someone to stroke their ego?

I went to the site and to begin with, race is not even an issue. This much is clear from some of the member's photos on the front page. Secondly, it is based solely on being voted in by other members, which is hardly a scientifically selective process. Thirdly, how do members know the photo is really the individual in question? It's like those 1-800 numbers where you call for live chat with a beautiful woman, but in reality some ugly, fat girl who can't get a date but has a nice voice is on the other line.

And to think the marketing director compares it to Mensa. :lol I hardly see the similarities between members voting on beauty in a photograph and a high intelligence organization that selects members based upon rigid criteria (scores on approved tests of intelligence). Maybe if Mensa simply voted on the intellect of an individual based on loose criteria such as educational or employment achievement-- then the two would be comparable. I have an idea, how about the website run the photos of individuals through a computerized analysis based upon research derived algorithms which then assign a numerical value of beauty onto the photos? Only those which strictly fit research derived criteria of beauty will be admitted. :thumbup

CountBloodSpawn
Friday, December 9th, 2005, 02:23 AM
looks like an interesting experiment none the less, I say let it be an option for people

Allenson
Friday, December 9th, 2005, 03:23 PM
Here (http://www.goodgenes.com/) is one dedicated more toward mental faculties than to phenotype. ;)

Esther_Helena
Friday, December 9th, 2005, 07:00 PM
I agree with Jennifer. I too wonder if it is to stroke their ego or if they are surrounded by ugly people. Hmm.. :chinrub Also, if they are so beautiful, then why do they have to go online to get a date? :suspect

Janus
Friday, December 9th, 2005, 07:29 PM
I think that this is exactly the way the world should not go along.Having no interest in sexual activity I might be biased but in my opinion intelligence should be valued most in eugenics.Objective beauty (golden section) should be secondary.I atleast would definatly prefer a future more intelligent world with around the current peoples' beauty over a world filled with beautiful but unintelligent people.Besides that,beautiful people normally do not solve political,racial and environmental problems :p

Ventrue
Saturday, December 10th, 2005, 04:29 AM
We get an egalitarian message shoved down our throats, that there is no difference in physical and mental quality between any two individuals on earth. Anything that combats that lie is welcome. This site and its popularity blows sky-high the lie that beauty would be relative. Why do you think the measuring of beauty is so hated by the Left? Because they are all about bribing the low! With welfare, with Affirmative Action, with license to live out sexual perversion, with license to be as lazy and immature as you want, and never try to improve - and meanwhile, the Marxist intellectuals will come up with excuses for you.

To tell the ugly that they're not ugly, that there is no such thing as beauty, is simply one of many bribes in this ideological landscape. You better realize that the Marxist hates beauty with a vengeance - beauty in people, beauty in music and art, beauty in buildings, you name it. Because our appreciation for beauty shows us that people differ in quality, and that there are objective standards, not subjective ones. This is the truth that is the enemy of all Marxism.

And you - even visitors of this Nationalist website instinctively hate a website like beautifulpeople.net. "You should value the mind, not the body!" Wake up, both are important! Our need for beauty stretches back tens of thousands of years! Jealousy and leftist hatred of those who look better is the enemy of nationalism.

QuietWind
Saturday, December 10th, 2005, 05:25 AM
We get an egalitarian message shoved down our throats, that there is no difference in physical and mental quality between any two individuals on earth. Anything that combats that lie is welcome. This site and its popularity blows sky-high the lie that beauty would be relative. Why do you think the measuring of beauty is so hated by the Left? Because they are all about bribing the low! With welfare, with Affirmative Action, with license to live out sexual perversion, with license to be as lazy and immature as you want, and never try to improve - and meanwhile, the Marxist intellectuals will come up with excuses for you.

To tell the ugly that they're not ugly, that there is no such thing as beauty, is simply one of many bribes in this ideological landscape. You better realize that the Marxist hates beauty with a vengeance - beauty in people, beauty in music and art, beauty in buildings, you name it. Because our appreciation for beauty shows us that people differ in quality, and that there are objective standards, not subjective ones. This is the truth that is the enemy of all Marxism.

And you - even visitors of this Nationalist website instinctively hate a website like beautifulpeople.net. "You should value the mind, not the body!" Wake up, both are important! Our need for beauty stretches back tens of thousands of years! Jealousy and leftist hatred of those who look better is the enemy of nationalism.

