TIGER TV/ONLINE REPORTER
“Beauty is in the eye of the beholder,” “Don’t judge a book by it’s cover” and “Beauty is on the inside” are adages the general public can throw out — at least according to Daniel Hamermesh, an economics professor from the University of Texas.
Hamermesh conducted a study that revealed unattractive people earn 12 percent less than attractive people.
“As corporate executives you need to make money for the company,” Hamermesh said. “If customers want good looks then you hire good looks. You have to indulge the tastes of the customers.”
For example, lawyers, specifically litigators, are ranked higher in good looks than corporate lawyers.
“Beauty lets you accumulate clients,” Hamermesh said. “The litigators are the best looking because they deal with people.”
A man’s income suffers more from unattractiveness than a woman’s, Hamermesh said. Though beauty matters more for women than men, women have more margins.
Women can enter the work force or get married, he said.
“If a woman’s ugly she can stay at home because there’s no discrimination at home,” Hamermesh said.
But a woman’s looks matter in the marriage market.
“Women care more about a guy’s earning ability and guys care more about looks,” Hamermesh said.
Uglier women tend to marry men with less education. Less education translates to 10 percent less earnings among men.
Hamermesh also said beauty standards are more universal in today’s society.
“When people say ‘beauty is in the eye of the beholder’ I say yeah, but we behold beauty very similarly,” he said.
Hamermesh showed slides of men and women the audience considered attractive.
But Yoshinoro Kamo, sociology professor, said he disagrees with universal standards of beauty.
“In Africa women need to be fat and are forced to gobble milk against their will,” he said. “Being fat is a symbol of wealth.”
Western culture believes thin is beautiful, as evident by models and celebrities, he said. However, Hamermesh said weight does not affect beauty.
“Beauty is rated independent of weight,” he said.
Hamermesh raised the question of affirmative action for less attractive employees.
Affirmative action for uglier job candidates means employers cannot deny employment based on looks.
“This is a political argument because it takes energy to protect people and I care more about women and ethnic minorities than the ugly,” Hamermesh said.
Kamo said he finds Hamermesh’s claim interesting because he never thought about looks as an ascribed factor. Something that is ascribed means it cannot be controlled. Such factors include race, status and gender.
Kamo doesn’t believe affirmative action for unattractive people will happen.
But Damir Torrico, a food science graduate student, said affirmative action may be unnecessary in the future.
“Business is going to the internet instead of being personal,” he said. “More ugly people will be hired thanks to technology.”
Though beauty plays an important role in the job search, studies show that the amount of money an individual invests towards beauty makes no difference on earnings.
“If you’re ugly,” Hamermesh said, “suck it up.”
