# The importance of appearances



## bryanc (Jan 16, 2004)

SINC posted something in another thread that got me thinking. I certainly have my own opinions on this, but I'd like to see some discussion on this. To what extent do we judge others on the basis of their physical appearance (size, shape, tattoos, piercings, hairstyle, clothes, etc.), to what extent can we control this tendency to judge, and to what extent is it fair and reasonable to make such judgements?


----------



## bryanc (Jan 16, 2004)

My own opinion on this is that, to some extent we can't control our tendency to judge people on the basis of their appearance, and to some extent it is reasonable. I think this is instinctive, and it has served our species well as a mechanism of maintaining tribal integrity and defending ourselves against potentially threatening outsiders.

However, I also think this instinct is the root of bigotry and intolerance, and that fair and open-minded people ought to exert themselves to resist it as much as possible. The adage "you can't judge a book by it's cover" is fundamentally correct, and while people people have some control over their appearance, it is difficult, if not impossible, to know what the social, psychological and physiological context of their decisions may have been. Therefore the interpretation of appearance is fraught with complexity, and misunderstanding is almost inevitable.

Personally, I have little appreciation for tattoos or piercings, although I have to admit, I've started to get used to it, and it sometimes does provide an excuse for one's gaze to linger on particularly attractive bits of female anatomy ("I wasn't staring; I was trying to figure out what her tattoo is of."). But it is also obviously the case that people getting tattoos aren't getting them to impress me.

Similarly, I make a point of actively trying not to interpret clothing as meaning anything other than what that particular person finds comfortable. The best scientists I have ever met generally wear jeans and t-shirts to work, but I try not to be unfairly skeptical of people wearing suits and ties.

So I think we try to judge on people's words and actions, rather than on their appearance.


----------



## John Clay (Jun 25, 2006)

Reading SINC's comments, I agree 100% with him (which is rather rare, I think).

I don't understand the people that get visible tattoos, odd piercings, etc, and then lament about their inability to find gainful employment.

Regarding bryanc's comment about judging based on words and actions, rather than appearance - their appearance is a cumulation of their actions.


----------



## fellfromtree (May 18, 2005)

Never mind- just saw the link.


----------



## John Clay (Jun 25, 2006)

fellfromtree said:


> Never mind- just saw the link.


The post in question was direct linked from the first post in this thread.


----------



## jamesB (Jan 28, 2007)

SINC said:


> Sadly, all I can focus on is the damn tattoos. They are an abomination and will continue to be when today's generation grow up.


Tattoos Sinc, what tattoos?
I went and viewed the link mentioned
and when you scroll down the page a bit you see that what appeared to Sinc as tattoos is really just skin pigmentation variations.
And yes it is the same patient as can been seen by the 2 dark spots on her wrist.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

I find some tattooing and piercing aesthetically unappealing. I would similarly tend not to hire someone who dressed badly or wore their hair in a point at the top of their head either. 

My one strong objection to tattooing is the whole arm tattoo for foodservice employees. It makes me feel as though their tattoos are masking uncleanliness.


----------



## fellfromtree (May 18, 2005)

Macfury said:


> My one strong objection to tattooing is the whole arm tattoo for foodservice employees. It makes me feel as though their tattoos are masking uncleanliness.


As opposed to a balding guy dressed in a shirt and tie, overweight, sweating profusely as he dresses your food?


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

fellfromtree said:


> As opposed to a balding guy dressed in a shirt and tie, overweight, sweating profusely as he dresses your food?


Not as opposed to at all--I can see that guy is sweating profusely and will take my leave.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

jamesB said:


> Tattoos Sinc, what tattoos?
> I went and viewed the link mentioned and when you scroll down the page a bit you see that what appeared to Sinc as tattoos is really just skin pigmentation variations.
> And yes it is the same patient as can been seen by the 2 dark spots on her wrist.


See how much what I thought were tattoos throw me off? That first pic looked like tattoos and I immediately rejected them and looked no further, just like I do on a live person I meet on the street. It is something I cannot fathom. 

