A while back, I made a post comparing people who solicit for designer donor eggs to Nazis. As always, art and humor can never find ways to be as awful as real life. Lookie what we have here from Sunday.
So are people who look for those specifications in their love life Nazis as well?
Eugenics may be tainted by its association with Nazism and racial purity, but I don't see anything wrong with voluntarily selecting for desirable traits. When does (non-coercive) eugenics become bad? Selecting out diseases with in-vitro fertilization? For long life? For a fit body? For intelligence? So that the child will appear to be the natural child of the parents? For other aesthetic desires?
I understand that messing with evolution can be dangerous, and I understand that coercive eugenics is a pretty huge violation (though sometime in the future we may question the ethics of parents who do not select out deadly diseases), but condemning the science as "just evil" is failing to improve the quality-of-life of individuals and, potentially with time, society as a whole just because of bad memories that aren't directly related to the practice.
Ok, you're full of crap and hyperbole. Aesthetics are aesthetics and have nothing to do with exalting one race over another or genocide, y'know, the actually bad things Nazis did.
People are commonly attracted to people with similar general features to themselves and their family members. Whether this is some genetic predisposition to perpetuating your clan or a simple association between your family and comfort, it's not like you're going to tell them "you find this person attractive instead". If some Swedish guy is attracted to women with Nordic features, so what?
"Aesthetics are aesthetics" -- a tautology. Where do aesthetics come from?
From this, I should infer that aesthetics, the appreciation of beauty, comes from either a genetic predisposition to in-clan breeding or psychological association with in-clan features?
That is where appreciation of beauty comes from?
Now... we've no knowledge that this family is Sweedish. Indeed, if they were Scandinavian, they may well have specified something like "Scandinavian herritage preferred"-- but they didn't.
Presumably they're Caucasian, however. The relative scarcity of blond hair and blue eyes is thus quite relevant, given the arguments you're advancing-- most members of "their clan" don't have (natural) blond hair or blue eyes!
Yes, my guess would be that appreciation of beauty comes from one (or a mixture of) those two some mixture of those two sources.
My assumption here is that most people do not identify specific ethnic tribes in their aesthetics. Some people may have conscious tribal desires and would search out someone who has specifically Nordic ancestry, but most people will only be operating on a subconscious level where the primary physical characteristics have the most impact.
If you're assuming the parents are not blond haired and blue eyed, why are you even assuming they're Caucasian? My assumption here is that they're trying to match the mother's appearance in order to have a child that would be as close to what would be their natural child as possible.
They want a Caucasian egg, so it's natural to assume they're Caucasian. They want a blond-haired, blue-eyed egg, so it's natural to assume they're not Caucasian because Caucasians usually don't. The only people who think Caucasians are supposed to have blond hair and blue eyes are the NSDAP.
But why do you assume only the skin color request matches the parents physical traits? The only people who think Caucasians as a whole are supposed to have blond hair and blue eyes are Nazis, but every blond haired and blue eyed mother out there expects their own baby to have a relatively reasonable chance of having blond hair and blue eyes (much more so if the father has the same).
You're assuming secret Nazis when the much more reasonable assumption is you've got a blond haired blue eyed mother who wants to have a child that looks like its her own. In the same way it's unnatural for a black couple to have a white child, it's also unnatural for a couple with brown hair and eyes to have a little blond blue eyed baby.
He's assuming blond-hair-and-blue-eyes-ism is correlated with nazism.
He's right.
Why aren't people specifying that they want babies with roman noses, or detached earlobes? Why are these specific identifiers the ones which are called out? Why not height?
You're engaging in a naturalistic fallacy, and your notion of race is similarly fallacious. "Whites" and "Blacks" are not a race (unless you ask a Nazi.)
I'm not assuming secret Nazis. I'm assuming self-absorbed people who, even if it was pointed out to them that this might be even a tiny bit odd, would put it right out of their mind. And don't you forget that no matter who the egg comes from, the child will have traits of the father. If the parents are as homogenous as we both think they are, the genetic makeup of the biological mother is almost irrelevant - the kid will be predisposed to have the traits they're looking for anyway.
I'm pleased to know that people want to have sex with landscapes, especially the Italian countryside. Similarly, I'll hereto after assume the reason people find buildings built according to the golden ratio to be pleasing has something to do with proper breasts being rectilinear.
I'll never picture bowls of fruit the same way again, that is for sure...
Here's a rhetorical question for you before I get up to increasing someone's stakeholder value... How many ads have blondes in them, as compared to the general population?
...what? I'm assuming there was some misread in there, because those first two paragraphs are just weird. Is this supposed to be some non-sequitur expansion of the contextual aesthetics of human beauty to aesthetics in general?
