A really shallow---but some what amusing---topic.

Colleges and Universities A-Z Columbia University
1

<p>I visited Columbia---the campus looks gorgeous. (Love, love, blah, blah. Applied ED, hoping for the best. I've said all this before.) Anyway, every day we're consistently told "The generations are getting so obese... jeez. You fatties. Get on a treadmill." and my teachers seem to always bring up the Frosh 15. When I visited, however, I didn't really see that issue on campus. </p>

<p>Was I just not paying attention? Is obesity even an issue at Columbia? My father likes to joke and tease about how hard I'm going to have to work---"You see? They are thin because they study so much! They probably skip meals!" Yeah, Dad. Okay. While this may be true for some cases, I can't imagine people consistently skipping meals to pour themselves over books and---well, no. I have met such people. But the students I've seen at Columbia seem sane and together enough to remember to seek nutrition.</p>

<p>Not that being thin means being pretty---I know plenty of gorgeous people who still have curves to love. On that note, though...</p>

<p>My friend was telling about how she could go visit a community college, see a pretty girl, and say to herself, "Well, I'm probably smarter than her." (I'm not degrading people who go to community colleges, my friend happens to be incredibly judgmental.) Subsequently, she visited Yale and thought, "Well, at least I'm not unfortunate-looking." Coincidentally, she later saw a girl attending who was, in fact, "so beautiful I considered being lesbian for a moment" and then she just "bowed down to her, because she was, in every way, better than me."</p>

<p>You can call my friends shallow if you want. I'd have to agree. Some of them are. Maybe I am too. I've also read in some college guide though (perhaps someone else knows which one I'm referring to, I've forgotten the name) that Columbia's students are not known for being particularly good-looking. That same college book introduced me to the quote "Barnard to bed, Columbia to wed." If I were to attend either schools, I'd find that really, really insulting. Actually, I do even now. Columbia was rated a "C" for girls and boys, I think. I just have to wonder---who is doing the judging?</p>

<p>I can't sleep. And I'm bored. So I thought I'd share some random thoughts that were running through my head. Any opinions? Personal experiences? Do share.</p>

2

<p>My $0.02 in vast, sweeping generalizations:</p>

<p>It's been proven that people who live in urban areas tend to be skinnier.</p>

<p>Generally speaking, those who spend more time on their appearances (so as to appear more "pretty") are probably likely spend less time studying, and would probably attend a school of Barnard's caliber rather than an Ivy. Unless you're like the characters in Gossip Girl or whatever, but I assume that they have LEGACIES and $30 million donations helping them get into Harvard/Princeton/Yale.</p>

<p>Being shallow is a natural part of human behavior, no matter how subconscious or deliberate it may be for different individuals. Women naturally tend to be more attracted to taller men, and there is a direct correlation between how tall a man is and how many resources in society he controls.</p>

3

<p>Hahahahha... Gossip Girl. They were filming that while I was visiting actually. It didn't really excite me, I don't watch that show but my bf's sister was hyperventilating, asking if I saw so-and-so or some random celeb. Some people just give me that invisible floating question mark above my head---not always a bad thing, I suppose.</p>

<p>And you bring up many good points---I was unaware of the urban setting statistic, and your logic seems... well, logical. God, I wish I had legacies behind me. My dad did get admitted and full coverage with tuition, but it was room and board that he just couldn't afford. Funny how life works out.</p>

4

<p>1) Young people are going to tend to be thinner than the average person in a city. Your metabolism is higher.</p>

<p>2) People on "smart" campuses are going to be less attractive (on average) than the vast majority of schools out there because the students have grown up spending a lot more of their time and energy on academics rather than making themselves pretty. 5 minutes at both Berkeley and UFlorida will convince any rational observer of this fact. That's my own sweeping generalization and if you don't like it you can go form your own opinion.</p>

<p>3) There is a regional factor at play here. To wit: People in the South and Midwest are generally prettier than those in the Northeast. Again, comes from level-of-effort put into it. This is reflected in regional schools. Columbia is no exception, every time I visited my friends at ASU, Georgia Tech or even freakin Oberlin, there was such a difference that I ended up kicking myself for my choice of school.</p>

