Established 1826 — Oldest College Newspaper West of the Alleghenies

Opinion | The nature of beauty creates callous, sexist social mindset

Oriana Pawlyk, Columnist

When you get up in the morning, what's the first thing you do? Eat breakfast, shower and maybe even do a bit of homework before class? It's more than just going through the motions — we do these things to better ourselves and promote our well-being. But how many of us have taken our "well-being" to a whole new level?

The amount of time you spend in the bathroom primping and getting ready or the amount of time you spend at the Rec says just how willing you are to look your best for others. So has this idea behind the definition of "beauty" always had such an affect on us? Or is there more to it than just looks?

In the article "Ugly? You May Have a Case" in last Sunday's New York Times brought up quite a few responses to what beauty has done for our culture. As said in the article, being beautiful earns you a higher salary, an attractive partner or spouse and a better deal on mortgage settlements.

The article also highlighted study results from researchers and economists that showed "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." The difference in these two workers' wages amounted to nearly $230,000 over a lifetime.

Sure this "beautiful" way of life has its perks for both men and women, but men and women benefit differently. Men already have economic advantages, while women don't get as much return from their "erotic capital."

Sociologist Catherine Hakim, who coined this term, argues that discrimination is just a part of life — so if people, especially women, have the tools to bypass the hate, they should use them.

Hakim says, "The key point is for women to be aware that there's a sex differential and a sex gap in returns and rewards, and to be aware that they should therefore not be holding back or feel embarrassed about seeking to get value for their contribution, for their attractiveness."

If people are playing off each other's attractiveness, when does it stop being a game? Once more, what defines this beauty everyone covets so much?

The New York Times article also pointed out that those people who aren't fortunately beautiful are lacking economic rights. Therefore, in order to resolve this injustice, legal protection should be offered to those who do not fall in the top one-third attractive rank.

So now a radical solution is offering legal protection to the ugly as we do for the ethnic minorities, racial minorities and handicapped individuals? Capitalizing on opportunities shouldn't be a crime, but creating a legal system solely for those who are subjectively defined isn't the greatest idea either. Can't beauty just be defined as in the eye of the beholder?

We sometimes forget to look at the inner person. Courage, wisdom, independence, humor, compassion, etc. cannot be defined by the makeup you put on your face or the amount of times you run laps at the gym. Beauty is more than just the person who you see in the mirror. It's the way you put yourself out there for society to see, whether that is by what you do, who you help, what you believe in, etc. It can't just be about outer beauty. Because what's left once that beauty grows distant and old?

Enjoy what you're reading?
Signup for our newsletter

Beauty is only useful if others can see you for more than just your looks. You work hard to be recognizable and valued — as much as you work on your looks, don't forget to work toward contributions for society and for the good of others.