Doesn't it feel terribly unfair sometimes that..

[DrowninginMaryBeardsBeard]

The kids in primary school who tend to be the clever ones also, unfairly, seem to be attractive and popular too.
Not sure if its just my kids school. Obviously my kid is beyond beautiful to me. But she's not as well put together as these girls, her hair is all over the place due to her inheriting curly hair from me, she's too skinny due to food aversion.
Then there's a group of girls who are just beautiful, they always have neat work, speak several languages, get the best parts in the school play, they look... cool... even at nine. Mums are equally stylish usually European women.
Why is this? Attractive well educated women have attractive clever children. Scatty, hairy mares like me born without beauty and brains have to run around like headless chickens, work more hours for less pay so have less time for taking our kids to the hairdressers and spending hours teaching them Spanish, doing long division or reading the classics?
It's like if you see the line of kids you could almost match them up with the parents without knowing. Slightly overweight child with the overweight parents, messy kid with the messy mum (that's me!), hippie child with the hippie parents, sleek ponytailed outdoorsy child with horse riding mum. I mean this isn't exactly rocket science. But the link between attractiveness, academic ability, class and 'polish' .... that I find fascinating.
Is there also a link with neurodiversity?
For what it's worth my primary school was not middle class at all, kids with parents in prison or addicts who had left them with grandparents to raise, and this was not the case. We were all the same class and so that wasn't a factor. It was more who was 'pretty' and that was only decided by who the boys wanted to kiss, so not a true representation of beauty. I remember there being a sort of 'blonde privilege' where blondeness was a marker of beauty which brunette would never beat, regardless of facial symmetry. That would never fly now and would be rightly challenged in DD's very diverse school.
And these ramblings are why I'm exhausted every day...

Also, surely as a community we all learn from and inspire each other? I grew up in a time when uniforms and hairstyles were dull, with parents who didn't value dress sense. These days we all have more options. The community I live in has certain values that everyone adheres to.

The best thing you can give your child is self belief, curiosity and the belief they can do anything and achieve what they want. My DD has achieved something amazing and told me that I always told her she could do anything she wanted- so she did. Give your child the gift of freedom and self determination. Let them try things you would never try and find their own personality.

Absolutely. My DD is much prettier than I was at her age. I see how people react to her, comment in the street, even how other kids approach her in the playpark - and of course she’s more confident because of this.

I was a plain, messy, home-haircutted, 80s child. Smart but no confidence. Older kids doted on my prettier, blonder friends when we were small. I did blossom later though 😁 so prettiness/ neatness in primary are no guarantees for the future, as others have said.

Certainly the case much of the time! Although i am messy mum with a well put together daughter... I try anyway, she doesn't always look perfect but usually goes to school looking well presented with nice hair, while I rock up looking like I've been dragged through a hedge because I have no time. Not sure if people would put her with me or not 😅

Also though.. curly hair is lovely, it doesn't mean she looks messy, I sure she doesn't!

Well, all other things being equal (so ungroomed, nude, untutored etc) most people are averagely attractive, intelligent, talented etc. A relative few are ugly. A relative few are conventionally beautiful.

With resources, the average can become above average. Not exceptional, but certainly improved. Be that grooming, clothes, time, money, parental support, tutoring, enriching experiences etc etc.

It is economically advantageous (and deeply wrong) for women to appear thin, rich, white attractive and young. Thus smart women often strive to appear so. Smart women who are successful in appearing attractive (by male gaze standards) are more likely to be economically successful. And so it goes.

Also, many traits you describe are inherited or have a genetic component. Looks, well behaved hair of a particular colour, intelligence, charisma , money (and thus time and energy available to improve any of those things) on the positive side. Being overweight, neurodiversity, a harder time learning, Frizzy hair, time blindness etc etc. are also inherited to varying degrees.

More people seem attractive because many, many people strive to at least some extent to appear attractive. We are herd animals, biologically driven to fit in. Very, very few people are driven to appear unattractive. So a few go from ‘ugly’ to average. Lots go from average to attractive. A very few go from average to ‘ugly’. So the numbers are skewed heavily upwards. So it goes.

(when I use words like ugly, un/attractive and beautiful, I am using them in the sense of as defined by society. I do not believe they make people better or worse in any way personally)

It's probably been said before in this thread (not going to read the whole thing) but aren't the smart kids usually stereotyped as ugly 'nerds'? Are you sure you aren't confusing intelligence with confidence and polish?

Let's unpick this, shall we? Are you suggesting there is a correlation between looks and reading a particularly unpleasant tabloid? And can we flip it? Are we to assume that, as Liverpool and much of the wider Merseyside area boycotts this particular tabloid, they don't as a result pay the 'Sun Under-Average Looks' tax?

Or are you making a not-very-covert point about social class and appearance?