"USA Today has come out with a new survey - apparently, three out of every four
people make up 75% of the population."
Never before has a report about a "survey" brought out so much emotion in me that I feel the need to mention it, let alone blog about it. However, earlier this month, I read an article published by The Week, "The science behind anti-redhead prejudice", written by Greg Stevens, The Kernel, February 4, 2014. Like with any magazine or publication, there are times when I agree or disagree with their topics, their information, or their views. I have read this publication often and found most times to not be moved one way or the other by their reports.
Not so this time.
When this article first appeared on my facebook homepage, it intrigued me because I am a natural "ginger". (Did this term come about because of "Ginger" on Gilligan's Island? Just wondering.) Anyway, I read it.
I lost 5 minutes of life I will never get back.
The first thing that I thought, and perhaps even said out loud was, "You've got to be kidding me." Did they really take the time to put wigs on people and then ask them to go into a nightclub for this "survey"? (I use the term very lightly in this case.) Wigs? In a nightclub? They call this research?
Oh, then it gets better.
The article goes on to talk about freckles being "cancer factories" and that they "can serve as quite a biological 'warning sign'". This apparently crosses others' minds more than it does mine because the first thing that I think about when I see another redhead is NOT when he/she is going to receive a cancer diagnosis. In fact, if you are a true redhead, you know for a fact that we are smothered in sunscreen from the day we're born and reminded even well into adulthood to apply and reapply often when in the sun. Much to our dismay at times. We know our limitations and our risks and do something about it.
Just when my blood was beginning to boil, the article continues its nonsense by quoting Charles Darwin.
Yes, Darwin. Commence rolling of eyes in disgust and shaking of head in disbelief.
It seems that redheads are a result of less genetic mixing, therefore we are less strong, genetically speaking. According to the article, we are biased against this. Apparently people do a lot more thinking about this sort of thing than I do.
The writer of the article tries to end on a happy note...I think. Fails at doing so, in my book, but an effort was made to do so at least. It is too bad that I was so not into the research methods and reasoning from the beginning for by the ending I honestly could not have cared less. The "research data", if you can call it that, was so lame from the get go that nothing more could be trusted after the opening paragraph. Especially when a personal lifetime of research of my own goes against everything assumed by the information gathered for this project.
If you judge my attractiveness based on the things mentioned in this article, then please, by all means, bypass me when our paths cross. You will be hard pressed to find me in a nightclub, however, so do not waste your time scouting out the joint when you enter. Attractiveness is more than a hair color. It is found in the whole package...the overall person...looks, personality, character, demeanor, etc. There has to be more to this bias, if one truly exists, than what this article has to offer. If you walked with me in public, you'd know how many women want my hair color...I find it hardly a negative for gingers when women walk away disappointed I cannot offer a specific brand or my colorist's number.
If a redhead is not attractive to you, then fine. Fill in the blank with any other hair color as well. We all have our preferences. However, my guess is that someone's longstanding attractiveness has to do with something more than just the color of their hair, even if hair color may have drawn your attention to them first off.
My name is Janet and I am a ginger. I answer to "Red" with a smile.