A guest poster at Pandagon is considering Lasik, but ultimately decided to keep her glasses. She says she came to this decision because she's
sallow and pointy blonde and thin and thinks she needs the glasses to look competent.
This stereotype fascinates me. Why should conventionally attractive women be seen as less able?
Two explanations present themselves:
- Conventionally attractive women are supposed to expect to get by on their looks, and thus never bothered to become able. This is the flipside of the insulting notion that women who don't meet this alleged ideal are forced to apply themselves intellectually (or learn their way around a car engine, or whatever) because they'll never be able to get a man on their looks.
- There's no such thing as the whole package: if she's beautiful, she's not smart, and vice versa. I've never seen the Paris Hilton sex tapes, but I'm told she sort of bares this out; she's so attractive she doesn't have to offer anything else to people who'll fuck her, including participating in that that activity. This reduces women to objects in I think an obvious way, treating her in terms of what she has to offer rather than as a person in her own right.
Both of these explanations, in addition, presume that only thin blondes with big tits have any hope of getting a man, or at least a good man. In the real world, everyone's attractive to somebody. Anyone you have to significantly change yourself for probably isn't worth the effort.