Order is more important than both of those two combined.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;30224917]Pole dancing pretty much runs on tips so you're welcome to try it, probably won't make any money.[/QUOTE]
jobs that run off tips pay like 2-3 dollars an hour and the tips fill in the rest. if you don't make above minimum wage with tips the company HAS TO pay up the difference.
you shouldnt feel bad about not tipping because they'll make minimum wage no matter what
[QUOTE=Ond kaja;30224964]I'm not against freedom[/QUOTE]
You said equality is more important than freedom, that means you assume that we can live without freedom as long as we have equality. Neither equality nor freedom is more important. A society where you can't have both is a shit society.
[QUOTE=Gaza Pen Pal;30225030]jobs that run off tips pay like 2-3 dollars and hour and the tips fill in the rest. if you don't make above minimum wage with tips the company HAS TO pay up the difference.
you shouldnt feel bad about not tipping because they'll make minimum wage no matter what[/QUOTE]
They're working a hell of a lot harder than minimum wage so they deserve more
I think that if a place wants young attractive girls for a specific role or task, then they should be allowed to do it. But if they only ([i]for no reason[/i]) want white people working in an office, then it's a different thing.
[QUOTE=BrQ;30225070]I think that if a place wants young attractive girls for a specific role or task, then they should be allowed to do it. But if they only ([i]for no reason[/i]) want white people working in an office, then it's a different thing.[/QUOTE]
are you saying attractive people are all white?
[QUOTE=Gaza Pen Pal;30225118]are you saying attractive people are all white?[/QUOTE]
:what:
[QUOTE=Gaza Pen Pal;30225118]are you saying attractive people are all white?[/QUOTE]
Are you threatening my business?
Seriously I demand you stop posting posts such as that or I will become very angry.
[QUOTE=Laserbeams;30225034]You said equality is more important than freedom, that means you assume that we can live without freedom as long as we have equality. Neither equality nor freedom is more important. A society where you can't have both is a shit society.[/QUOTE]
Freedom and equality are generally not mutually exclusive so I don't know why you assume I only want equality and no freedom. What I meant is that equality should be priorotised ahead of freedom if you can't have both, i.e. you shouldn't have the freedom to discriminate other people.
[QUOTE=Ond kaja;30225182]Freedom and equality are generally not mutually exclusive so I don't know why you assume I only want equality and no freedom. What I meant is that equality should be priorotised ahead of freedom if you can't have both, i.e. you shouldn't have the freedom to discriminate other people.[/QUOTE]
And I still disagree, I should have the freedom to discriminate people. Not that I would, of course.
[QUOTE=Laserbeams;30225263]And I still disagree, I should have the freedom to discriminate people. Not that I would, of course.[/QUOTE]
And I think freedom from oppression is better than freedom to oppress. How do you justify your stance on discrimination, shouldn't a minority have the same rights and oppurtunities, even in the private sector as the majority?
[QUOTE=Ond kaja;30225345]And I think freedom from oppression is better than freedom to oppress. How do you justify your stance on discrimination, shouldn't a minority have the same rights and oppurtunities, even in the private sector as the majority?[/QUOTE]
I don't promote discrimination in any way. People should be able to say anything they want, even if I don't agree with it. It's called freedom of speech.
[QUOTE=Laserbeams;30225393]I don't promote discrimination in any way. People should be able to say anything they want, even if I don't agree with it. It's called freedom of speech.[/QUOTE]
So, denying a person employment based on ethnicity or gender should be covered by freedom of speech?
[QUOTE=Ond kaja;30225481]So, denying a person employment based on ethnicity or gender should be covered by freedom of speech?[/QUOTE]
Yes. People should be taught to respect other people, not forced
The whole idea that people are equal is bullshit.
Everyone is different from each other.
But where the problem lies, is respect.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;30224917]Pole dancing pretty much runs on tips so you're welcome to try it, probably won't make any money.[/QUOTE]
I wouldn't get hired in the first place.
It's not as easy as saying "well you can try it but you won't do so well if you don't appeal to people."
People have businesses to run. If a hooters hired men and/or ugly women, people would no longer go to that hooters. So, they don't say anywhere that you have to be an attractive female to work there, but it's not discrimination when they only hire attractive females. Discrimination is when you're equally, if not more, qualified than someone else and don't get hired because of something about your race or whatever that isn't related to the job. In the context of hooters, an attractive girl is much more likely to boost business, therefore she is more qualified for the position.
Same with pole dancing. You can't just get up there and give pole dancing a shot, somebody has gotta hire you. They aren't going to hire someone who turns patrons away. If you're not attractive, you're not well qualified for the job. Once again, it isn't discrimination, it's basic business.
