There's a complication with this study, which is that it seems really weird in the first place to attach a photo to a resume. (Maybe this is different in Israel -- anyone?) A photo is out of the ordinary and prompts people to think up an explanation for it. One possible explanation HR staff and potential interviewers might come up with is that the person relies on their looks as a career asset. That assumption is easier made about women than about men because it better fits gender stereotypes, which could account for the discrepancy without bringing the gender of the HR workers into the explanation.<p>(A picture of an unattractive person would not provoke suspicion that the person expects to get by on their sex appeal instead of their performance, so "plain" women and men would not be stigmatized for attaching a picture.)<p>Because attaching a picture prompts the recipient to wonder why, and possibly to make different assumptions about the applicant based on the explanation they come up with, I think the situation is too complicated for it to be possible to draw conclusions from the results. I don't disagree with the researchers' explanation, though. Even when we try to be fair, the idea of an attractive person getting by on their looks is more viscerally offensive, and threatening, when the person is of the same sex. Men might think it's lame and shitty if a woman relies on her looks, but if a man is rising in the office by charming and chatting up female managers, it goes beyond "lame" and becomes a personal threat. Ditto for women. Both sexes "appreciate" sex appeal as part of a charming personality when it appeals to us and stigmatize it as dangerous when it competes with us.