“Beauty is only skin deep,” goes the old adage. It implies that far more important qualities lie within a person. Character is an immensely more important aspect than attractiveness. It is wrong to condemn an individual based on looks if their personality is radiant. Attractiveness of the mind should be enough to win the heart of the woman of your dreams, even if your physical features are more homely. This is an ideal that many in our society praise but few bother practicing.

What inane, platitudinous, utter babble. I consider myself thankful that we live in a world that recognizes aesthetics.

First of all, beauty is not skin deep. Bone structure and muscle tone, which are beneath the layers of the epidermis, are vital components of beauty. Splendorous complexion can do nothing to salvage the form of someone who has allowed their fitness to evaporate in a cloud of cheese puffs and couch dust. The skin can be the pinnacle of perfection, but if it is stretched across a frame that shapes it into a likeness of the Adirondacks on one’s face, the skin is irrelevant. Therefore, beauty is, at the very least, as deep as the skeleton.

Biological inaccuracies aside, the phrase can have dangerous societal implications. “Beauty is only skin deep,” argues that one should overlook physical flaws in favor of metaphysical merit. However, it could also be viewed as ignoring a vital facet of a person to focus only on one trait. That, by definition, is just as shallow as the action the saying argues against. When it comes to companionship, it would be masochistic to choose a partner that you are not attracted to because she is kind and funny. That might guarantee that she is pleasant to socialize with, but it may cause technical difficulties when procreation is concerned. In this case, choosing a partner whose facial hair may be off-putting is irresponsible to the human race.

And, accepting every single being regardless of looks rewards the unkempt and disheveled and is unfair to the person who spends time and effort in grooming. Why should Miss America be a slovenly, dull-haired, unwashed, overweight spinster who afforded five minutes to don a pair of sweatpants? Why, because she is nice or has an excellent singing voice? That is preposterous. That is analogous to awarding the title of best car to a Scion because it is safe to drive, even though it is slow, ugly and has unpleasant steering. Discounting Miss America’s looks makes it impossible to choose an overall best recipient.

Finally, the problem with this sentiment of universal acceptance manifests on the scales beneath our feet. Children, who are told to be proud of the way they look, are more likely to forsake the jungle gym for a video game. They know that nobody has the right to ridicule them for their overweightness. We protect self-esteem at the expense of health. We sacrifice truth for political correctness. There are no social reprisals to teach them to focus on exercise. This forces them to learn the hard way, through diabetes and cardiac arrest. If we continue to omit appearance when we evaluate others, we will continue to enable people to endanger themselves.

The inconvenient truth is: it can be difficult to maintain a pleasing display. But just as a good sculptor works hard to give his project a beautiful form, a good person must endeavor to cultivate an appealing presentation for himself. Shower, clean your clothes, stay fit and take care. Then you may hold your head high, knowing people are judging you positively. This is your reward, and it is significant because it is not unconditional.