[QUOTE=Gaza Pen Pal;30225118]are you saying attractive people are all white?[/QUOTE]
are you awwwtistic? where could you even pull that out of that sentence
[QUOTE=MaverickIB;30225617]It's not as easy as saying "well you can try it but you won't do so well if you don't appeal to people."
People have businesses to run. If a hooters hired men and/or ugly women, people would no longer go to that hooters. So, they don't say anywhere that you have to be an attractive female to work there, but it's not discrimination when they only hire attractive females. Discrimination is when you're equally, if not more, qualified than someone else and don't get hired because of something about your race or whatever that isn't related to the job. In the context of hooters, an attractive girl is much more likely to boost business, therefore she is more qualified for the position.
Same with pole dancing. You can't just get up there and give pole dancing a shot, somebody has gotta hire you. They aren't going to hire someone who turns patrons away. If you're not attractive, you're not well qualified for the job. Once again, it isn't discrimination, it's basic business.[/QUOTE]
a business shouldn't use sex to sell their product
[QUOTE=BrQ;30225070]I think that [b]if a place wants young attractive girls[/b] for a specific role or task, then they should be allowed to do it. [b]But if they only ([i]for no reason[/i]) want white people[/b] working in an office, then it's a different thing.[/QUOTE]
he literally uses white and attractive interchangeably
[QUOTE=Gaza Pen Pal;30225838]a business shouldn't use sex to sell their product
he literally uses white and attractive interchangeably[/QUOTE]
No, they are two separate examples.
[QUOTE=Gaza Pen Pal;30225838]a business shouldn't use sex to sell their product
[/QUOTE]
That's en entirely different argument. Plenty of businesses are based around using sex to sell products. Magazines, clothing, perfumes, etc. Hell, when you really think about it, [I]most[/I] businesses use sex to sell their products. If that wasn't the case, you wouldn't have busty video game characters walking around. Women in movies wouldn't be the most gorgeous women they could find. Is this right? Who knows, it's a different argument altogether.
Sex being used to sell products has no relation to discrimination. Like I said, it's business. Attractive people are technically more qualified to work in industries that rely on sex to sell, you aren't being discriminated against. If you apply for a job at an everyday business and they hire someone else because that other person is more qualified for the position, did they discriminate against you? Not at all.
Which is more important to you?
-Freedom
-Pseudo-Equality
NOT BIASED AT ALL
I assumed equality was an aspect of what most people consider "freedom."
Shouldn't everybody have all of their freedoms equally?
pseudo equality is much more important to me than freedom
[QUOTE=MaverickIB;30226109]That's en entirely different argument. Plenty of businesses are based around using sex to sell products. Magazines, clothing, perfumes, etc. Hell, when you really think about it, [I]most[/I] businesses use sex to sell their products. If that wasn't the case, you wouldn't have busty video game characters walking around. Women in movies wouldn't be the most gorgeous women they could find. Is this right? Who knows, it's a different argument altogether.
Sex being used to sell products has no relation to discrimination. Like I said, it's business. Attractive people are technically more qualified to work in industries that rely on sex to sell, you aren't being discriminated against. If you apply for a job at an everyday business and they hire someone else because that other person is more qualified for the position, did they discriminate against you? Not at all.[/QUOTE]
i dont think they're separate at all, the use of sex to sell things leads to discrimination, sexism, and abuse
because we live in a patriarchy men are automatically put into niche roles regarding sex, so not hiring a male waitress at hooters because the patrons wont find him attractive [i]is[/i] discrimination. especially so because attractiveness isn't a proper qualification, you don't need to be attractive to take orders or bring out food.
if you only hire attractive women for that role you are discriminating against ugly women and men based on how hard they make your dick.
Which is more important to you?
- Freedom (if you're white)
- Pseudo-Equality
hmm
[QUOTE=thisispain;30226472]pseudo equality is much more important to me than freedom[/QUOTE]
I agree, Equality is better than Freedom/Liberty.
Freedom to establish equality.
Here is a small pet peeve i have on people who use "equality" wrongly.
You can't use the wrong EQUALITY without listing a shit ton of stuff related to it.
Are you trying to say HE/She/IT is equal to a homeless person ? Or equal to the other gender ?
Equal to ALL ? Equally to WHAT ?! It's far more complicated then being school children.It depends on the context of the situation.Real life is too complicated to use EQUAL.
How do you treat people equally and when ?
By what measure are they EQUAL !?
One person is better then others.Denying it is stupid.
So many factors and variable factors.It's far more complicated then the kindergarten telling you that you are equal to others kids around.
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jrk7m3aKpWA[/media]
So a 60 year old black man working at hooters is your idea of freedom?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.