Lookism: An Overview Of Controversy

Overview of Controversy

The phenomenon of “lookism” has been a running topic of discussion for a long time. The term is a culturally formed word used to describe the treatment of people who are thought to be physically attractive. As far back as 42 BC, Publilius Syrus declared that “A fair exterior is a silent recommendation” while Shakespeare said that beauty in itself persuades people without another form influence (Cavico, Muffler, & Mujtaba, 2012). A perfect example was given by James (2008), that when two women of similar qualification apply for the same job, the employer would likely pick the most attractive of the two. This decision is purely based on and informed by the notion that physical attractiveness is accompanied by other favorable

characteristics. This, however, has often led to more disagreement than productive discourse or even positive follow-up action on the part of the involved stakeholders.
The Association for Psychological Science says that people are better off being attractive because they are generally treated better and judged favorably more often than not (Wargo, 2011). This directly alludes to this discriminatory practice that is carried out by a large number of businesses and corporations in the service industry. It is, however, not unique to just this sector of the economy. The president of Abercrombie & Fitch famously said that he wished only attractive people to wear their brand causing a wave of public uproar (Haberman, 2013). In truth, he only vocalized what is a widespread practice in business.
The heuristic phrase that “what is beautiful is also good” implies that physically attractive individuals are the most suitable candidates for employment (Johnson, Podratz, Dipboye, & Gibbons, 2010). This supports the notion that physically attractive people have a higher chance of being successful at their jobs and, therefore, more hirable. The downside of this is that it also inadvertently implies that less attractive individuals are less capable of delivering professionally at the same level as their counterparts. Such a notion goes against the ethical positions of many people in society and forms the basis of this controversy.