Forum Settings
       
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next »
Reply To Thread

Fashionism?Follow

#152 May 01 2007 at 6:43 AM Rating: Default
****
9,997 posts
Quote:
This is part of the answer, but it's incomplete. That's because in most jobs, being accepted in your role directly affects your ability to fulfill that role. Customers in a store expect a clerk to wear a uniform, and high-powered business execs expect the people they make deals with to wear suits. To dress otherwise lowers their opinion of the organization, and hurts business. That's all the ethical justification an employer needs to set a dress code.

And as for those customers/executives going around judging people by their clothes? Well of course it isn't "right." But neither is judging people by their face, their smell, the way they talk, or a hundred other things we instinctually do. Everyone should be scrambling over each other to dance with the ugly girl with the heart of gold, but they don't. There are some things about humanity and culture that you just have to accept.



That's really all I was getting at; that while it's acceptable for the employer to do so, they are merely catering to the customer, who is discriminating unethically, and I would also argue that sometimes it has nothing to do with customer/business image, but is simply a personal bias of the employer. I also don't consider the "ugly girl with the heart of gold" analogous, but that's because I don't think there's anything wrong with choosing mates based on physical attractiveness, because it's a crucial element to the sex drive, whereas a person's dress is not crucial to their ability to perform their job, necessarily.

As for just accepting it, it's not as if upon having this though I could no longer cope with day to day life. It's such a minor issue to me that it only serves as a means of entertaining discussion. That said, there are some things about humanity and culture that if we just accepted, we'd make no progress.

Thank you by the way for actually making a thoughtful post relevant to my question.

Quote:
So your reasoning relies on a slippery slope fallacy?


No, it would be a slippery slope if it were moving from a less extreme real life example to a more extreme example, but all of the examples are just ridiculous, not more or less extreme than the reality. They aren't in any way more or less wrong than current practices of discriminating on fashion, at least not based on this:
Quote:
Given that it's the norm, it would seem that it's your task to prove that it's unethical.

If they were the norm, you couldn't really prove that it were unethical, could you?


@Red: almost all of your examples and explanations were conditional on the employer having a specific need for a quality that was dependent on choice. Those are fine... to disagree with them would be like saying that it's sexist to deny a man a role on a douche commercial because the script is for a woman.

You did have a good point about it being representative about your decision-making abilities at least wherein first impressions are concerned, but I think that's still dependent on catering to discrimination in the first place. Actually, that's probably my own discriminatory tendencies talking. If someone shows up to an interview in a suit, and another shows up in a chicken outfit, the only thing I really know based on that is their understanding of social conventions, which could be crucial to their performing a job, but again, only based on the reality that my customers discriminate based on those things.

Quote:
I don't know how old you are, but you better get used to them...


I'll just say again, this conversation is not about me. It's purely for the sake of discussion. If anything you should think of me as the person in the employer role for the purposes of this discussion, because I'm the one more likely to "oppress" someone based on their dress.

Perhaps I should have made that more clear from the beginning, or perhaps some of you just shouldn't be so presumptuous :d I'm not looking for a defense for my dress habits (they're fine), I'm looking inwardly as to how I treat other people, and inviting others to do the same.

But I know, I'm dumb.

#153 May 01 2007 at 6:56 AM Rating: Decent
Quote:
almost all of your examples and explanations were conditional on the employer having a specific need for a quality that was dependent on choice


No, they were conditional on an employer having a specific need for someone who understands, and is aware of, their surroundings, the social norms, and the working of the human psyche.

Having said all that. I agree that if you're doing a desk-job where you never see clients, or if you're a researcher in academia, then the way you dress is less relevant than if you're dealing with customers.

I do understand what you're getting at. You're saying that we all have a tendency to judge based on appearances, and that this is not necessarily "ethical".

And while this is theoretically partially true, the point that most people here are trying to make is that, at the end of the day, it doesn't really matter. There are many norms, codes, prejudices which are far more damaging to society than the need to dress decently for a specific job.

Not only that, but this tendency to judge other people "superficially" (ie, on their dress sense), is not "unethical". It's completely necessary and very useful. It might not be accurate, it might not be comprehensive, but it's not immutable either. It's just the first part of an analytical process.

Yes, it's a "societal norm", but it's both a useful one, and one which doesn't require great effort on anyone's part.

____________________________
My politics blog and stuff - Refractory
#154 May 01 2007 at 7:02 AM Rating: Default
****
9,997 posts
I guess it would be fair to say that people who dress according to certain societal norms are at least more likely to exhibit the behaviors associated with them, at which point it becomes a statistic rather than a stereotype.

But I still wouldn't be comfortable making a decision based on that, anymore than I would be making a decision based on race.

#155 May 01 2007 at 7:06 AM Rating: Decent
Kachi wrote:
But I still wouldn't be comfortable making a decision based on that, anymore than I would be making a decision based on race.


I'm pretty sure everyone on this board would agree that basing your whole judgment of someone purely on the way they dress is wrong.

Well, apart from Varrus, maybe.

____________________________
My politics blog and stuff - Refractory
#156 May 01 2007 at 7:57 AM Rating: Default
****
9,997 posts
But you'd still take it into consideration when making decisions that effect that person's life.
#157 May 01 2007 at 8:50 AM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,360 posts
Kachi wrote:
But you'd still take it into consideration when making decisions that effect that person's life.


Well of course. As would you.

Along with demeanor, of course.
____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#158 May 01 2007 at 11:03 AM Rating: Decent
*****
19,369 posts
Damn hippy.
#159 May 01 2007 at 11:04 AM Rating: Default
****
9,997 posts
I've never even smoked pot!
#160 May 01 2007 at 12:20 PM Rating: Good
Ministry of Silly Cnuts
*****
19,524 posts
Kachi wrote:
I've never even smoked pot because I can't afford a Pot Smoker's Uniform!
See?
____________________________
"I started out with nothin' and I still got most of it left" - Seasick Steve
#161 May 01 2007 at 1:47 PM Rating: Default
****
9,997 posts
I'm going to have to insist that you link an appropriate visual aid.
#162 May 01 2007 at 2:25 PM Rating: Good
Ministry of Silly Cnuts
*****
19,524 posts
OTST
____________________________
"I started out with nothin' and I still got most of it left" - Seasick Steve
#163 May 01 2007 at 2:34 PM Rating: Default
****
9,997 posts
If you were attempting to confuse me, you have succeeded.

Though apparently that is no challenge.
#164 May 04 2007 at 6:10 PM Rating: Decent
34 posts
I agree that it is indeed prejudiced to discriminate against people who don't dress according to societies norms with the work place being a perfect example, but as humans, can we help it?

Sure, we can talk of how high minded we are and how we have transcended racism, sexism, etc. while we sit here comfortably in our homes in front of the computer. But out on the street, away from the comfort of home, our instincts take over. While we may not mean to judge people by appearance, our minds do anyways.

For example: you're walking out of the grocery store with two armfulls of bags. Who do you expect to lend a helping hand? (with out thinking, just instinct)


This person?


or this person?


Its a survival instinct. Is it an antiquated instinct? Sure. It probably helped us identify friend from foe back in a time when we didn't have as sophisticated ways of doing so as we do now. Is it wrong? Sure, if you consider instincts to be wrong.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next »
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 375 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (375)