Although the famous saying “Beauty is in the eye of the beholder” originated in the third century BCE and was revived in its current form by Margaret Wolfe Hungerford in 1878, it can also be said that society, and the media in particular, create and reinforce stereotypical ideas of beauty.

Beauty is a social construct. It is based on societally agreed upon ideas that have been ingrained into our systems and our psyches over time and have been accepted as the norm. These ideas of beauty slowly become embedded into our minds on a micro-level and affect the way we operate. There is a multidirectional relationship with societal forces including media, marketing, businesses, government, and other institutions. These forces influence youth, affecting appearance, cosmetics, behavior, and clothing. While there were 50 media conglomerates (groups that control the media) in the United States in 1984, by 2011, 90% of media was controlled by six media conglomerates who are owned by predominantly White and wealthy males (Lutz, 2012), are responsible for creating and reinforcing preferences and biases that reinforce the dominant culture’s idea of beauty.

Western society has identified particular aspects of physical appearance as being beautiful or desirable. People with these characteristics are favored and featured. This is known as the halo effect, in which additional favorable characteristics are associated with “attractiveness.” One example of this effect applies to academia. Using just the faces of university students, researchers learned that subjects inaccurately attributed competence and intelligence to more attractive faces (Talamas et al., 2016). This can have long-term implications for success in education, as other research has found that teachers’ expectations of learners can have a positive or negative effect on their learning (Rosenthal & Jacobson, 1968).

Another example from academia describes how gender, perceived attractiveness, and age intersect to affect how students’ perception of physical appearance moderate their experience of the actual behavior of faculty. When students rated the perceived qualities of instructors based on appearance in a 2014 study, women’s age and attractiveness were linked (older women were judged to be less attractive). Less attractiveness correlated with judgments students made about prospective faculty. Students judged less attractive (and older) faculty as less likely to be organized or have rapport with their students, illustrating the halo effect (Wilson & Monteiro, 2014).

There have been some insightful analyses of attractiveness and facial symmetry related to pay and job attainment in sports. The most well-known analysis relates to “quarterback face.” Using computer measurements, economists found that while taking into account career statistics, experience, Pro Bowl appearances, and draft position, one standard deviation of symmetry of facial structure led to an 8% increase in pay (Berri, 2008). This holds true for starting quarterbacks in the National Football League (NFL) and even more strongly for backup quarterbacks.

Beauty can and does change from place to place, from culture to culture, and from person to person. It is demonstrated via society’s products, patterns, trends, wants, and desires. It is influenced biologically, by pheromones and natural physical attractions. This shows us that it is a social construction. The threat to family well-being is when that socially constructed idea is assigned different value or worth, based on physical appearance. Bullying, fewer academic opportunities, and loss of employment can all be linked to the idealized conception of beauty. The halo effect can lead to a self-fulfilling prophecy, where those who fit the social construction of attractiveness, are perceived as being more valuable members of society, which then may lead to preferential treatment and more life chances, thereby increasing the person’s likelihood of succeeding (Barelds-Dijkstra & Barelds, 2008).

So what does this mean for us, the readers and writers of this text? It means that we need to be aware and pay attention to what we might call our “intuition” or “gut” feelings about who is deserving of the benefit of the doubt or of an extra opportunity. Sometimes those instinctual feelings are masking some preference for attractiveness or an implicit bias. We can teach our children, students, peers, and colleagues the same. By making this topic discussable, we can work toward achieving equity in education, employment, and experience.

The dominant culture is powerful. Finding ways to fit in is important and sometimes people go to extremes to fit into what is deemed desirable. For example, in the film Crazy Rich Asians, the movie rewards Rachel Chu for mimicking European beauty standards. She is preparing for a big wedding and has a friend who comments how they need to get her eyelids taped, which is a popular method for East Asian and Asian Americans to remove their monolids and appear more White. In this movie, Whiteness is provided as the aesthetic for beauty standards, particularly Euro-American standards. The continual reinforcement of one kind of beauty creates tension and conflict for families between this ideal, their own culture, and individuality.

Figure 12.23. Several examples of body art, both permanent and temporary, are shown here.

Art and beauty matter. Makeup and face paint can reflect one’s identity and culture, but also idealized beauty standards (Figure 12.23). In some Indigenous tribes, men use face paint to identify themselves, align with hopes and dreams, demonstrate their honor, and prepare for battle. Paints come from a variety of natural materials and hold significance related to color and pattern (Gowder, 2017). Drag families form with various familiar family roles, including a head parental figure, and they use costumes and makeup to express identity, role, and representation (National Center for Transgender Equality, 2017). Tattoos and piercings have a long history of affiliation with beauty and expression and have only grown in recent decades in importance related to identity. And yet there are questions and concerns related to employment when one has tattoos; bias against those with tattoos is a worry. The complexity of how each person and family member sees oneself, influenced by the societal norms that favor certain appearances, continues to affect functionality of both families and society.

Licenses and Attributions for Beauty, Identity, and Academics

Open Content, Original

“Beauty, Identity, and Academics” by Elizabeth B. Pearce and Wesley Sharp. License: CC BY 4.0.

Open Content, Shared Previously

Figure 12.23. “Native American Dancer C” by alandberning. License: CC BY-NC-SA 2.0. “Several Piercings” by Sara Marx. License: CC BY 2.0. “Celtic Cross” by scorpion1985x. License: CC BY-NC-ND 2.0. “Face Painting” by clickclique. License: CC BY-NC 2.0

References

Barelds-Dijkstra, P., & Barelds, D. P. (2008). Positive illusions about one’s partner’s physical attractiveness. Body Image, 5(1), 99-108. https://doi.org/10.1016%2Fj.bodyim.2007.07.004

Berri, D. J. (2008, September 16). Do pretty-boy quarterbacks make more money? The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/14/sports/playmagazine/0914play-FBALL-QBS.html

Gowder, P. (2011, July 21). Face painting traditions & meanings. PowWows.com. https://www.powwows.com/face-painting-traditions-among-men-of-the-plains/

Lutz, A. (2012, June 14). These 6 Corporations Control 90% Of The Media In America. Business Insider. https://www.businessinsider.com/these-6-corporations-control-90-of-the-media-in-america-2012-6

National Center for Transgender Equality. (2017, April 28). Understanding drag. https://transequality.org/issues/resources/understanding-drag

Talamas, S. N., Mavor, K. I., & Perrett, D. I. (2016). Blinded by beauty: Attractiveness bias and accurate perceptions of academic performance. PLOS ONE, 11(2), e0148284. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0148284

Rosenthal, R., & Jacobson, L. F. (1968). Teacher expectations for the disadvantaged. Scientific American, 218(4), 19–23.

Wilson, J. H., Beyer, D., & Monteiro, H. (2014). Professor age affects student ratings: Halo effect for younger teachers. College Teaching, 62(1), 20–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/87567555.2013.825574