posted on Jun, 9 2018 @ 09:45 AM
There is one thing that seems to have been conveniently swept under the rug with the #MeToo movement and that is all the people who have been
adversely effected either in jobs, schools or other places/positions by a type of sexual discrimination. This isn't so much about the sex of the
person being discriminated against, it is about the sexiness of the person. I've seen restaurants and bars which have many very qualified applicants
for a position such as bar tender and for some odd reason, the person who gets the job doesn't even know a "Jack and Coke" is the same as "Whiskey and
Coke" but the person who was hired had different qualifications such as wearing tight, low cut shirts and tight pants. This issue was very noticeable
in college where some people seemed to get much more lee-way in test answers or in turning in assignments late. Where I went to school there were a
few professors which were widely known to favor "pretty girls" who dressed provocatively and they seemed to be called into his office a few times a
semester for "course guidance" while the "normal students" never got this kind of special treatment.
I would really like to know how many people have been effected by this type of special treatment over the years and I doubt that it effects one sex
more than another and it isn't only one sex that benefits from this as well.
Also, when the way people dress is brought up in alleged sexual assault allegations or work place discrimination issues, and the person who either
benefited from "priority" treatment or were on the receiving end of advancements, it would be completely untrue to say that the way a person dresses
has nothing to do with these issues and not taking these things into consideration puts the "defense" in an unfair position (yet again).
We have all seen people get ready for dates and how they dress is specifically designed to convey a message about their interest in the other person.
You don't see many people dressing up in sweat pants, track suits, or sweaters & snow pants when they are trying to be seductive on a date. They dress
in a more provocative manner because they want to convey their inner intentions. To say that this doesn't translate to the work place or other social
situations is being completely dishonest and is an attack to the social structure of any culture. This also puts those on the receiving end of these
non-verbal messages at a distinct disadvantage as if they act upon them it seems a no-win and if they don't act on them they either miss an
opportunity (which was between two consenting adults and not forced) or they may make an enemy by rejecting an advancement (we all know this is also
an issue though rarely ever acknowledged because it would admit people are vindictive when turned down).
This doesn't just effect people applying for jobs but also those already in the work place. I'm sure many people have had a boss that favors another
employee because they "like them" (often sexually attracted) and this can manifest in that person not having to do tasks they don't like or getting
more breaks and an endless number of other possible benefits (like free food when working at restaurants when others have to pay). The problem with
situations like this is it is often difficult to prove unless one of the parties admits to the unfair treatment and this is seldom done by the person
in power (could cause legal issues) and also rarely done by the person receiving benefits b/c it would alienate them from co-workers among other
things. It seems that issues like this are usually brought to light after a person leaves the employment and then the person receiving benefits is
more likely to admit it (though they say they didn't see it at the time - usually).
edit on 6 9 2018 by DigginFoTroof because: (no reason given)
edit on 6 9 2018 by DigginFoTroof because: (no reason