Posted on 04/10/2006 9:43:46 AM PDT by USFRIENDINVICTORIA
EDMONTON -- The next time you see a child wandering lost and alone in the grocery store, sneak a peek at the parents.
New research from the University of Alberta suggests there's a good chance they're ugly.
"Unattractive parents are less likely than attractive parents to supervise their children closely," said Andrew Harrell. He's the same social scientist who took a fair bit of heat last year when he presented evidence suggesting parents pay more attention to attractive children.
Now he's onto new findings bound to stir up further familial feelings.
"The unattractive parents may be ugly because they have had economic difficulties, health problems, diabetes, poor eyesight, psychological and physical hardships that distract them," Harrell offers as an explanation.
"They have their own personal concerns and they have less time to be attentive to their children. They are in such physical and psychological misery they are not there."
He admits his limited data can't prove the theory, since his team never interviewed the parents or children who were observed.
But his argument could explain why a child can drown in a swimming pool, even though a parent is close by and supposedly watching, he said.
Harrell, director of the university's Population Research Laboratory, began studying parents in grocery stores.
His team went to 14 stores in Edmonton to observe 861 single parents with one child roughly between the ages of one and seven in tow.
Observers found that 16 per cent of homely parents lost sight of their children at least once compared to 10 per cent of attractive parents.
That corresponds roughly to 89 inattentive, ugly parents and 30 inattentive, attractive ones.
"That may not seem big, but people, for the most part, don't lose sight of kids," Harrell said. "So that's pretty strong."
If the homely parents had ugly children, the neglect was even worse, with 36 per cent of parents letting their children out of sight.
"This inattentiveness is what happens. They don't see the kids in distress and this is when accidents happen."
Harrell acknowledges that ideas on beauty are subjective, but also noted scores on the parents' looks were very similar among observers.
Parents were considered neglectful if a child wandered more than three metres away -- too far for the adult to intervene in time if the child got into trouble -- or went out of sight around an aisle or across the store.
David Begun, an anthropology professor at the University of Toronto, said other studies have had similar results.
"We are attracted to, or pay more attention to, attractive people versus unattractive people," Begun said.
But a biological sciences professor at Stanford University in California calls Harrell's study nonsense.
"There's no possible way he could draw that conclusion from watching people in grocery stores," Paul Ehrlich said.
"These kinds of claims are made all the time."
Whatever the case, Harrell said he just wants parents to be conscientious.
"I'm pretty old-fashioned," said the sociologist. "It is harsh, but when kids' lives are at stake, it's important."
It seems reasonable that people with serious health problems might not be able to pay enough attention to their children. OTOH -- are the "beautiful people" in Hollywood the model parents that the collorely of this study would suggest they should be?
[Insert Hillary/Chelsea joke here]
My wife is an EXCELLENT mother. I, on the other hand, am a terrible father.
This is one of the things that kind of make sense, but not so much as to be worth spending any brainpower on. I wonder if this was financed by the government.
This is a study of "homely" people, not "beautiful" people. I am sure "normal" people scored just as well as "beautiful" people on this test.
All that said, there are good reasons we think of people as "homely" --- it is the fact that someone is mentally or physically unhealthy that makes them "homely."
A plain-faced person who takes care of themselves physically, is otherwise healthy, and is mentally balanced looks just fine.
God (or evolution) causes us to favor such people for a reason.
Children - are those the little people running around my house?
An ugly kid with ugly parents just doesn't stand a chance ...
I wonder where they did this study...unfortunately the area I live has really turned into Uppieville and thanks to plastic surgery and private trainers we are surrounded by beautiful people and I find way to many of these parents are severely lacking in good parental skills.
I do not think it has anything to do with looks it just seems parents do not want to be parents these days. I could go on but then it would be rambling.
My parents must be the best damn looking people on the planet because I couldn't get away with anything! They were all over me....I thought I had 10 parents once!
It's not usually health problems, but general having-your-act-together problems. People who just can't seem to find time or inclination to keep their hair washed and trimmed in some recognizeable style, or dot some cover-up on their zits (and take measures to prevent them), or control their weight, etc., and can't/won't keep a pleasant, alert expression on their faces and stand up straight, usually just don't have their acts together period, so not paying attention to their kids is just consistent with the rest of their lives. If I went to the grocery store looking exactly the way I look when I first roll out of bed in the morning, I'd probably be classified as "ugly". But I don't leave the house looking like that, so I'm sure I'd be counted as "attractive".
I guess that the authors of the study might ask you, "How did you get such a good looking woman to marry such an ugly guy?"
I'll take Junk Science for $1000, Alex.
Or more likely, kids just don't like to be seen with ugly parents.
collorely = corollary (I hit the "post" button, when I meant to hit "Preview")
"I wonder if this was financed by the government."
It's Canada -- I don't think you have to ask.
And poor people don't fare well either. Whats next brown haired people?
That's not nice! Maybe the fishies were scared of you! :P
Reminds me of the Rodney Dangerfield joke, "I was so ugly as a child, my parents had to tie a pork chop around my neck to get the dog to play with me..."
This makes some sense intuitively, but the "study" this guy did is pretty darn weak.
Incidentally, percentage-wise, I think ugliness correlates to poverty, as politically incorrect as this sounds. Its not difficult to see why: 1) less motivation and less intelligence, therefore less exercise and less attempt to eat well, and less understanding of the importance of these things; 2) rich guys often get the pretty girls, which makes prettier children; 3) attractive people have an easier time finding good jobs or rich husbands, etc. because of their attractiveness.
BTW, I am not rich. :)
Doesn't stop a reporter from stirring up invalid issues, though.
Now, isn't that special?
Tall men are offered more money at job interviews. Beautiful women get more dates, etc. Children think "attractive" people are smarter.
That's life. Maybe it's not "fair", but there it is. Move on, keep your day job.
It's natural selection by mother nature to keep us mating and hopefully reproducing.
Life is hormones.
>My parents must be the best damn looking people on the planet because I couldn't get away with anything!<
LOL! Mine, too. And they say "beauty is in the eye of the beholder." I say that beauty lies in the eye of the responsible parent.
Awww! Poor little girl. When I was little, I was very unattractive...but I grew up, and am a lot better looking than I was then. Give her 15 years, she might be beautiful some day.
Snicker
Love you!? They're supposed to tremble at the mention of your name. ;-)
Hey! I'm doing just fine.
A child is considered neglected if it wanders more that TEN feet away? Ridiculous.
I was so ugly my momma fed me with a slingshot.
(Rodney D)
Rosie O'Donnel must not even know she has kids.
You're very lucky, my friend. Growing up ugly is no fun!
I think you nailed it.
It has nothing to do with looks in and of themselves, but rather the care and attention those particular people give to ALL things in their lives, not just the children.
Let's see....isn't it ugly is as ugly does?
I agree. When I was six, I was allowed to go wandering back into the woods, all around the neighborhood, the neighboring neighborhood, you name it.
That was in 1972-1973. Stranger abductions of children were about at the rate then what they are now. That is to say, almost nonexistent. Parents worry way too much.
My momma rocked me to sleep
with real big rocks.
A fine example of an acausal relationship.
Maybe if you looked more like a fish...you'd catch more.
And you thought that gorgeous thing actually worked for you. Ha!
That's funny, most of the women I see neglecting their children are the frilly, let's go get our nails done types.
Sounds like this guy has some issues with less than attractive people.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.