[betterunix]

"While claiming not to, this article feeds into the narrative of 'attractive women must be stupid,' by implying that attractive women, having clearly been selected for their attractiveness, will tend to be less intelligent."

This is not the right way to read it. The article is saying that if your promotion process selects the men with the most merit, but where the appearance of women takes precedence over their merits, the women who make it to higher levels will be less likely to have strong merits than the men (due to different selection criteria). It is not saying that attractive women are less likely to be intelligent, it is saying that they will be competing against men who were selected for their talents (including intelligence).

[ctbeiser]

Perhaps I'm not being clear enough; I'm aware that wasn't what was being argued,but it did very little to dispel that narrative, which it plays into. Still, looking back, it seems to be a somewhat overblown critique.

I didn't feel that it explicitly addressed how an individual should be running their promotion process, but I could have missed something.