the "tramp stamp", what do we think about it?

[Mise]

The part where the interviewer will react (probably negatively) to the tattoo/haircolor/whatever, but the interviewee knows it going in and does not change/hide it in advance.

Ah, I get you now. Well, perhaps it's more instructive to identify what the problem is. The problem is bad interviewers who don't follow management best practice or adhere to senior managers' instructions.

EDIT: I may as well leave this as a reply to the other post. The problem is the irrational behaviour of the interviewer. The emergent irrationality of the pink-haired applicant is contingent on the irrationality of the interviewer -- the irrationality of the interviewer is a result of being hardwired to discriminate against people who are different. The interviewer's irrationality is closer to the source, more primitive, and therefore the start of the chain. You don't treat the symptom, you tackle the cause, and the cause is primitive, hardwired response to discriminate against people who are different.

 

[IglooDame]

Ah, I get you now. Well, perhaps it's more instructive to identify what the problem is. The problem is bad interviewers who don't follow management best practice or adhere to senior managers' instructions.

EDIT: I may as well leave this as a reply to the other post. The problem is the irrational behaviour of the interviewer. The emergent irrationality of the pink-haired applicant is contingent on the irrationality of the interviewer -- the irrationality of the interviewer is a result of being hardwired to discriminate against people who are different. The interviewer's irrationality is closer to the source, more primitive, and therefore the start of the chain. You don't treat the symptom, you tackle the cause, and the cause is primitive, hardwired response to discriminate against people who are different.

So in the end, we agree. But that still doesn't mean I'm going to start wearing a skirt to interviews - I'll treat the symptom in parallel with tackling the cause.

 

[Mise]

Yeah, same here... But some of the language used in this thread is clearly of the primitive variety; and the post-hoc rationalisations of that primitive response merely serve to cover up a really important part of human development. We can't continue to live in denial of our evolved irrationality by pretending our responses aren't just hardwired fear of people who look different to us.

 

[GoodGame]

Quite frankly, I'm sick of it. It's common as dirt. Makes the chick look stupid.

Yeah, I've even seen a professor with one.

 

[Traitorfish]

If your Persian cat/gerbil/canary bird proved to be the most capable guardian of your house, why prefer a German shepherd? Correct, for no reason at all.
But is it likely enough to try?

Granted, yes, my comparison is hyperbolic, but it stands.

Given that it holds species to be analogous to lifestyle choice, I would argue that it does not.

Very clever of you to change my words to spuriously justify your biased view!

My post drew attention to the changes which I made; it was rather the point.

And pray tell, why are you dragging culture/race into it?

Culture is the issue under debate, and race is not a concept which I have even hinted at.

I did say I would employ him if he was capable, regardless if he was a freak.

So this kind of leaves you screaming in an empty room, sir.

But you acknowledged that the wearing of an unorthodox hairstyle would be seen as indicative of incapability; that is a prejudice which I challenge.

But they aren't identical. Their preparation for the interview was different.

If you want to argue about negative impact of, say, a facial tick, a nose the size of Delaware, whether one wears a blue shirt or a green shirt (by the way, what color clothes you wear - even if all relatively conservative shades - also has an impact), and why it is irrational, fine, I'd agree with you. But the person with the pink hair is going into the interview aware of the potential negative prejudice against pink-haired applicants and yet declining to change their hair color. Like it or not, that makes them legitimately different from the brown-haired applicant in terms of evaluating the results of the interview.

But in what manner can that be taken to reflect unsuitability for any particular employment? All you have established is that the individual has decided against pre-emptively bowing to irrational prejudice; to demand that they do so is no more rational than the prejudice itself. Certainly, a tendency to accept such prejudices is of no discernible benefit to any company that I could imagine.

 

[Bill3000]

But in what manner can that be taken to reflect unsuitability for any particular employment?

I can see it in service industries, considering that one has to accommodate to the customer which would involve bowing to irrational prejudice, although not much other than that.

 

[Traitorfish]

I can see it in service industries, considering that one has to accommodate to the customer which would involve bowing to irrational prejudice, although not much other than that.

Service industries, I'll grant; you the nature of the sector means that irrational prejudices, as you say, really do effect the job, unfortunate as that is. Regardless of the employer's own feelings, they are effectively obliged to at loosely follow broader social conventions.

 

[Karalysia]

I propose a tax on the tramp stamp. We can have a tramp party where tramps and harlots are thrown off a ship.

 

[BCLG100]

Oh. this argument is still going huh?

 

[CaptainF]

I like the tattoo that Abbadon posted, but that picture that Erik posted is absolutely right, she isn't ever going to get a job that pays taxes. And that's the problem. She's not going to get a tax paying job because people are prejudiced against people with bold tattoos. Prejudice is bad. All the antipathy in this thread towards tattoos -- and subsequently judging them negatively -- is not a good thing for an otherwise progressive, open-minded bunch of liberals.

It's amazing how a thread on women's appearance can bring out the most narrow-minded, bigoted, judgemental, conservative, Victorian, puritanical nonsense in a board that's supposed to have an overwhelmingly left-wing, liberal bias!

This!

 

[The Imp]

I support the tramp stamp. It narrows down the field of easy to lay chicks when at at bar after a few drinks.