SocioAttractiveness has a bigger impact on men's economic success than women's | Hacker News Reader

SocioAttractiveness has a bigger impact on men's economic success than women's

psypost.org

13 pointsgehwartzen7 comments

Simpson’s paradox. The causal axis is (more strongly) positive for career success, but the informative axis is negative for the choice to pursue economic mobility through a career versus family. In simple terms, more attractive women are more likely to marry rich and neglect career success, while the number of men that pursue this strategy is much lower.

Reminder that statistics are only accurate for exactly the question asked. We have a bad habit of assuming that we correctly asked the question that we are actually interested in.

> We have a bad habit of assuming that we correctly asked the question that we are actually interested in.

Insightful and harks back to one of the greatest jokes in literature: the answer is 42. But what's the question again?

Height, for men, seems to be the key factor here; which I think most short kings knew before reading the article.

Maybe with women or RTO. WfH, it doesn't matter.

I was going to say: "wear a suit, don't be overweight, be symmetrical, and be tall." WfH: Have interesting background objects indicating you've traveled, are cool, are educated, and have artistic taste.

PS: Unemployed 6'5" MAANG SRE/PE here. Hire me! Hire me! ;@D

Was pointed out elsewhere that this defines economic success as wage income. So for example, marrying a very wealthy person and having your children inherit their wealth is not counted as economic success by this study.

That makes sense in this setting. I guess the question most people want answered in this kind of study is: are attractive people (positively) discriminated?

Discrimination in a setting requires that the attributes is irrelevant in the setting. A blind person cannot be a pilot, that's not discrimination.

In most career settings beauty is irrelevant and therefore an attribute that can be discriminated. If you get a raise because of your beauty in most situations that is a kind of discrimination (but not if you're a model).

In the setting of marriage beauty is generally considered relevant and therefore not an attribute that can be discriminated against.

If the study aims to investigate discrimination because of attractiveness it makes sense to separate between financial outcomes because of career and financial outcomes because of marriage.

While this is not great, there's a silver lining. It's rather straightforward for men to increase their attractiveness. Bathe, get clothes that fit, workout. In that order.

Easier said than done ofc. I'm not Adonis ;)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com