I think you missed something, because this website (Beautifulpeople) is not about objective standards of beauty. It is entirely about the subjective standards of pre-existing members, which includes a multicultural view point. There is nothing scientific about their selective process. My disregard for the site has nothing about being against beauty. It is the fact that this site is a joke (figuratively speaking).

Siegmund
Saturday, December 10th, 2005, 06:45 AM
Also, if they are so beautiful, then why do they have to go online to get a date? :suspect
Exactly right. Personally, I don't find any of these people particularly attractive anyway: they look like typical party girls and boys to me.

Janus
Saturday, December 10th, 2005, 01:16 PM
And you - even visitors of this Nationalist website instinctively hate a website like beautifulpeople.net. "You should value the mind, not the body!" Wake up, both are important! Our need for beauty stretches back tens of thousands of years! Jealousy and leftist hatred of those who look better is the enemy of nationalism.
And now please tell me with a bit less pathos why beauty so important is and why marxists hate beauty.The (unrealistic) ideal of Marxism is a classless society and not the Borg collective!

Edit:I've now visited the thread and found out that they just use the mainstream media beauty ideal with big boobs for women and those steroid muscles for men.Sad...

Sifsvina
Saturday, December 10th, 2005, 01:32 PM
We get an egalitarian message shoved down our throats, that there is no difference in physical and mental quality between any two individuals on earth. Anything that combats that lie is welcome. This site and its popularity blows sky-high the lie that beauty would be relative. Why do you think the measuring of beauty is so hated by the Left? Because they are all about bribing the low! With welfare, with Affirmative Action, with license to live out sexual perversion, with license to be as lazy and immature as you want, and never try to improve - and meanwhile, the Marxist intellectuals will come up with excuses for you.

To tell the ugly that they're not ugly, that there is no such thing as beauty, is simply one of many bribes in this ideological landscape. You better realize that the Marxist hates beauty with a vengeance - beauty in people, beauty in music and art, beauty in buildings, you name it. Because our appreciation for beauty shows us that people differ in quality, and that there are objective standards, not subjective ones. This is the truth that is the enemy of all Marxism.

Well said!
It might be a silly site and not at all what I would consider ideal but I'm getting so fed up by what you describe so well above that anything like this is somewhat of a relief. But True attractiveness (even the shallow kind this site seems to cater to) is hard to capture in a still picture and can be faked with make-up and lighting. How someone holds themselves, moves, chooses to dress, interacts, speaks, smells etc. all affect someone's "attractiveness". I think it is hard to distill the "perfect" beauty because there are many factors besides basic measurements, though these do play an important part. The ideal person would be a balance of looks, personality, and smarts. It is natural for people to be attracted to beauty/health(wide spectrum though it may cover) and be repulsed by ugliness/disease(mind, body, or spirit), trying to train people out of this natural inclination is stupid and reversing positive evolutionary flow. People might need to be reminded occasionally that there is more to beauty than pure looks but training them to idolize dysfunction is sad. At this rate we seem to be trying to breed people that cannot function without modern medicine:( I don't like what humans are turning into. Too many science fiction books, I can see where it is going.

I don't need a website to tell me I'm one of the beautiful people;-) teehee Though it is always nice to get a little approval now and again.

Oskorei
Saturday, December 10th, 2005, 03:55 PM
Not really my cup of tea. It might annoy the PC-crowd, but it annoys me somewhat too.

I don't think that modern society downplays the importance of looks. Yes, in school kids are told that "you are all useful, you are all good-looking", but in reality they are bombarded by messages of the importance of looks (I wouldn't use the world beauty, rather looks or sexiness, to describe what the modern world appreciates) via popular culture, advertising and so on.

Especially young European girls are given the message via pop-culture that looks is all that matters. Either they are "sexy" enough to get Ahmed or Amir to like them, or they are totally worthless. The methods to attract Ahmed are various, they can become anorectic, dress like 14-year old prostitutes, and so on. Anyway, modern society often reduces young girls to aestetical or sexual objects.

Beautifulpeople seems to be a part of that trend, not a more traditional European appreciation of beauty. Our ancestors had a balanced view of a persons worth, with the trinity of beauty, truth and goodness/virtue.

Ventrue
Saturday, December 10th, 2005, 05:53 PM
And now please tell me with a bit less pathos why beauty so important is and why marxists hate beauty.The (unrealistic) ideal of Marxism is a classless society and not the Borg collective!

