Lookism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Lookism is a term used to refer to the positive stereotypes, prejudice, and preferential treatment given to physically attractive people, or more generally to people whose appearance matches cultural preferences. The pejorative term body fascism is also used as a synonym[1] and Warren Farrell has proposed the term genetic celebrity to describe adoration of the attractive.[2]

Physical attractiveness is associated with good things, such as beautiful princesses; in contrast, physically unattractiveness is associated with negative things, such as wicked witches. Based on physical appearance, many people make automatic judgments of others that influence how they respond to those people. Research on the "What is beautiful is good" stereotype shows that, overall, those who are physically attractive benefit from their good looks. Researchers found that physically attractive individuals are perceived more positively and that physical attractiveness has a strong influence on judgements of a person’s competence.[3] In return, physically attractive people benefit from these stereotypical beliefs. Research shows that on average, physically attractive individuals have more friends, better social skills, and more active sex lives. However, attractiveness does not have any effect on the level of happiness experienced by the individual.[4]

Contents

Who is considered physically attractive? [edit]

In United States culture, many cannot define what attractiveness is, but they know it when they see it.[citation needed] A 2001 study suggested that infants seem to have high agreement about which shapes are more attractive than others.[5] This shows that judgements on attractiveness are not entirely influenced by culture. On average, smooth-skinned, youthful, symmetrical faces are seen as more attractive. Those with muscular body types are seen as more attractive, healthy, and adventuresome. Overweight individuals are often stereotypically categorized as unattractive. Although there has been little research on the topic, taller people seem to benefit more from their stature and are more likely to get dates, be hired, and be seen as competent and powerful. A study by Timothy Judge and Daniel Cable (2004) showed that an individual who is 72 inches tall are predicted to earn almost $166,000 more across a 30 year career than an individual who is 65 inches tall.[citation needed]

History [edit]

The term was first coined within the fat acceptance movement. It was used in the The Washington Post Magazine in 1978, which asserted that the term was coined by "fat people" who created the word to refer to "discrimination based on looks."[6] The word appears in several major English language dictionaries.[7]

Lookism has received scholarly attention both from a cultural studies and an economics perspective. In the former context, lookism relates to preconceived notions of beauty and cultural stereotyping based on appearance as well as gender roles and expectations. Important economic considerations include the question of income gaps based on looks, as well as increased or decreased productivity from workers considered beautiful or ugly by their co-workers.

Some writers have examined body fascism among gay men. Author Michelangelo Signorile described it as "the setting of a rigid set of standards of physical beauty that pressures everyone within a particular group to conform to them. Any person who doesn't meet those very specific standards is deemed physically unattractive and sexually undesirable. In a culture in which the physical body is held in such high esteem and given such power, body fascism then not only deems those who don't or can't conform to be be sexually less desirable, but in extreme sometimes dubbed lookism also deems a person completely worthless as a person, based solely on his exterior. In this sense it is not unlike racism or sexism, or homophobia itself."[8]

Empirical support [edit]

According to Nancy Etcoff, a psychologist at Massachusetts General Hospital, "we face a world where lookism is one of the most pervasive but denied prejudices."[9] Referring to several studies, Angela Stalcup writes that "The evidence clearly indicates that not only is there a premium for prettiness in Western culture, there is also penalty for plainness."[10]

Research by Dan Ariely found that American women exhibit a marked preference for dating taller men, and that for shorter men to be judged attractive by women, they must earn substantially more money than taller men.[11]

In the article "Is Lookism Unjust", Louis Tietje and Steven Cresap discuss when discrimination based on looks can legitimately be described as unjust.[12] Tietje and Cresap quote evidence that suggests there exists "a 7–to–9 percent 'penalty' for being in the lowest 9 percent of looks among all workers, and a 5 percent 'premium' for being in the top 33 percent". While accepting that the evidence indicates that such discrimination does occur, the authors argue that it has been pervasive throughout history. Therefore there can be no clear model of injustice in such discrimination, nor would legislation to address it be practicable. The authors conclude: "We do not see how any policy interventions to redress beauty discrimination can be justified."[12]

Law [edit]

United States [edit]

Until the 1970s, lookism in the United States was sometimes codified into law. In many jurisdictions, so-called "ugly laws" barred people from appearing in public if they had diseases or disfigurements that were considered unsightly.[13][14] Today, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission considers extreme obesity to be a disability protected by the Americans with Disabilities Act, and a few cities protect against discrimination based on appearance.[15] Otherwise, there is no federal law protecting against discrimination based on physical appearance.

See also [edit]

The Ugly Duckling, book illustration by Theo van Hoytema.

References [edit]

  1. ^ O'Brien, Jodi (2008). Encyclopedia of Gender and Society, Volume 1. SAGE, ISBN 9781412909167
  2. ^ Farrell, Warren (2005). Why Men Earn More: The Startling Truth About the Pay Gap -- And What Women Can Do About It. AMACOM, ISBN 0814472109 p. 193
  3. ^ Eagly, Alice; Ashmore, Richard (1991). "What is beautiful is good, but...". Psychological Bulletin 110: 109–128. 
  4. ^ Rhodes, Gillian last2 = Simmons (2005). "Attractiveness and Sexual Behavior: Does Attractiveness Enhance Mating Success?". Evolution and Human Behavior 26: 186–201. 
  5. ^ Game, Florence; Carchon, Isabelle; Vital-Durand, Francois (2003). "The effect of stimulus attractiveness on visual tracking in 2- to 6-month-old infants.". Infant Behavior and Development 26: 135–150. 
  6. ^ John Ayto, 20th Century Words, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999. ISBN 978-0-19-860230-9
  7. ^ Bartleby.com — "Lookism". The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language: Fourth Edition. 2000.
  8. ^ Morrison, Todd Eclectic Views on Gay Male Pornography: Pornucopia, Volume 47, Psychology Press, ISBN 9781560232919
  9. ^ William Safire. "The Way We Live Now: 8-27-00: On Language; Lookism", New York Times Magazine, August 27, 2000.
  10. ^ Angela Stalcup. The Plainness Penalty: Lookism in Western Culture.
  11. ^ "Ariely found that a 5'4" man would need to make $229,000 more than a 6' man to have equal appeal; a 5'6" man would need $183,000 more; a 5'10" man would need $32,000 more." Lori Gottlieb (2010). Marry Him: The Case for Settling for Mr. Good Enough. Penguin, ISBN 9781101185209 p. 239
  12. ^ a b Louis Tietje and Steven Cresap. (2005). "Is Lookism Unjust?: The Ethics of Aesthetics and Public Policy Implications". Journal of Libertarian Studies 19 (2): 31-50.
  13. ^ Brown, Patricia Leigh. "Viewing Ahab and Barbie Through the Lens of Disability." New York Times (August 20, 2000) as quoted by http://www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2/summary_0286-29736932_ITM
  14. ^ Begging the question: disability, mendicancy, speech and the law.(Viewpoint essay), 01-JAN-07, Schweik, Susan, Ohio State University Press
  15. ^ Gomez, Evangeline (2012 January 31). [Should Businesses Worry About Appearance-Based Discrimination in the Workplace? "http://www.forbes.com/sites/evangelinegomez/2012/01/31/should-businesses-worry-about-appearance-based-discrimination-in-the-workplace/"] Check |url= scheme (help). Retrieved 27 February 2013. 

External links [edit]