How can anyone be "too pretty?" and then get fiired?

[Gingerbread Demon]

[yt]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Oqd0ecxUCM[/yt]



But how can an employer fire someone based on how they look?

Is that even legal, and mind you they probably fabricated all the other reasons they fired them for, especially the very first lady. I followed that first story when it actually happened and it was bizarre.

 

[MacLeod]

I'm going to say it's illegal to fire someone based on how attractive they are.

 

[JarodRussell]

Happens in entertainment companies all the time.

 

[Pingfah]

I'm going to say it's illegal to fire someone based on how attractive they are.

That depends where you are. In some states in the US you can be fired for absolutely no reason at all.

 

[TEACAKE'S PLEATHER DOME]

I wish I had this terrible problem.

 

[JWPlatt]

What if you're hired as the star of a TV series called "Ugly Betty?"

 

[Rincewiend]

But how can an employer fire someone based on how they look?

Is that even legal, and mind you they probably fabricated all the other reasons they fired them for, especially the very first lady. I followed that first story when it actually happened and it was bizarre.

Yeah, very often it's because some-one in charge is afraid he will be "tempted" by sinfull tjoughts so he just fires the woman...

 

[Gingerbread Demon]

But how can an employer fire someone based on how they look?

Is that even legal, and mind you they probably fabricated all the other reasons they fired them for, especially the very first lady. I followed that first story when it actually happened and it was bizarre.

Yeah, very often it's because some-one in charge is afraid he will be "tempted" by sinfull tjoughts so he just fires the woman...

You mean like not acting like a responsible adult....

 

[FPAlpha]

What if you're hired as the star of a TV series called "Ugly Betty?"

No problem because they still hired an attractive woman and just makeup'd and clothed her so she appeared unattractive, not that hard to do.

There's tons of movies and shows that used this formula and usually in the last chapter she gets a total makeover and the male lead (usually a hunk pr prettyboy of some sorts) then realizes what a mistake he made and they get together.

I remember the first case mentioned, the bank manager, and she is pretty hot. What i find utterly unbelievable is that her boss told her outright that she was dressing too sexy and should change her wardrobe style.

She can do nothing about her attractive frame and i'm pretty sure she didn't show much, if any cleavage, so it would be a regular business suit. I'm sure male workers with a fit body wouldn't get any problem if they wore fitted suits.

As the video narrater has said multiple times.. the women are not the problem but the people around her that, for some reason, are threatened by the female body. It is the same reason religious fanatics want to hide every woman behind disfiguring robes so they don't attract male gazes or even arouse them.

This drives me nuts to some degree because it implies that we are all hormone driven sex maniacs who can't keep their hands off women.

There's also the male control over womens issue but this is not TNZ so no need to rant.

 

[MacLeod]

^Well would those fit males get into any problems if their boss was female? But as has been pointed out the problem wasn't with the person who was fired for being too attractive but with the person(s) doing the firing.

Besides I can find someone attractive but not be attracted to them there is more to attraction than simply looks.

 

[JES]

There oughta be a law, and I'm not talking about being to pretty.

I find the whole thing outrageous! I hope the victims sued in each circumstance. In this economy, you just can't afford to get fired, at least for such stupid a stupid excuse.

And the Saudi Arabian "religious police" can go to hell.

 

[Relayer1]

There oughta be a law, and I'm not talking about being to pretty.

I find the whole thing outrageous! I hope the victims sued in each circumstance. In this economy, you just can't afford to get fired, at least for such stupid a stupid excuse.

And the Saudi Arabian "religious police" can go to hell.

It's no more ridiculous than being able to be fired for 'no reason'.

 

[JWPlatt]

What if you're hired as the star of a TV series called "Ugly Betty?"

No problem because they still hired an attractive woman and just makeup'd and clothed her so she appeared unattractive, not that hard to do.

Yeah, I'm sure there's a trope for that. But what if she had to be ugly? There are ugly modeling services. What if they provide great benefits and some attractive person applies, is rejected, then sues for discrimination?

So consider same question but you need "Mama" for the titular role in "Throw Mama From The Train." Someone like Anne Hathaway goes for it but Anne Ramsey gets the role instead. Discrimination? Or are looks important and relevant?

 

[RoJoHen]

It depends on the nature of the job, and acting really isn't the best example to use. Roles in movies and TV shows are often specifically written for a certain type of person.

Not getting hired because you don't fit a particular model is a much different thing than getting fired from a job you already have.

 

[Ar-Pharazon]

There oughta be a law, and I'm not talking about being to pretty.

I find the whole thing outrageous! I hope the victims sued in each circumstance. In this economy, you just can't afford to get fired, at least for such stupid a stupid excuse.

And the Saudi Arabian "religious police" can go to hell.

It's no more ridiculous than being able to be fired for 'no reason'.

