Superhero creator Stan Lee allegedly a victim of elder abuse

Call it “prejudice” if you like, but that Morgan guy’s got a real smarmy-looking face in that video. I wouldn’t want to trust a face like that on principle!

Thinking it over, I know precisely where this prejudice comes from. Morgan reminds me vaguely of Al Capone, only thinner! Same smug, self-satisfied air. Following the St. Valentine’s Day Massacre: “Good news from your stockbroker, Mr. Capone?” “I’ve just made a killing in the market, harr harr!”–recalling Rod Steiger’s wonderful portrayal of Capone in the classic 1959 movie.

I’d love to know what Cesare Lombroso would have said about that perceived similarity! (And not because he, like Capone, was Italian.)

For anyone who doesn’t know, Lombroso was a 19th century Jewish-Italian physician and criminologist who wrote (among other works) an 1876 book called L’Uomo Delinquente, translated as “Criminal Man.” (Although he was sexist, he wasn’t completely sexist on this topic, because he wrote one on “Criminal Woman” as well: La Donna Criminale, 1895).

Lombroso’s theory was that criminal traits are largely inherited, and that criminals are atavisms: genetic “throwbacks” to more primitive stages in our ancestry. Leftovers from our past, in other words. He also believed that these traits were reflected, and could be seen, in the physical appearance of a criminal, such as long, “apelike” arms, and particularly in the region of the skull: sloping forehead, protruding jaw and other simian features, low-set or peculiar ears or notable asymmetry of the face.

Wikipedia notes that these particular theories of Lombroso’s are “largely rejected by the contemporary scientific community.” And I have to admit, I don’t see how Morgan’s face, or Capone’s either, conforms to any of Lombroso’s criminal criteria. Well, maybe Capone’s forehead slopes a bit… or does it just look that way because he was going bald on top? Google “Al Capone image” and judge for yourself.

But that’s not to say there’s nothing at all in Lombroso’s theories. Especially in the sphere of heritability. Not every criminal is a psychopath, but some of the worst ones are, and psychopathy has been shown to be distinctly heritable. According to Wikipedia again, “Lombroso also maintained that criminals had less sensitivity to pain and touch; more acute sight; a lack of moral sense, including an absence of remorse; more vanity, impulsiveness, vindictiveness, and cruelty.” Some of those latter traits sound very familiar!

And I’ve read somewhere that even Lombroso’s notion of irregularities and asymmetries in the face or skull are developmental defects that can correlate, to a limited extent, with certain mental defects that could predispose a person toward criminal tendencies. So he wasn’t one hundred percent wrong about that. It’s just nowhere close to being a reliable indicator, that’s all.

Apart from that, is it really pure accident or circumstance that the offenders in so many criminal mugshots look like a bunch of plug-uglies?

Wouldn’t it be nice if we could tell good from bad people just by looking at them? What a shame that life doesn’t work that way! Lederer and Burdick’s “Ugly American” in their splendid, inspiring classic novel of that name really was “ugly”–plain-looking, at any rate–yet he had wisdom and a heart of gold. Although that was fiction, plenty of “ugly” people in real life are beautiful inside. And then there are people like Ted Bundy, such a deceptively good-looking monster. No wonder so many victims fell for him. Just as many people here have partnered with monsters who were good-looking. Or wait… do I see an evil gleam of wickedness behind Bundy’s grin in some of his photographs?

Never mind, it’s probably just my imagination. Pure projection, knowing with the wisdom of hindsight what Bundy was really like.

In spite of that, prejudice or not, I still wouldn’t trust that Morgan guy! Too greasy by far!