Poll: Body Modification : Conformity Vs Individuality

[Craorach]

This is a genuine question: Are you allowed to refuse employment to someone with a deformity? Say, if they had a cleft lip or something? If not, I think that shows "it's ugly and makes people uncomfortable" shouldn't cut it. I think rather than validating the shallowness of society we should judge people by their performance and not by their appearance, whether congenital or self inflicted.

I have no problem with tattoos and other body mods, if that's what people want to do, they can do it. Only the most extreme stuff will make me uncomfortable, generally speaking.

But when you get these things done, you have to accept that people will look at you differently, and that it is going to be there for life.

Rightly or not, people with extremely unorthodox or publicly placed tattoos and piercings are considered to be trying to reject social norms and freak people out. In many cases, this is true. When you reject social norms, you have to accept that certain portions of society are going to reject you as well.

While, yes, we should judge people on performance and personality not appearance.... tough luck, that's the real world. In the real world people DO stare, or worse try not to stare, at the person with extensive facial birthmarks.. let alone people with tentacle rape tattooed on their forehead, complete with screw in tentacles.

Edit : Denying someone employment based upon a physical deformity they have no control over is very different from doing so based upon one they actively pay to get done to them.

 

[That Annoying Guy]

I think this sort of thing depends on the situation. A person walks in looking like the got hit with a shrapnel bomb? This really is a touchy subject but I think some people do it to make themselves more prone to attention, sometimes in a bad way; of course it goes without saying that they also would need to be qualified.

A little off topic (and extreme) here but would you seriously hire someone who looked like this?

Spoiler: Warning: May be distrubing to some, view at your own risk!

This is a genuine question: Are you allowed to refuse employment to someone with a deformity? Say, if they had a cleft lip or something? If not, I think that shows "it's ugly and makes people uncomfortable" shouldn't cut it.

Natural deformities aren't chosen like tattoos or piercings are.

 

[DoPo]

This is a genuine question: Are you allowed to refuse employment to someone with a deformity?

Again, it depends. Same with tattoos. If it hinders their job, then yes, perhaps you can.

Some might say you should have to pay for the consequences of making a harmless mistake your entire life.

Harmless mistake? It's a long term decision, you should take full responsibility. Presumably, you have considered it and decided you are OK with the consequences. And then you back up on your decision. And there is plenty of information on tattoos and how society reacts to them, so it's not like you can say "but I didn't know".

 

[GrandmaFunk]

we should judge people by their performance and not by their appearance, whether congenital or self inflicted.

in some positions performance is tied to appearance.

"deformities" caused by medical conditions or accidents are unfortunate but they do sometimes limit what positions a person can fill.

as for "self-inflicted"..it goes beyond actual limitations and points to simple bad judgement. It's a bit of a chicken/egg situation but if you go out today and get a face tattoo, you KNOW that it will limit your chances of getting jobs, whether you agree with the values behind that or not, it's a straightforward fact. If you still get a face tattoo knowing that, doesn't that kind of illustrate that you're not a very good decision maker, validating future employer's opinion that you probably aren't a good choice?

 

[manic_depressive13]

Harmless mistake? It's a long term decision, you should take full responsibility. Presumably, you have considered it and decided you are OK with the consequences. And then you back up on your decision. And there is plenty of information on tattoos and how society reacts to them, so it's not like you can say "but I didn't know".

When I say "harmless mistake" I mean to be compared with something illegal like drink driving and saying "it was a mistake". So yes, getting a tattoo is harmless in that it doesn't negatively affect anyone else.

 

[Fishyash]

This law would do nothing even after being accepted. All the employer has to do is think of another reason to not accept someone.

 

[DoPo]

Spoiler: Warning: May be distrubing to some, view at your own risk!

"Would you like fries with that?"

Harmless mistake? It's a long term decision, you should take full responsibility. Presumably, you have considered it and decided you are OK with the consequences. And then you back up on your decision. And there is plenty of information on tattoos and how society reacts to them, so it's not like you can say "but I didn't know".