I would expect there are more (female) blonds in ads than in the general population, indicating that blond women have a wide aesthetic appeal. Whether this is the remnants of a time when it was publicly accepted that blond/blue was pure and good, some trick of the colors where light hair and eyes makes models look more feminine (you'll note few male models have blond hair), or a self-fulfilling prophecy where new models are hired because they look like "models", I would love to see more darker haired models but don't personally feel a need for active manipulation of societal aesthetics.
I have not dismissed the possibility that the choice is solely one of aesthetics, I just do not find it nearly as likely as a mother who cannot conceive herself wanting her baby to look like it is hers. Also, there's probably a 0.1% percent chance that she's a secret Nazi, but that's the only choice in here which is morally wrong.
definitions of aesthetics as provided by google's "define:" (out-of-context trimmed; google it yourself if you want.)
The philosophy or study of the nature of beauty and art.
The sum total of the visual response to the beauty of an object. Elements of aesthetics may include: color, shape or particular features of the object.
Relating to the artistic or the"beautiful"; traditionally a branch of philosophy, but now a compound of the philosophy, psychology, and sociology of art.
The pleasurable sensations, mental and physical, which humans may experience as a result of certain environmental resources.
Of or pertaining to the perception of things, places, or objects which evoke appreciation by the individual, without regard to market or monetary value, or the utility of said things, places, or objects.
"Philosophical investigation into the nature of beauty and the perception of beauty, especially in the arts; the theory of art or artistic taste."
Properties perceived by touch and sight, such as the hand, color, luster and texture of carpet.
A branch of philosophy that focuses on the nature of beauty, the value of art, and the human responses to those topics.
the sense of what people consider beautiful or culturally appropriate, varying from folk group to folk group and individual to individual.
The branch of philosophy that deals with beauty and art. Central questions in aesthetics include: What is art? What kinds of objects possess aesthetic value? Is aesthetic experience rational or emotional? What is the relationship between an artist, their artwork and the critics?
Perhaps blonds have a wider aesthetic appeal because they appear in more ads?
You really need to stop using the word "aesthetics."
Nazism in a nutshell: My race should stick together. There's nothing sufficiently evil about it in its basis that we need to shoot Nazis on sight. But race war is a natural, logical, and inevitable outcome of Nationalist Socialism. When your race needs to expand and so does your neighbor's, the exclusivity forces you into conflict.
It's perfectly fine to say "I trend this way". But confusing trend lines with natural laws is where I disagree with Homophobes, Racists, Sexists, and Bigots of all stripes.
No, that's tribalism. Aryans are far from the only tribalistic group and certainly not an inevitable product of it. Hell, the Jews themselves are exceptionally tribalistic.
I'm not even in favor of tribalism, but when the answer is "you're wrong for following your aesthetic desires" it's stepped too far. If someone trends to find blond haired and blue eyed women attractive, it's hardly a bad idea to put that up in a dating profile. If a couple is blond haired and blue eyed, it's not in any way weird for them to want a child who looks the same, for both shallow and not so shallow reasons.
Yes, Nazism is tribalism as political (as opposed to sociological) theory.
you're wrong for following your aesthetic desires
Did you even look at the ad? They're not following aesthetic desires. They provided a set of hard and fast criteria, many of which have nothing to do with genetics or aesthetics.
-some form of college education -irrelevant to genetics or aesthetics -BMI of 28 or less -linked more closely to income than either -20-28 years of age -irrelevant to aesthetics, more relevant to the surgery than reproduction -height 5'3 or taller -Blond hair -Blue eyes -some form of post HS education -irrelevant to genetics or aesthetics -Caucasian -no use of illegal drugs, cigarettes, alcohol abuse or antidepressants -linked more closely to income than either -active lifestyle -linked more closely to income than either -attractive -linked more closely to income than either
I agree that many of these traits do not necessarily indicate a good set of genetics, but they might. Maybe their college educated egg maker got there because her parents were rich, but it's a filter that is likely going to slightly predispose your chances toward intelligence. Rich dumb people and smart poor people may fall on the "wrong" side, but in the middle there's going to be some selection group where the smart kids decide to go on to college and the dumb kids decide they don't want to go to school anymore.
So you've basically got three goals here, selecting for positive genetic traits (however inaccurately), selecting to match the mother in gross physical characteristics, and selecting for current health (separate from larger genetic traits). The only one that doesn't seem to make much sense to me is the current health, but that more seems irrelevant than offensive in any way.
I do. I think that intelligence is far from the main factor that gets you into college. Income is probably an order of magnitude higher on the list.
