Would You Accept A Job If You Had To Change Your Hair Or Appearance?
Printed From: HairBoutique.com
Category: Hair Talk
Forum Name: Hair Politics
Forum Description: The politics of Hair is a slippery slope...
URL: /forum_posts.php?TID=8776
Printed Date: Dec 26, 2024 at 10:37am
Topic: Would You Accept A Job If You Had To Change Your Hair Or Appearance?
Posted By: Bratty
Subject: Would You Accept A Job If You Had To Change Your Hair Or Appearance?
Date Posted: May 15, 2003 at 9:57am
I think everyone will agree that the job market is horrible and the worst it has been in a very long time. My guy is trying to get a job and has very long hair that is neat and in a ponytail but he has a beard as well. He has been told by recruiters that it would help him to cut his hair and get his beard shaved off. He refuses. So while I agree it is important to have a code of ethics about your appearance, there are bills that have to be paid.
What is your thoughts? Would you be willing to change your appearance if it meant getting/keeping/losing a job?
-------------
|
Replies: 32
Posted By: Bratty
Date Posted: May 15, 2003 at 9:57am
I think everyone will agree that the job market is horrible and the worst it has been in a very long time. My guy is trying to get a job and has very long hair that is neat and in a ponytail but he has a beard as well. He has been told by recruiters that it would help him to cut his hair and get his beard shaved off. He refuses. So while I agree it is important to have a code of ethics about your appearance, there are bills that have to be paid.
What is your thoughts? Would you be willing to change your appearance if it meant getting/keeping/losing a job?
|
Posted By: Lyris
Date Posted: May 15, 2003 at 12:55pm
Hmmm...good question. Is anyone here an actor? Talk about having to change your appearance for a job--there's Renee Zellwegger's weight gain for Bridget Jones (then losing it all for Chicago), Samantha Morton's shaved head for Minority Report and Brad Pitt's mountain man beard that looked like advancing shrubbery from a distance. (Can't remember the movie that was for though.) I did musical theatre during high school/college and directors are very specific in how they want a character to look. If your hair needs to be short and you really want the role, you either chop it off or wear a wig (the latter works well in non-professional production.) Fortunately with stage productions you can get away with fake bears/wigs/makeup/padded clothing more than you can if you were in a movie. (Not that I've had that experience or ever will!)
But anyway. I don't know if I would. It would depend on the job and the change required. I'm blessed to work in a very inclusive environment right now where that's not an issue. Other thoughts? |
Posted By: uzma
Date Posted: May 15, 2003 at 4:27pm
I do change my appearance for work.
Working for a corporation, ! have to wear a suit or at least a jacket. I can live with that.
With respect to hair - there is a little compromise.
I will not cut it, but I do tie it back.
I have been under pressure to cut my hair, colour it, style it, etc, but have expressed very clearly that people are walking on thin ice when they broach the subject with me. So those comments are no longer made within my hearing.
I change jobs every 9-18 months so interviews are a way of life. However, I believe if you have the skills required by the marketplace, you will be hired despite any appearance-bias on the part of the employer.
In a depressed market, one is competing with a greater number of people who modify their appearance to suit employers.
If your partner is happiest with long hair and beard, I suggest that he finds alternative hair-friendly employment, outside of his field of expertise as an interim solution.
In parallel to that, he should continue to search for those employers in his specialist area that are interested in him and his skills rather than his appearance.
They do exist, I'm sure .
Best of luck to you both.
Uzma ), R '. `p %
|
Posted By: LiliBeach
Date Posted: May 15, 2003 at 8:49pm
Has he thought of maybe shaping his beard into a goat tee? These seem to be very accepting to the corporate world. !- A `badera -, , @ )20`p )2$-!) !-,- )!4 r $(
|
Posted By: Rod
Date Posted: May 15, 2003 at 9:32pm
Ethics? An ethical dilemna is when an employer asks you to lie to a client. Your boyfriend has a preference to long hair and a beard. He doesn't feel anyone should tell him what to do.
We live in a world with other people. Sometimes, that means making decisions that aren't our first choice. When you're married or have kids, that happens a lot.