When I say "harmless mistake" I mean to be compared with something illegal like drink driving and saying "it was a mistake". So yes, getting a tattoo is harmless in that it doesn't negatively affect anyone else.

I mostly agree on the "harmless". However, since it is causing harm on the person with the tattoo, it's arguable how harmless it is. I do have an issue with "mistake". If it was really a poor impulse control or short-sightedness that made someone have a tattoo that hinders them, then this is a rather good reason to reject that candidate. It clearly says something about their character and their abilities.

 

[Esotera]

You should be able to do whatever the hell you want to your body, and you shouldn't be discriminated against for any modifications. You're not discriminated against if you wear glasses or hearing aids, so why on earth should you be discriminated against if you choose to modify your body? (yes, both of those are choices, before anyone tries to point that out, and are more necessary than tatoos/piercings, but the issue of freedom still remains).

 

[Vault101]

I've already been rejected from 3 jobs for having a triforce on my wrist. Sucks :/

do you know for sure it was for that? I mean theres got to be some way you could cover it up...long sleeve shirt or even make up (it might look like a bruise at worst)

people get pissy about tatoos but honestly I dont care, I think they are cool

I jsut wish they would stop telling others that they will regret it when theyre older...do I tell people they are going to regret geting married and having kids when they are odler?

 

[dobahci]

Conformity vs. Individuality. Most of the people I know with body mods, their friends all have body mods as well. What's so individual about just doing what all your friends are doing?

Having said that, I don't think an employer should be allowed to consider it (either positively or negatively) when hiring. The only thing that should impact the decision to hire is how well the person would do the job that they are (potentially) being hired for.

 

[Tuesday Night Fever]

Some might say you should have to pay for the consequences of making a harmless mistake your entire life.

Except that it's not harmless if it causes harm. In this case, it harms how employable you are because, like it or not, this society is obsessed with image and reputation. If an individual failed to plan for that, it's no one's fault but their own.

 

[Phlakes]

Just want to say, the most prominent culture associated with body modification isn't one you'd really want to employ. Yeah, generalizations are bad, but you can't deny that a lot of the people turned down might just be the rebellious dickbag type.

Also, employers can't control what other people see. If a potential buyer/partner/whatever stops by the office and sees someone with gauges and full sleeves, no matter how open minded the employer is, it'l probably give the company a bad image to the other person, and that's something that won't be fixed anywhere but a perfect world.

But yeah, in a perfect world, no one should be denied fair treatment because of appearance. But this isn't a perfect world and if you don't consider the risks, it's also your fault.

 

[isometry]

I don't think there is a case for an equal opportunity type of law, but in 20 years we probably won't need such a law as only a minority of employers will care.

 

[Hasido]

While this definitely used to be true, in this day and age it often feels like getting a tattoo is more mainstream than not getting one.

*Hipster Glasses* I've been not having tattoos before if was cool.

EW! NO! I REFUSE TO BE HIPSTER!

OT: My initial reaction: why does it matter?
after some thought: i guess because the question is being asked, it means that someone cares, whether or not for good reason, which means that even those who wouldn't normally care has to.

On that note, I guess its up to the discretion of the employer.

 

[GrandmaFunk]

*Hipster Glasses* I've been not having tattoos before if was cool.

meh, after seeing your millionth butterfly tramp stamp or tribal armband, the whole "I want to express my individuality" thing doesn't really hold weight

also:

http://gosmellthecoffee.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/10/tatoo.jpg

 

[CrimsonBlaze]

It not so much discrimination as it is a job requirement. Many employers want to convey a certain image at their establishment and unfortunately, having tattoos or other external/visible body modifications tends to limit what kind of occupation you can apply to. There ARE certain employers and establishments that will take you as is (for jobs in which it is uncommon to find people sporting tattoos and body modifications), but you will need to search long and hard to find them.