<p>4) I'd rather be with a smart-and-sassy girl than a beautiful-but-boring girl any day. I need a challenge. Columbia has some girls who are blessed with both great looks and winning personalities, of course, as any college does, but the trend is definitely towards the latter.</p>

<p>5) The phrase you use can't possibly be more than 25 years old, so I really wouldn't exactly consider it an aphorism. Frankly it feels like one step above schoolyard taunting, but I say this as an unabashed Barnard-lover (sorry Cerberus!)</p>

<p>6) Go to sleep.</p>

5

<p>
[quote]
To wit: People in the South and Midwest are generally prettier than those in the Northeast.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>People from the South and California are more likely to be better looking. That you threw the Midwest in as a region where people are among the more pretty is absurd. You're the first person I ever heard to say something like this.</p>

<p>
[quote]
I'd rather be with a smart-and-sassy girl than a beautiful-but-boring girl any day. I need a challenge.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Like whether it's better to get a B in an AP or an A non-AP and the right answer is to get an A in the AP, you want a girl who is smart and hot.</p>

6

<p>I have had 30 pound weight swings in college. in both directions.</p>

7

<p>
[quote]
People from the South and California are more likely to be better looking. That you threw the Midwest in as a region where people are among the more pretty is absurd. You're the first person I ever heard to say something like this.

[/quote]

personal preference thing. i'll grant the South and California are the usually-cited cases, though I find SoCal to have a lot more ugly people than is normally admitted to, and the SF bay area is basically the pacific northwest looks-wise.</p>

<p>absurd: utterly or obviously senseless, illogical, or untrue; contrary to all reason or common sense; laughably foolish or false</p>

<p>personal preference, dude. enjoy your plastic overtanned babes.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Like whether it's better to get a B in an AP or an A non-AP and the right answer is to get an A in the AP, you want a girl who is smart and hot.

[/quote]

right, but what's the first thing you're willing to compromise on? for dating, not one-night-stands.</p>

8

<p>"4) I'd rather be with a smart-and-sassy girl than a beautiful-but-boring girl any day. I need a challenge. Columbia has some girls who are blessed with both great looks and winning personalities, of course, as any college does, but the trend is definitely towards the latter."</p>

<p>Thank you Denz. I like you too. Sort of. </p>

<p>"5) The phrase you use can't possibly be more than 25 years old, so I really wouldn't exactly consider it an aphorism. Frankly it feels like one step above schoolyard taunting, but I say this as an unabashed Barnard-lover (sorry Cerberus!)"</p>

<p>Sometimes, you need to stop talking :)</p>

<p>Corretto: Obesity isn't an issue at Columbia, putting on weight after your freshman year is. And it's unlikely someone would get obese once they're into college unless they have some fatal hormonal swings.</p>

<p>In any case, yeah, some people put on weight (I did; my mother greeted me at the airport after freshman year with a "what the HELL have you done to yourself")--but that's easily reversed: exercise regularly (and there are more benefits to that than just losing weight) and eat right, which isn't hard to do in NYC.</p>

<p>Don't worry about it too much though--those few extra pounds was enough to scare me into working out every day. Call me shallow :P</p>

9

<p>Here are some random thoughts of mine too:</p>

<p>If you're beautiful + smart you have very little to worry about because you'll probably end up with another beautiful + smart person.</p>

<p>If you're really lacking in either (but not both) departments, you don't have to worry about finding a beautiful + smart person because they'll probably go for someone like themselves (who has both qualities) instead of someone like you (who has just one).</p>

<p>I really like the OP's friend's way of putting it: "so beautiful I considered being lesbian for a moment". I have only seen 3 to 5 people I would describe as such. Is it just me and the OP's friend? Can't decide if it's envy or something else...hmm =)</p>

10

<p>first of all gaining 15 pounds doesn't make you "obese" unless you were already extremely overweight</p>

