Oh well, everyone here knows the social hierarchy is completely and utterly fucked up, if you pardon my language. It’s the truth. But I guess I’m just kinda glad that at least for our schools (selective) we don’t have the whole stereotypical jocks, bimbo cheerleader blondes, nerds/geeks, loser fags, and the whole shebang.
After reading Ri’s blog about how popularity is confidence in yourself, I don’t know. I kinda disagree with that. There are people who are very confident in themselves, but they aren’t popular in the way we deem it as being popular. Confidence in what though? Confidence in maths skills? That certainly isn’t the case. I mean, who are the populars anyway?
Let’s see. It’s all different. I think the key to being ‘popular’ is that people envy you for one reason or another. Whether it’s confidence, clothes, money, boys, looks, or even the whole package, it’s about how you are seen by your peers. It doesn’t matter if you have all of these, if your peers don’t see you as being ‘worthy’ then you aren’t. We rely so much on other people’s view/judgement of us.
Popularity is a majority-rules decisions. If no one in our grade thought that those ‘popular’ girls were popular, would they be? No. It all comes back to how we view them. Because we classify them as populars, therefore they are.
“are all guys attracted to the pretty popular vixens at least once during their high-school life?”
hmm…tough one. But I would say yes. You know what they all say. Guys are attracted to girls who are confident about themselves, their looks, or just anything. Confidence, and yet still not being overly controlling or arrogant. The balance needs to be there. Sure not all guys go for girls like this, but once again, generalisation.
And even for us girls. Because hey, on the most basic shallowest level: would you rather date a girl/guy who was good looking and nice and popular, or a girl/guy who was good looking, nice but a complete and utter social reject? If both were identical twins in every single way except for their social standing? (same level of attractiveness, niceness, etc)
You would go for the girl/guy who was popular, of course. There’s still that ingrained instinct in us to choose someone who we think is better. Sure, we might say right now that we’d prefer the social reject, just to prove that we’re not part of the herd. But as a human, it’s our basic instinct to choose what is better for us. So yes, popular is better in the natural instinct terms than socially retarded.
That’s why they say that females are attracted to bad boys/jerks. Which actually has some truth attached to it. In the stone age times, this process was part of NATURAL SELECTION.
Stone age era, women had to make a lot of babies in order for the species to survive. It was then natural for us to choose JERKS over the GOOD GUYS because those jerks will steal and kill enough so that there would be enough food to feed the babies and make it through winter. Of course, now jerks have no real use anymore, but of course, thanks to our ancestors and our instinct for survival, that’s why we end up being attracted to those bad ass boys we see so much on television.
So after all that, popularity…
It’s just a social standing really, how our peers view each other in our hierarchy.