Dear fellow equity warriors,
There’s no use sugarcoating things. Times are tough for the revolution. The summer of rage — by which I mean, of course, the summer of love — feels like a lifetime ago. Everywhere we look, the movement is in retreat. Diversity, equity, and inclusion departments are being slashed. Our most powerful allies are ghosting us. Anybody see Michelle Obama get a bag last week in Germany for a speech on diversity and inclusion — but not equity? Even the legacy media think we’re cooked. Last week, Bloomberg said “the virtue economy is over” — to which I respond, how dare you, Bloomberg? Have you no shame?
But even shaming no longer seems effective. We’re in real danger here. The revolution needs to adapt if it’s going to survive. We need bold, fresh thinking. And that’s why I’m writing you today.
It’s true that our movement has done more to include marginalized groups (the ones who conform to our ideology, that is) than any in history, and for that we can be proud. The problem is not our collective will, but our collective imagination.
Yes, we’ve fought like hell to secure equal outcomes for marginalized groups, but we need to expand the definition of who counts as marginalized in order to advance our vision; we need to enlarge the tent and replenish the troops. This means understanding “equity” in a new and more truly inclusive way. We’ve left too many folx behind.
In short, we must begin to demand equity for the facially asymmetrical.
The less attractive among us have struggled against their better looking oppressors since the dawn of our species — to no avail. Through no fault of their own, these innocent victims, who comprise the vast majority of humanity, were born with facial differences that have limited their social achievement, earnings potential, and representation in our entertainment industry (which, as we know, is everything).
Indeed, the symmetrically challenged are disadvantaged from the earliest stages of life, and most of it has to do with, you guessed it, unconscious bias. Asymmetrical babies receive less attention from caregivers, which results in fewer gifts given by adults (no, really) and higher instances of accidental injury. They also have a harder time making and keeping friends, which means fewer social connections and fewer overall opportunities in early life.
School-aged children with symmetry differences fare no better. The symmetrically privileged get more attention from teachers, receive higher grades than their counterparts — the difference in GPA between the two is on par with the difference between children from two-parent and single-parent households — and get accepted into college at a higher rate.
And once in the workforce, less attractive people have a harder time securing a position. A recent study out of the University of Buffalo confirms what we all suspect to be true: “Attractive people are more likely to get hired, receive better evaluations and get paid more.” Another study out of Harvard puts a dollar value on the discrepancy, revealing that attractive people make 10% to 15% more than unattractive people.
Meanwhile, the symmetrically privileged have enjoyed unearned advantages, especially in the post-masking age. Even movements such as our own have centered privileged faces (yes, we need to begin thinking in terms of faces, not voices), which has the effect of further demoralizing the oppressed and cementing the systemic advantages of the privileged. The equity movement must refrain from centering the likes of Rep. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez (D-NY), who Rolling Stone once described as “impossibly symmetrical.” This is a blind spot, and history will be our judge.
Make no mistake, the future is ugly. Though we have made some accidental strides in leveling the aesthetic playing field — the Kool-Aid hair color phenomenon above all — beauty justice will only be attained through forceful, top-down action.
The fate of the equity movement is in the balance. Will you join me in ridding the world of toxic loveliness and securing a fairer, if duller, future?
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM RESTORING AMERICA
Peter Laffin is a contributor at the Washington Examiner. His work has also appeared in RealClearPolitics, the Catholic Thing, and the National Catholic Register.
