Lookism: Should beautiful people get more breaks because they beautify the world?

[js_africanus]

A little while back 20/20 did a piece on lookism, the differential treatment that people get based on their looks. While it was not the first time that I've seen such stuff on the telly, it was one of the better done pieces that I've seen on it.

Basically, people who are more attractive get more breaks. This is, of course, unfair. Or is it? Attractive people make the world a nicer place to be in. When I see beautiful women, I get satisfaction from that (and I don't mean in some prurient sense -- or, at least not strictly prurient). Other isms, such as racism, would seem to be more arbitrary in that the "good" a racist receives from only being around whites, for example, really doesn't seem to be too fundamental. However, attractive people seem to be univerally enjoyed. It's nice to have an attractive doctor, broker, or salesperson. It's nice to have beautiful people around. Couldn't one argue that lookism really isn't an ism at all, but instead it is compensation for the pleasure that attractiveness brings to us all?

To put it another way, isn't lookism something like personalityism? People with great personalities surely have better luck than someone who is shy or socially inept, don't they? To say that people with better personalities get unfair advantages seems disingenous. They're more pleasant to be around, they're easier to work with, etc. It's not like someone creates her own personality from scratch. She really didn't have much choice in it; her parents raised her and her environment and genetics sculpted who she is. Is that any more out of her control than her looks? Shouldn't looks be in the same class?

So shouldn't attractive people be compensated for being attractive? If you agree, please remit payment to
js_africanus
123 Fake St.
Rural, MI 49686

Okay, that last part was a joke.