We’ve all heard the saying “nice guys finish last” but it seems it’s the ones who are perceived as unattractive that finish last. We all want to believe that when we go for a job interview or if we are self employed that we will be judged on how well we do the job or deliver on the promised goods and services.
According to huffingtonpost.com,
A new video from Vox reveals, there are real, measurable economic benefits to being considered “conventionally attractive,” and we’re all affected. Heavier women earn less. Taller people earn more. With how much symmetrical faces are rewarded among professional quarterbacks, one would think it directly affects how far they can throw the ball.
If you’re a “heavier woman” an argument can be made for you to lose weight in an effort to improve your paycheck but what about a short man? A short woman can maybe wear some high heels to increase her height but it seems short men can not do much to overcome this kind of bias.
Overall, beautiful people are seen as more competent, kind and trustworthy, according to the video. Unless it’s an attractive woman — then, she might have a distinct disadvantage if applying for a “masculine” type job.
Over time, these taxes on our supposed imperfections add up, with a lifetime pay gap of $230,000 separating the “attractive” and “unattractive.”
The effects are so pronounced, we’re starting to wonder the going rate for each aesthetic advantage. An extra 10 cents an hour for skillfully plucked eyebrows, 15 percent pay cut for few extra pounds?
As Vox aptly notes — is it any wonder the beauty industry has ballooned into a $160 billion business? “We’re just responding to our economic incentives,” the video says.
Here is the video:[leadplayer_vid id=”53CFB36DE81E9″]