You don't have to want to sleep with them, though. Why would straight men vote for a taller good looking president? Not because they're all secretly gheyz.

It's not about wanting them in a sexual way.

Prettier gets more positive attention. We trust attractive. We want to be around attractive. We want to be attractive.

Are they voting for the dude based on the fact that he's tall and good looking? I think that's a way oversimplification.

I think with sexual equality comes valuing women as something other than sex object, and with that comes treating women you find unattractive with just as much kindness and politeness as you would women you find attractive.

I do not automatically trust attractive nor is it particularly something I want to be around without other qualities to make me, you know, actually want to be around that person.

Are they voting for the dude based on the fact that he's tall and good looking? I think that's a way oversimplification.

They aren't consciously choosing which dude they'd rather bang if they had to, but our lizard brains are kinda simplistic. So yes. Tall-ish and good looking seems healthier, just like symmetry does. And we do subconsciously lean toward these attributes in leaders. I don't have time to go on a cite rampage here but the study was most recently done by Louisiana State, I think.

No, people aren't thinking, "Hmm, prettier, so yes." But people are NOT thinking that and then they FEEEEEEEEEEL like the prettier one is smarter or a better leader.

I'm not saying it's an awesome characteristic of us, but it's there. And pretending people don't go for prettier packaging on many levels doesn't really get us anywhere new.

And pretending people don't go for prettier packaging on many levels doesn't really get us anywhere new.

Yeah. People like pleasing to the eye. It's how we are, on a level that goes way beyond sexism and racism. I think every attempt to sabotage unconscious prejudice that's not based on truly relevant criteria is admirable and should be striven for, but I'm not going to pretend it isn't reflexive.

And it's not *just* about sexism.

They aren't consciously choosing which dude they'd rather bang if they had to, but our lizard brains are kinda simplistic. So yes. Tall-ish and good looking seems healthier, just like symmetry does. And we do subconsciously lean toward these attributes in leaders. I don't have time to go on a cite rampage here but the study was most recently done by Louisiana State, I think.

But that study ONLY used looks as a criteria for voting. People are evaluating more than that. Quasimodo would get my vote if he were running against George Clooney if he was on record as pro-choice, pro-single payer, pro-union and living wage.

I'm not saying people don't go for prettier packaging. Well...depending on what you mean when you say go for.

Not all men treat women as things to be overlooked (or even treat badly) unless they find them attractive, but plenty do, and I think playing into that kind of sexism doesn't help to make fewer Tucker Maxes in the world.

I've got to give my mother the props she deserves, she let my sisters and I have any standard-boy-thing that we wanted. I had a chemistry set and was pushed towards the more technical things. There were some nifty science toys that were labelled "The thinking boy's toy", and all of us looked at that and went "that's not right," and my mother got the magic marker and blacked out "boy's". This was in the late '60s.

Why couldn't she have understood that the fact that we turned to be strong, self-assured, stand-up-for-ourselves women was a good thing, even if it meant we disagreed with her? It meant she did a good job.

But that study ONLY used looks as a criteria for voting. People are evaluating more than that. Quasimodo would get my vote if he were running against George Clooney if he was on record as pro-choice, pro-single payer, pro-union and living wage.

But that assumes all voters are thinking. I'm not so sure about that.

I know they are not, or at least not always.