October 26, 2011, - 3:38 pm
A new study on women’s cosmetics says that women who wear makeup are seen as more “competent” in the workplace. Gee, I’m shocked at the finding . . . especially since it was funded by CoverGirl makeup’s parent company, Procter & Gamble. But the bigger story, to me, is who designed carried out this dumb study: Boston University and the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute. (Oh, and it’s also interesting that Harvard professors did this silly study. Remember that the next time you meet a proud Harvard grad.)
Nancy Etcoff [is] the study’s lead author and an assistant clinical professor of psychology at Harvard University (yes, scholars there study eyeshadow as well as stem cells). . . . No research, till now, has given makeup credit for people inferring that a woman was capable, reliable and amiable.
Wow, how did we heretofore function as a society without these important findings?!
The study was paid for by Procter & Gamble, which sells CoverGirl and Dolce & Gabbana makeup, but researchers like Professor Etcoff and others from Boston University and the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute were responsible for its design and execution.
If you’re wondering what the heck studying whether wearing lipstick and eyeliner makes working women seem more competent, has to do with studying and treating cancer, great minds think alike, because I was wondering that, too. I also wonder how much in donor money meant for cancer research and given to Dana-Farber and how much of the cancer center’s resources went to this silly eyeliner-ology research.
Let this be a lesson to you–a lesson I’ve noted on this site before with regard to Sean Hannity’s Freedom Concert scam and other purported charities: charities don’t always use the money for what they claim they do. In many cases, it goes to scams–like spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on private planes and hotel suites for Sean Hannity and his cronies–or, in this case, designing cosmetics studies. Even if P&G paid Dana-Farber to design and implement the study, it makes no difference, as it takes employees away from their job: cancer research.
If I were a donor to Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, I’d now be a former donor. The organization should be looking into cancer and trying to cure it, not designing studies on whether wearing blush and mascara helps women in the workplace.
Tags: Boston University, cancer, charities, charity scam, cosmetics, Cover Girl, CoverGirl, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Fraud, Harvard, makeup, Nancy Etcoff, Procter & Gamble, scams, women's cosmetics