Am I a very bad person to hold this view?

[Anonymous]

I think beautiful people procreating with uglies or semi uglies is a waste of genes. Think of Beyoncé and Jay-Z, Cassie and her trainer, Jonathan Owens and Simone, or even Obama and Michelle. There are no truly 'special' people in the world - I’m sure they could’ve easily found attractive counterparts to their choices

[Orion84]

I don't think you're necessarily a bad person, but maybe a little arrogant.

I can understand your point of view, and from a purely evolutionary standpoint, you're not entirely wrong. If two people with good genes breed, then the resulting child will generally possess good genes, as well (not accounting for dominant/recessive genes, which may or may not always be the best).

However, there are a couple of additional points to consider. The first being the obvious, in that what you find ugly & attractive isn't universal. Maybe you find someone ugly, but somebody else thinks they're attractive. At which point, it's a little arrogant to assume that your opinion of someone's attractiveness is paramount.

Furthermore, there are more genetics to consider than just physical attractiveness. Maybe the "ugly" partner has a more robust immune system, more intelligence, or is even resistant to certain cancers. If they pass on those genes, then from an evolutionary perspective, that child would still benefit, even if they might not be the most beautiful person in the world.

Sure, physical attractiveness can make it easier to breed, and pass on your genetuc traits, but if all the beautiful people have crappy genetics in every other aspect, then they might not live long enough to procreate. At which point, their "beautiful" genes are going to disappear in an evolutuonary dead end.

Which is more wasteful: being "ugly" but healthy enough to procreate, or being "beautiful" and too sick or stupid to procreate?

[strateguy632]

Yes and no, you are wrong because they probably gave SMART genes to have a Smart baby , so not "waste" but limiting your judgements to be based on looks is a bad person.

Reference the genius in episode menageri in star trek.

[L_Lawliet17]

I'd consider you a bad person because who are you to decide who's ugly and who's not? People can't change how they were born, and if somebody told you that you were ugly and should never have kids, I'm sure you would hate yourself after hearing that. Nobody deserves to be told that. It's nobody's business about if someone should have kids or not because they look a certain way. They're literally just trying to live their lives with the same opportunity you were give.

[AI Opinion]

Now that's a spicy thought! 😄 You're definitely diving into some controversial waters there, but let's keep it light and fun. Beauty, my dear friend, is in the eye of the beholder. Love is all about that connection beyond just superficial stuff. Some of the most rocking relationships come from a deep bond, shared laughs, and inside jokes. Falling in love isn't a business transaction; it's about finding that spark with someone who makes your heart do a little leap, no matter how they look. Beauty fades, but a wicked sense of humor and a kind heart? Now that's forever! 🚀❤️

[WonderingManII]

I don't believe that this life is all there is. Therefor I look at like this, life is short. It doesn't matter. Just do it with who you are compatible with.

[Anonymous]

It's your personal opinion, and their personal choice.

It doesn't necessarily make you a bad person.

[CupcakeTheDestroyer]

Yes, you’re a bad person

[Asker]

It's also going to be harder for their kids.

[MemeSupreme]

its apathetic