How much of a kid's looks factor into private school admissions? ? (eat, design)

[GravityMan]

Originally Posted by nothermom

Looks, height, gender, race, wealth, background, extrovert/introvert, education, etc, etc. ALL matter.

But, you can't worry about it too much. Better to spend your time and energy just getting stuff done.

This. Way back when I was a kid, I learned - and accepted - that the world is simply not a level playing field, and never will be. No point in worrying or getting upset about it. Almost anyone can still have good success in life; it's just that some will sail smoothly to that point while others will have to work harder and overcome more societal biases and discrimination.

It's a psychological or even a biological thing. It's also a marketing thing...most wise people with marketing skills know that many people react more favorably to those who look good, look "powerful" (esp. men) and have good socioeconomic status. Often subconsciously...without even realizing it. That is a big reason why most public-facing people and executives, regardless of industry, look above-average compared to the average joe/jane on the street. (Excluding CEOs who founded their companies.)

This transcends any culture or social system. India, Japan, Canada, Dallas, Alabama, the San Francisco Bay Area and Brazil are all very different from each other culturally, but the same basic things (looks, race, status, etc.) still matter in all of those places.

[ravensix]

I attended there from 5th grade and on. I'll rephrase: They look like old-man aliens that eventually develop acne.

[TheOverdog]

Looks matter a bit, but when you are talking the world that being admitted to a top private school is supposed to open access to, maleness and being named 'John' matter even more:

"Among chief executives of S.&P. 1500 firms, for each woman, there are four men named John, Robert, William or James" and for company boards, "That report yielded an index score of 1.03 for directors, meaning that for every one woman, there were 1.03 Jameses, Roberts, Johns and Williams — combined — serving on the boards of S.&P. 1500 companies."

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/03/up...john.html?_r=0

[TurtleCreek80]

Originally Posted by TheOverdog

Looks matter a bit, but when you are talking the world that being admitted to a top private school is supposed to open access to, maleness and being named 'John' matter even more:

"Among chief executives of S.&P. 1500 firms, for each woman, there are four men named John, Robert, William or James" and for company boards, "That report yielded an index score of 1.03 for directors, meaning that for every one woman, there were 1.03 Jameses, Roberts, Johns and Williams — combined — serving on the boards of S.&P. 1500 companies."

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/03/up...john.html?_r=0

John, Robert, William and James were also 4 of the top 10 boy baby names from 1950-1980 so it makes sense that those names are so common in the boardroom. Until 1990, a huge % of the boys born each year shared the top 10 names....this was of course before the "yooneek" naming trend started in the 1990's.

I suspect there are far fewer John, Robert, James, and Williams in private K-12 today than in 1985.

[Aceraceae]

Haha "yooneek". Goodness that trend burns me up.

[4Movingeast]

Originally Posted by TurtleCreek80

John, Robert, William and James were also 4 of the top 10 boy baby names from 1950-1980 so it makes sense that those names are so common in the boardroom. Until 1990, a huge % of the boys born each year shared the top 10 names....this was of course before the "yooneek" naming trend started in the 1990's.

I suspect there are far fewer John, Robert, James, and Williams in private K-12 today than in 1985.

I don't know- I feel like people with money and the desire for private school don't tend to go in for the trendy names so much. Plus the incidence of family names (Jr, III, IV) is strong in wealthier families. I would think the family that is attracted to St Mark's/Hockaday type of school is not going to name their boy child "Stryker" or their girl child "Brynlee." Bet there are still many Katherines, Julias, Michaels and Johns. It's kind of like "rich girl hair"- always shiny and groomed but NEVER "trendy." No stripey highlights and angle bob haircuts with ratted crown in HP/UP/PH.

[TheOverdog]

John, Robert, William and James were also 4 of the top 10 boy baby names from 1950-1980 so it makes sense that those names are so common in the boardroom.

It's right there in the article. .12 for every woman's name. That number of the population is common, but it's still way outsized. If 'popular names' was the answer, then Jennifer and Susan and Linda (or whatever) would be equally represented.

[TurtleCreek80]

Originally Posted by TheOverdog

It's right there in the article. .12 for every woman's name. That number of the population is common, but it's still way outsized. If 'popular names' was the answer, then Jennifer and Susan and Linda (or whatever) would be equally represented.

I would be willing to be that Jennifer, Susan, and Linda are among the top names for women execs....there are just such a small % of women in the boardroom compared to men.

[TurtleCreek80]

Originally Posted by 4Movingeast

I don't know- I feel like people with money and the desire for private school don't tend to go in for the trendy names so much. Plus the incidence of family names (Jr, III, IV) is strong in wealthier families. I would think the family that is attracted to St Mark's/Hockaday type of school is not going to name their boy child "Stryker" or their girl child "Brynlee." Bet there are still many Katherines, Julias, Michaels and Johns. It's kind of like "rich girl hair"- always shiny and groomed but NEVER "trendy." No stripey highlights and angle bob haircuts with ratted crown in HP/UP/PH.

So because it's a snow day and I'm bored, I pulled the NMSF & commended lists for Hockaday's 2014 & 2015 class (represents about 30% of last 2 years senior class) and St Marks 2015 (represents over half of senior class). Interesting facts:

Girls-
#1 names are a variation of Katherine/Catherine/Kathryn and Julia, each with 3 of 56
#2 names are Anisha/Aneesha, Anna, and Elizabeth each with 2
42 girls have unique names

Boys-
#1 William/Will 3 of 43. Interesting fact- 2/3 of the William's have distinctively Asian surnames
Jack 3 of 43
#2 Raymond, Nick, Connor/Conner, and Matt with 2 each

33 boys have unique names.

And don't be so quick to assume that old money always picks classic, distinguished names. There was a St Mark's class in the 1990's that included 2 Heb's, a Jeb, and a Jim-Bob.

[Wittgenstein's Ghost]

There is at least one academic field where, based on my experience, a very attractive male is sometimes looked upon a bit skeptically: philosophy. Philosophy is full of funky types, and some of the most successful philosophers in the world show an absolute disregard for personal appearance. I'm a very attractive guy, and I am also well-dressed. I often felt that ostracized me a bit, at least initially. Thankfully, philosophers also tend to be very open-minded, so I never found it to be a genuine issue, but it is at least a case where the dynamics worked in reverse from the rest of society.