Stop Telling Kids The Lie That Looks Don't Matter
Julia Baird with a more realistic view than you usually see -- from a 2015 NYT opinion piece:
The advantage of beauty has been long established in social science; we know now that it's not just employers, teachers, lovers and voters who favor the aesthetically gifted, but parents, too.We talk about body shape, size and weight, but rarely about distorted features. And we talk about plainness, but not faces that would make a surgeon's fingers itch.
Even in children's literature, we imply ugliness is either transient or deserved. Hans Christian Andersen wrestled with rejection from his peers as a child, most probably because of his large nose, effeminate ways, beautiful singing voice and love of theater; "The Ugly Duckling" is widely assumed to be the story of his own life. But the moral of that story was that a swan would emerge from the body of an outcast, and that you could not repress the nobility of a swan in a crowd of common ducks.
What if you just stay a duck?
Mr. Hoge tells us we don't need to apply a sepia filter. "I'm happy to concede the point," he says, "that some people look more aesthetically pleasing than others. Let's grant that so we can move to the important point -- so what?
"Some kids are good spellers; some have bad haircuts; some are fast runners; some kids are short; some are awesome at netball. But the kids who are short aren't only short. And the kids who are great at netball aren't only just great at netball. No one is only just one thing. It's the same with appearance."
It's important to talk to children, he says, before "they get sucked into the tight vortex of peer pressure, where every single difference is a case for disaster. Don't tell kids they're all beautiful; tell them it's O.K. to look different."
I say something similar in a piece I wrote back in 2010 for Psychology Today, "The Truth About Beauty":
If you're a woman who wants to land a man, there's this notion that you should be able to go around looking like Ernest Borgnine: If you're "beautiful on the inside," that's all that should count. Right. And I should have a flying car and a mansion in Bel Air with servants and a moat.Welcome to Uglytopia--the world reimagined as a place where it's the content of a woman's character, not her pushup bra, that puts her on the cover of Maxim. It just doesn't seem fair to us that some people come into life with certain advantages--whether it's a movie star chin or a multimillion-dollar shipbuilding inheritance. Maybe we need affirmative action for ugly people; make George Clooney rotate in some homely women between all his gorgeous girlfriends. While we wish things were different, we'd best accept the ugly reality: No man will turn his head to ogle a woman because she looks like the type to buy a turkey sandwich for a homeless man or read to the blind.
...It turns out that the real beauty myth is the damaging one Wolf and other feminists are perpetuating--the absurd notion that it serves women to thumb their noses at standards of beauty. Of course, looks aren't all that matter (as I'm lectured by female readers of my newspaper column when I point out that male lust seems to have a weight limit). But looks matter a great deal. The more attractive the woman is, the wider her pool of romantic partners and range of opportunities in her work and day-to-day life. We all know this, and numerous studies confirm it--it's just heresy to say so.
We consider it admirable when people strive to better themselves intellectually; we don't say, "Hey, you weren't born a genius, so why ever bother reading a book?" Why should we treat physical appearance any differently?
...Like French women, we, too, need to understand that a healthy approach to beauty is neither pretending it's unnecessary or unimportant nor making it important beyond all else. By being honest about it, we help women make informed decisions about how much effort to put into their appearance--or accept the opportunity costs of going ungroomed.
We never tell boys succe$$ doesn't matter.
dee nile at April 16, 2016 4:35 AM
Only girls are allowed to be in denial -- and lauded for it.
Amy Alkon at April 16, 2016 4:37 AM
No, boys get sold a bag of goods too. Especially in the current feminist dominated public schools.
Think back to that teacher who told the boys they could play with the toys they preferred when their turn came around . . . which was scheduled for when hell froze over (as she put it). We also tell boys girls want an equal partner, which is a flat lie.
Public schools are a bit odd. When you have really bad schools the teachers have given up and nothing gets learned (i.e. DC). But when you have really affluent schools with the 'best of the best' teachers you get a bunch of energetic feminists with heads full of garbage and a fanatical zeal to force everyone else into their unrealistic mold. Finding the optimum where they only teach useful skills is difficult. Which drives a lot of home schooling.