Some jobs require certain appearances. You may not think they are always justified, but then it's the boss's decision. Jobs dealing with the public often require certain appearances.
If your boyfriend's dream job is like that, I hope he wouldn't compromise his dreams for hair. Hair is great, but dreams are so much more.
|
Posted By: Bratty
Date Posted: May 16, 2003 at 5:11pm
Thanks all for your feedback. I am of two minds. I see his point of view and I agree that you should be true to your value systems but I also see that bills have to be paid and after all if someone is paying you to do a job, they do have a right, within reason to ask a certain dress code and look. I know this was a big controversy at I think Disney awhile back. So thank you for all your thoughts. I am going to discuss this all with him and hopefully we can find a compromise. I like the idea LiliBeach of the goatee.
Thanks,
Bratty
|
Posted By: duke
Date Posted: May 29, 2003 at 11:24am
Cutting your hair for a job/shaving is discrimination
and positively stinks. Can he get a lower end job
to help pay the bills until someone will hire him in
his area of expertise as he is?
|
Posted By: Lyris
Date Posted: May 29, 2003 at 11:32am
|
Bratty, would he really be willing to work for less money to keep the beard? That could be a real burden financially. |
Posted By: Rod
Date Posted: May 29, 2003 at 12:41pm
It's descrimination not to hire someone due to race, color, religion, or gender. There have been lawsuits about people getting hired or not hired due to apperance. When a less attractive woman lost out on a receptionist job to a more attractive woman, she sued and lost. The company believed they had an image to convey.
Any job dealing with the public, with vendors, or clients is within an employer's discretion. Companies have dress codes, even those that don't deal with the public. Is a hair code that much of an extension?
Besides dress, employers ask you to compromise your beliefs by coming in on time, bathing regularly, not goofing off and posting on the Internet (oops), among other things.
It isn't descrimination to ask someone to change their appearance for a job.
|
Posted By: tina m
Date Posted: May 29, 2003 at 11:16pm
Most courts have decided that an employer CAN discriminate on the basis of clothing, hairstyle and hygene and cleanliness. In most civilized countries you CAN'T discriminate by race, religion, ethnicity or gender but you can have "dress" codes.
But just because the employers have a right to thus discriminate doesn't mean it is "morally" right.
If a person has an unusual hairstyle that isn't overly distracting to other employees or the public and if that person does good work, many enlightened and progressive employers will hire that person anyway.-( Example - men with very long hair or earrings, a woman with a short dress or noserings as I wear)-.
Personally I am willing to go along with a dress code within reason and no employer I have ever had has requested me to remove my nosestuds, but if the employer was too conservative I might decide not to work there.
Two can play this game;- an employer could miss out on a talented hard-working employee if they discriminate too much. -(In my humble opinion)-.4!,!
|
Posted By: reggia
Date Posted: Jun 26, 2003 at 1:28pm
Hi! (new here)
If a specific would-be employer asked me to cut my hair, I'm not so sure I'd want to oblige. However, I am very seriously considering cutting my hair as I go out job prospecting. (I haven''t worked in a few years -- been home raising children.) And once I secure a job, I won't have any qualms about growing it back. By that time, I can be judged for my work performance and not my looks. Unfortunately, it really does seem as if long-hair people aren''t considered as professional.
|
Posted By: Rod
Date Posted: Jun 26, 2003 at 3:17pm
Reggia, perceptions can be a key to securing a job and the employer might not even realize it. How you look, (clothes, hair) and body language can send subconscious signals to interviewers.
How long is it now and how short are you thinking of going? You may not need to cut your hair if you can wear it up in a way that makes you look professional and not like a young girl. Along the same lines, if you go too short it can be attractive, but may be intimidating.
A new cut will enable you to leave your stay-at-home mom look behind and create your professional self. Get a cut that makes you feel more self-confident, like you
|
Posted By: duke
Date Posted: Jun 28, 2003 at 12:29pm
For crying out loud, Reggia, jut put it in a bun. A neat and tight bun and
it will not only look professional but it will not even be clear how long it is.
|
Posted By: reggia
Date Posted: Jun 28, 2003 at 7:03pm
Well, thanks for the suggestion, Duke. ...only problem is that buns don't stay neat on me for very long. I don't seem to have the "tight bun" face either, or maybe it's the personality -- dunno for sure.
