Civil rights for "ugly" people

Tuesday, 26 October 2010 06:30

Written by Marvin Bionat

A few years ago, a bill was filed in the Philippine Congress making it illegal for employers to discriminate against ugly people. While the idea caught a lot of media attention, I don’t think it made it through the legislative mill.

I also didn’t read anything about the research behind that particular legislative proposal. Only recently did I chance upon some evidence of the negative impact of being “unattractive.”

According to a study by Daniel Hamermesh and Jeff Biddle (“Beauty and the Labor Market,” American Economic Review), people are in fact penalized for their bad looks. Men who are considered attractive earn 9% more than those who are considered below average or homely. Among women, the earning advantage of the attractive is less than that of their male counterparts, but it’s still a significant 4% more than unattractive women.

It also literally pays to be blond. While this is not to suggest that non-blonds are ugly, it falls within the stereotypical, thus superficial, definition of what is beautiful. According to a study by David Johnston (“Physical Appearance and Wages: Do Blondes Have More Fun?” in Economic Letter), blonds in general earn 7% more than non-blonds.

And what about height? According to Michael Kortt and Andrew Leigh (“Does Size Matter in Australia?” in The Economic Record), women earn an extra 5% to 8% more for every three inches of height advantage over the average woman. For men, it’s 4% to 10% more money for every three extra inches above the average.

In the US, the seminal Civil Rights Act prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. Considering all indications of discrimination based on physical attributes, shouldn’t such protection extend to an entire class of ugly people, as a Philippine legislator once proposed?

One practical barrier to the passage of such legal protection is the issue of determination. How do we define ugly? Will a one-inch scar on someone’s face make him ugly by legal definition or does it have to be two inches? Will blond highlights diminish one’s claim to being non-blond? What about white hair from old age? Can it be used against your promotion by some dark-haired up-and-coming colleague? Can the court subpoena your three-inch elevator shoes as evidence that you’re in fact really about as tall as the next guy in the office ever since you started wearing those shoes? And what if the boss is actually uglier than the employee? Will that be a mitigating circumstance? It’s certainly not quite as clear-cut as being black and not getting a promotion for no other reason than because of the color of your skin.

It’s important to note that there are in fact states in the US that have made it illegal to discriminate against people on the heavy side, which is of course a lot easier to prove. If “ugliness” gets defined and measured as clearly as extra poundage, then perhaps there is hope for legal protection. After which, those classified by society as ugly will need to have the extraordinary courage to assert and prove that their ugliness has made it necessary to take their employers to court.

Add this page to your favorite Social Bookmarking websites