Jealous of better looking babies, kids

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"I think we are all biologically programmed to find our own kids stunning but by elementary school you will be able to tell if your kids are objectively good looking because they will be generally be the kids that other kids are drawn too. I have seen this play out time again with my kids and their friends (my kids are not the stunners) and as a teacher. Popular kids are almost always good looking. If you take a grade of 100 elementary kids, I think most of us can pick out the 1 or 2 who are head turners. The rest are all variations of "nice looking" but are fairly interchangeable. But there are are always 1/100 or so that are like "wow, she/he is stunning".

By middle school looks definitely correlate with social cred. 100%. People are drawn to attractive people."

It's painful to acknowledge this, but it's so true. And to make it even worse, people assume that the good looking people are smarter and more talented than they actually are. I'm convinced my kid got into better colleges than he otherwise would have because of the Zoom interviews he did.

It's not just the objective looks, it's all the confidence that comes from a lifetime of having people respond positively to you because you're cute or pretty or handsome or beautiful.

Wow this thread is exhausting and tedious with tons of mental gymnastics thrown in for good measure


Eh. My DH and I were *just* talking about how foggy-brained middle schoolers and high schoolers are about beauty. If you are an objectively stunning 14 year old, but nerdy, you simply won’t have the reputation of being “hot” like the sunny-dispositioned cheerleader type . Self perception influences others perception.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not jealous of beautiful kids. Most of them (especially girls) will end up overweight in this country.

Not the rich ones.

Sometimes even some of the rich ones. There is a body type that can be very cute/beautiful when younger (big boobs, on the short side, round face, big eyes) but ages poorly. When you are short, it's really hard to keep weight off in middle age, especially if you are predisposed to be curvy -- you'd basically have to starve yourself and exercise for hours a day and while being rich makes that easier, it's still really, really hard.

I know multiple wealthy women who are in this situation in their late 40s. Maybe one or two will figure it out with extreme discipline around food and exercise, and some expensive procedures to help you along. But most won't.

Guess what -- it's coming for Kim K too. Middle age is not friendly to short curvy women, and it doesn't care how much money you have.

There are also many rich women who are thin. Not everyone is short and voluptuous. You can be petite and thin or athletic.

I am in my mid 40s and the same weight as when I was 30. I’m 5’4” and 125 pounds. Just in my Orangetheory class, I see many women my age who are thin or athletic build. You don’t have to be fat in middle age.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not jealous of beautiful kids. Most of them (especially girls) will end up overweight in this country.

Not the rich ones.

Sometimes even some of the rich ones. There is a body type that can be very cute/beautiful when younger (big boobs, on the short side, round face, big eyes) but ages poorly. When you are short, it's really hard to keep weight off in middle age, especially if you are predisposed to be curvy -- you'd basically have to starve yourself and exercise for hours a day and while being rich makes that easier, it's still really, really hard.

I know multiple wealthy women who are in this situation in their late 40s. Maybe one or two will figure it out with extreme discipline around food and exercise, and some expensive procedures to help you along. But most won't.

Guess what -- it's coming for Kim K too. Middle age is not friendly to short curvy women, and it doesn't care how much money you have.

Haha yeah right. Kim has been dieting her whole life, it’s basically her job at this point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"I think we are all biologically programmed to find our own kids stunning but by elementary school you will be able to tell if your kids are objectively good looking because they will be generally be the kids that other kids are drawn too. I have seen this play out time again with my kids and their friends (my kids are not the stunners) and as a teacher. Popular kids are almost always good looking. If you take a grade of 100 elementary kids, I think most of us can pick out the 1 or 2 who are head turners. The rest are all variations of "nice looking" but are fairly interchangeable. But there are are always 1/100 or so that are like "wow, she/he is stunning".

By middle school looks definitely correlate with social cred. 100%. People are drawn to attractive people."

It's painful to acknowledge this, but it's so true. And to make it even worse, people assume that the good looking people are smarter and more talented than they actually are. I'm convinced my kid got into better colleges than he otherwise would have because of the Zoom interviews he did.

It's not just the objective looks, it's all the confidence that comes from a lifetime of having people respond positively to you because you're cute or pretty or handsome or beautiful.

