Are Good Looks Overrated?

Are Good Looks Overrated?

Prof. Daniel Hamermesh, in his book Beauty Pays, has claimed being attractive pays—good-looking people enjoy more perks and higher pay packets than their plainer-looking colleagues. But his research has come in for a whole lot of criticism. After all, wasn’t that a rather sweeping statement, it was asked? And how do you say what is exactly ‘good-looking’ or ‘attractive’? Was not it perception-based (beauty lies in the beholder’s eyes)? Did it also not depend upon the kind of field or activity involved? It is expected that models, film stars, air hostesses be good-looking but what about secretaries, nurses, and people, especially women, employed in numerous professions and activities outside their homes? Do we really ‘need’ good-looking people in all these fields of activity? In a number of fields, including films and modeling, there are the plain looking ones who are more successful and earn more than their good-looking counterparts (has Amitabh Bachchan ever had the perfect looks and has Shah Rukh Khan ever been really good-looking though they are two of the most successful heroes of the silver screen ever). Though a lot of research and articles have emphasized on the ‘good looks quotient’, thanks to the media in particular which glorifies ‘good looks’ and everything associated with glamour, very little has been said for the other side.

Strongly disagreeing with Mr. Hamermesh’s research, many recruitment officers feel good looks have somehow been overrated in most fields. Looks have nothing to do with it, they say; it's completely skills-based. Persons who present themselves nicely and are well-qualified would do well in the workforce.  In truth, a lot of professional and other work requires talent and qualifications backed by a great deal of dedication to the job. Honesty and hard work are vital if one has to be a success in any field. Education and experience matter in the end.

It is interesting to note a few things in this debate. In this world of ours which is dominated by impulses of crass consumerism and superficiality, ‘looks’ are indeed overemphasized as a rule. Whether it be students in schools or colleges, office-goers in general or professionals, those who are seen to be good-looking are viewed and rated higher by others. The good looks vs. plain looks debate concerns the ‘fairer’ sex more than the other: girls and women face greater pressure to look good and attractive than boys and men, and it is so in almost all societies irrespective of their level of so-called ‘advancement’! The expectations are high and the cost of being unable to fulfill a certain criteria of good looks can be immense for one’s popularity, career or the coveted marriage proposal! It is therefore quite surprising that women have not more often seriously led the debate. Last but not the least, what about actually interacting with those plain janes who are involved in various professions and fields, and asking them what they feel about their jobs and the pressures as plain looking persons. The pressure is more; they need to show greater commitment and put their talents to greater use; their performance is also constantly evaluated far more strictly; and of course they have to work hard. However, what they do get in the end is well-earned recognition and rewards that are not dependent on their having or maintaining a pretty face through a rigorous regime of beauty treatments or even cosmetic surgery. They can make themselves indispensable to the organization and develop a lasting bond with their colleagues and earn recognition for being not only good employees but also great persons with some admirable qualities. After all, what matters in life is what one ‘is’, and not how one ‘looks’!

By: Syed Ruman Shamim Hashmi,   Editor-In-Chief