* * *
Thanks for your response, Rod. My hair is about 4-6 inches above the waist. Yes, I don't much care for very short cuts but may consider a cut that touches the shoulders. I think the change would be a little fun but... Even so I'm hoping that long layers will do the trick, and enable me to put it up.
|
Posted By: DaveDecker
Date Posted: Jun 29, 2003 at 8:52pm
Reggia,
If you believe in your skills and ability to do the job, then let that be your source of confidence. You know you can do the job just as well with long hair. So there's no compelling reason to change it. Just restrain it in a ponytail or braid. Confidence in yourself with shine through and convince would-be employers to hire you.
It worked for me, and I have (what appears to be a waist-length) braid.
Let us know how your job search goes, and good luck!
|
Posted By: reggia
Date Posted: Jun 30, 2003 at 6:14pm
|
Thanks for the encouragement, Dave! When you mentioned your long braid, it reminded me of the comment I made when first moving to this town over a year ago. I remember saying and thinking that it was the long-haired capital of the country - not negatively but just in awe, I had not seen so much hair since I was a kid. Perhaps this town is more accepting than I gave it credit for.
|
Posted By: HeadBoy
Date Posted: Jul 2, 2003 at 3:36pm
I did cut my hair for a job when I was in my late teens. In the news business, there are very rigid appearance standards. I'm not saying they are right or wrong, but they are expected in that industry.
It was a foot in the door to a career I wanted. I had hair to my shoulders and had little interest in cutting it. Guys with hair that long don't get to be on camera. Oddly enough, it turns out I prefer my hair short. It's a buzzcut these days and has been for a long time.
I did it and have no regrets. That does not mean everyone should cut their hair for a job.
If the job is just "a job" I most likely would not have. Since it was in the career I wanted and the competition was stiff, I did it without hesitation. (Never did get on camera, he notes, semi-ironically)
I grew a goatee while working at an underground magazine. When I interviewed for a newspaper in a more conservative area, I was asked if I'd shave it off if I was offered the job.
We haggled out a price and I did. (My wife was grateful)
Being a guy, the longer your hair is, it is most likely the job market will frown upon that look. As a fan of short haired women, and as a guy who used to have long hair, I find that a bit of a double standard. I understand health concerns in food service jobs, which is why hair nets and hats are available. In an office situation, as long as someone is neat in their apearance, it should not be a problem. sadly, it is.
I've hired people in the past based on how much talent I felt they had, not the way they looked. It is a strange world we live in and human resources people have preferences like everyone else. It is a shame when those preferences become a stumbling block for someone who just wants to support his/her family.
!!! `g add
|
Posted By: DaveDecker
Date Posted: Jul 2, 2003 at 6:47pm
 ``* $b $`a d`"
Hi Reggia,
You are welcome. :-) I have gone through the process of finding employment several times while with long hair, and as HeadBoy mentions, it (on a man) is an obstacle with some HR folks.
You have piqued my curiosity... where exactly is this long-hair heaven, if I may ask?
|
Posted By: reggia
Date Posted: Jul 17, 2003 at 12:00am
|
That would be Boise.
|
Posted By: Vineman
Date Posted: Sep 5, 2003 at 1:53pm
 Some jobs require certain appearances. You may not think they are always justified, but then it's the boss's decision. Jobs dealing with the public often require certain appearances.
If your boyfriend's dream job is like that, I hope he wouldn't compromise his dreams for hair. Hair is great, but dreams are so much more. |
Don't you realise it's that attitude that causes this in the first place? Nothing "requires" specific appearance except maybe actros, and at least then they may be able to pass up certain roles for others.
It's this that tells the public what to expect anyway.
I am a guy with very thick wavy just blow chin length hair, it'd be extremely hard for me to get a job because of it. I'm never, ever going to cut it though, unless it's what I want to do and even then it'll only be an inch or too shorter.