Eh. My DH and I were *just* talking about how foggy-brained middle schoolers and high schoolers are about beauty. If you are an objectively stunning 14 year old, but nerdy, you simply won’t have the reputation of being “hot” like the sunny-dispositioned cheerleader type . Self perception influences others perception.

Whatever makes you sleep better at night

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"I think we are all biologically programmed to find our own kids stunning but by elementary school you will be able to tell if your kids are objectively good looking because they will be generally be the kids that other kids are drawn too. I have seen this play out time again with my kids and their friends (my kids are not the stunners) and as a teacher. Popular kids are almost always good looking. If you take a grade of 100 elementary kids, I think most of us can pick out the 1 or 2 who are head turners. The rest are all variations of "nice looking" but are fairly interchangeable. But there are are always 1/100 or so that are like "wow, she/he is stunning".

By middle school looks definitely correlate with social cred. 100%. People are drawn to attractive people."

It's painful to acknowledge this, but it's so true. And to make it even worse, people assume that the good looking people are smarter and more talented than they actually are. I'm convinced my kid got into better colleges than he otherwise would have because of the Zoom interviews he did.

It's not just the objective looks, it's all the confidence that comes from a lifetime of having people respond positively to you because you're cute or pretty or handsome or beautiful.

Eh. My DH and I were *just* talking about how foggy-brained middle schoolers and high schoolers are about beauty. If you are an objectively stunning 14 year old, but nerdy, you simply won’t have the reputation of being “hot” like the sunny-dispositioned cheerleader type . Self perception influences others perception.

Whatever makes you sleep better at night

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"I think we are all biologically programmed to find our own kids stunning but by elementary school you will be able to tell if your kids are objectively good looking because they will be generally be the kids that other kids are drawn too. I have seen this play out time again with my kids and their friends (my kids are not the stunners) and as a teacher. Popular kids are almost always good looking. If you take a grade of 100 elementary kids, I think most of us can pick out the 1 or 2 who are head turners. The rest are all variations of "nice looking" but are fairly interchangeable. But there are are always 1/100 or so that are like "wow, she/he is stunning".

By middle school looks definitely correlate with social cred. 100%. People are drawn to attractive people."

It's painful to acknowledge this, but it's so true. And to make it even worse, people assume that the good looking people are smarter and more talented than they actually are. I'm convinced my kid got into better colleges than he otherwise would have because of the Zoom interviews he did.

It's not just the objective looks, it's all the confidence that comes from a lifetime of having people respond positively to you because you're cute or pretty or handsome or beautiful.

Eh. My DH and I were *just* talking about how foggy-brained middle schoolers and high schoolers are about beauty. If you are an objectively stunning 14 year old, but nerdy, you simply won’t have the reputation of being “hot” like the sunny-dispositioned cheerleader type . Self perception influences others perception.

Whatever makes you sleep better at night

I agree with the PP. When I looked back at my middle school yearbook I couldn't believe who were the kids that were teased vs the popular ones, and who the "hot" ones that people wanted to date were. It was so much more about charisma at that age. Which is hard if you're nerdy or not totally mainstream and bubbly, but reassuring in that tweens/teens aren't as superficial into looks as maybe we sometimes think they are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"I think we are all biologically programmed to find our own kids stunning but by elementary school you will be able to tell if your kids are objectively good looking because they will be generally be the kids that other kids are drawn too. I have seen this play out time again with my kids and their friends (my kids are not the stunners) and as a teacher. Popular kids are almost always good looking. If you take a grade of 100 elementary kids, I think most of us can pick out the 1 or 2 who are head turners. The rest are all variations of "nice looking" but are fairly interchangeable. But there are are always 1/100 or so that are like "wow, she/he is stunning".

By middle school looks definitely correlate with social cred. 100%. People are drawn to attractive people."

It's painful to acknowledge this, but it's so true. And to make it even worse, people assume that the good looking people are smarter and more talented than they actually are. I'm convinced my kid got into better colleges than he otherwise would have because of the Zoom interviews he did.

It's not just the objective looks, it's all the confidence that comes from a lifetime of having people respond positively to you because you're cute or pretty or handsome or beautiful.