Ben at April 16, 2016 6:11 AM
No matter how ugly you are, you can look a lot better if you take care of yourself and dress well and wash your hair and comb it. Amazing, eh?
Conversely, you can make yourself repulsive on purpose--goth anyone?
The truth is that men love beauty but are also attracted to a girl who smiles, who is nice to them, who treats them well, who shows affection. This overrides not being model-pretty. BUT being pretty does not overcome being nasty and mean and lazy.
Craig Loehle at April 16, 2016 7:49 AM
How about teaching them not to use looks as a criteria to judge others, but to expect others will do it to them
Nicolek at April 16, 2016 8:17 AM
You're not OK, I'm not OK, but that's OK.
I R A Darth Aggie at April 16, 2016 10:12 AM
I already mentioned Baird's piece, back in February:
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2016/02/01/you_dont_make_l.html
lenona at April 16, 2016 10:19 AM
I know a lot of plain-looking women with very handsome husbands. They may not be great beauties, but they make the most of what they have. They are flirtatious, they smile, their eyes sparkle and they laugh a lot.
They are more interested in listening to what others have to say than in telling everyone their life story.
I also know some extremely beautiful women who have never had a successful relationship.
Now, if any person's features are so distracting that you can't stop looking at the oddness, well, that's a problem.
I worked with a guy whose forehead what peeling all the time. He drove me nuts just because of that. Not his fault. I found that I discounted his knowledge because of the skin falling off his face all the time. How could he be a good software engineer when he can't fix his skin?
That was probably really unfair of me, and this was just a work relationship - I can't imagine overlooking something like that in a romantic relationship.
Beth Donovan at April 16, 2016 3:01 PM
You know what it takes to stop judging people on their appearance? A little bit of maturity and perspective.
Most teenagers and 20 somethings don't have it.
Recognizing that you are picking friends and lovers based on how sexually attractive they are, is one thing.
Thinking that this *should* be your primary criteria is another.
You should gear your look to attract the kind of person you want to attract.
If someone is so superficial they are going to dump you the moment you lose your initial attractiveness than you aren't looking for a life partner. You are looking for a fuck buddy.
Don't be surprised when that is what you attract.
Isab at April 16, 2016 5:55 PM
"Conversely, you can make yourself repulsive on purpose--goth anyone?"
I hope you know that this does not mean, "filthy anarchist", or whatever your picture is, all the time. Jessica Dupont is a delight, in that the closer you get, the more amazing she looks (she's also the tour manager for her husband's band). More and more "fans of black" are seeing to every detail to make themselves a showpiece, however unconventional. Sometimes this movement is called "darkwave".
Let us not forget that sexual attractiveness is a fine measure of overall health. There are exceptions, of course...
And let us also bring up personal hygiene. If you or someone you know is resistant to suggestions about this, let drop the idea that if they expect a total stranger to perform CPR or render other emergency medical aid, it will arrive faster and be done better if you bathe and brush your (remaining) teeth!
Radwaste at April 16, 2016 8:22 PM
I agree Rad. Goth wasn't about making yourself ugly. It was always about high contrast (white skin/black hair clothes, or the inverse some times). There are plenty of hot goth chicks. The dumpy feminist look is something else.
Ben at April 18, 2016 6:31 AM
The thing about "don't judge people by their looks" is that many people dress in order to project an image. They want you to assume certain things about them by their appearance. That is, after all, why we've had Tallulah Bankhead, Liberace, Elton John, and Lady Gaga. That said, it's a hard thing, because people do not necessarily see what the wearer is trying to project -- there's too much individual variation for everyone to agree on what it "means". And the wearer themselves may be making certain assumptions that are not shared by most of the people who see them, so they wind up projecting an image different from what they intended. I try to note someone's appearance, but keep an open mind about what it means. That said, there are certain things I just find repulsive.
I do ballroom dancing, and a constant refrain I hear is, "How can I get more dances?" Three things that anyone can do:
1. Good personal hygiene
2. Wear clothes that fit reasonably well
3. Have a smile on your face
Do those three things (particularly the last one), and there will be someone who will dance with you. It might be the hunkiest guy or hottest woman in the room, but someone will.
Cousin Dave at April 18, 2016 7:51 AM
Leave a comment