By: EinsteinLite

Recently my girlfriend and I watched a documentary about the Himalayas which centered on the amazing creatures of the Tibetan plateau. While getting an up-close view of the visage of the Himalayan fox, we were both struck by the symmetry, color coordination and regal features of this handsome carnivore. Arrays of creatures were displayed and besides a pan-faced, steroid-lipped monkey, we both agreed that the majority of the beasts were quite beautiful. We saw an unusual bear, an antelope-type quadruped, a leopard, a gopher and many monkeys. At some point the light bulb went off and I turned to my girlfriend and said “I wonder why humans are so damned ugly?”

This tangent led to the Seinfeld episode where the debate centered on whether 2 or 4% of the population was dateable. And dateable isn’t saying attractive. I’ve had this discussion before and I’ve never heard anyone (whether gorgeous or hideous) insist that more than 4% of the population is attractive. Just go to the State Fair if you don’t believe me. The horror of the faces that will appear before you can’t be overstated. Gnarled-toothed pinheads will only be outnumbered by pimply obesities. We can use the 80-20 rule and say that perhaps 20% of the human population is serviceable while maybe 1 to 2% is attractive. When you get to terms like gorgeous or beautiful, you’re probably in the tenths of 1%. And remember these Hollywood celebrity beauties are fake, air brushed, 21st-century recipients of all that modern technology can accomplish. Many of them look like werewolves when they awaken, too. So don’t fret homely Homo Sapiens, it’s perhaps to our ugly ancestors credit that we exist at all!

To most of us, all members of many species look the same. Black bears and leopards and antelope all appear identical; at least from the same region. I wonder if this is from our anthropomorphic perspective or if in fact variety is limited. We humans show a lot more variety and most of it is butt ugly. Reminds me of the old Richard Pryor stand up line “beauty may be only skin deep but ugly goes all the way to the bone.”

In nature, males must impress in order to score the lady. Be it the impressive color and plumage of the Peacock or the macho chest pounding of the Silver Back gorilla, something special must be demonstrated. Now go back 50,000 years and imagine the human species. We’re these disheveled, half hairy, ugly, toothless half-apes without much to distinguish one from another. I seriously doubt there were any George Clooney’s back then (airbrushed or not). Now certainly the biggest baddest boy often got the girl through sheer force and maybe some even occasionally impressed by the beauty of their spears (no, not that spear girls) but by and large some other trait had to work the magic. This gets to the heart of my thesis. The male had to dance or sing or do something funny because looks alone wouldn’t cut it. I admit I got part of this from Christopher Hitchens and his VF piece on “Why women aren’t funny.” He pointed out that men had to be funny to attract a mate and that’s why humor is almost strictly a male province. I’d add clever, athletic, goofy and other attributes that would help one guy stand out from another. Back in the Pleistocene, as some silly little Woody Allen won the favors of a female, his silly little children would abound and let Darwinism do its thing.

I believe the cleverness, creativity and humor of our homely ancestors was passed down and enabled our species to survive. If it was the handsome one always scoring we’d all look like Gregory Peck. If it was the one with the giant schlong, all men would have three legs. But no, it was the quirky, abhorrent, ill-kempt dude who won the girl and why we’re a rather unattractive but very adaptable species to this day.

That said, we shouldn’t fret if we don’t look like Brad Pitt or, for the ladies, Angeline Jolie or Scarlett Johansson since our very unattractiveness allowed us to survive, as cleverness was selected for rather than looks. Now most of you know I’m being somewhat tongue-in-cheek with this assessment. Some of us aren’t so bad and god knows we do everything possible in the modern world, especially the females, to make ourselves attractive. At some point in our development, probably since the dawn of modern civilization, the females of our species have become the Peacocks. This is very rare and sets us apart. No one knows when adornment became largely the province of females but it most likely occurred when sedentary societies developed and suddenly some guy started to accumulate good stuff. The guy with the goods consequently became attractive to the females so they put on their feathers and cozied up to get some of that good stuff. This phenomenon persists to this day as females seek power and money through their looks; this is cross cultural and shows no signs of abating even after 50 years of women’s liberation. But that is a different discussion for another time and place.

For now, everyone (including you metrosexuals) cancel your appointments to the plastic surgeon; forget the tummy tuck, the boob job, the nose job, the face lift, and storm outside butt ugly as ever with your head held high. Without your hideous greatness to the 10th power grandfather, none of us would be here today!