[speechlesstx]

I kid you not...

Ugly? You May Have a Case

BEING good-looking is useful in so many ways.

In addition to whatever personal pleasure it gives you, being attractive also helps you earn more money, find a higher-earning spouse (and one who looks better, too!) and get better deals on mortgages. Each of these facts has been demonstrated over the past 20 years by many economists and other researchers. The effects are not small: one study showed that an American worker who was among the bottom one-seventh in looks, as assessed by randomly chosen observers, earned 10 to 15 percent less per year than a similar worker whose looks were assessed in the top one-third — a lifetime difference, in a typical case, of about $230,000.

Beauty is as much an issue for men as for women. While extensive research shows that women’s looks have bigger impacts in the market for mates, another large group of studies demonstrates that men’s looks have bigger impacts on the job.

Why this disparate treatment of looks in so many areas of life? It’s a matter of simple prejudice. Most of us, regardless of our professed attitudes, prefer as customers to buy from better-looking salespeople, as jurors to listen to better-looking attorneys, as voters to be led by better-looking politicians, as students to learn from better-looking professors. This is not a matter of evil employers’ refusing to hire the ugly: in our roles as workers, customers and potential lovers we are all responsible for these effects.

How could we remedy this injustice? With all the gains to being good-looking, you would think that more people would get plastic surgery or makeovers to improve their looks. Many of us do all those things, but as studies have shown, such refinements make only small differences in our beauty. All that spending may make us feel better, but it doesn’t help us much in getting a better job or a more desirable mate.

A more radical solution may be needed: why not offer legal protections to the ugly, as we do with racial, ethnic and religious minorities, women and handicapped individuals?

OK, so who's going to decide who's ugly or not? What about short people? Fat people? Bald people? People who can't pronounce "nuclear" or speak with a lisp... oh that's right, we make them president and congressmen from Massachusetts.

[spitvenom]

This is the end all be all of who decides if someone is good looking or not!! HOT or NOT ;)

[speechlesstx]

I want to be on the Caligula panel that decides this, thumbs up or thumbs down.

[twinkiedooter]

So do they get the jobs and nice looking people get fired? Don't quite understand this as ugly folks never rated before, why now?

[excon]

Hello Steve:

I can't imagine having a job and somebody saying that I only got it because I was ugly. I AM pretty ugly. But, I made it this far in life without any help from anybody.

excon

[paraclete]

Ugly would exclude most of the world, what about the closed off people who can't communicate, should we exclude them?

[Stringer]

According to Ron White ugly can be fixed it's 'stupid' that can't be.

[paraclete]

According to Ron White ugly can be fixed it's 'stupid' that can't be.

There are some parts of ugly than can be fixed but not all

[smoothy]

Sorry to drag this back... but I find a problem with all forms of affirmative action. Being it Beauty impaired, Intelligence impaired, skin color or anything else.

Anyone that hires anyone else for reasons other than them being the best qualified for the job... deserves the less than optimum employee staff they WILL end up with.

[TUT317]

Sorry to drag this back.....but I find a problem with all forms of affirmative action. Being it Beauty impaired, Intelligence impaired, skin color or anything else.

Anyone that hires anyone else for reasons other than them being the best qualified for the job......deserves the less than optimum employee staff they WILL end up with.

Hi Smoothy,

There is no blanket ascription when it comes to affirmative action.It's not that simple. Race, colour and gender would be treated differently to impaired intelligence.

Tut

[paraclete]

Hi Smoothy,

There is no blanket ascription when it comes to affirmative action.It's not that simple. Race, colour and gender would be treated differently to impaired intelligence.

Tut

That is the logic that has existed for thousands of years. Affirmative action hasn't helped us much, in fact it has made things very difficult at times. Sure some people got jobs they wouldn't have otherwise got, but lots of good people got excluded for no good reason other than no extra places existed

[smoothy]

Hi Smoothy,

There is no blanket ascription when it comes to affirmative action.It's not that simple. Race, colour and gender would be treated differently to impaired intelligence.

