In today's NYTimes, there is an article from a scholar who has studied ugliness in the US for the past two decades. His conclusion? The most repellent, ugly people -- the ugliest 1% of the population -- ought to be able to apply to some sort of benefits, since so many employers refuse to hire them, treat them as dirt, and skip over them for basic things like promotion.
It sounds ridiculous (after all, how do we measure ugliness?) but he makes a substantial case about how people with mismatched eyes, lock-jaws, and other unfortunate features end up suffering throughout their lives. He argues that they are disabled.
On the various email threads and blogs I'm on, this has blown up. First, how does on measure ugliness? Surely a good question. Second, is an extension of the Americans with Disabilities Act the answer? I'm not sure.
But some people are using this opportunity to argue that the ugly people in American society serve a valuable service: they make beautiful women know who is truly beautiful. They make able-bodied, mentally clear, white, financially successful men glory in their successes. These people I know -- people who are good-looking, benefactors of nepotism from their high birth, future inheritors of lots of money -- are complaining that someone might be given a leg up during their otherwise miserable life devoid of partnerships, gainful employment, fine neighborhood housing and all that.
First, it sickens me to read such opinions about the "good job" ugly folk are doing, upholding the pretty people in the world.
Second, though, how practical is this? Is extreme ugliness a form of disability? How would this affect the classroom?
Looks count; I believe there have been studies about teachers not valuing input from "ugly" students or picking the pretty girl/boy first. That written, standards of attractiveness and beauty vary widely....also the New York Times has always been a cheap shitty rag posing as the US cersion of the "London Times" and failing constantly; they fell hook-line-sinker into the pure bullshit excuses given for the Gulf of Tonkin Incident, they seemed to follow "Wired" magazine's "New Economy" hype until it blew up in 1999-2001, the "magazine" section of the NYT put Ann Coulter in a leopard-spot miniskirt to sex her up for a 1990s cover story on "the new conservatives" (I think that little wanker Dinesh D'Souza was also on that cover.) So the source of this post is pretty damn superficial. And yes, if William F. Buckley were still around, I would have nailed him in the groin for "God and Man at Yale."
ReplyDeleteHow can this possibly be relevant to CM? There are no ugly people here. Drunks, maybe. But no ugly people.
ReplyDeleteDearie, we talk about disability and accommodation all the time on this blog. How would this apply in the classroom? What do other scholars think of this research?
ReplyDeleteWith the benefits of a vent.
ich bin ein ugly.
ReplyDeleteI feel prettier just knowing about this research.
ReplyDeleteThis is why I love teaching online. Unless the student posts a picture, which I always give the option of doing but few take advantage, or comes to see me on campus, I never know what that student looks like. I sometimes form pictures in my head based on the student's work, but I know that's my imagination. In fact, I am often surprised when a student does come to meet me because his/her online persona doesn't at all match the physical being in front of me. This summer, I had one who I would have sworn was a 5'10" badass female rugby player. When she showed up, she was 5'3" and almost fragile looking.
ReplyDelete"I feel prettier just knowing about this research."
ReplyDeleteAnd I feel worse for the state of American journalism.
My ugly students definitely do way better than the hotties. Maybe because I tend to identify with the ugly ones more. Are there studies on the correlation between teacher/student ugliness or boss/employee ugliness?
ReplyDeleteI have had instances where students have claimed a disability (sometimes legitimately and sometimes not), and this one can't really be made up (unless one is Ugly Betty). I'm not sure what point I have (if any), but I like that pretty soon (pun unintended), being poor will also be a disability, as will poor fashion sense (at which point I will claim it).
ReplyDeleteCould one claim the same of people who are beautiful? Because we tend to also label and limit them based on their beauty, are they, too, disabled?
Cynic, studies show consistently that beautiful people earn more and get promoted more often than their counter parts. Same goes for blonde women compared to brunettes. The whole "dumb blonde" thing goes out the window in interviews, apparently.
ReplyDeletePlus, people buy them free drinks all the fucking time.