Appearance Discrimination in the United States

In the essay “Why Looks Are the Last Bastion of Discrimination” by Deborah L. Rhode, she portrays the stereotypes hardships which are faced by certain people. She wants the audience to know how the stereotypes can cause suffering. The way certain people appear can cause people to have certain view point towards them due to their look. Discrimination is generated in people’s minds due to the physical appearance of a person. She wants the people to know that discriminating others because of their race, religion, color, and gender should be stopped. She gives an example in her essay about an obese lady, where the lady is called she not fit for job and

The beauty standard is a culturally constructed notion of physical attractiveness that has become increasingly imperative for women and men. However, this standard has become extremely perilous to men and women’s self-image. Camille Paglia, a highly educated individual who earned her PhD at Yale University and became a highly acclaimed author, explicates this conception in her essay “The Pitfalls of Plastic Surgery”. Paglia suggests that the beauty standard idealizes women to look like “sex symbols with an unattainable grandeur” (776). She continues to claim that it forces her audience of higher class women to pay large sums of money in order to alter their features ultimately conforming to a very “parochial” definition of beauty (776). Although Paglia is a highly credible source, she illogically appeals to the reader’s fears in order to persuade them. Paglia fails to give any credible outside sources which affirms her preposterous beliefs. Contrary to her inconsistencies, Daniel Akst, a social journalist and graduate from New York University provides his audience with reputable sources in order to persuade his audience. Daniel Akst believes that there needs to be a “democratization of physical beauty” in which instead of attempting to alter the beauty standard, we must first change how we view ourselves. Akst provides credible sources to establish his credibility where he observes cases studies and cultural experiments from scientists and organizations including:

“We all know that appearance matters, but the price of prejudice can be steeper than we often assume” (Washington1.) Published originally in the Washington Post on May 23,2010 by Deborah L. Rhode. Rhode the Professor of law and legal director at Stanford University in her essay “Why Looks Are The Last Bastion Of Discrimination,” argues that an individual's physical appearance is one of the few qualities of their personal identity that other people are legally within their rights to discriminate against. Rhode states her thesis clearly explaining the forthcoming reasons she will offer to uphold her position. Rhode believes that discriminating against individuals based on their appearance is wrong, and is often overlooked in many environments such as the workforce. Many think it is crucial that discrimination on looks is banned in workplaces, schools, and most other organizations.

Deborah L. Rhode, a law professor at Stanford University and author, has written or co-written over twenty-seven books in the genre of “professional responsibility, leadership, and gender,” and published editorials in the New York Times, Washington Post, Boston Globe, and Slate. On May 23, 2010, an editorial by Rhode titled, “Why Looks are the Last Bastion of Discrimination,” was published in the Washington Post. This article argues for the need of stricter anti-discrimination laws after proving that the United States’ bias towards more attractive people severely impacts one’s ability to obtain jobs and other opportunities. Rhode follows Toulmin’s model of argument which states that an argument must incorporate data, a claim, warrants, qualifiers,

In the society we all live in today, where outside beauty is emphasized more than inner beauty, businesses have realized how to utilize that view to their own benefit They have looked at trends and realized that it is profitable to hire those with outer beauty. However, since certain businesses are only hiring certain ethnicities in order to project that image, it has been questioned whether these businesses are discriminating. In the article, Going for the Look, but Risking Discrimination, it says that " hiring attractive people is not necessarily illegal, but discriminating on the basis of age, sex, and ethnicity is." The companies cannot help it that only certain types of people fit their marketing image and their hiring strategies are

(In one study, economists Jeff Biddle and Daniel Hamermesh estimated that for lawyers, such prejudice can translate to a pay cut of as much as 12 percent.) When researchers ask people to evaluate written essays, the same material receives lower ratings for ideas, style and creativity when an accompanying photograph shows a less attractive author. Good-looking professors get better course evaluations from students; teachers in turn rate good-looking students as more intelligent. Not even justice is blind. In studies that simulate legal proceedings, unattractive plaintiffs receive lower damage awards. And in a study released this month, Stephen Ceci and Justin Gunnell, two researchers at Cornell University, gave

“Judging by the Cover,” is an essay written in 2003 by Bonny Gainley who is a consultant, speaker, and author. It originally appeared in an opinion column in a Colorado newspaper. Although non-discriminatory, she believes that people project messages about themselves with their appearance. This essay seems to be intended for recent graduates and young job seekers. The main point that she tries to explain to the reader is that even though our family and friends may accept us for who we are, employers may not.