Tut

Affirmative action by its very nature is discrimination, institutionalized discrimination. You are forcing someone to put a lesser qualified person in a position than would normally be chosen based on merit.

And like I said... any company that picks people (except maybe models who can be dumb as a stump to do the job) on other than purely merit gets what they deserve. Because the company that DOES select on merit with have the best staff and all the advantage that goes with it.


I tossed the impaired intelligence thing in because of the whiners of a number of ethnic groups that complain their test scores are lower because of discrimination... when the answer is they are lower as a group, because that group doesn't expend the same energy on education that other groups do. They all have the same capacity to learn as a group that any other group has.

I.E. the Inner City dropouts that claim to be underprivileged. You get out of an education what you put into it. Don't avail yourself of that opportunity, then its your own fault. Some very bright people come out of inner city schools, and some very dumb ones out of private schools.

[excon]

I.E. the Inner City dropouts that claim to be underprivileged.

Hello smoothy:

If you looked at inner city kids with your typical right wing blinders on, and NO historical reference whatsoever, you COULD claim that they're NOT underprivileged... But that wouldn't be true! It's not even close to the truth.

That said, the question is, do we make up for past discrimination by discriminating today? Uhhhh, I say YES. Is it fair?? Nahhh... Justice ain't fair.

excon

[smoothy]

Hello smoothy:

If you looked at inner city kids with your typical right wing blinders on, and NO historical reference whatsoever, you COULD claim that they're NOT underprivileged... But that wouldn't be true! It's not even close to the truth.

That said, the question is, do we make up for past discrimination by discriminating today? Uhhhh, I say YES. Is it fair??? Nahhh... Justice ain't fair.

excon

Bull****. If they don't study... or drop out.. they only have themselves to blame.

Lazy is a choice. Not a gateway to entitlements. But then... liberals believe inner-city people are born dumber than the rest. I don't hold that belief.

There are a LOT of rural areas that don't have schools that are any better, and have far fewer services and opportunities. Same rules apply there too.

[excon]

Hello again, smoothy:

Predictably, your post is BEREFT of historical reference. It's those blinders again. Right wingers don't seem to remember ANYTHING before Obama got elected...

I don't know how they do that.

excon

[smoothy]

Hello again, smoothy:

Predictably, your post is BEREFT of historical reference. It's those blinders again. Right wingers don't seem to remember ANYTHING before Obama got elected...

I dunno how they do that.

excon

So you are claiming Latinos and Blacks AREN'T historically as naturally intelligent as whites... and nobody is as smart as the Asians? Because that's exactly what you are implying.

Your comments are BEREFT of anything that proves being in an inner city causes lower intelligence. Because inner city dwellers have far more opportunities than some poor backwater rural town have.

Obama is a prime example of what happens as a result of affirmative action.

[excon]

Hello again, smoothy:

I don't know HOW you're missing the point, but you ARE. It's those blinders again..

excon

[smoothy]

Hello again, smoothy:

I dunno HOW you're missing the point, but you ARE. It's those blinders again..

excon

When did you join the KKK. Because your assertions are right in line with what they appear to believe in case you haven't noticed. I think White, blacks, latinos and Asians have the same intelligence on average... you are asserting they don't.

The inner cities are such wonderful places the left loves to flock towards. Thus they are what they make them into. Perhaps the liberal Utopia doesn't have such good results after all?

[excon]

Hello again, smoothy:

Apparently, you haven't a clue WHY affirmative action was instituted in the first place, so your arguments against it are specious.

excon

[smoothy]

Hello again, smoothy:

Apparently, you haven't a clue WHY affirmative action was instituted in the first place, so your arguments against it are specious.

excon

Affirmative action was ALWAYS simply reverse discrimination... was on day one... and its never changed. Lazy people whining about things that happened before their parents were born... expecting to screw people who never had any part in any discrimination.

It's a concept Liberals are completely unable to understand for some reason.


Perhaps we are due some Affirmative action for conservatives to right every real and perceived wrong by liberals... and do it the next say 40+ years. Maybe that will make them understand.