Classism is Inenvitable

[Copernicus]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

A nit:

Inevitable

[/ QUOTE ]

I spelled the title wrong? *self-flagellates*

[ QUOTE ]

I think using kids in school as a parallel to the "real world" presents some problems, mainly because kids will be influenced by the behavior of their parents, and their parents will be influenced by their status and situation in the "real world", so I don't think you can really assert that the school is an isolated egalitarian society in any meaningful way. Confident parents have confident kids. Rich parents are more likely to be confident. Etcetera etcetera. There are some interesting trends with the alpha/omega stuff, but I don't think it stands up that well.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's a matter of degree, imho. I agree that, all other things being equal, a child from a wealthy family will be more popular than a child from a poor family. Similarly, an adult male who successfully competes in sporting events will be more attractive than one who does not. The point is, though, that this is not particularly high on the females' selective criteria.

Think about it this way. Let's say that your priorities in selecting a job are as follows, in order of decreasing priority: 1) Salary 2) Lack of stress 3) Closeness to home. If these are what you value, then it is quite possible that you will take a job with a big salary, even if it is somewhat stressful and requires a bit of a commute. If you're paid enough, these inconveniences will be compensated for. Now let's say that heavy socialism comes along and all jobs pay nearly equal amounts. Salary ceases to be a priority; it is controlled for. Now your other priorities take the forefront. Chances are now that you don't want that job you wanted before. Your first priority now is lack of stress and your second is proximity to home. Why would you want a stressful job that requires a commute? You will select something else under the new circumstances.

Logically, if we assume economic status to be the first (or one of the first) priorities in a female's selective basis, and looks to be the second (or codominant), we would expect selection under communism to favor the good-looking more. Suddenly the average-looking upper management yuppie fellow is much less attractive than the rugged, good-looking construction worker.

[/ QUOTE ]

I guarantee you based on some of Sklansky's girlfriends (or mine for that matter) looks are most definitely not co-dominant!