This is to establish a baseline of what the net expectation is among the group of people who take an interest in the topic.

So, it's been long established by replicated studies (IIRC) demonstrating that on average, humans treat each other more or less badly depending on how good-looking the subject is.

For example, we allow good-looking people more personal space in the street. Meaning, we crowd the hell out of uglies who'd also appreciate some room. Space is a zero-sum game, once crowding gets above a certain level, and you need a simple metric to discriminate between different types of people. Nobody's doing it consciously.

So what if we ran the same studies, with a randomly chosen control group, a red group and a feminist group.

None of the groups will know what they're being tested for.

On the assumption that the reds and feminists will both diverge strongly from the norm in granting less social status to ugly people of both sexes, which group will be found to be nicer in practice, not in ideology to those not blessed with beauty? (Which is everyone, at some point in their life, if they live a full lifespan)

Or do you believe that there'll be no statistically significant difference from the norm for one or other, or both?

Who's warmer?