If we all cut our hair for jobs, nothing will cahnge, don't you see? If enough people protest for something as simple as this people do take notice. If even only one case manages to make a good example it would help.
What's worse is that even when I get my Degree in Computer systems, I still won't be as preferable for a job as someone underqaulfiied. I'm growing mty hair out logner and I do intend it to be bright unnatural colours which equates "Useless Punk" to idiots.
How is it any different from discriminating against race? YOu're saying "Sorry, you can't be black" "Sorry you can't be long haired". There is no difference except that the latter can change. If a black man could change to a white but not go back, would there still have been outrage? Of course, rightfully so. We are entitles as human beings to show our insides on our outsides, to be who we want to.
If you think about it discriminating against religion isn't as bad, Religion is something implied upon you at birth, only if it's personal religion should it be applicable, yet ironically nobody takes personal religion seriously.
Some things are mroe important than money. Human rights, for instance.
Where has our fighting spirit gone? )! Aa la q`e !$40`" 4$b /4 ! $% ) , ,%,b` #(
|
Posted By: Rod
Date Posted: Sep 5, 2003 at 2:29pm
If you show up for a job interview dirty, unshaven, ungroomed in your underwear, should the interviewer take that into account? Didn't how your significant other looks impact your attraction? We're all here on a hair board, so appearance has to be important to you.
When you work in retail or sales or any job that deals with the public (lawyer, doctor) how you appear impacts your impression on your clients/customers. If we all decided we were going to make judgements based on appearance, the world would be a better place. But it's not the world we live in. Attractive, well-dressed, polite people sell better than unattractive, poorly dressed, rude people. So, who should the boss hire? If the boss thinks that you could sell more product if your hair was a certain way, shouldn't he want that? The receptionist needs to be someone who is welcoming to his clients.
In jobs where you don't deal with the public, the boss shouldn't have a say in hair recommendations, but most people would agree he has the right to say no shorts or sandals. Is that very different?
I know a lot of men who are computer programmers. Two of them have hair below their shoulders. In that profession, long hair actually gives a better impression. Techies are off-beat. They go against the norm.
|
Posted By: duke
Date Posted: Sep 6, 2003 at 6:48am
Well, Vineman and Rob show opposite ways
of looking at the situation and it's interesting.
This is how I see it: generally, if you don't
work with clients but are in a closed office, it shouldn't matter one bit how you dress, as
long as you are not distracting people. Thus, if I
ever become an average employer, I will allow
my office employees to wear a chicken suit to
work if it doesn't deconcentrate the others
too much. As for workers who are with clients,
there might be a stricter dress code (in some
industries at least no real potentially gross
things like body art) but I'd try to keep it as
lenient as possible and would certainly not
regulate hair length. If dress codes are ever
necessary, they are then in an average place
a necessary evil.
Bratty, are you there? Whatever happened
with your boyfriend?
|
Posted By: Vineman
Date Posted: Sep 6, 2003 at 7:36pm
If we all decided we were going to make judgements based on appearance, the world would be a better place. But it's not the world we live in. Attractive, well-dressed, polite people sell better than unattractive, poorly dressed, rude people. So, who should the boss hire? If the boss thinks that you could sell more product if your hair was a certain way, shouldn't he want that? The receptionist needs to be someone who is welcoming to his clients.
|
That's disgusting, you're saying that unattractive, poorly dressed people are generally rude. You're encouraging this rape of personality. You're looking at it from a business point of view, what should the Boss do to get profit, you're not saying anything about actual personal rights at all. You're just encouraging the greed that lies in the black hearts of so many employers on this dirty planet.
I hate when people talk about "Welcome to the real world, you have to make sacrifices for money"it's so stupid. WHY? Why make money if it's not making you happy! You don't HAVE to have a family, you don't HAVE to be the same.
It just goes the show what the world has come to. Progress... People work to run the world... but if everyones working, whos in the world to appreciate it?
Pathetic. )! Aa la q`e !$40`" 4$b /4 ! $% ) , ,%,b` #(
|
Posted By: Rod
Date Posted: Sep 7, 2003 at 12:21am
<"p (!4 $`ab a0
You've misread my post. I never said unattractive people are rude, only that if a person is unattractive or poorly dressed or rude, they won't get hired.
