Does good looks help during the recruitment phase or career advancement, and what kind of images are associated with different professions? And why can a man likely only benefit from good looks – Professor Outi Sarpila spoke about this at Joki Forum.
On average, women spend much more time and money on their appearance than men. Yet there is no guarantee that these investments will pay off. Good looks can be an advantage for a woman in life, but they can also be a disadvantage.
Because men spend less time and money on their appearance than women, the cost-benefit ratio of the investment is always better for them. Good looks do not hinder men's success or career.
This is summarized by University of Turku professor of sociology Outi Sarpila, who spoke about the appearance society at Joki Forum in the spring of 2024. Sarpila has led a research team that, among other things, wrote the book Ulkonäköyhteiskunta – Ulkoinen olemus pääomana 2000-luvun Suomessa.
When we talk about appearance, we are not just talking about faces and their attractiveness. Appearance is also intrinsically linked to the body, its shape, and its size, such as height and weight. Furthermore, hair, beard, clothing, and style also influence one's appearance.
Good looks have generally been considered something that benefits a person in working life and assists, for example, in career advancement. Is this really the case – and is the effect the same for both men and women? Sarpila's research set out to challenge this idea, and the results were surprising. According to them, good looks can even be a disadvantage for women in working life. In contrast, men do not experience a corresponding phenomenon.
– One could say that appearance is an uncertain resource for a woman in working life. The general mindset that you have to be the “best version of yourself” in the workplace can be harmful to women. It is not necessarily what working life is looking for, says Sarpila.
Good looks can be a disadvantage for a woman even at the job application stage if the photo on her application is beautiful. This can give rise to a stereotype that a beautiful woman cannot be smart. Style can also cause problems. A good-looking woman who dresses in a certain way can be perceived as too sexy for the role – on the other hand, a polished style can be perceived as too formal for a certain position.
“For a woman in the workplace, appearance is an uncertain resource.” Outi Sarpila
– According to research, workplaces are looking, at least subconsciously, for a person who fits the organization's style and company brand. If the applicant's style is different, the conclusion might be that “they don't fit us”.
The process can also be unconscious, as recruiters can easily say they made their conclusions based only on the applicant's merits and so-called hard skills. Appearance is not necessarily discussed because it is not perceived as a relevant issue – even when it has an influence in the background.
Sarpila challenges us to pay attention to such attitudes.
– We cannot wash our hands of the matter and say that there is nothing to be done about it. Every recruiter is a power-wielder. I challenge everyone to think about what they can do to avoid fostering inequality in such situations. According to studies, colleagues also produce and reproduce the organization's appearance culture and, in a way, monitor each other's appearance. The danger is that an appearance culture is produced where there is not enough room for different looks and self-expression.
What kind of appearance is expected of a representative of a certain profession, such as a researcher, teacher, or nurse? Sarpila is currently studying this in a project funded by the Academy of Finland. The goal is to find out if we have shared perceptions of so-called professional consistent appearance, and what kind of social and economic consequences professional consistency and inconsistency have.
The matter is studied through pictures of people representing different professions and through different experimental setups. As part of the research, the portraits of the 2017 municipal elections were compared. The comparison examined how gender, social class, and appearance correlate with each other.
The research revealed that if a person clearly belonged to the upper middle class and had a high professional status, looking like a representative of their own profession was equally beneficial for both men and women. If, on the other hand, a candidate clearly belonged to the working class by profession but was a man, a working-class appearance was not a disadvantage for him. For a woman, however, it was clearly a disadvantage, and it showed in the votes received.
– Politics is a traditionally male domain, so traditional working-class masculinity fits well into labor parties. Women, on the other hand, are still new in that field. In addition, it is known from international studies that a feminine habitus perceived as working-class is particularly despised by the middle and upper classes.
This research brought up the same conclusion that comes up repeatedly: men get a double or even triple status from appearance.
– However you measure it, appearance likely brings the most benefit to men who are already doing well. First of all, they have the status brought by masculinity, the success brought by a good profession, and also good looks. For a man, good and culturally appropriate looks are therefore fundamentally more likely to be beneficial than similar looks are for women.
Sarpila says the conclusion shows that the appreciation of appearance in society not only deepens gender inequality but also fuels inequality among men.
– A new kind of alienation and experience of exclusion emerges when one’s own appearance is not felt to be sufficient in the current labor or dating markets. Extreme examples of this are the misogynistic incel communities online.