Looking Good – Scientifically

Women’s Wear Daily raises the question – are glasses just plain stylish rather than necessarily functional?

The social swirl these days is looking less like a scene out of “High Society” and more like something straight from “Revenge of the Nerds.” Actresses Cate Blanchett, Amy Sedaris and Dana Delaney have all hit the red carpet bespectacled in heavy, black-rimmed glasses, and even the Park Avenue set has given up hiding its imperfect vision – witness [NY socialite] Heather Mnuchin’s dorky specs … “…The funny thing is they do make me feel smarter – which is probably an indication that I’m not.” IQs aside, the totally chic have gone totally geek.

Is faking it making it? Making it in what, exactly? Being seen as attractive or being seen as smart? The phrase “Boys seldom make passes, at girls who wear glasses” originates from Dorothy Parker’s poem ‘News Item‘ – more than likely making a comment about the intellectual aura that came with popping on a pair of specs and whether it was going to deter men from finding you attractive.

I immediately think of the scene in ‘The Big Sleep‘ where the prim bookstore clerk Dorothy Malone, lets down her hair and removes the glasses in order to gain the full attention of Bogart’s Detective Philip Marlowe. Is it the same today?

A Salon article by Charles Taylor looked at ‘Sexy Specs‘, for both genders and the messages that entail:

We are all tied to the belief that glasses denote intelligence, while not being a guarantee of it. And maybe, where women are concerned, the belief that glasses are unsexy is a subtle way of saying that brains aren’t sexy, or at least that they are indicative of prim reticence. Too often the sight of a woman taking off her glasses in a love scene denotes that the pretense of brains has to be put aside before she can become sexy. But doesn’t it depend on the brain? Sexiness is a state of mind. I want to be surprised, and you can’t surprise anyone if your brain is put on idle.

So – what is on our mind when we’re looking for attractive others? Research into attractiveness shows us the one of the most important determinants: simple physical proximity. If you like what you’re close to in the first place and increase exposure to them with additional contact, you’ll regard them more highly – as found in an experiment with assistants posing as students, who were rated high on ‘likability’ by other students, even though they didn’t ever speak to anyone.

Maybe plumping up your Facebook profile won’t work as well as you like in that case – but when you include circumstances in which you meet, in a comfortable condition and demonstrating similar habits, you’re going to reinforce your favourable attitude towards them. But physical attractiveness, from preschool to adulthood is the key to popularity. What’s physically attractive varies across cultures and over time, which is why ongoing research is so important: you may also like to contribute to Richard Wiseman’s experiment into faces and personality, open for participants on his Quirkology site.

Considering that contact lenses are easily available and corrective surgery has become more and more popular (even uber-god-to-all-nerds Weird Al had his eyes done) it may seem even more redundant to wear glasses. Mind, I have a few good friends who either have eyes that are not able to be operated upon due to a corneal problem, or are working on dealing with their fear of going under the laser – as well as pulling together the four grand or so it’ll take them to ditch wearing glasses altogether.

Certainly the popular media figures I originally cited are making a point publically – but perhaps like a science show performer who dons fake specs (link to the Bad Astronomer on the Mystery Investigators site, another glasses-wearer!), this trend could easily have more factors involved for the celebrities on the red carpet… that aren’t so easily seen.

As for what I’d like to see more of – Conaway’s dissertation Girls who (don’t) wear glasses: The performativity of smart girls on teen television raises a question I’ve asked in an earlier blog post:

As of the end of the 2006-2007 television season, there are simply too few smart girls to see. During the teen-show era of 1990-2006, despite the flaws of Beverly Hills, 90210, My So-Called Life, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Freaks and Geeks, and Gilmore Girls, as well as more encouraging programs such as Daria, Life Goes on, and Veronica Mars, there has been a place to see smart girls who are capable of reading, writing, doing math and conducting scientific experiments and still find success, popularity, and love. Where will future girls go to find role models like that?

Well, when it comes to overall attractiveness, in the end – I say that with enough effort, you more than likely can see what you want to see in someone – kind of like the recently reported case in 60 Second Science of a man from Idaho:

…who upon thinking that he had the “biblical ‘mark of the beast‘, used a circular saw to cut off one hand, then cooked it in the microwave and called 911″.

…eek. Okay, some things I just don’t want to see…

*****************************************

Since I’ve sourced some of the above items from the great 60 Second Science news site on Scientific American – do check out their great episode You’re so Psychic, Bet You Know This Podcast is About You which touches on the Harvard research into ESP using neuroimaging that I previously mentioned in a blog entry.

Whilst whilst we’re on the topic of snappy and quick-to-access Science resources online, you should also sign up for the latest in informative broadcasts from Australia’s CSIRO – Science By Email! Science by Email features accessible science new items, brilliant experiments suitable for kids and even competitions – whether you wear specs or not, you’ll certainly look cooler reading it (but maybe not cuter) than Michael McRae’s cave man who is wearing last year’s unfashionable mammoth-skin!

References:

Bordens, K. S., & Horowitz, I. A. (2002). Social Psychology (2nd Edition). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Conaway, Sandra B. Girls who (don’t) wear glasses: The performativity of smart girls on teen television. [Dissertation Abstract] Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences. Vol 68(5-A), 2007, pp. 1716. PDF Version.

Langlois, J.H., Kalakanis, L., Rubenstein, A.J., Larson, A., Hallam, M., & Smoot, M. (2000). Maxims or myths of beauty? A meta-analytic and theoretical review. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 390-423. PDF Version (2.2 MB) ? American Psychological Association.

Moreland, R.L., & Beach, S.R. (1992). Exposure effects in the classroom: The development of affinity among students. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 28, 255-276.

Taylor, C. 2002. Sexy Specs: Glasses, Like Small Breasts, Seem To Be One of Those Things That Women Automatically Assume Men Find Attractive. Salon (April 17). Online.

Tagged as: CSIRO, Daria, educational, ESP, Facebook, fashion, feminism, geek, glasses, intellectual, podblack, podcast, psychic, Quirkology, Scientific American, sex, sexy, skeptic, Skepticism, television, Veronica Mars, Weird Al, women