What personal rights are you talking about? Should a boss give you money because you want it? It's his money. He has the say. Start your own company and let the people come in whenever they want wearing bathrobes. Either make your own rules or you live by someone's else's rules. If you don't have to make sacrifices for money, how do you eat? Pay the rent? Does someone support you? All of us aren't as lucky.
You don't have to have a family, but for most of us, the family makes us happy? So, we're willing to make sacrifices for them.
The world is a far better place than it used to be. Freedom is at a premium. If you look through history, the choices you want to make couldn't have been made. People worked much longer hours and their employers, or feudal lords, ruled those lives.
|
Posted By: Vineman
Date Posted: Sep 7, 2003 at 8:36am
| hat personal rights are you talking about? Should a boss give you money because you want it? It's his money. |
That's very... capitalist. You should get money because you're just as fit as the next person to do it who doesn't have purple hair.
Like, what if some boss said "I don't like the look of that black guy... he looks kinda shady" that wouldn't be very fair would it?
I only hope you are victim to prejudice some day so you'll understand, then again if you have I'm pretty sure you didn't have the "balls" to stand up for yourself.
| he world is a far better place than it used to be. |
Don't you see? It's better because people like me stood up for themselves and others and said "Hold on, that's not right". So why are you criticising further progress? very hypocritical.
Also, the point is that the world needs people like me, if the world was filled with Rods (no offence) nobody would stand up for their rights and there would be no real progress. The world needs different types of people to work and evolve. )! Aa la q`e !$40`" 4$b /4 ! $% ) , ,%,b` #(
|
Posted By: Rod
Date Posted: Sep 7, 2003 at 10:42am
<"p (!4 $d`` $"
You've chosen to bolster your argument by insulting my character. Considering you've never met me, I'm blown away by this. Character insults are a sure sign your argument is weak.
My arguments are capitalist. We live in a country that has a capitalist system. If you don't try to earn money you can't eat or pay the rent. I don't know how you earn money, but if you do so without making any compromises for your clients, co-workers, boss, spouse, or children, you're in the minority. Most of us that live in this society, are a part of this society.
There's a huge difference between being black and having purple hair or wearing a bath robe to work or smelling like feces.
I've suffered through quite a bit of prejudice in my life and stand up to it just fine. Thanks for the insult though.
on't you see? It's better because people like me stood up for themselves and others and said "Hold on, that's not right". So why are you criticising further progress? very hypocritical.
Also, the point is that the world needs people like me, if the world was filled with Rods (no offence) nobody would stand up for their rights and there would be no real progress. The world needs different types of people to work and evolve.
|
It's people like me that do that change things in this world, not people who just complain. Martin Luther King wasn't posting on Internet boards. He was doing something. Karl Marx, on the other hand, wrote about how terrible Capitalist society was and how the constraints society put on people were wrong. Several of his children died of starvation because he refused to participate in society.
|
Posted By: Vineman
Date Posted: Sep 7, 2003 at 7:42pm
Yes that personal comment was uncalled for I'm sorry but there's an almost insulting tone to the way you say certain things, I can't help feeling like you're talking down to me. You could accuse me of that, but in reality I'm not talking in any particular direction, just shouting out.
"Smelling like Feces" you're still making it seem as if Purple hair is a bad thing
Anyway, throwing focus on things like that is also often a sign of a weak argument, declaring an argument to be SURELY weak shows you're jumping at the chance.
[quote]
It's people like me that do that change things in this world, not people who just complain. Martin Luther King wasn't posting on Internet boards. He was doing something. Karl Marx, on the other hand, wrote about how terrible Capitalist society was and how the constraints society put on people were wrong. Several of his children died of starvation because he refused to participate in society. [/quote]
Sadly, in our world people do have to suffer to make a point, just as you say people have to suffer to make money.
Ideals can be worth nothing or everything. I'd say the ideal of personal freedom is one worth dying for.
I AM probably going to be a "techie", I'll most likely get to wear my hair long, hopefully, but I'm only one person and there are many others who will suffer.