Eh. My DH and I were *just* talking about how foggy-brained middle schoolers and high schoolers are about beauty. If you are an objectively stunning 14 year old, but nerdy, you simply won’t have the reputation of being “hot” like the sunny-dispositioned cheerleader type . Self perception influences others perception.

Whatever makes you sleep better at night

I agree with the PP. When I looked back at my middle school yearbook I couldn't believe who were the kids that were teased vs the popular ones, and who the "hot" ones that people wanted to date were. It was so much more about charisma at that age. Which is hard if you're nerdy or not totally mainstream and bubbly, but reassuring in that tweens/teens aren't as superficial into looks as maybe we sometimes think they are.

I agree that middle-school hot doesn't equate with grownup hot. Hair/makeup/trendy clothes have a lot of importance at that age, more than actual good looks. The hot girls from my middle school are not particularly good-looking women now - the hot girls from my high school mostly are, though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"I think we are all biologically programmed to find our own kids stunning but by elementary school you will be able to tell if your kids are objectively good looking because they will be generally be the kids that other kids are drawn too. I have seen this play out time again with my kids and their friends (my kids are not the stunners) and as a teacher. Popular kids are almost always good looking. If you take a grade of 100 elementary kids, I think most of us can pick out the 1 or 2 who are head turners. The rest are all variations of "nice looking" but are fairly interchangeable. But there are are always 1/100 or so that are like "wow, she/he is stunning".

By middle school looks definitely correlate with social cred. 100%. People are drawn to attractive people."

It's painful to acknowledge this, but it's so true. And to make it even worse, people assume that the good looking people are smarter and more talented than they actually are. I'm convinced my kid got into better colleges than he otherwise would have because of the Zoom interviews he did.

It's not just the objective looks, it's all the confidence that comes from a lifetime of having people respond positively to you because you're cute or pretty or handsome or beautiful.

Eh. My DH and I were *just* talking about how foggy-brained middle schoolers and high schoolers are about beauty. If you are an objectively stunning 14 year old, but nerdy, you simply won’t have the reputation of being “hot” like the sunny-dispositioned cheerleader type . Self perception influences others perception.

Whatever makes you sleep better at night

I agree with the PP. When I looked back at my middle school yearbook I couldn't believe who were the kids that were teased vs the popular ones, and who the "hot" ones that people wanted to date were. It was so much more about charisma at that age. Which is hard if you're nerdy or not totally mainstream and bubbly, but reassuring in that tweens/teens aren't as superficial into looks as maybe we sometimes think they are.

Agree with this. The most important stuff as to whether a middle school girl is considered attractive are:

- Pierced ears
- The right clothes
- "Adult" haircuts, getting highlights
- Clear skin (which I guess is a function of natural beauty, but some people have access to dermatologists and others don't)
- Going through puberty at the right time (not too early and not too late) so you start to look more grown up before other girls but don't have big boobs too early, as that will get you teased and treated differently.

Actual natural beauty counts, but not as much as this other stuff at that age. Like a homely girl who has access to all of the above will be considered cute and be popular, and a naturally pretty girl who doesn't have any of it except clear skin might be considered weird and uncool. It literally takes a couple years for those kids to look at her and go "oh wait, Lucy has really pretty hair and eyes and a nice face."

Kids who go through puberty late definitely get overlooked in middle school and then can really come into their own in high school. Meanwhile, girls who go through puberty early get a lot of attention, and most of it is unwanted.

The idea that middle school kids are good arbiters of attractiveness is absurd. That age is the craziest and the cruelest of childhood, but it is not known for being rational or objective.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From the perspective of a childfree woman:

1. All children are cute, but very few merit a second glance from a stranger.

2. Cute kids definitely don't always grow up into attractive adults. Two girls in my elementary school class were breathtakingly beautiful children, but as adults they have bad skin and weight problems. Meanwhile, some of the ugly ducklings blossomed into swans.

+1, same experience.

Also, I've found I'm way more likely to be taken by a cute kid because of their personality than their appearance. And some of the features that make a kid cute are not objectively attractive/beautiful, but are specifically adorable on kids.

