Do you mean how well we actually perform our roles and functions or how well we are PERCEIVED to perform our roles and functions?
No, I mean how well our roles and functions are actually
If an attractive physical appearance is an essential element of one's job, then it follows that having an attractive physical appearance will actually factor into how well one performs.
It is difficult to imagine a successful professional lingerie or swimsuit model who is unattractive. Their job is to entice people to purchase the garments, and they do so by "wearing them well," by associating the garments with their own personal attractiveness.
People buy the garments because they want themselves or the person for whom they are purchasing the garment to appear, to some extent, like the model. There may be other reasons for purchasing the garments, but none that are reinforced by the model. The model doesn't send a message to the consumer that the garment is comfortable, or inexpensive, or hypo-allergenic or any of the other possible reasons someone may want to buy it. The model sends the message that the person who wears the garment can be attractive like them.
It is not a matter of our falsely perceiving that the attractive model is the more successful model, the unattractive model will simply not get the job done, no matter how pleasant and talented he or she may be.
There are a number of other jobs for which physical appearance is an actual element for success, and while they may only constitute a portion of all jobs, they never-the-less exist and they generally pay better than other jobs.
There are also a fair number of jobs where personal attractiveness may not be required for success, but does actually improves its chances.
When men are the primary or exclusive purchaser of particular goods and services, the physical appearance of a saleswoman will enhance her chances of success. The advantage is actual, not perceived.
Whether or not this is how it should be is immaterial. It is how it is, how it has been and how it will be for quite some time to come.
I can also see how once someone passes the typical or average standard of perceived beauty or handsomeness, they can become quite distracted with that aspect of their life to the detriment of other aspects- like all those women who are paying for surgery and physical enhancement, unable to relax with who and what they are.
Do you think they're particularly happy and functional? Or happier and more functional than those people who don't have the onus of maintaining a perceived level or standard of attractiveness and so are happy to take whatever comes with age and the passing years?
No, I don't think that being physically attractive is a guarantee of happiness or functionality, and any behavior that borders on or crosses over into obsession is more than likely to guarantee the opposite, but I also don't believe that people who don't care about their physical appearance are somehow freed of a neurotic burden and therefore more likely to be happy.
Frankly, I don't think there are very many people who don't care about their physical appearance. There are many people who appear not to care, and there are many who claim not to care, but I think we are hard-wired to care and that it’s not an instinct easily changed.
We do (emphasize personal appearance) - but I don't think we should. Yes, it's good to be clean but I disagree that someone with a facial or figure flaw should be made to feel less than by the standards our society decides to employ.
I think there is a difference between emphasizing and obsessing over personal appearance. Personal appearance is inextricably intertwined with sex and we are not, for the foreseeable future, likely to become indifferent about sex. It's connection to sex has led to an additional connection to acceptance. These things are not bad, they just are.
Finding people attractive and wanting to be attractive to others does not cause people with "flaws" to feel unworthy, and I'm not sure that anyone has argued that people with physical "flaws" should
Not directly, but you said something like, 'What a surprise that all this kerfuffle is going on in the Democrat camp' (a very broad paraphrase)
My political take on the topic was expressed by
There are plenty of good looking women of the Right and of the Left. Unfortunately the MSM tends to consider hot women on the Right as bimbos or trophy wives, while only average looks on the Left equate with "beauty."
My point is that there is an utterly silly wave of effusive bedazzlement rolling over the Michelle watchers that is in keeping with the utterly silly infatuation the same folks have for her husband.
To a large extent they are becoming or have become the first media created characters to occupy the White House - that they are Democrats should not be surprising.
However, how the media perceives the folks in the White House does make a big difference on how they focus on their appearance, and for the most part, members of the media perceive Democrats more positively than Republicans.