傾聽各國草根真實聲音,縱論全球平民眼中世界
福彩中奖是真是假 -> 國外新鮮事 -> 正文 Tips:使用 ← → 鍵即可快速瀏覽其他文章
愛荷華州立大學:長得好看會影響人們對性的態度
2019-05-22 yzy86 6993 0 0  



People tend to feel strongly about mattersof sexual morality, such as premarital sex or gay marriage.

人們往往對和性道德有關的問題反應很大,比如婚前性行為,或是同志婚姻。

Some sources of these differences areobvious. Religion, media portrayals and parents and peers are big social forcesthat shape attitudes about sex.

造成這些差異的部分根源是顯而易見的。宗教、媒體的刻畫、父母以及同齡人是塑造性態度的重大社會力量。

But could something as innocuous as the waywe look spark these different outlooks, too? In a recently published article, Istudied this question.

但是,像外貌這種無關痛癢的東西也能激發出這些不同的觀點嗎?我在最近發表的一篇文章中研究了這個問題。

Beauty and opportunity

美麗和機遇

Compared with the rest of us, mostbeautiful people lead charmed lives.

和我們其他人相比,最美麗的人過的是順風順水的生活。

Studies show that pretty people tend to getfavorable treatment. They secure better jobs and earn higher salaries. Othersare friendlier toward them. With this extra money and social support, they’rebetter equipped to fend off any consequences of their actions. For instance,the better-looking can get more benefit of the doubt from juries.

研究顯示,漂亮的人群往往能得到優待。他們能弄到更好的工作,賺取更高的薪水。旁人對待他們更為友善。有了這份額外的金錢和社會支持,他們便能更好地規避其行為導致的任何后果。譬如說,更美貌的人能從陪審團的懷疑中得到更多好處。

Their lives are most charmed, though, inmatters of sex and romance. While many benefits of beauty are small – aslightly higher salary offer here, a better performance uation there – theromantic benefits are larger and more consistent. Good-looking people onaverage have more sexual opportunities and partners.

不過,他們的生活在性和愛情方面是最順風順水的。雖然美麗帶來的很多利好在于小處,這里稍微高一點的薪水,那里得到些更好的表現評價,但愛情方面的受益更為重大也更為持久。平均而言,美貌的人擁有更多的性機遇和性伴侶。   

Could this create a sense, among attractivepeople, that anything goes when it comes to sex? Could it make them lessinclined to value sexual purity? And might sexually experienced people belittlethe moral costs of sex in order to feel better about their own past conduct?

這種情況會不會讓富有吸引力的人群產生一種感覺,就是在性的方面躺著都能贏?這種情況是否會讓他們不那么容易去珍視性的純潔?而且在性方面富有經驗的人群會不會為了對自己過往的行為產生更好的自我感覺而去貶低性的道德成本?  

If so, we would expect good-looking peopleto be the most tolerant ones where sex is concerned. They would have lessrestrictive views on issues like premarital sex, abortion or gay marriage.

如果是這樣,我們便可以認為好看的人是對性最寬容的群體。他們對于婚前性行為、墮胎或是同志婚姻之類議題,沒有那么多約束性的觀點。

A link to conservatism?

和保守主義有聯系?

But you could also argue the opposite.

但你也可以主張相反的觀點。

Higher salaries and greater success in thejob market might pull good-looking people toward more conservative views whenit comes to taxes or economic justice.

職場上更高的薪水和更大的成功可能會在繳稅或是經濟正義問題上,把美貌人群拉向更保守的觀點。   

Since conservatives, on average, dislikesexual freedom more than liberals do, identifying with conservatives foreconomic reasons – or simply moving in conservative social circles – might makethe beautiful less, not more, tolerant where sex is concerned. Along theselines, studies have found that good looks are associated with conservatismamong politicians.

由于保守派平均而言比自由派更厭惡性自由,出于經濟原因認同保守派(或是生活在保守派的社交圈中)可能會讓美貌人群對性更不寬容,而不是更寬容。沿著這些思路,各種研究已經發現:在政客中,美貌和保守主義是聯系在一起的。

Attractiveness could then plausiblyassociate with higher or lower standards for what sexual activities are morallyacceptable. Or the two arguments could cancel each other out, as one study ofcollege students suggested.