You're going on the point that you have to suffer to enjoy things like a family, no you don't. You don't have to. It's implied on you that you should. With a little work in the opposite direction it can be changed. That's the point I'm making.
The problem is that you and others don't take it seriosuly even if you're not saying it you have an element of "well he's a useless punk" in what you're saying, like anyone who chooses to be themselves over work is a complete waste of space, and that things like purple hair and looking different are just whymsical quirks of the young generation, nothing more.
It's a lot, lot more than that.
There is much more to life than work. Happiness is one thing.
Like about coloured people and jobs, that means that a lot of coloured people are unhappy because they can't get jobs, but the way it a lot of every group is unhappy because they can't be themselves, or can't get a job because they look a little different, there are probably millions of people who deep down have always wanted to look different but never got a chance to try between work and peer pressure.
You have to balance and weigh it out. A massive amount of unhappiness still applies to this.
It's not something that can be taken lightly, people only take work seriously any more, if someone can't get a job, thats more horrible to the general public than someone being unhappy in a job, even if that person is single and has no family to feed.
How often do you hear "the unhappiness rate of people in jobs rose this year..."? Maybe a nice little article in the paper hitting a similiar tone once and again, but nothing compared to unemployment stories.
Work sells, individuality doesn't.
)! Aa la q`e !$40`" 4$b /4 ! $% ) , ,%,b` #(
|
Posted By: Rod
Date Posted: Sep 7, 2003 at 8:39pm
<"p $% @ !`` e
I'm guessing from your "I AM probably going to be a "techie" that you're young and haven't been in the work force. The great advantage of youth is that you believe you can do anything. You see injustice and believe you can do something about it. As we age, we lose a little bit of that. That's a shame.
With age, comes wisdom. I've learned which compromises aren't really compromises. What things aren't really that important. What things I'm willing to give up and sacrifice for my family or the other things I really want. I'd gladly give up so much of what's important to me for my family, because they're far more important to me.
There are compromises I'll make to pay the mortgage and put food on the table. When I was younger, I didn't want to buy a home and couldn't see making compromises for others. Having a family wasn't that important. The compromises I make don't make me unhappy.
But don't interpret that to mean I'm not true to myself. I'm just not the same person I was at 20. I won't be this person at 60.
I've been an employer and an employee. As an employer, my bottom line was the most important thing. If it wasn't, I wouldn't have been able to operate and provide the employees jobs. Employee satisfaction was down the list. My business was such that it didn't matter if someone had purple hair or T-shirts and shorts. There was no dress code. I hired the best people I could afford. Of course, my business didn't require dealing with the public, so I didn't have to worry about that.
As an employee, I've had to conform. I hate wearing ties, but if that's part of the job, I will. I don't like to get up so early in the mornings, but that's another compromise I have to make. I don't like taking direction from people who don't know what they're talking about, but that's part of it too. (Direction from people who know what they're doing is not only welcome, but what I hope for.)
So, no I don't mind if you have long hair, purple hair, tattoos, or a dozen piercings, but I understand that some people do. And if I'm buying from you and you have purple hair, I might not be as impressed with your sales pitch. It may be subtle, but it can happen.
Changing my hair or appearance for a job isn't a big thing.
Chances are that I'll enjoy the job more than I regret any changes, and the things I can do with my income are much more important.
