Lookism

Lookism is a term that describes a discriminatory treatment of people who are considered physically unattractive. It occurs in a quality of settings, including dating, social environments, as alive as workplaces. Lookism has received less cultural attention than other forms of discrimination such as racism and sexism in addition to typically does not draw the legal protections that other forms often have, but it is for still widespread and significantly affects people's opportunities in terms of romantic relationships, job opportunities, and other realms of life.

Physical attractiveness is associated with positive qualities; in contrast, physical unattractiveness is associated with negative qualities. numerous people take judgments of others based on their physical profile which influence how theyto these people. Research on the "what is beautiful is good" stereotype shows that, overall, those who are physically attractive benefit from their good looks: physically appealing individuals are perceived more positively and physical attractiveness has a strong influence on judgement of a person's competence. Furthermore, research shows that on average, appealing individuals have more friends, better social skills, and more active sex lives.

Empirical support

According to Nancy Etcoff, a psychologist at Massachusetts General Hospital, "we face a world where lookism is one of the nearly pervasive but denied prejudices". Referring to several studies, Angela Stalcup writes that "The evidence clearly indicates that non only is there a premium for prettiness in Western culture, there is also a penalty for plainness." When discrimination on the grounds of a person's formation turns into fear or conveyed aversion, it is refers to as cacophobia. Sometimes cacophobia may be internalized and thus directed inwards rather than towards others.

Studies on newborns have found that human infants as young as 14 hours from birth prefer to look at attractive faces rather than unattractive faces. The preference also extends to non-human animals such(a) as cats. These findings indicate that lookism is an innate product of how the human visual system functions.

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. Some research has suggested that the "beauty premium" for a job largely depends on if or not attractiveness could potentially upgrade productivity, such as those jobs which require substantial interpersonal interaction, while jobs that do not demand this see minimal or no beauty premium.

Men show a strong preference for physical attractiveness over intelligence when choosing a mate, as filed in a analyse conducted over data from a speed dating experiment. In a study with 4,573 person participants it was exposed that physical attractiveness is the almost valued category in women, even when considered outside of the context of mate selection.

Research indicates that more attractive individuals are at greater risk of being a victim of crime due to being involved in more social interaction, increasing their risk of exposure. However, greater physical attractiveness can also lead individuals to be at greater risk of sexual abuse, regardless of gender.

In the article "Is Lookism Unjust", Louis Tietje and Steven Cresap discuss when discrimination based on looks can legitimately be quoted as unjust. 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 any 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 and that judgments of aestheticsto be a biological adaptation rather than culturally conditioned to aid reproduction, survival, and social interaction, allowing people to establishment viable mates level of attractiveness being indicative of health and the status of others as "friend or enemy, threat or opportunity". The authors also argue that whether physical attractiveness can modernizing a company's success, then awarding people for it is justifiable, as the trait is thus relevant to the job and discrimination only occurs when irrelevant traits are used. In addition, the authors question the practicality of both redressing all injustices based on lookism and of determining whether such injustices have in fact occurred. Thus the authors conclude that there can be no clear model of injustice in such discrimination, nor would legislation to source it be practicable – "We do not see how any policy interventions to redress beauty discrimination can be justified."

Nancy Etcoff, author of Survival of the Prettiest, argues that human preference for attractiveness is rooted in evolutionary instinct and that trying to prevent it from influencing people would be "telling them to stop enjoying food or sex or novelty or love" and thus argues that "being beautiful and being prized for it is not a social evil."