Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by breadbox 5007 days ago
In my experience (and studies seem to bear this out), most people will automatically assume an attractive woman has poor skills in X (where X is anything that doesn't involve dealing with customers). So I don't think your "commonsense" argument actually holds in the real world.
2 comments

"most people will automatically assume an attractive woman has poor skills in X (where X is anything that doesn't involve dealing with customers). "

Could you provide a source on that please? Because from the wording of your statement it seems that what you are claiming is completely anecdotal. I remember studying in one of my psychology courses that attractive people are instantly assumed to be smarter and more successful than unattractive people. It even has a name although I can't think of it right now. If I could I would provide a source.

edit: Here is a source, not really great but it's something. http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/wired-success/201108/why...

edit2: The word I was looking for was halo effect. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halo_effect http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_attractiveness_stereot...

As I recall being told by one of my professors as an MBA student, attractive people -- both men and women -- are generally assumed to be more competent. This effect is stronger for women than men. However, attractive women in "masculine" fields, like engineering, technology, or construction, are generally seen as being less competent.
If you already objectively know that the person is qualified the fact that they are attractive is only a plus. I think the study you a mentioning is done with people that do not know the qualifications of the person they are viewing.
True, it is done with people whose qualifications are unknown. However, I would find it very hard to believe that the bias against attractive women in a "masculine" field would be removed as soon as you knew the qualifications. Diminished a bit? Sure. But removed? Unlikely. Your initial assumptions will give you a lens through which you view someone's accomplishments.
A study found that this isn't really true for attractive women though. Attractive women who included their photo with their resume got less response than less attractive women who did the same. The result was the opposite for men.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1378298/Attractive-w...

So assumptions aside, once you've vetted the person (a woman in this case) through an interview and they seem to be the real deal, what would be the deciding factor at that point?

People can exploit any number of traits to help them accomplish things, be it connections, looks, charms, etc.