Edit:I've now visited the thread and found out that they just use the mainstream media beauty ideal with big boobs for women and those steroid muscles for men.Sad...

Oh dear me, I used pathos about something you don't like! Something that isn't taught in the state-controlled school system! Oh, forgive me, "Toilet Man." It is only okay to show appreciation when it's for ideas that you embrace, right?

Riiight.

You don't know why the appreciation for beauty was created by evolution? [Edit: insult deleted.] Go read up in the psychology section, I have no desire to teach you on this matter just because you say so. Why do you show up in this forum when you haven't learned even fundamental nationalism? Just to disturb and vent your hatred of our philosophy? How many nationalist books have you read? Zero? Thought so. How many Pierce broadcasts? Zero? Thought so. Go do your homework. [Edit: insult deleted.]

Siegfried
Saturday, December 10th, 2005, 05:58 PM
"You should value the mind, not the body!" Wake up, both are important!

Very true. It's a bit of popular wisdom that mind and body are one, but it seems a lot of people haven't really accepted its consequences. Cicero said it quite eloquently: "It is of great consequence in what bodies souls are placed, for many things spring from the body that sharpen the mind, and many that blunt and dull it." This immediately ties in with racialism.

Ventrue
Saturday, December 10th, 2005, 06:13 PM
Very true. It's a bit of popular wisdom that mind and body are one, but it seems a lot of people haven't really accepted its consequences. Cicero said it quite eloquently: "It is of great consequence in what bodies souls are placed, for many things spring from the body that sharpen the mind, and many that blunt and dull it." This immediately ties in with racialism.

I hadn't heard that quote from Cicero, but he is right once again. I read something similar from what the Japanese samurai learned - how the body influences the mind and vice versa, and that they are really one.

The subject of beauty is important. Our enemies work intensely on dragging it down, showing just how important they know it is. One thing the Jews are not, is stupid.

If I were to use a dating service, I might try to put an ad at a site like beautifulpeople.net as well. Are they worse people because they are beautiful? (The knee-jerk reaction is to say yes - it's always the jocks in teen movies that are rapists and the home-coming queens that are stupid and wicked, while the ugly Jewish nerd is the hero, la the slave morality.) I would then evaluate any women there in the same way I would evaluate ads at any other dating site, but with the added bonus of having a greater chance of finding a girl who meets my physical criteria. What's not to like?

Now I just wish there was a site only for those who are both beautiful, and could provide an IQ test showing them to be above the average. (Notice how part of your mind cringes at that combination, both beauty and intellect? That's because the Jew's Hollywood has been messing with you.)

Siegfried
Saturday, December 10th, 2005, 06:16 PM
Now I just wish there was a site for those that pass both the beauty criteria of the members, and could provide an IQ test showing them to be above average.

You might be interested in this thread; http://forums.skadi.net/showthread.php?t=12843 :)

Janus
Saturday, December 10th, 2005, 06:52 PM
Oh dear me, I used pathos about something you don't like! Something that isn't taught in the state-controlled school system! Oh, forgive me, "Toilet Man." It is only okay to show appreciation when it's for ideas that you embrace, right?

Riiight.

You don't know why the appreciation for beauty was created by evolution? ... Go read up in the psychology section, I have no desire to teach you on this matter just because you say so. Why do you show up in this forum when you haven't learned even fundamental nationalism? Just to disturb and vent your hatred of our philosophy? How many nationalist books have you read? Zero? Thought so. How many Pierce broadcasts? Zero? Thought so. Go do your homework. ...

I said with less pathos not with even more empty phrases but I decided to ignore your meaningless and childish insults and answer.
The sentences between your empty phrases doesn't make much sense either.Beauty created by evolution?I didn't know evolution was some kind of god who creates.Evolution is a mechanism of life to ensure the survival of the fittest and strongest.So healthy individuals were considered as attractive but sexual attractiveness isn't necessarily beauty.Besides that what have nationalism and communism to do with eugenics?Right,nothing.And when I joined here it was an European preventionist forum (now only germanic) which is also not nesserarily nationalism.And you're,of course,wrong since I've read several books of any political couleur.

But to come to a real point again I say again that I would strongly prefer a world with the current beauty and a much higher average intellect over a world filled with model-like persons with the intellect of today.Where would be the evolutionary advantage in beauty centered eugenics?Beautiful people won't solve our problems!