I know lots of older men who got tattoos in the navy etc., like an anchor or a heart on their forearm. My oldest to my dismay, got a piece of barbed wire around his bicep years ago in a drugged up stupor. He has since had it altered to make it less visible, but he is scarred for life without spending thousands to remove a hundred bucks worth of stupidity. 

As for body piercing with studs or other crap sticking out of people's noses or belly buttons or tongues, they need help. It is mutilation and nothing more than walking around looking like they fell face first in a tackle box.


----------



## G-Mo (Sep 26, 2007)

I'd love to put SINC (and some others) in a room with my cousin-in-law. He's got a Tā moko, is a former All Black and current police community liaison. I'm sure he'd have fantastic things to say about the colossal ignorance towards the historical significance of body art.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Who cares if the guy is a cop or whether body art has historical significance--I don't like it.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

G-Mo said:


> I'd love to put SINC (and some others) in a room with my cousin-in-law. He's got a Tā moko, is a former All Black and current police community liaison. I'm sure he'd have fantastic things to say about the colossal ignorance towards the historical significance of body art.


Oddly enough I have watched tribes in Indonesia, Africa and the Amazon on TV documentaries continue to mutilate themselves to this day. They do so because of the ignorance of which you speak about abusing themselves. Anyone who condones such actions, cousins included, who cannot get past the cave man aspect of human development, community liaison cop or not, is lacking the same knowledge of those very societies who still condone such ignorance.


----------



## Andrew Pratt (Feb 16, 2007)

Interesting topic. I was at the bank on Friday discussing some items with a senior account manager. It was Friday and he was in jeans and a polo shirt that was in need of ironing...I was better dressed then he was and it was my day off. After the meeting I asked my wife what she thought and her comments mirrored my impressions...that sure I get casual fridays but IMO casual at a bank should at least be nice jeans and a shirt not a wrinkled polo.

Do I judge? Yes we all do though I think much depends on the setting as to how much it gets in the way. Our culture expects a certain look and if you push that too far then yes you will be judged as being a rebel and stereotyped. 

Interestingly it isn't just looks that matter. We have research students from all over North America present their research each fall and it is interesting how difficult it is to take those with strong southern accents as seriously as those with a northern accent. Prejudices run strong and while I know these people are obviously very intelligent your first impression is to think they're dumb based solely on how they sound not visual appearance.


----------



## G-Mo (Sep 26, 2007)

The sooner antiquated ideas of a short historical time frame pass from our history the better.


----------



## bryanc (Jan 16, 2004)

SINC said:


> Oddly enough I have watched tribes in Indonesia, Africa and the Amazon on TV documentaries continue to mutilate themselves to this day. They do so because of the ignorance of which you speak about abusing themselves.


How do you feel about ear rings and circumcision?

I understand how you feel (and I have some of these reactions myself), but I think if you examine it, you'll find that a substantial part of it is cultural prejudice.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

bryanc said:


> How do you feel about ear rings and circumcision?
> 
> I understand how you feel (and I have some of these reactions myself), but I think if you examine it, you'll find that a substantial part of it is cultural prejudice.


I know the question wasn't directed at me, but I have always found the idea of pierced ears and circumcision rather bizarre.


----------



## G-Mo (Sep 26, 2007)

Macfury said:


> Who cares if the guy is a cop or whether body art has historical significance--I don't like it.


Newsflash, he's not a cop (learn to read), and I have a good idea he wouldn't like you!


----------



## bryanc (Jan 16, 2004)

Andrew Pratt said:


> We have research students from all over North America present their research each fall and it is interesting how difficult it is to take those with strong southern accents as seriously as those with a northern accent. Prejudices run strong and while I know these people are obviously very intelligent your first impression is to think they're dumb based solely on how they sound not visual appearance.


