But honestly, someone who uses the concept "ugly women" is failing so hard at sexism already they might as well be a character from "Mad Men".
I suspect you mean they are succeeding at being sexist?
Also, why is it sexist to acknowledge that some people are better looking than others? Clearly, making this sort of judgment about a non-customer-facing role is inappropriate, but is it wrong to acknowledge that looks play a part in customer contact[1] roles?
[1] In person, obviously. No one care what the call center person looks like as long as they speak English.
More generally, calling things "PC" is a lazy shortcut, a straw man attack.
I mean, unless someone actually sincerely says to you "oh, reinhardt, you mustn't say XYZ, I want you to be politically correct". In that case, mock away.
I absolutely disagree with JulianMorrison (that "us[ing] the concept 'ugly women' is failing so hard at sexism ..."). My disagreement has nothing to do with suspecting him of being "PC", nor do I dismiss other related claims from other people because of the existence of this statement.
Trying to get people to deprogram their own biology at a very deep level is probably going to be a losing battle.
Do you know any men in real life? Unless you're just trolling, I find it hard to believe that you actually believe this.
Marketers have (I can only assume) found that triggering the former to lead to the latter is a working strategy (they do tend to at least try to base their actions on observed results). Even if that's not the case the concept that there's a dual throw switch for power between the gonads and the brain seems pretty silly and needlessly underestimates men (though it sort of overestimates them at the same time I guess...).
A man has both brains and balls, to expect that he can switch one of those off or pretend it does not exist is unrealistic. (Obviously, this does not excuse a man if he sexually harasses a woman or otherwise behaves badly.)
Surely this is a parody?