[isoprophlex]

People disagreeing with this comment: please consider what the post is trying to highlight.

There's an apparent asymmetry in how imagery of females is perceived, vs. similarly posing males. Commercials employing 'sex sells' tactics are still biased towards using the female sex to sell. Reddits' r/gonewild and offshoots is pretty huge, and filled with females. This is a truism.

The label 'beauty' being only returned for females highlights this asymmetry. There is something deeply absurd about this: on a first order approximation, ~50% of the population should be attracted to males. To me personally it is enlightening to see how 'smart' data driven systems expose the systemic biases in our society.

[watwut]

Yes, that was my point. Not that I think males look ugly, I don't. More that beauty being female only is a clear example of bias. I have seen similar bias with the word "elegant" exactly today. It was prompt in the list of photos and there was exactly one guy and many women in result.

> To me personally it is enlightening to see how 'smart' data driven systems expose the systemic biases in our society.

I also think that they to make that systemic bias bigger. Like, if there is small difference between the gender of elegant in real life, the algorithm will make it higher. The human bias in worst as amplifier too, but I find algorithmic harder to control and even worst in amplifying effect.

[skocznymroczny]

Also most women find most men unattractive or average looking. Most men find most women average looking or attractive.