Do Looks Really Matter?

Britains Got Talent 2009 Susan Boyle (Singer) (HD) - The most amazing videos are a click away

Everyone is familiar with television talent show, Britian's Got Talent/ YouTube sensation, Susan Boyle, a stout, burly, 47 year-old woman, that turned off everyone by her looks. From the judges to the people in the audience, no one took her seriously. It was not until, she opened her mouth to sing, Les Miserables tune, I Dreamed a Dream, that she took the crowd into a state of shock.

The question presumes, did her unattractive looks deter the judges perception of judging her fairly? The answer is clear, but how many times does this shallow act happen to people everyday? Does having experience land you that job alone, or can being attractive give you access to the golden elevators instead of climbing the corporate, glass staircase?

The known stereotypes between attractive and unattractive, males and females have been rounded out to three main adjectives, based on a survey of twenty-five men and twenty-five women, the three average adjectives for attractive men were:

• Tall
• Athletic build
• Conceited
  

For attractive women the three main adjectives were:

• Stuck up
  
• Thin
• Long Hair

For unattractive men the three main adjectives were:

• Bald
• Obese
• Big nose

And for unattractive women the three adjectives were:

• Obese
• Small breast/ butt
• Unintelligent

In an over-the- phone, interview with sociology Professor at the University of Connecticut, Bradely Wright, he states, "In society and in the workplace in order to succeed, education and experience alone will not get you to the top." Wright's theory is that social psychologist have identified the stereotypes according to 'what is beautiful'. If someone has clear skin, bright eyes, a symmetrical face, and exotic features, society tends to see them as sexy or cute. In addition, we also believe that they have other positive attributes. Just from thinking that he or she is attractive we think that they are also intelligent, competent, kind, and humorous.

So does that give us the reason to treat them differently? In an interview with Maurice St.Pierre, a Professor of Psychology and Sociology at Morgan State University, said that traditionally, most stereotypes break down into two broad dimensions: whether a person appears to have malignant or benign intent and whether a person appears dangerous. “In ancestral times, it was important to stay away from people who looked angry and dominant,” he said. Women are also subdivided into “traditionally attractive” women, who “don’t look dominant, have baby-faced features,” Professor St. Pierre said. “They’re not threatening.”

Before

In the corporate world, a double standard on appearance is evident on the basis of performance and character. Valerie Roberts-Edwards, a Registered Nurse at Washington Hospital Center, strongly believes that the double standard is strong, even in her field of work. "I feel that women are scrutinized more harshly than men in respect to their appearance. A women is looked at negatively for being overweight and a man is looked at as just being a "big guy"."



Theodore Powell, the Sales/CEO of IndividualityLIVE!, works one - on- one in the fashion industry, and has experience in working with a business that is heavy on appearance. However, the appearance of a person is only half of their charm. When asked how strong does some one's appearance make a stronger impression than their character. "Working in the fashion field people may think that character doesn't really matter, but it is just about how you look. But, I will say that I have seen beautiful people well dressed, yet have nasty attitudes and no knowledge. And those people have nothing compared to those with a beautiful personality. So, I will say that no matter how good you look, your character always wins over your appearance."

Indeed, attractiveness is one thing that can make stereotypes self-fulfilling and reinforcing. Attractive people are “credited with being socially skilled,” Professor St. Pierre said, and maybe they are, because “if you’re beautiful or handsome, people laugh at your jokes and interact with you in such a way that it’s easy to be socially skilled.” If you are unattractive it is much harder to get these type of reactions.

In a self-conducted survey 20 men and women were asked to rate the possibility of different men and women with common stereotyped features and if the views of society and beauty has affected the way that they view themselves.. The results are listed below:

A highly attractive female whom is very well- dressed, the chances that she is stuck up?

16% voted that the female would be stuck up.

An unattractive male with glasses and braces, what are the chances that you would stereotype him as a 'nerd'?

3% voted that the male would be a nerd.

The way that society has classified what beauty is, has it affected that way that you see yourself? 50% voted that society has affected the way that they view themselves.

The results from the survey show that the stereotypes in beauty have various social implications. We are all aware of the the large amount of time and money spent put into our appearance. I, myself, spend two hours to get ready. Last year, in the U.S. alone women have spent about 2.3 billion dollars on Botox, based on information provided by the American Cosmetic Surgery Network. This might seem frivolous, but to those whom get the procedure done, are just reacting to the views of society.

One could justifiably argue that it is wrong to give extra social capital to people because of their good looks. Somehow it seems unfair, almost discriminatory, to those of us who will never earn the name “Stone”. Still, the same argument applies to intelligence, education, organizational skills, and any other factors that society rewards. Some have more, some have less. Now, don’t get me wrong. If society rewarded only beauty, I personally feel as if I wouldn't be in trouble. But, if society inherently conditions its rewards, i.e., some people get them and some people don’t, how much does it matter which criteria are used? The true alternative is unconditional value, no?