Look But Risking Discrimination

He mentions several key factors that support his argument that looks do matter; Socially, attractive people are more likely to get paid more on the job, and mothers tend to look for attractiveness in their children. The way someone looks tends to determine their social status, physical activity, and their fitness level. From 1939 to 1989, the importance of looks to both men and women increased along with the change in trends in fashion, magazines, and the media, and that these trends will continue to develop along with technological changes that are not likely to change anytime soon. The author then mentions obesity, and its effect on someone's look. In a study, people that weighed more pounds were estimated to be older than the thinner person. As society further develops, the way both men and women dress changed in terms of the level of formality. The clothes we wear to school/work, private/public, and formal/informal are the same because America has been getting more casual ever year. There is no longer a distinction in clothing between gender, class, and age. Shorts used to be meant for youth only, but now you see people of all age wearing

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

“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,

Why women are discounted by employers and not men is interesting. Men have judged women based on their looks for years even in the workplace. This is a form of sexual objectification and undervaluing women according to Caroline Heldman, (2013). One would think that due to The Equal Pay Act that positive business acumen would be practiced for the greatest good based on skill and not using discriminatory practices based on sex and looks. The utilitarian theory will be evaluated to identify the greatest good for the greatest number as it pertains to women being discounted and

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

Today’s jobseeker has tough competition. In our text book readings “Judging by the Cover” (657-658), Bonny Gainley begins the argument of the paper by stating that job seekers must be careful when they make personal choices that initially will affect their chances of entering the workplace. People have a need to be accepted by others just the way they are, in the same way people continue to say, “you can’t judge a book by its cover”, yet people do based solely on their personal appearances. That goes for businesses as well, “[t]he bottom line is that businesses exist to make money. Whether it seems fair or not, most employers do care about the personal appearances of the people they hire because those people represent the business to its customers”.

(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.

The stores attracted customers with “physical attractiveness” of the store employees and quite clearly there is an argument of unconscious bias in the practice of hiring employees based on physical attractiveness as considered by Shahani-Denning (2003) in the study. Although numerous lawsuits under employment legislation were filed, most of them were based on conscious discrimination and quite interestingly there are no laws governing discriminatory practices under hiring based on “physical attractiveness”. However the brand image of Abercrombie and Fitch is dependent on the outward projection of physical appearance and hence there is a rationale for the argument of hiring physically attractive store staff to attract more

People often judge or misperceive others appearances in a less than equal manner before they even know the true nature of the person. Every day we make assumptions by what we can see physically. Even in the supermarkets, we distinguish good products from bad products based on how they look. We are apt to choose good-looking products because they don’t have flaws, cracks, and bruises. Moreover, we assume them to have good qualities and good tastes. Actually, taste doesn’t deal with its looking. However, we bias in favor of assuming human nature. Since people judge human beings based on how they look, it is called prejudice. In fact, prejudice just disadvantage

Personally I see this world of salesmanship and such value being put on image everyday in the world of business. Sad but true, that many employers hire first off based on what that candidate looks like as they walk up to the interview room. Image without substance; what ever happened to what that

Wolf discusses the effect that these standards are having on women in the workplace. A woman’s beauty, or lack of it, can be used against her. In 1986, Mechelle Vinson lost a sexual harassment case. “Vinson was young and ‘beautiful’ and carefully dressed. The district court ruled that her appearance counted against her.” (Wolf 38) “In Hopkins v. Price-Waterhouse, Ms. Hopkins was denied a partnership because she needed to learn to ‘walk more femininely, talk more femininely, dress more femininely,’ and ‘wear makeup’.” She brought in more business than any other employee. (Wolf 39)

Cann, A., Siegfried, W., & Pearce, L. (1981). Forced attention to specific applicant qualifications: Impact on physical attractiveness and sex of applicant biases. The Journal of Personnel Psychology, 34, 65-66.

The article “Beauty and the Labor Market” by Daniel S. Hamermesh and Jeff E. Biddle examines the economics of discrimination in the labour market based on looks and the relationship that exists between beauty and labour market earnings. Analyzing, results from several studies, data from various empirical research and surveys; the article identifies the source of earnings differentials related to looks in six distinct and detailed sections.