In the race for the presidency between Richard Nixon and John F. Kennedy, many would say that the debate was the most influential factor. Specifically the decision of makeup or no makeup that the two candidates had to make. Before the debate, Nixon had just recently recovered from a broken knee and was exhausted from the long day, but then refused makeup when it was offered to him. Kennedy, on the other hand, had spent the day relaxing and rehearsing, and accepted makeup, looking fully rejuvenated (Morton). TV viewers of the debate said JFK won, while the radio audience claimed it was a draw. Those who could see the competitors were more focused on the contrast in their appearances than their responses to important global issues. If we deem our leaders responsible based on their face rather than their eligibility, we’ll lead ourselves down a destructive path of failure. Also, on the labor side of things, Deborah Rhodes mentioned in her book that short men have a disadvantage in earnings, hiring, and career advancement (Rhodes, pg. 93). Employers are constantly dismissing individuals because they don’t meet some aesthetic quota, even when it doesn’t apply to the type of work for which they’re applying. They evaluate their interviewees using irrelevant information, while possibly affecting the company’s

Many types of discrimination are present in society today, however, are the authors of today portraying it correctly in their works? Wonder is a story about a young boy named Auggie with facial deformities that encounters discrimination. Discrimination is the act of being stopped from doing something solely based on looks, race, social class, age, or gender. Discrimination can come in all forms, although some question how large the issue is in order to be described as discrimination. The social issue of discrimination is not relayed accurately throughout Wonder.

The sole thought of discriminating against “ugly” people in the United States can seem like a joke to most people around the world. Many that hear this may think America is freedom or the American dream could not be infected with such ideas. Unfortunately, America is flooded with look based hiring system; a way of discriminating against the non-American look. Nowadays, it seems like having a picture of a good-looking person on a resume opens up more doors to getting a job. This is not something new to our society.

When I was only a little girl, I had been told that true beauty came from within. Yet as I grew up, I noticed that looks mattered. From their attractiveness, race, age, or gender, anyone’s image was always up for scrutiny. Under those circumstances, I grew up thinking that if people were to judge me based on my appearance, that I should judge them the same way. Though, as I became older, I at some point learned that how a person looked wasn’t always in their range of control. A person simply isn’t born with the choice of picking what they look like, nor are they born with the choice of having a genetic disorder or disease. In that case, I believe that nobody should be defined purely based on what they look like.

It is impossible to exist in our society without experiencing its looksist effects on some level. Even those who receive privilege from Looksism still experience some of its oppression at the same time. Our standard of beauty is so specific and unrealistic that people are reaching to appear in away that is not naturally possible. It is exemplified in throughout Lorian, Ohio in The Bluest Eye in the 1940s, however it is still a concept that is extremely prevalent in our society almost eighty years later. We don’t hear a lot of positivity about our own bodies or the bodies of those around us. The majority of discussions about physical appearance are in an attempt to change it, to alter ourselves in order to fit into this narrow view of what beauty really is. Values of honesty and respect take second place to our standard of beauty. We, as a society, are more concerned with how we look than being positive and influential people. Until these priorities get straightened out we will continue to produce young people like Pecola, who just want blue eyes, or want to be taller, or shorter, or thinner in order to fit into the microscopic box that we call

Lookism is discrimination based on the way people look, or perceived by others. No one should ever have to face being discriminated based on how they chose to style their hair, their body type or the type of clothes they wear. In order to be able to understand lookism, it will be defined, given a brief history of why it exists, discuss specific cases of its impact, and will offer a solution to decreasing or eliminating lookism; moreover, will show examples of how the media expects people to look a certain way.

We make women believe that they have to be a certain height, weight, and have other desirable features in order to be beautiful. Not only do we teach this to women but also to society which means when it comes to service or entertainment, there is a demand for attractive women. According to Julie Tappero, there have been three cases in which women were discriminated based on their looks. One case of lookism involves Debrahlee Lorenzana, who sued Citibank after they fired her because she wore clothes that were distracting to her male coworkers and because she was “too hot” (Tappero par. 18). In this particular case, she was apparently too attractive for the job. Lookism is not a concept tied to unattractive people but rather to all. Another case she mentioned was Annette McConnell, who weighed 300 pounds and was removed from her job because her supervisor said “people don’t like to buy clothes from fat people.” (Tappero par. 18). The last case she mentioned included Cassandra Smith, who sued Hooters after she was told to join a gym and “lose weight and improve her looks.” (Tappero par. 18). All of these women were fired from their job due to the fact that they did not have the looks or was too hot. Losing a job can lead to financial issue later on, especially if you do not find a job

Discrimination of any one on the basis of physical attributes is wrong. Early Greek philosophers described justice best as blind. Blind in the sense that all people should be judged by their actions not their appearance. Sam Dillon’s article Evictions at Sorority Raise Issue of Bias depicts a large number of college students being evicted for not fitting the sorority girl mold. “Virtually everyone who didn’t fit a certain sorority member archetype was told to leave”(Dillon 604). This is a terrible example of how society tries to shape us to fit a mold. No mold fits two different people. As individuals we act as so.