Freakonomics contributor Dan Hamermesh was featured on The Daily Show last night, in a piece about ugly people. Hamermesh has done extensive research on the economic disadvantages of being unattractive. His most recent book, Beauty Pays: Why Attractive People Are More Successful, shows how all kinds of economic benefits flow toward physical beauty — from higher salaries, to better loan rates, to attractive, educated spouses. We did a Q&A with him here.
In this segment, Hamermesh and Daily Show correspondent Jason Jones have some fun discussing whether ugly Americans should be given special legal protection.
| The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | Mon – Thurs 11p / 10c | |||
| Ugly People | ||||
|
||||
and 
. You can also watch it on 
Hamermesh was hilarious (and a good sport), although he should be corrected on one bit of nomenclature. It’s “douchebaggery,” not “douchebagness.”
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
11 
0
Bravo, professor. Not everybody can take a joke. It would have been nice for them to throw in some sort of qualifier, that this is simply an interesting question rather than your life’s obsession or something.
In case word filters back to New York, the three-fifths line had me actually laughing out loud.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
8 
0
I hope the Ham was kidding about social support for ugly people… Stupidity cannot be helped either, maybe we should force companies not to discriminate based on intelligence.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
6 
0
There are, in fact, many social supports for those at such low percentiles of intellect as the Professor suggests need some legal protection for ugliness.
We’re not talking 1 on the 1-5 scale, we’re talking maybe the bottom 0.3 out of 5.
http://wagesofwins.net/2011/09/07/the-nfls-best-looking-team/
On the same note this kind of thinking actually applies in the NFL as well. So even being a super talented athlete at the high end of the pay scale, it still is better to be a super talented attractive athlete.
Hasn’t hurt David Beckham’s income either.
It was one of the best pieces I’ve seen on The Daily Show in a while. He was fantastic!
how about offering free plastic surgery, dental work, and the like?
I have a dim recollection reading abouto a plastic surgery programme aimed at rehabilitating prisoners whose ugliness got them into violent situations.
And a less popular search engine found it here:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3420443
I saw the humor. The question is- what was funny? At what point, does `ugly’ for one become beautiful for another. My mom lived with arthritus for 46 years. Her hands became deformed and she was all the way bent over. The curvature of her spine essentially killed her. But in no way, shape or form would I ever think of my mom as ugly. I never saw her that way and never will. She lived in pain, but found a way to rise above it (by how she lived) and was perhaps the happiest and most beautiful person I have ever known. I just find this discussion and that tape offensive.
Hot debate. What do you think?
4 
24
You’re right. If we don’t talk about a phenomenon, that means it isn’t real. /s
Facts aren’t offensive. He’s not stating or researching how looks should effect one’s life, he’s analyzing how it DOES. Not talking about it doesn’t change reality.
yes, yes. I know of my own sensitivity when it comes to certain things. There’s the rub.