|
Posted By: Kuroneko
Date Posted: Sep 8, 2003 at 4:19am
|
I have a friend who was complaining about the dress code at her work because they set limits on the number of earrings a person could wear at one time, said employees' hair had to be either short or kept tied back, and wanted no visible tattoos or piercings, all of which she found unreasonable. Curiously, she had no objections to having to wear a uniform every day. . . so apparently it's all right for them to tell her what to wear, as long as they don't tell her to limit her jewellery and wear a ponytail :-P . She might argue the uniform is just clothing, and she can take it off when she gets home, but she can also take down her ponytail and put on as much jewellery as she wants once she gets home, so I don't see how it's that much different. Appearance clauses might not seem fair, but it's just an extension of the dress code. You don't see police officers protesting having to wear uniforms, after all, even though I'm sure not all of them like it. *shrugs* If you want something badly enough, you're generally willing to sacrifice a little to get it, even if it does seem inconvenient. ! % Aaebade d !, ` . 4``
|
Posted By: duke
Date Posted: Sep 8, 2003 at 6:51am
There are various nuances to this. I agree that
cops should wear a uniform, which allows them
to be recognized at a moment - this is important
for their line of work. But many departments
require or required their officers to be "clean
cut" - no long hair for men or even beards. This
is too strict I think. Also, officers are often
required to wear a tie, even though today even
many business people don't wear one with their
suit. Ties are uncomfortable and not that good
for your health. I think a cop can still look like a
cop if they wear a dress shirt and forage cap,
and don't need a tie - really one of the stupidest
inventions I can think of. If I were given the
chance to modify the dress code of the Toronto
Police, my first change would be "no ties except
with the (rarely worn) full dress uniform" and if
they have to keep their hair short, that would
be changed too.
Also, "smelling like feces" is different from how
you wear your hair - the former is sure to
sicken co-workers and negatively distract them,
while the latter is really just a matter of taste.
|
Posted By: Vineman
Date Posted: Sep 8, 2003 at 6:19pm
I don't like Uniforms either - they're pointless and serve mostly to dampen spirits, but at least you can take it off. It's hard for me to take a haircut off.
And I probably AM going to be a Techie, because I'm doing Computer Systems in college, I have the points, either that or I'm screwed. So I'm not being arrogant, just logical, computers is a wide field and i'ts what I'm best suited to, not neccessarily what i'd best like to do. I want to either design games, write books and poetry or obviously my ultimate dream, play music. But I'm sensible enough to know I'll probably end up as a web designer or something.
I'm guessing from your "I AM probably going to be a "techie" that you're young and haven't been in the work force. The great advantage of youth is that you believe you can do anything. You see injustice and believe you can do something about it. As we age, we lose a little bit of that. That's a shame.
With age, comes wisdom. |
Aw man, if you're going to bring ageism with it I'm just going to leave, everyone has different experiences in their lifetime, no matter how short, some more valuable than others.
I'm sorry but ageism is very low, a lot lower than my comment which I at least apologised for.
Of course I don't believe I can do anything, otherwise I wouldn't care waht you think, I can't do things on my own, but if everyone sat up and took notice, the world would be a different place.
All evils in the world feed off one another, it's the same mindset that spreads conformity that keeps thrid world debt going, that promotes child labour, that, that promotes greed. It may not be the same people but changing small things can result. The more free we are, the more confident we are to correct wrongdoings.
EDIT: The swear sensor on the board is rubbish, it just filtered the word C0cky, as in arrogant and c0cky. )! Aa la q`e !$40`" 4$b /4 ! $% ) , ,%,b` #(
|
Posted By: hairalways
Date Posted: Sep 9, 2003 at 4:31am
Look...It's plain and simple...The world is based on survival of the fittest....Being the strongest (mentally and physically)...You either survive, or you don't. When you think of it in those terms, physical appearances and other things like that are trivialities. If you don't consider them to be that, then you are part of the group referred to as "the thinning of the herd"
Plain and simple.
|
Posted By: duke
Date Posted: Sep 9, 2003 at 5:57am
Technically, Rob and Hairalways have a
point, but if people like Vineman (and me,
for that matter) stand up for our rights
to be who we are, there may just get to
be less "survival of the fittest" and more
charitability. Look at the Netherlands - not
that I appove of their lax attitude towards
drugs or anything, but there, you can even
have long hair in the army. Something
there HAS changed. A dozen years ago or
so, "white collar workers" often did have
to wear "the white collar" and tie, now
casual is much more common. 50 years
ago, virtually all men had short (often real
short) hair as a matter of course. If bright
young people didn't come along and fight
for the right to have long hair, we might
still all have to go to the barber's for our
monthly clipping.
I don't see why Vineman would not be a
techie. My dad's a computer programmer
with one of the world's most reputable
computer firms, and he can go to work in
jeans. In fact there are people where he
works who have on them more extreme
fashion.
|
|
| | | |