Post: #1

http://www.slate.com/blogs/how_not_to_be...jerks.html



Suppose you’re a person who dates men. You may have noticed that, among the men in your dating pool, the handsome ones tend not to be nice, and the nice ones tend not to be handsome. Is that because having a symmetrical face makes you cruel? Does it mean that being nice to people makes you ugly? Well, it could be. But it doesn’t have to be.

Behold the Great Square of Men. (And I'd like to note that you can find more stunning hand-drawn illustrations just like this one in How Not to Be Wrong.)
great square of men

Now, let’s take as a working hypothesis that men are in fact equidistributed all over this square. In particular, there are nice handsome ones, nice ugly ones, mean handsome ones, and mean ugly ones, in roughly equal numbers.



But niceness and handsomeness have a common effect: They put these men in the group of people that you notice. Be honest—the mean uglies are the ones you never even consider. So inside the Great Square is a Smaller Triangle of Acceptable Men:
triangle of acceptable men



Now the source of the phenomenon is clear. The handsomest men in your triangle, over on the far right, run the gamut of personalities, from kindest to (almost) cruelest. On average, they are about as nice as the average person in the whole population, which, let’s face it, is not that nice. And by the same token, the nicest men are only averagely handsome. The ugly guys you like, though—they make up a tiny corner of the triangle, and they are pretty darn nice. They have to be, or they wouldn’t be visible to you at all. The negative correlation between looks and personality in your dating pool is absolutely real. But the relation isn’t causal. If you try to improve your boyfriend’s complexion by training him to act mean, you’ve fallen victim to Berkson’s fallacy.

The fallacy works, too, as a driver of literary snobbery. Why are popular novels so terrible? It’s not because the masses don’t appreciate quality. It’s because the novels you read are the ones in the Acceptable Triangle, which are either popular or good. So within that group, the good ones are less likely to be popular, for the same reason the handsomer men are bigger jerks. If you force yourself to read unpopular novels chosen essentially at random—I’ve been on a jury for a literary prize, so I’ve actually done this—you find that most of them, just like the popular ones, are pretty bad. And I imagine if you dated men chosen completely at random from OkCupid, you’d find that the less attractive men were just as jerky as the chiseled hunks. But that’s an experiment I can’t recommend, not even for the sake of mathematical enlightenment.

And now what happened to Julian Barnes is pretty clear. There are two reasons you might have read The Sense of an Ending and rated it on Goodreads. It might be because it’s exactly the kind of novel you’re apt to like. Or it might be because it won the Booker Prize. When a book wins a prize, then its audience expands beyond the core group of fans already predisposed to love it. That’s what every author dreams of, but more frequently read inevitably means less universally liked.
___________________

Found this via NY Mag who had linked to the Slate piece.

WIA

Post: #2

Deleted, never mind.

Post: #3

Written by a Mangina. Assesses the attractivity just by female values. Handsome guys are not necesserily jerks, because they are handsome, but because they realize that being more Dark Triad actually was more effective at attracting women.

The mainstream Manginas are dumbfounded.

Post: #4

This article is a classic example of not seeing the forest for the trees.

Post: #5

This article is a total waste of time, is the classic space filler - something that can be stated in a few sentences is fleshed into some damn article.

Post: #6

This is as sensible at article as "Hot women are bitches".

Load of nonsense.

Post: #7

Everybody who gets sex is a jerk in the eyes of both male and female incels.

Post: #8

This was written by a person with female rationalization skills?

Post: #9

I love that graph, its like the intelligence/beauty graph for women.

Post: #10

If you want to ruin the day of guys who write articles like this show them the thousands of women who want to fuck serial killers, terrorists and hard time prisoners.

Not all of these guys are good looking. I highly doubt any of them are "nice".

Post: #11

The graph there could have a blank space to fill with "whoever you resent"

Post: #12

I googled pictures of this guy, looks like a chode with a capital C.

Post: #13

Read the article quickly and saw nothing wrong with it. It just says then handsome men aren't actually jerks, it's just that the jerky ones receive more attention than non-handsome ones. Though you could also throw in the "sense of entitlement" variable.

Whether jerks attract women or not is a different question.