{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03164179104477612, 'fraction_numerical': 0.020895522388059702, 'mean_word_length': 5.230483271375465, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Is lookism unjust?: The ethics of aesthetics and public policy implications

LOOKISM IS PREJUDICE TOWARD people because of their appearance. It has been receiving increasing attention, and it is becoming an important equal-opportunity issue. People we find attractive are given preferential treatment and people we find unattractive are denied opportunities. According to recent labor-market research, attractiveness receives a premium and unattractiveness receives a penalty. For both men and women, results “suggest a 7–9-percent penalty for being in the lowest 9 percent of looks among all workers, and a 5percent premium for being in the top 33 percent” (Hamermesh and Biddle 1994 , p. 1186). Similar results were found in a study involving attorneys (Biddle and Hamermesh 1998, pp. 172–201). These studies adjusted for other determinants, but they were unable to determine if beauty led to differences in productivity that economists believe generate differences in earnings. This is an important issue for economists because they seem to assume that a beauty premium might be justified if it is connected to increased productivity. In one study, Hamermesh and Parker (2003) concluded that it may be impossible to untangle productivity and discrimination. In an interview, however, Hamermesh, one of the principal investigators in much of the labor-market research, said that “hiring attractive staff had proved a successful strategy for some companies. He studied, for instance, 250 Dutch advertising agencies and found ‘the agencies that had better-looking managers did better, a lot better actually’” (Saltau 2001). In another interview he said, “Good looking workers