Oriana
Tuesday, December 13th, 2005, 04:02 AM
Here (http://www.goodgenes.com/) is one dedicated more toward mental faculties than to phenotype. ;)

An Ivy League education is nothing if not an intensive, exclusive, expensive course in networking. Were I as inclined toward biological determinism as the owner(s) of goodgenes.com, I would question the genetic fitness of "Ivy Leaguers, et al." who must resort to the Web to forge connections - romantic or otherwise - with their fellow graduates.

Oriana
Tuesday, December 13th, 2005, 06:05 PM
To say it with a bluntness he would perhaps appreciate, Ventrue's heavy-handed rants are hackneyed (likely to the point of plagiarism), overstated and outdated.

Many threads on this site provide examples of the (pop) scientific community's currently trendy insistence that standards of beauty are objective and universal. Meanwhile, the media ruthlessly promote highly specific forms of beauty (which, especially in the case of female beauty, have become increasingly narrow in recent years). Not surprisingly, people today tend to believe in the objectiveness of beauty - or to take it for granted.

And, not unusually, Ventrue has internalized dated rhetoric (evidenced by his diction, style and tone) at the expense of observation. If he pulls his nose out of those propaganda pamphlets, it shouldn't take even him long to realize that belief in objective standards of beauty, whether or not one shares it, is under no threat - least of all from "Marxism." But I wouldn't count on that happening.

(Since V.'s ban is only temporary, I fully expect an irate response.)



We get an egalitarian message shoved down our throats, that there is no difference in physical and mental quality between any two individuals on earth. Anything that combats that lie is welcome. This site and its popularity blows sky-high the lie that beauty would be relative. Why do you think the measuring of beauty is so hated by the Left? Because they are all about bribing the low! With welfare, with Affirmative Action, with license to live out sexual perversion, with license to be as lazy and immature as you want, and never try to improve - and meanwhile, the Marxist intellectuals will come up with excuses for you.

To tell the ugly that they're not ugly, that there is no such thing as beauty, is simply one of many bribes in this ideological landscape. You better realize that the Marxist hates beauty with a vengeance - beauty in people, beauty in music and art, beauty in buildings, you name it. Because our appreciation for beauty shows us that people differ in quality, and that there are objective standards, not subjective ones. This is the truth that is the enemy of all Marxism.

And you - even visitors of this Nationalist website instinctively hate a website like beautifulpeople.net. "You should value the mind, not the body!" Wake up, both are important! Our need for beauty stretches back tens of thousands of years! Jealousy and leftist hatred of those who look better is the enemy of nationalism.

Cole Nidray
Tuesday, December 13th, 2005, 07:20 PM
which includes a multicultural view point.

All the non-Whites on the site have Europid morphology. I doubt "Ms. Congo" would qualify for that site! :P

Ms. Congo 2005:

http://picsrv.missworld.tv/?fif=/missworld/img_399_3896.jpg&obj=iip,1.0&wid=405&hei=631&rgn=0,0,0,0&cvt=jpeg

shockgrrrl
Friday, December 16th, 2005, 07:50 AM
So, it's like another 'hot or not' or 'ratemyface' site. Ahh... I'd join just for kicks! haha.

I do believe intellect should over-rule apperance anyday.

Ventrue
Tuesday, June 13th, 2006, 05:53 PM
To say it with a bluntness he would perhaps appreciate, Ventrue's heavy-handed rants are hackneyed (likely to the point of plagiarism), overstated and outdated.

Many threads on this site provide examples of the (pop) scientific community's currently trendy insistence that standards of beauty are objective and universal. Meanwhile, the media ruthlessly promote highly specific forms of beauty (which, especially in the case of female beauty, have become increasingly narrow in recent years). Not surprisingly, people today tend to believe in the objectiveness of beauty - or to take it for granted.

And, not unusually, Ventrue has internalized dated rhetoric (evidenced by his diction, style and tone) at the expense of observation. If he pulls his nose out of those propaganda pamphlets, it shouldn't take even him long to realize that belief in objective standards of beauty, whether or not one shares it, is under no threat - least of all from "Marxism." But I wouldn't count on that happening.

(Since V.'s ban is only temporary, I fully expect an irate response.)

Paki socialist says what? :roll

This is what you can expect when you allow antis and non-Whites in a nationalist forum. Their agenda is only about promoting the anti-White and Marxist viewpoint. My case is strengthened by the fact that the non-Whites are my enemies.