How Capitalism Shapes What We Consider 'Desirable'
6 min read
Capitalism shapes desirability by linking worth to productivity, accumulation, and conformity, treating people as investments rather than individuals. In the job market, desirability is tied to efficiency and profit, sidelining those who don’t fit the ideal mould – where youth and physical attractiveness are assets, while disability, race, and gender often become liabilities. Hiring biases prioritise appearance and social ease over competence, reinforcing exclusion through the myth of “cultural fit.” Workers chase success under the illusion of meritocracy, yet the promised rewards remain elusive, keeping them trapped in a cycle of striving for validation. To reclaim desirability, we should reject capitalist definitions of worth and embrace inclusivity, recognizing that real value comes from authenticity.
What makes someone desirable? A chiselled jawline? A high follower count? A six-figure salary with a side of generational wealth? Desirability politics isn’t just about who’s considered attractive or lovable – it’s about who is valued, who gets access, and who is granted stability, employment, and even basic human rights.
The Market Forces Behind Desirability
Capitalism teaches us that worth is tied to what you can produce, earn, or accumulate. We don’t just look for partners; we look for "good investments". We don't just want to be liked or even loved; we want to be deemed a "high-value" individual. Desirability, then, becomes an economic equation where identity markers are treated as assets – some appreciating, some depreciating but all able to be valued, traded, and exploited.
In the labour market, desirability isn’t about who you are – it’s about what you can produce, how efficiently you can do it, your availability, your compliance, and whether you can be replaced by someone cheaper. Under capitalism, workers are commodities, their skills, identities, and even personalities shaped by economic incentives rather than intrinsic value.
In this marketplace of employment, physical attractiveness is marketable – a lucrative asset that can be commodified. Youth is a non-renewable resource – finite in its advantage but with significant short-term benefits. But add any of the following, and the perception of value decreases: disability, chronic illness, neurodivergence, race, ethnicity, gender, or sexuality.
These factors aren’t inherently limiting but are treated as liabilities within capitalist logic. Disability provokes apprehension about productivity and efficiency. Race and ethnicity trigger ingrained biases tied to cultural representation and colonial legacies. And gender and sexuality are assets or barriers depending on their alignment with prevailing social narratives and power structures.
These inherent or socially constructed attributes mean that many are pushed to the margins, deemed "less employable" not because they lack talent but because the capitalist machine doesn’t accommodate difference unless it can be monetised.
The Ideal Worker: Built for Profit, Not for People
It’s not coincidental that desirability and productivity are deeply linked under capitalism. The more desirable something is deemed, the more likely it is to catalyse performance, reinforcing a cycle of desirability and productivity. A six-pack isn’t just about a desirable aesthetic – it suggests productivity through discipline and control. And a desirably high salary isn’t just about financial security – it suggests productivity through economic provision. So, what happens if you can’t pump iron or push paper? Are you suddenly less "desirable" because capitalism has trained us to equate desirability with utility?
In a capitalist system, the most "desirable" are those who maximise productivity while minimising costs. This means:
Availability over autonomy – The expectation to always be ready and available, willing to sacrifice personal time for professional gain.
Efficiency over humanity – Speed and compliance are valued more than creativity or well-being.
Profitability over purpose – The work that generates the most revenue is prioritised, while essential but less profitable labour (such as caregiving, teaching, or community work) is undervalued.
Workers who fit the capitalist mould are rewarded – their hiring, promotion, and celebration dictated by the system. Whereas those who require more from the system – even if it’s just basic accommodations or the ability to operate differently – are deemed incompatible, burdensome, or too costly to employ.
Who Gets to Be Desirable at Work?
Beyond skills and experience, desirability in the workplace is shaped by biases embedded in the capitalist system. Race, gender, class, and disability status all impact who is seen as “hireable”, “leadership material”, or “a good fit for company culture”.
Professionalism is often coded in ways that have little to do with skill or competence, but with presentation mattering more than substance. The "right" look, accent, or demeanour frequently determines who gets hired or promoted. The expectation to “look the part” disproportionately disadvantages people of colour, disabled individuals, and those who don’t conform to traditional capitalist corporate aesthetics. Thriving on unattainable ideals, professionalism in capitalist corporate culture becomes a performance. Those who can mimic the image of success, even when it has no bearing on their actual skills or effectiveness, are rewarded.
Similarly, capitalist workplaces prioritise polish over potential, penalising any divergence. Like the projection of perfection via filters and Photoshop, capitalist corporations favour employees who present as effortlessly competent. Adaptability and social ease are prized, while those who might require accommodations, training, or alternative ways of working are unable to thrive despite their skills.
This obsession with maintaining a specific image extends to how labour is valued. Preferring a cycle of renewal to stability, the capitalist labour market is sustained by disposable workers. Older employees – particularly women – often experience career stagnation. The pressure to stay “relevant” forces them to constantly prove their worth, with experience overlooked in favour of youth. And instead of adapting workplaces to be more inclusive, capitalist companies often view accessibility as an inconvenience rather than a necessity.
The idea of "cultural fit" further consolidates these biases when it comes to hiring opportunities. Just as racial and gender norms shape who is seen as “attractive”, they also influence who is perceived as a “leader”, a “team player”, or a “good fit” for capitalist company culture. Capitalist hiring managers tend to favour candidates who reflect existing workplace norms. This ensures that exclusionary structures remain intact, reinforcing racial and class-based inequalities – all while appearing neutral on the surface.
The Productivity Trap: Chasing an Ever-Moving Target
The myth that "hard work pays off" has been capitalism’s most successful ploy – not only for the above reason, but because work is no longer just a means of survival. It is glorified as a moral imperative, framed as a personal virtue – thereby putting the focus of any failings on to the individual rather than the systemic necessities from which it stems. The cult of productivity ensures that masses of people are constantly striving and looking inward; rarely questioning the psychological manipulation and pressure strategies being deployed around them.
For despite working longer hours, sacrificing personal lives, and proving worth through relentless labour (with exhaustion worn like a badge of honour), most workers don’t see the promised rewards. Goalposts keep shifting, promotions remain out of reach, wages stagnate, and stability feels like a fairy tale. The hustle culture narrative of grinding until success is achieved only serves to keep workers perpetually chasing an illusion that there’s always something better, something more, something just out of reach.
At its core, capitalism is a game of the perception of value, and subsequently of scarcity – real or imagined. It doesn’t just respond to desire – it manufactures it, promising infinite choice but only based on homogenised definitions. The "best" car, the "ideal" body, the "dream" job – all follow a template shaped by profitability rather than individual need. Once enough money is thrown behind a certain ideal, it becomes the gold standard. If desirability were equally distributed, entire industries and careers would collapse overnight. So, we’re kept in a cycle of insecurity and aspiration, with desirability as a singular moving target, designed to ensure that most people never feel like they’ve "made it".
Reclaiming Desirability on Our Own Terms
If capitalism disappeared tomorrow, would we still define success by productivity, output, earnings, and accumulation? Would we still view certain bodies, professions, or lifestyles as inherently superior and measure a person's worth by their title? Would our aspirations truly become ours, instead of manufactured by a system that depends on our dissatisfaction? Would we redefine work or would we still claim overwork is a virtue? Would people still be dismissed for needing accommodations, or would we finally recognise that differences aren’t weaknesses but strengths?
If desirability is manufactured by capitalism, then maybe it’s time to stop letting capitalism be the designer. Because real value isn’t something capitalism can put a price on. And a system that profits off all our insecurities in this way was never going to make us feel desired.