那么,吸引力可能就看似合理地與何種性行為在道德上可以被接受的更高或更低的標準聯系在一起了?;蛘?,這兩種主張也許會互相抵消,如同一項對大學生的研究所表明的。

Digging into the surveys

對這些調查的深究

To further explore this issue, I turned totwo large, prominent surveys of Americans’ views: the General Social Surveyfrom 2016 and the American National Election Studies from 1972.

為了進一步探索這個議題,我轉向了研究美國人觀點的兩個大型重要調查:2016年的綜合社會普查和1972年的美國大選研究。

Both surveys were administeredface-to-face. And, unusually, both studies asked the person administering thesurvey to uate the respondent’s looks on a one-to-five scale. (Therespondent doesn’t see the score. The study’s designers weren’t that heedlessof social awkwardness.)

這兩個調查都是面對面進行的。而且不同尋常的是,兩個研究都要求調查者用1分到5分去評價受訪者的外貌。(受訪者是看不到這個得分的。該研究的設計者也不是那種不理會社交無能群體的人。)

This measure of beauty isn’t rigorous. Butit does resemble quick personal judgments made in everyday life. Moreover, thedecades-long gap between the studies gives some sense of whether effectspersist across a generation’s worth of cultural change.

這種對美麗的估量方式并不算嚴密。但確實近似日常生活中的個人快速判斷。此外,各種研究之間長達幾十年的缺口能帶給人一些認識,即這種效果在跨越了一代人的文化變遷后是否還能存續。

The surveys also asked about legal andmoral standards relevant to sex, such as how restrictive abortion laws shouldbe, whether gay marriage should be legal and about the acceptability ofpremarital, extramarital and gay sex.

這些調查也問到了和性相關的法律和道德標準,比如墮胎法的限制程度應當為何,是否應該讓同志婚姻合法,以及對婚前性行為、婚外性行為和同志性行為的接受度。

In both studies, the better-looking seemmore relaxed about sexual morality. For instance, in the data from 2016, 51percent of those whose looks were rated above average said a woman who wants anabortion for any reason should legally be allowed to have one. Only 42 percentof those with below-average looks said the same. This nine-point differenceincreases to 15 points when accounting for factors like age, education,political ideology and religiosity.

在兩個研究中,更美貌的人群似乎對性道德都更不拘束。比如在2016年的數據中,外貌評分高于平均的人里有51%的人表示:一個出于任何原因想要墮胎的女人應該得到法律的許可。而外貌評分低于平均的人里只有42%的人表達了同樣的看法。而如果算上年齡、受教育水平、政治意識形態和宗教之類的因素,這里9個百分點的差異就增加到了15個百分點。

This pattern repeated for almost allquestions. The one exception was a question that asked when adultery wasmorally acceptable. Almost all respondents said “never” to that, washing outdifferences between the more and less attractive.

該模式在幾乎所有問題中都反復出現。這里有一個例外,有個問題問的是通奸在道德上是否能被接受。幾乎所有的受訪者都回答“絕不”,這就彌合了在更有吸引力和吸引力更小的人群之間存在的差異。

Are morals opportunistic?

道德也會玩機會主義?

If past experience is what makes beautifulpeople more tolerant toward issues like abortion and gay marriage, we would notexpect them to be notably more tolerant about matters in which looks don’tapply. This proves to be true. Good-looking respondents in these surveys aren’tdetectably more open, for example, to a legal right to die or to acceptingcivil disobedience.

如果是過往的經驗導致美貌人群對墮胎和同志婚姻之類的議題更為寬容,我們便不會指望他們在與外貌無關的事項中表現出明顯更為寬容的立場。這一點也被證明為真。比如說,并沒有發現參與這些調查的美貌受訪者對于合法死亡權利或是接受不合作主義持更為開放的態度。 
  
These results are consistent with otherfindings showing that getting away with violating norms can make you morecasual about those norms in the future. Whether in white-collar crime or policeviolence or international human-rights violations, those who pull off onequestionable action often become more willing to justify doing the same, orperhaps even a little more, in the future.