<p>i've seen the freshman 15 in action...this one girl was pretty attractive freshman year....wasn't thin but healthy looking and i saw her the next year and she was all kinds of fat....guess it was more like the freshman 30</p>

<p>the reason people are thinner in cities (especially in ny) is that we don't depend on our cars as much...in the suburbs people drive EVERYWHERE while most new yorkers can't even own a car because there just isn't enough space for them</p>

<p>
[quote]
I'd rather be with a smart-and-sassy girl than a beautiful-but-boring girl any day.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>yea, u've definitely dated some ugly girls in your day :P</p>

<p>.....kidding aside i agree with you</p>

11

<p>columbia is one of the few schools that asked me for a picture of myself. soooo i thought the student body would be exceptionally good looking. uhh, kidding. this is not legally blonde.</p>

12

<p>
[quote]
the reason people are thinner in cities (especially in ny) is that we don't depend on our cars as much...in the suburbs people drive EVERYWHERE while most new yorkers can't even own a car because there just isn't enough space for them

[/quote]
</p>

<p>This is dumb, including because NY is pretty unique among big cities in terms of the infrequency of driving.</p>

13

<p>Okay. Well in other news, I fell asleep around 1.30AM---after reading my posts and the following posts, I can't really discern what my original point (or lack thereof) was. (Blame the lack of sleep?) But I appreciate all your opinions, they're fun :).</p>

14

<p>You'll be in NYC. There are flocks of people everywhere that are beautiful so it doesn't matter the beauty standard at Columbia.</p>

15

<p>@Columbia2002, do you mean big cities in the US? Or big cities in general. Because internationally, the "big" cities tend to be the ones that are more pedestrian. However, cities in the US, especially in the South, Midwest, and West, tend to be more car-oriented. But they are also fundamentally different cities. For example, LA isn't a city. It is, as someone so astutely put it, "six suburbs in search of a city."</p>

<p>So yeah, everyone at Columbia probably takes the subway/taxi/buses and then walks. And, if you didn't notice, they tend to walk rather quickly.</p>

<p>But if you look at the statistics, the South, Midwest, and West tend to be a little bit more rotund than the Northeast.</p>

<p>But to answer the question about obesity, no people do not shy away from food. However, the food provided by the school is, apparently, atrocious. So the fact that the kids have to buy food (at inflated NYC prices no less) by themselves may be a factor in the slimming of the student body. But, I know my friends are right out there at restaurant week if they happen to be in town at the time and there is even a facebook group for Columbia students that catalogues the events that will have free food. The line for chicken over rice, when it comes to campus, is insaaaane.</p>

<p>As for attractiveness, you're in New York! There are so many other people that if you can't find someone at Columbia (god forbid), there are millions of other people there. And a good portion of them are also college students! Some of them are attractive!</p>

16

<p>does anyone know about the acting school at columbia? i just started in the starring role of my fifth grade play, and my name was in the paper. do you think i could get in?</p>

17

<p>I don't care much for how attractive people are at Columbia---and I'm sure my boyfriend appreciates that, haha. I was just kind of blah-blahing for the sake of conversation and to see what people thought... although it seems to be getting a bit hostile...</p>

18

<p>
[quote]
I don't care much for how attractive people are at Columbia---and I'm sure my boyfriend appreciates that, haha.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>You should. Odds that you'll be with your boyfriend until 2013 are slim at best.</p>

19

<p>all right, it's time to set all of you straight.
Jack Kerouac was gorgeous.</p>

<p>But really, when I visited many of the girls I saw were very pretty. I mean lets be honest studies have shown that there really is no correlation between intelligence and beauty. Also, to the original poster: You'll be in NYC for Christ sake it doesn't matter if the guys on campus are cute or not you're living in a city of male models and celebrity socialites.</p>

20

<p>
[quote]
You'll be in NYC for Christ sake it doesn't matter if the guys on campus are cute or not you're living in a city of male models and celebrity socialites.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>W T F? Male models are more often gay than not (or closet cases / so metro that they might as well be gay). And there aren't male celeb socialites. If you had to cite genres of the best looking datable guys in NYC, those aren't good examples.</p>