Of course nowadays almost everything is a choice. Michael Jackson used to be black then "chose" to be white, and didn't Cher have a daughter who is now her son (by her choice)? Just sayin.
Michael Jackson's ebony to ivory change was the result of an autoimmune disorder called
However, since you raise the valid issue that choice isn't always black & white (so to speak), I'll throw you a bone and concede that body modification isn't exactly like hygiene, in that the choice may have been made a long time ago and is more or less permanent – unlike taking a shower or getting a haircut.
/scott
My tu-pence worth. I worked in IT recruitment for 9 years up till 2007. HR don't do the hiring, they facilitate the process. The IT Manager or Finance Manager or whoever will decide who they want to work for them.
There was a theory that by the time the hiring manager meets you in Reception, navigates through corridors/elevators/coffee machines - he/she has already deceided if they like you.
If it comes down to a choice between 2 candidates of (more or less) equal technical abilities, it's then down to the personal preference of the hiring manager. Broadly speaking, I used to advise candidates to present themselves in a way which is least likely to 'offend'. So, turn up on time, have questions ready, be smartly dressed, do some research on the hiring company to answer the inevitable "what do you know about us" question.
So, I would keep body art and furniture hidden or disguised. Don't lie, but if you're not asked about such things, don't volunteer the information. Maximise the opportunity - you can bet that the hirer won't tell you about all their corporate warts
HTH
Your post is a jumble of non-sequiturs. You've mischaracterized my position by conflating several ideas and lacing your post with inflammatory words. Let me try to cut through the nonsense.
Employers should be free to choose who they hire, provided they do not discriminate on legitimate grounds, such as race, gender, and ok, since you brought it up, why not obesity. It is ridiculous to propose "discrimination" be enlarged infinitely ("for any reason"), as this effectively takes away the choice of the employer. For example, if an applicant comes into my office and, in the name of freedom of expression, ridicules and insults me, then I am not going to hire them. If you want to be inflammatory, you can call that "discrimination" against rude people, because that would be accurate. However, to characterize it as immoral simply does not follow.
Just because someone makes a choice you don't like doesn't mean they are immoral. It's just the flip side of the coin in a free society.
/scott
I'd argue that quoting your statement verbatim is pretty far from "mischaracterizing your position." In any event, your example of someone insulting/ridiculing/being rude to you doesn't apply in this argument at all and is comparing apples to oranges. The thread is about physical discrimination. Which one is not like the others? Race - Gender - Obesity - Personality.
I'd argue that quoting your statement verbatim is pretty far from "mischaracterizing your position." In any event, your example of someone insulting/ridiculing/being rude to you doesn't apply in this argument at all and is comparing apples to oranges. The thread is about physical discrimination. Which one is not like the others? Race - Gender - Obesity - Personality.
Quoting me? Let's see what you really said.
How do you see it as not morally wrong to judge someone based on their appearance, regardless of how that appearance came to be?
I don't. That is not a verbatim quote and it mischaracterizes my position.
By this logic you're saying it's OK to discriminate against a fat person because being fat is a choice.
No, I'm not. That is not a verbatim quote and it mischaracterizes my position.
to say it's "morally ok" to discriminate for any reason is just plain silly - dare i say immoral.
And now you imply that "for any reason" really means "physical." They are not equivalent. I think you just mischaracterized your own position.
See
/scott
What a great thread D I know a barrister with a tattooed buttock (he got it out in the pub once to show people), and know an ex-cop who worked with a colleague who had 'ACAB' (All Coppers Are Bastards) on his knuckles - I don't know how he managed to join with that, personally.
There's a growing trend for science-related tattoos in academia, as
BenUK, thanks for the highly entertaining links, especially Happy as a Monkey's suggestions for forensic tattoos. Pure gold!
/scott
i like
"Text “I learned NTFS forensics using the MFT record of a cheerleader photo“"
I'm somewhat surprised this thread has gotten so much attention, but I guess this is a bit of an emotional issue. Like it or not anything we do in society to stick out or express ourselves will be the subject of comments by others, good and bad.
I believe a lot would also have to do with what type of Tattoo the person had. If someone has a visible tattoo of a skull head they will likely be judged different than someone with their kids names on them.
Finding jobs these days is difficult even if you have everything going your way. Why give a perspective employer ammo right off the bat to disqualify you.