這些結果也和其他的一些發現相符,即違反了(社會/法律)規范而能僥幸全身而退,這就會在未來讓你對那些規范抱持更不以為然的態度。無論是白領犯罪還是警察暴力,抑或是國際間的人權侵犯,那些做成了一次可指摘行為的人往往更愿意在未來為一犯再犯辯護,甚至在程度上還加重了。

The same could be said for sex. If you’vehave a lot of sexual experiences in the past, it may color your attitudestoward the vast range of sexual possibilities – even those that don’t directlyapply to your own sexuality or personal experience.

這一點也適用于性。如果你在過去有很多性經驗,這就可能扭曲你對于類型紛繁的性事可能性的態度,甚至是那些不直接適用于你自己的性體驗或個人體驗的可能性。

評論區:

1、There have been otherstudies and reports written about we humans predilection to deference towardsattractive people.     One that springsto mind is a bank robbery where the robbers dressed in smart suits, ties andpolished shoes.    As they emerged fromthe bank guns ablaze the snipers who were tasked with neutralising themhesitated because they were “smartly dressed and looked like bankers”.    Very heavily armed bankers (the worstkind).

另有一些研究和報告,說的是人們更喜歡遷就有吸引力的人。浮現我腦海的是一宗銀行劫案,搶劫犯身著時髦套裝,打著領帶,皮鞋锃亮。他們從銀行里冒頭的時候,負責狙殺他們的狙擊手猶豫了,因為他們“衣履光鮮,而且看著像銀行家”。真是武裝到牙齒的銀行家?。ㄗ羈膳碌哪侵鄭?。

2、It is an interestingarticle. As a somewhat beautiful person I can tell you that there is privilegeinvolved, yes.I did want to say, though, with all due respect - I did not likethe term “dislike sexual freedom” which strikes me as a very manipulative wayof saying what we all know to mean “sexually conservative”. I just had to signin and chime in about this. I can’t stand this type of language because it isdishonest, and it is a misuse of the word ‘freedom’.

這文很有趣。作為一個頗有幾分姿色的人,我可以告訴你們:是的,確實會發生優待的情況。但我也確實想說,請恕我冒昧,我不喜歡“厭惡性自由”這個說法,我們都知道這里想表達的是“對性保守”,這種說法感覺上包藏著心機。對此我必須進來插點話。我無法容忍這種說話方式,因為這是在耍詭詐,而且是對“自由”這個詞的誤用。

3、I agree that on theface of it physically attractive people initially get treated with deferenceand can get away with more than a physically unattractive person.        But society is still predicated onability for success.     Not physicalfeatures      Unless you include filmstardom or modelling.

我同意:乍看之下,外在富有吸引力的人群在待遇上會得到遷就,而且相比外在沒有吸引力的人更容易僥幸過關。但這個社會仍然是以成功的能力來論斷人的,而非身體特征。除非你的身份是電影明星或模特。

In the long term competence or the lackthereof becomes their making or undoing.

長遠來看,是否具備能力最終決定了他們的成敗。

I’m in my 60th year and am short 168cm andnot particularly photogenic.
So I have had plenty of time andopportunity to observe and reflect on the treatment of others in relation tomyself and without being too immodest I have noticed that height especially isa trait that is commonly seen as desirable in both leadership and matchmaking.

我60歲了,身高168,也不是特別上相。
所以我有足夠的時間和機會去觀察反思和我有關系的人所受的待遇,我也不想太不謙虛,但我注意到身高這個特性在關系和婚介中被普遍視為性感點。

But and this is a big BUT, if the ‘chosenone’ is not competent they will fail and suffer greater distress than myself.
Why?   Well,l because they have become conditioned to the expectation ofpreferential treatment without effort.

但是,如果“天之驕子”能力不行,他們也是會失敗的,且會比我遭受更大的危難。
為什么呢?好吧,因為他們已經習慣了去指望不付出努力就能得到優待。