If a given state has "no cause termination", someone would be pretty stupid to even claim they were firing someone for being too pretty.

The lawsuits start when you can trace a firing back to an illegal reason.

 

[JWPlatt]

That suggests that we keep our true reasons to ourselves and merely appear to not be unlawful instead of fixing our attitude. There's a classic book about social hypocrisy like that - I forget which. Laws represent mirrors against our true nature while ideals are what we pretend to be.

Not getting hired because you don't fit a particular model is a much different thing than getting fired from a job you already have.

Does that metaphor extend to Rachel Dolezal?

 

[MacLeod]

There oughta be a law, and I'm not talking about being to pretty.

I find the whole thing outrageous! I hope the victims sued in each circumstance. In this economy, you just can't afford to get fired, at least for such stupid a stupid excuse.

And the Saudi Arabian "religious police" can go to hell.

In many countries around the world you can't be fired for no reason, and in those countries that have that protection firing someone for being too attractive is likely to end up badly for the company who fired the person. Aside from losing a tribunal when they are sued for wrongul dismissal, what would be even worse for a company would be the negative PR.

 

[auntiehill]

That suggests that we keep our true reasons to ourselves and merely appear to not be unlawful instead of fixing our attitude. There's a classic book about social hypocrisy like that - I forget which. Laws represent mirrors against our true nature while ideals are what we pretend to be.

Not getting hired because you don't fit a particular model is a much different thing than getting fired from a job you already have.

Does that metaphor extend to Rachel Dolezal?

Why would it? She wasn't fired; she resigned and the local organization for which she worked said they stood by her . And the scandal around her wasn't about her appearance; it was the fact that she lied about being African-American and being the target of racial threats, when she had actually previously sued Howard University for discrimination, saying she was denied a scholarship because she was white. It was about her honesty and integrity (and sanity)--not her appearance.

 

[Autistoid]

What if you're hired as the star of a TV series called "Ugly Betty?"

No problem because they still hired an attractive woman and just makeup'd and clothed her so she appeared unattractive, not that hard to do.

There's tons of movies and shows that used this formula and usually in the last chapter she gets a total makeover and the male lead (usually a hunk pr prettyboy of some sorts) then realizes what a mistake he made and they get together.

I remember the first case mentioned, the bank manager, and she is pretty hot. What i find utterly unbelievable is that her boss told her outright that she was dressing too sexy and should change her wardrobe style.

She can do nothing about her attractive frame and i'm pretty sure she didn't show much, if any cleavage, so it would be a regular business suit. I'm sure male workers with a fit body wouldn't get any problem if they wore fitted suits.

As the video narrater has said multiple times.. the women are not the problem but the people around her that, for some reason, are threatened by the female body. It is the same reason religious fanatics want to hide every woman behind disfiguring robes so they don't attract male gazes or even arouse them.

This drives me nuts to some degree because it implies that we are all hormone driven sex maniacs who can't keep their hands off women.

There's also the male control over womens issue but this is not TNZ so no need to rant.

So you fully admit that an attractive person can make themselves less attractive, and them moments later say the have no responsibility if someone else is attracted to them.

I see this kind of nonsense all the time.

Wearing makeup and expensive clothes etc, is a time consuming effort it doesn't just happen.

It's narcissism of these people that are absurd.

They quite clearly put a large amount of effort into looking good, and then play victim when they get attention.


I'm not saying you can fix the problem 100 percent, but the reality is there are tonnes of people who are very attractive that are smart enough to dress a bit more humbly. And guess what they tend to get a lot more respect.


Were only human and we all have relatively sensitive and feeble minds, this idea that were all suppose to behave at this higher moral level is such a joke.



People can't control instinct this puritanical viewpoints caused nothing but problems in the past and it's ironic "liberals" tend to be just as restrictive as those "conservatives".

This isn't a one way street, it's called being considerate.

I'm 6 4, and kinda have a bit of that crazy pyscho killer expression on my face all the time due to my autism. I make a dam hard effort to make people feel relatively comfortable around me, it's a simple consideration.

 

[MacLeod]

That suggests that we keep our true reasons to ourselves and merely appear to not be unlawful instead of fixing our attitude. There's a classic book about social hypocrisy like that - I forget which. Laws represent mirrors against our true nature while ideals are what we pretend to be.

Not getting hired because you don't fit a particular model is a much different thing than getting fired from a job you already have.

Does that metaphor extend to Rachel Dolezal?

Why would it? She wasn't fired; she resigned and the local organization for which she worked said they stood by her . And the scandal around her wasn't about her appearance; it was the fact that she lied about being African-American and being the target of racial threats, when she had actually previously sued Howard University for discrimination, saying she was denied a scholarship because she was white. It was about her honesty and integrity (and sanity)--not her appearance.

Not saying this is the case here, but resiging due to a hostile work place could be classed as constructive dismissal.