Anonymous wrote:Kind of. I named my daughter Gretchen in the hopes that she will be cute. If she ends up being 6' 2'' with a large build and an unattractive face, we might have to change it

In what weird world is Gretchen of all names considered a pretty girl name?

DD takes after the women in DH’s family. Tall, big boned that tends towards heavy if not athletic, and average looking. But blonde hair and blue eyes and probably curvy if she stays in shape. That’s totally different from me, but will do her just fine if she cares to dress and groom herself. Or maybe she won’t care at all and that’s her business, not mine. If she’s happy, I’m happy.

High standards around here. Honestly I was just hoping they wouldn’t be ugly or overweight as I think that makes life harder; I think most people IRL are average and that doesn’t hold them back professionally or personally.

I think looks has a lot to do with physical fitness, self-confidence, grooming, style. It’s rare to have someone who is unattractive if they take care of themselves and exude confidence. A lot of movie stars or models don’t have objectively beautiful features/classical good looks, but their whole package is beautiful.

Body and parents’ look are better indicators. I have two daughters (7 and 5). You might think that my second is prettier because she has a beautiful face, but my first has a long lean body inherited from DH. DH sister was a model and I bet my first DD will have a very similar body with bigger and prettier eyes.
My second might have a prettier face, but she got my body. She will have more curves (if she does not gain weight) and some men will find her more attractive...

Being attractive and not overweight makes every aspect of life easier and plenty more opportunities will be given to you than if you weren’t. That said, looks arent everything and you need to be smart and a hard worker to make something of the opportunities you have been given.

It's not as important for guys to be attractive because both the labor market and dating market place a higher value on intellect, confidence, and creativity. Most of the attractive women end up married to guys that are average looking but successful in their careers, went to good schools etc. Most "attractive" men who are not successful in their careers do not end up marrying attractive women. So, parental concerns are different or should be different depending on gender. I have boys and I'm mostly worried about their achievement in school and ability to to earn money later. I'd be worried about this for a daughter too, but I'd also be much more worried about how she looks.

Anonymous wrote:Kind of. I named my daughter Gretchen in the hopes that she will be cute. If she ends up being 6' 2'' with a large build and an unattractive face, we might have to change it

What an odd statement start to end

People want everything for their children. I think everyone wants their children to be happy, rich, intelligent and beautiful. It doesn’t always work out but everyone wants it for their kids. At least most parents.

Also, in anthropology babies and baby animals are “cute” so their adults will care for them.

Kind of. I named my daughter Gretchen in the hopes that she will be cute. If she ends up being 6' 2'' with a large build and an unattractive face, we might have to change it

I am glad I find them beautiful. They are still young so that’s as far as I have gotten thinking about this.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think “cute” is ideal. Breathtakingly gorgeous people can end up messed up emotionally for a whole host of reasons.

This. I think my 8yo is reasonably cute and I love the way she looks, but she's not stunning/gorgeous, and I'm glad for that. She'll have to develop her personality, intellect and other attributes.

This sort of weirdly implies that gorgeous people won't work on their personality or intellect because "they don't have to." I've not found that to really be the case.

PP here. I'm referring to what you could term "pretty privilege." Some pretty people may still work on their other attributes, but average people will have to work even harder. This goes with any sort of privilege, really. I'm okay if my kid has to work harder; I think it's a good way to develop grit.

My first was so cute, always handsome (still is at 13)
My second... he looked like an old man when he was a baby. Took forever for him to get hair. He isn’t conventional good looking at 10, and it doesn’t matter to me.
I’d rather people like my kids for who they are, not how they look.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think “cute” is ideal. Breathtakingly gorgeous people can end up messed up emotionally for a whole host of reasons.

This. I think my 8yo is reasonably cute and I love the way she looks, but she's not stunning/gorgeous, and I'm glad for that. She'll have to develop her personality, intellect and other attributes.

This sort of weirdly implies that gorgeous people won't work on their personality or intellect because "they don't have to." I've not found that to really be the case.

I have girls. I just want them to be generally attractive. It's hard otherwise. So far they are both adorable with cheerful personalities.