If you review “Ugly? You May Have a Case” at the end of this chapter, an essay by Daniel S. Hamermesh, a professor at the University of Texas at Austin, you’ll discover that he spends most of his...

If you review “Ugly? You May Have a Case” at the end of this chapter, an essay by Daniel S. Hamermesh, a professor at the University of Texas at Austin, you’ll discover that he spends most of his essay addressing potential objections to his proposal that we compensate unattractive people for society’s prejudicial attitudes toward them. Do you think it makes sense for him to argue this way? Or does Hamermesh need to do more to convince his audience (or you, specifically) that attractive people really do enjoy privileges to such an extent that the government needs to compensate unattractive people in the same ways it protects other disadvantaged groups? What kinds of audience issues does Hamermesh face in making his argument in a newspaper as widely read as the New York Times?