If action X increases my hypothetical kids' chances of entering or completing college by some positive value Y and action X has no cost and no downsides, then I'm taking action X even if Y is small.
Nazism in a nutshell: My race should stick together.
I think there's a big difference between racial pride and actively trying to exterminate other races. Perhaps racial pride is condemnable, but putting it on the same level as the Nazis is like saying murderers and shoplifters are equally condemnable since they're both crimes.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2008-09-16 03:03 pm (UTC)Eugenics may be tainted by its association with Nazism and racial purity, but I don't see anything wrong with voluntarily selecting for desirable traits. When does (non-coercive) eugenics become bad? Selecting out diseases with in-vitro fertilization? For long life? For a fit body? For intelligence? So that the child will appear to be the natural child of the parents? For other aesthetic desires?
I understand that messing with evolution can be dangerous, and I understand that coercive eugenics is a pretty huge violation (though sometime in the future we may question the ethics of parents who do not select out deadly diseases), but condemning the science as "just evil" is failing to improve the quality-of-life of individuals and, potentially with time, society as a whole just because of bad memories that aren't directly related to the practice.
(no subject)
Date: 2008-09-16 03:06 pm (UTC)Yes. It's a free country. If you want to be a Nazi, you can be a Nazi.
(no subject)
Date: 2008-09-16 03:18 pm (UTC)People are commonly attracted to people with similar general features to themselves and their family members. Whether this is some genetic predisposition to perpetuating your clan or a simple association between your family and comfort, it's not like you're going to tell them "you find this person attractive instead". If some Swedish guy is attracted to women with Nordic features, so what?
(no subject)
Date: 2008-09-16 03:24 pm (UTC)And how exactly do people develop their sense of aesthetics, in your view?
How prevalent is 'blond hair and blue eyes' even amongst Caucasians, and given that, what leads you to believe it is common?
(no subject)
Date: 2008-09-16 03:27 pm (UTC)And where did the commonality of blond/blue even come into the picture?
(no subject)
Date: 2008-09-16 03:48 pm (UTC)From this, I should infer that aesthetics, the appreciation of beauty, comes from either a genetic predisposition to in-clan breeding or psychological association with in-clan features?
That is where appreciation of beauty comes from?
Now... we've no knowledge that this family is Sweedish. Indeed, if they were Scandinavian, they may well have specified something like "Scandinavian herritage preferred"-- but they didn't.
Presumably they're Caucasian, however. The relative scarcity of blond hair and blue eyes is thus quite relevant, given the arguments you're advancing-- most members of "their clan" don't have (natural) blond hair or blue eyes!
(no subject)
Date: 2008-09-16 04:14 pm (UTC)My assumption here is that most people do not identify specific ethnic tribes in their aesthetics. Some people may have conscious tribal desires and would search out someone who has specifically Nordic ancestry, but most people will only be operating on a subconscious level where the primary physical characteristics have the most impact.
If you're assuming the parents are not blond haired and blue eyed, why are you even assuming they're Caucasian? My assumption here is that they're trying to match the mother's appearance in order to have a child that would be as close to what would be their natural child as possible.
(no subject)
Date: 2008-09-16 04:22 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-09-16 04:45 pm (UTC)You're assuming secret Nazis when the much more reasonable assumption is you've got a blond haired blue eyed mother who wants to have a child that looks like its her own. In the same way it's unnatural for a black couple to have a white child, it's also unnatural for a couple with brown hair and eyes to have a little blond blue eyed baby.
(no subject)
Date: 2008-09-16 05:10 pm (UTC)He's right.
Why aren't people specifying that they want babies with roman noses, or detached earlobes? Why are these specific identifiers the ones which are called out? Why not height?
You're engaging in a naturalistic fallacy, and your notion of race is similarly fallacious. "Whites" and "Blacks" are not a race (unless you ask a Nazi.)
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 2008-09-16 05:11 pm (UTC)The next time you listen to some Rage Against the Machine... why don't you fucking listen to some Rage Against the Machine?
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 2008-09-16 05:35 pm (UTC)(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 2008-09-16 05:06 pm (UTC)I'll never picture bowls of fruit the same way again, that is for sure...
Here's a rhetorical question for you before I get up to increasing someone's stakeholder value... How many ads have blondes in them, as compared to the general population?
(no subject)
Date: 2008-09-16 05:26 pm (UTC)I would expect there are more (female) blonds in ads than in the general population, indicating that blond women have a wide aesthetic appeal. Whether this is the remnants of a time when it was publicly accepted that blond/blue was pure and good, some trick of the colors where light hair and eyes makes models look more feminine (you'll note few male models have blond hair), or a self-fulfilling prophecy where new models are hired because they look like "models", I would love to see more darker haired models but don't personally feel a need for active manipulation of societal aesthetics.
