ita says something similar to what I was thinking. At least in the last few centuries, beauty was completely worhtless next to the possibility of increasing wealth. A woman's value was the wealth of her family far more than her looks. Before that it may well have been fertility or strength. Beauty has only been a career in maybe the last few decades.
Natter 48 Contiguous States of Denial
Off-topic discussion. Wanna talk about corsets, duct tape, or physics? This is the place. Detailed discussion of any current-season TV must be whitefonted.
Similarly, in some less modern cultures, obesity in men is considered a sign of good fortune & prosperity...
In modern culture, of course, the rich & famous have eating disorders and/or personal trainers.
I've seen stuff on TV, where they try to test for things like how people unconsciously react to the appearance of others. They usually use babies. They react better to pretty people than to less-than-pretty people. Ergo, according to the TV people, humans are pre-disposed to be attracted to beauty.
I don't know if that really means anything.
So what, then, is progress? A woman's currency is...anything? Dependent on her and the man? Variable in the same way a man's may be (and it can't be denied that his currency can often be his actualy currency)?
Unrelatedly, traumatic gag link. Traumatic in the NSFW way.
ita, goddammit! I totally thought she was kidding, she is not.
ita, that link took me to phonetrace.org, was that what it was supposed to do?
ita, goddammit! I totally thought she was kidding, she is not.
I'm finally totally up front about my link and it's some weird cry-wolf thing, huh?
I'm guessing you didn't put in a number, quester.
Oh, no I didn't.
eta: now I get it.
humans are pre-disposed to be attracted to beauty.
Actually, we're pre-disposed to be attracted to symmetry. The more symmetrical the person's face/body, the fewer genetic abnormalities.
Sail! You're right. I knew I was mis-remembering something.