February 24, 2020
“This is what a
demon great employee looks like.”
The way in which people choose to present themselves is a statement, so why shouldn’t we listen to what they have to say about themselves?
Despite the fact that employment regulations state it is illegal to discriminate against a potential employee due to their sex, religion or other personal characteristics, a surprising new survey finds more than half of employers admit to still judging job applicants based on their appearance.
The research, commissioned by Greene King, surveyed 1,000 hiring managers and bosses in the United Kingdom. Overall, 51% said they have knowingly discriminated against a potential employee because of the way they looked. Of those, 43% said they didn’t hire the candidate because of their visible tattoos. Another 40% didn’t hire candidates based on their clothes, while hair color put off 30% of employers.
Can you really use that to portray those employees as the bad guys though?
Visible tattoos tell a story.
The way in which people dress also tells a story.
Hair color often tells a story many are already familiar with.
These aren’t minor things.
Similarly, about half of respondents said they can’t “look beyond” an interviewee’s physical appearance, even if they appear to be more than capable of excelling in the job they are applying for. To that effect, 21% said they didn’t hire a candidate because they had a disability.
“Employers should be open-minded and hire people based on potential, rather than just appearance,” says Greene Kine HR director Andrew Bush in a statement. “Unfortunately, our research shows many businesses still judge a book by its cover – which means those talented, intelligent and experienced applicants could be overlooked because they don’t conventionally ‘look the part’. Having a tattoo, or a piercing, doesn’t mean you are unable to do a job efficiently. Employers could be discriminating against potentially brilliant candidates.”
Still, just under a third of hiring managers also find it difficult to ignore visible tattoos when considering an applicant for a job. Visible piercings were a distraction for 28% of employers in the survey, and 25% said they can’t overlook how a potential employee is dressed for an interview.
How about we trust our eyes and guts instead?
“Don’t judge a book by its cover” is like saying that you shouldn’t evaluate whether things are food or not based on how edible they look and that instead you should be biting and chewing on everything to try and figure it out.
“Chew on everything because something may taste nice.”
It’s also a pillar of The Tranny, because judging appearances is the first step towards misgendering someone.
Judging appearances is ingrained in our biology. At its core, it is an automated process that cannot really be controlled at will.
When people think that they’re not really judging appearances, they’re actually judging appearances and using their conscious mind to override the results from the judging.
If this process didn’t exist, people would be unable to find others sexually attractive, and everyone would be doing sex stuff with everyone to “read the book” and find out if it’s good or not.
Also known as “you won’t know if you like it until you try it.”
By pure unadulterated coincidence, we live in a cultural environment that proudly states that people shouldn’t judge a book by its cover and that everyone should be tasting different genitals to Find Themselves.
The whole “oh, but what if the person is actually some kind of very capable genius” thing is silly.
What about the other capable people that don’t come with the telltales of undesirable baggage?
It’s a bit like saying “yes, she may be insane but she has a vagina.”
Normal people shouldn’t be shamed for refusing to engage with people they don’t want to engage with.