Like my favorite kid I've ever met was a 4 yo girl who was was not stunning. She had pretty hair and a symmetrical face, but not a look that would make you say "omg that's a beautiful child." What she did have was an amazing personality. She had an actual sense of humor, like the ability to tell and understand actual jokes. She was also really bright and in tune with what was going on -- she asked insightful questions and genuinely listened to what others were saying. She was more with it and personable than like 99% of adults I encounter. But her looks were probably average at best? Still absolutely the cutest child I've ever encountered.

A really beautiful child who just kind of stands there and smiles is nice, I guess, but I'd rather hang out with the less attractive kid who can carry on a conversation and has interesting and funny things to say.

I hope you realize this is a really ableist thing to say.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From the perspective of a childfree woman:

1. All children are cute, but very few merit a second glance from a stranger.

2. Cute kids definitely don't always grow up into attractive adults. Two girls in my elementary school class were breathtakingly beautiful children, but as adults they have bad skin and weight problems. Meanwhile, some of the ugly ducklings blossomed into swans.

+1, same experience.

Also, I've found I'm way more likely to be taken by a cute kid because of their personality than their appearance. And some of the features that make a kid cute are not objectively attractive/beautiful, but are specifically adorable on kids.

Like my favorite kid I've ever met was a 4 yo girl who was was not stunning. She had pretty hair and a symmetrical face, but not a look that would make you say "omg that's a beautiful child." What she did have was an amazing personality. She had an actual sense of humor, like the ability to tell and understand actual jokes. She was also really bright and in tune with what was going on -- she asked insightful questions and genuinely listened to what others were saying. She was more with it and personable than like 99% of adults I encounter. But her looks were probably average at best? Still absolutely the cutest child I've ever encountered.

A really beautiful child who just kind of stands there and smiles is nice, I guess, but I'd rather hang out with the less attractive kid who can carry on a conversation and has interesting and funny things to say.

I hope you realize this is a really ableist thing to say.

+1. All you people who do not explicitly prefer to hang out with an emotionally disturbed special needs child having a full poo-flinging meltdown, are not only ableist, but racist and transphobic as well.

[Anonymous]

The person saying cute kids don't always grow up to be attractive is correct. My cousin looked like Little Bo Peep as a little girl, huge eyes and adorable round face. She looks ... not very pretty now.

[Anonymous]

No, because my girls are pretty cute. Way cuter than I was (my husband brought some better genes to the pool lol)

I’m sure we are all biased but I will confess some kids are just not cute at all

[Anonymous]

Not middle school, but I did have a brief period with each of my kids around the 3-4 month old mark, where they sprouted baby acne, a molty level of cradle cap with just a few strands of Gollum hair poking through, hadn't filled out yet, and still had that weird old man newborn look, but lankier, where I was veerrrrry self-concious about them with my friends who had no kids and just expected babies to be cute all the time. Like, I overly explained: 'this is a normal hormonal phase, all babies go through this to some degree!' Thank goodness they re-cuted at about 5 months haha

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From the perspective of a childfree woman:

1. All children are cute, but very few merit a second glance from a stranger.

2. Cute kids definitely don't always grow up into attractive adults. Two girls in my elementary school class were breathtakingly beautiful children, but as adults they have bad skin and weight problems. Meanwhile, some of the ugly ducklings blossomed into swans.

+1, same experience.

Also, I've found I'm way more likely to be taken by a cute kid because of their personality than their appearance. And some of the features that make a kid cute are not objectively attractive/beautiful, but are specifically adorable on kids.

Like my favorite kid I've ever met was a 4 yo girl who was was not stunning. She had pretty hair and a symmetrical face, but not a look that would make you say "omg that's a beautiful child." What she did have was an amazing personality. She had an actual sense of humor, like the ability to tell and understand actual jokes. She was also really bright and in tune with what was going on -- she asked insightful questions and genuinely listened to what others were saying. She was more with it and personable than like 99% of adults I encounter. But her looks were probably average at best? Still absolutely the cutest child I've ever encountered.

A really beautiful child who just kind of stands there and smiles is nice, I guess, but I'd rather hang out with the less attractive kid who can carry on a conversation and has interesting and funny things to say.

I hope you realize this is a really ableist thing to say.

It’s… really not.

[Anonymous]

A lot of good looking kids are average to ugly adults--like child stars.