People can be attractive, for various definitions of that word, for various reasons. Some characteristics that cause attraction are kinda sorta fixed at birth via genetics. See your local biology class on reproductive fitness and relevant examples in peacock tail size, elk antler size, etc etc. There also exist characteristics not fixed at birth. See how birds can get sick trinkets.(sidenote:1https://heymonstergoaway.tumblr.com/post/648145666162540544)
Coming back to human-land, where we Live In A Society that can, like, manufacture the wheel or whatever, there’s a bunch of the obvious markers for attractiveness that aren’t genetics—hygiene, women shaving legs, fashion. But a friend once mentioned another to me that was neat. They mentioned the idea that maybe two-piece suits of bygone workplace dress code fame had the little bits of white from the long-sleeved shirt sticking out of the arms to signal the effort into conformance? Oh no, no short shirt here, I put the effort into conforming to having a long sleeve, you can see it right here. idk, some gibberish. hmmm.
Not sure what the thesis is here. Maybe one is that while some non-genetic markers for attraction are directly correlated with genetic fitness (liking fit figures because these people die less), others markers that aren’t directly correlated with genetic fitness is instead correlated with being able to spend extra effort, which is then correlated to fitness? Second degree links? asterisk waves hands around asterisk.