Consider the situation in, say, politics however. Attractiveness is definitely a quality which is driven home for women in politics. It's not to say all women are chosen for their looks exclusively, but let's face it - if a woman in a public position does not look decently attractive, she will get slandered more than a man of similar attractiveness. Women are expected to be held to a different standard, even subconsciously. There were news reports about Obama's inauguration this month which focused on Michelle's choice in dress and giving unbelievable importance to her appearance. It feels like a casual glance at the news will yield an in-depth critique of how she looked, but barely a peep over what she's said. I know, the first lady isn't exactly a political position of great weight but the unbelievable focus on her appearance is emblematic of the zealotry with which people judge women in the public sphere on their appearance.
Is attractiveness the sole identifier for "will this woman be hired"? No, obviously not. Does it mean every woman in a high position is also attractive? Certainly not, that's a gross exaggeration. But is there a pattern? You can't deny that you won't see generally unattractive women in the heights of business. Women are judged more harshly on appearance than men, and it requires greater skill and competence to overcome the initial negativity over appearance than it would for a man.