By FML - 05/07/2010 00:15 - United States
Add a comment - Reply to : #
agreed^ if you were truly an asset you wouldn't have to change the way you work in order to obtain a promotion. what makes you think that you are the number 1 option without sales experience. Yeah her boobs are big and fake but if she has any sales experience you can't say anything.
How the hell would you "prove" yourself if you're working in the stocks? Besides, put yourself in the customer's shoes. Especially in retail, if you're a ugly girl and you see an attractive girl wearing the clothes from the store, the customer subconsciously thinks "maybe I can look good too if I wear the same clothes". Stuff your bra and maybe the boss will notice you ;) If your a guy.... um, stuff your crotch and hope your boss is bisexual?? lol good luck either way.
1: As 67 said, she may just be better at sales than you. No need to jump on the bitchy, feminist bandwagon quite yet. 2: Even if he did hire her for her boobs, he did the right thing for the business. My friend owned a bar with a big chested waitress, and she brought in tons of customers. He made the sensible decision in this economy.
Sucks for you OP, but you sound so bitchy. : maybe she's nicer. Maybe, if you're working in retail, for example, she'es better suited because she might be more concerned with her image and therefore makes a huge effort to be fashionable. She might be more sociable and easy to talk to, or she just might be nicer. And more qualified, as other people've said. :P But still sucks for you. Keep trying.
get used to it. this happens in non-sales/customer facing jobs too. big fake boobs like hedi montag = promotion or better job. this will happen to you throughout your career, even in the medical field. But your coworkers who are better educated (Ms, Phd) or experienced will hate you.
136: Sometimes it's obvious. OP: Show up to your next shift or employee review with a giant stuffed bra under your shirt. Or if you really want to make a statement, do the same after taking a short vacation for "medical reasons." Bonus points if you're a guy.
75: Watching too much David Brent again, aren't you? ;) 81: *blushes* I'll answer you despite my embarrassment because it takes guts for a virgin to ask such things-- guts I wished I had when I was a virgin. The position allows for, erm, deeper penetration and more male control (without as much physical exertion as missionary or other male-controlled positions), and causes a visually-pleasing bouncing effect. I suspect the preference also has to do with a sense of domination, spanking convenience, and the implied anal connotations. It's a primal position that tends to have more to do with purely physical, animal satisfaction and less emotional intimacy (screwing or f*cking as opposed to making love).
It's cultural. We have decided that they are a symbol of femininity and thus must be hidden. So... wah lah. They are sexy. I have never heard the idea that they evolved in order to resemble the butt, but I seriously doubt that. In most non-Western cultures, breasts are not considered to be sexual or attractive at all. The same way that other cultures would think our supermodels are unattractive. Most of what we find sexy is cultural. Take a college course in Human Sexuality and you will get SCHOOLED on the ethnocentrism of our visions of sexuality, haha.
The other problem with using evolution to explain things like that is that evolutionary psychology is methodologically flawed. You see something and then retroactively try to explain it. Ex. "I think boobs and butts look the same SO we must have evolved to like boobs because we already liked butts." It is easy to track the path of physical evolution because of the fossil record, but psychological evolution is 99% guesswork. For example, we know that the vagina gradually moved to the front of the pelvis as people started to have face-to-face sex, but maybe they started doing that because they liked boobs, and not because boobs followed? And again, that makes the ethnocentric assumption that all societies work the same way that our does and like the same things. Obviously, "culture" is a difficult idea to socially quantify, making people hesitant to just use it to explain everything, but evolutionary psychology is just as generalizing and useless. In an unrelated note: The USA only has one state (Michigan) that bans discrimination based on looks. They get very few cases, because no one wants to go in and say, "Look, I'm obviously ugly. That's why this person fired/didn't hire/didn't promote me.