When Bad Science Hurts Good Women

Nothing drives me crazier than bad science which gets published in big forums as reliable. No, I don't mean the silliness they publish as science on ScienceBlogs.com. I mean actual science, only badly done, and this one published in a news service. This German study says redheads get the most sex, not blondes. Now, common sense tells you this isn't true because, as all scientists know, blondes rule. Heck, my awareness of this fact is so keen I have developed some sort of allergy and/or eye affliction that prevents me from even seeing brunettes.* But let's not use me as an example, let's approach this scientifically. Exhibit 1: Sarah Mason, blonde cutie and a terrific actress: Exhibit 2: Evangeline Lilly, brunette and also a terrific actress: Tell me what you think. The blonde is more attractive, right? ( editor's note: someone wrote me an email and said the picture of Evangeline Lilly appeared empty to them. I guess that 'not able to see brunettes' allergy is more common than previously thought.) So how did this study go so wrong? It's easy. The study was done in Germany, where there are lots of blonde women, but they are German women. The redheads in the study were currently living in Germany but moved there from other countries and therefore were less ugly than German women. Had they included the country of origin in the initial study the results would have been as expected. So we have reaffirmed that 'Blondes have more fun' is scientific law but also have lent support to the 'hotter women of any hair color will get more sex than German women' theory.** I am happy we were able to solve another mystery of science together. Should you have more blondes to include in the study, please don't hesitate to do some fact-finding of your own. *What affliction is it? The medical term is 'LadyScientistreadingthisovermyshoulderwithafryingpaninherhand-itus.' **Except women who dye their hair orange. The jury is still out on that one.