I have not dismissed the possibility that the choice is solely one of aesthetics, I just do not find it nearly as likely as a mother who cannot conceive herself wanting her baby to look like it is hers. Also, there's probably a 0.1% percent chance that she's a secret Nazi, but that's the only choice in here which is morally wrong.
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means
Date: 2008-09-16 05:33 pm (UTC)The philosophy or study of the nature of beauty and art.
The sum total of the visual response to the beauty of an object. Elements of aesthetics may include: color, shape or particular features of the object.
Relating to the artistic or the"beautiful"; traditionally a branch of philosophy, but now a compound of the philosophy, psychology, and sociology of art.
The pleasurable sensations, mental and physical, which humans may experience as a result of certain environmental resources.
Of or pertaining to the perception of things, places, or objects which evoke appreciation by the individual, without regard to market or monetary value, or the utility of said things, places, or objects.
"Philosophical investigation into the nature of beauty and the perception of beauty, especially in the arts; the theory of art or artistic taste."
Properties perceived by touch and sight, such as the hand, color, luster and texture of carpet.
A branch of philosophy that focuses on the nature of beauty, the value of art, and the human responses to those topics.
the sense of what people consider beautiful or culturally appropriate, varying from folk group to folk group and individual to individual.
The branch of philosophy that deals with beauty and art. Central questions in aesthetics include: What is art? What kinds of objects possess aesthetic value? Is aesthetic experience rational or emotional? What is the relationship between an artist, their artwork and the critics?
Perhaps blonds have a wider aesthetic appeal because they appear in more ads?
You really need to stop using the word "aesthetics."
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:I am familiar with all internet traditions!
From:(no subject)
Date: 2008-09-16 03:25 pm (UTC)It's perfectly fine to say "I trend this way". But confusing trend lines with natural laws is where I disagree with Homophobes, Racists, Sexists, and Bigots of all stripes.
(no subject)
Date: 2008-09-16 03:39 pm (UTC)I'm not even in favor of tribalism, but when the answer is "you're wrong for following your aesthetic desires" it's stepped too far. If someone trends to find blond haired and blue eyed women attractive, it's hardly a bad idea to put that up in a dating profile. If a couple is blond haired and blue eyed, it's not in any way weird for them to want a child who looks the same, for both shallow and not so shallow reasons.
(no subject)
Date: 2008-09-16 03:47 pm (UTC)you're wrong for following your aesthetic desires
Did you even look at the ad? They're not following aesthetic desires. They provided a set of hard and fast criteria, many of which have nothing to do with genetics or aesthetics.
-some form of college education -irrelevant to genetics or aesthetics
-BMI of 28 or less -linked more closely to income than either
-20-28 years of age -irrelevant to aesthetics, more relevant to the surgery than reproduction
-height 5'3 or taller
-Blond hair
-Blue eyes
-some form of post HS education -irrelevant to genetics or aesthetics
-Caucasian
-no use of illegal drugs, cigarettes, alcohol abuse or antidepressants -linked more closely to income than either
-active lifestyle -linked more closely to income than either
-attractive -linked more closely to income than either
(no subject)
Date: 2008-09-16 03:55 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-09-16 03:58 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-09-16 04:32 pm (UTC)So you've basically got three goals here, selecting for positive genetic traits (however inaccurately), selecting to match the mother in gross physical characteristics, and selecting for current health (separate from larger genetic traits). The only one that doesn't seem to make much sense to me is the current health, but that more seems irrelevant than offensive in any way.
(no subject)
Date: 2008-09-16 11:00 pm (UTC)You don't think that intelligence (or at least scholastic aptitude) has a genetic component?
-no use of illegal drugs, cigarettes, alcohol abuse or antidepressants
It's pretty widely documented that alcoholism and other addictive behavior have a strong genetic component, as well.
(no subject)
Date: 2008-09-17 02:34 am (UTC)I do. I think that intelligence is far from the main factor that gets you into college. Income is probably an order of magnitude higher on the list.
(no subject)
Date: 2008-09-17 03:46 am (UTC)If action X increases my hypothetical kids' chances of entering or completing college by some positive value Y and action X has no cost and no downsides, then I'm taking action X even if Y is small.
(no subject)
Date: 2008-09-16 11:04 pm (UTC)I think there's a big difference between racial pride and actively trying to exterminate other races. Perhaps racial pride is condemnable, but putting it on the same level as the Nazis is like saying murderers and shoplifters are equally condemnable since they're both crimes.