Slimy and Ugly

Does this look ugly and slimy to you?  

The other day I told a kid I enjoyed fishing for Carp the most.  When I asked if he liked carp he replied, "Not really..."  "Why not?" I asked.  "I don't know... they're ugly and slimy," he replied.

I would argue that anyone that has had the opportunity to admire a carp up close, or pursue them with a fly rod, would refrain from using descriptive terms like "ugly" and/or "slimy".  I understand that beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and is completely subjective.  I don't expect everyone to share in my fascination of this species, or even enjoy fishing for them as much as I do.  I only ask that you refrain from judging a fish before you've fished for it and/or touched it.  Put a northern and a carp in a slimy grudge match and the northern will come out slimier every time.

I believe the common carp has a bad rep for two reasons:

1 - Their lifestyle (depending on the fishery) is a bit less lavish than people would like to see.  Thought, by many, to eat trash and live in "dirty" water, commons make their living scavenging for any aquatic worms, insects or crustaceans that await.  They are always seen while fishing for other species, and every-so-often, caught by accident when one grabs a nearby crawler or hapless minnow.  When the fight is on, there are nothing but positive remarks from the angler hauling in their trophy.  That is until they see that pretty face smiling back at them.  Then it's, "Oh (explative)!  It's only a (explative) carp!"

2 - Their status as an invasive species and relation to Asian/silver carp don't do them any favors.  Their reputation as a "trash fish" is becoming stronger by the day.  I don't know how much research there is to back it up, but Common's can cause damage to water ecosystems by harming native aquatic plant species with their feeding habits, muddying waterways, contributing to increased algal blooms and have the ability to procreate rapidly and resist extreme change in conditions.  They are well oiled evolutionary machines.   I need to continue digging for research connecting the common carp to the loss of fish and waterfowl in a particular body of water.  I don't know if such a thing exists.  Regardless, it causes folks to be concerned, and that concern morphs into disdain for an entire species.  They've been around since 1880 in the midwest, and our fisheries are pretty amazing.  Where's the evidence that suggests otherwise?