I once found myself struggling not to giggle at a scientific presentation made by someone from the UK who's accent made him sound *exactly* like a character in a Monty Python sketch. So I know what you mean. But we don't have to let our learned/cultural first impressions bias our judgement; you can't really choose how you react, but you can be aware of it and compensate for it. Then you can make better judgements about the actual merit of what someone is saying or doing, rather than letting your cultural conditioning convince you that the people who look/sound/dress like you are really better.


----------



## bryanc (Jan 16, 2004)

Macfury said:


> I know the question wasn't directed at me, but I have always found the idea of pierced ears and circumcision rather bizarre.


I completely agree; but having grown up in a culture where these things are normal, I don't find them immediately repulsive. I've thought about it and decided that if someone wants to do these things to themselves as an adult, I have no reason to object, but doing them to an infant is rather hideous.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

G-Mo said:


> Newsflash, he's not a cop (learn to read), and I have a good idea he wouldn't like you!


No, he is a police community liaison volunteer, and such committees are made up pf community members and police officers. So I am saying I wouldn't care even if he was a cop--his body art doesn't interest me.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

bryanc said:


> My own opinion on this is that, to some extent we can't control our tendency to judge people on the basis of their appearance, and to some extent it is reasonable. I think this is instinctive, and it has served our species well as a mechanism of maintaining tribal integrity and defending ourselves against potentially threatening outsiders.
> 
> However, I also think this instinct is the root of bigotry and intolerance, and that fair and open-minded people ought to exert themselves to resist it as much as possible. The adage "you can't judge a book by it's cover" is fundamentally correct, and while people people have some control over their appearance, it is difficult, if not impossible, to know what the social, psychological and physiological context of their decisions may have been. Therefore the interpretation of appearance is fraught with complexity, and misunderstanding is almost inevitable.
> 
> ...


Good post bryanc... As far as I am concerned live and let live... What people choose to do to their own bodies and how they choose to dress is their own business and it should not form the basis for how we judge someone.

Of course not everyone feels this way as is demonstrated by some of the posts here and those that choose to be outside the "norm" should understand that is going to be the case especially when they make the choice of "permanent" alterations to their body and that they may suffer consequences for those decisions. I wish it weren't so and wasn't the case bud it is a sad reality that not everyone can simply realize that what people choose to do to their appearance is their own business and they shouldn't be judged because of those choices.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

screature said:


> Of course not everyone feels this way as is demonstrated by some of the posts here and those that choose to be outside the "norm" should understand that is going to be the case especially when they make the choice of "permanent" alterations to their body and that they may suffer consequences for those decisions. I wish it weren't so and wasn't the case bud it is a sad reality that not everyone can simply realize that what people choose to do to their appearance is their own business and they shouldn't be judged because of those choices.


I disagree. The thought processes that go into these choices say something about the people who make them, albeit on a case-by-case basis. It is their own business as to whether they make these choices, and it is the business of others as to how they perceive the person who makes such choices. 

Wouldst that we could be seen as we wish others to see us--but this is not unicorn land.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

Macfury said:


> I disagree. The thought processes that go into these choices say something about the people who make them, albeit on a case-by-case basis. It is their own business as to whether they make these choices, and *it is the business of others as to how they perceive the person who makes such choices. *
> 
> Wouldst that we could be seen as we wish others to see us--but this is not unicorn land.


Prejudice is most definitely a choice and I already stated as much but just because something exists in human behaviour doesn't make it right or desirable.

I will say that this attitude is a little surprising coming from some ones whose signature reads: "My life is my own."


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

screature said:


> Prejudice is most choice definitely and I already stated as much but just because something exists in human behaviour doesn't make it right or desirable.


Prejudice is the act of judging something without thought, not the act of judgement itself.



screature said:


> I will say that this attitude is a little surprising coming from some ones whose signature reads: "My life is my own."


Each person should be free to make choices. Just as other should be free to judge those choices.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

Macfury said:


> Prejudice is the act of judging something without thought, not the act of judgement itself.


No prejudice is:

prejudice |ˈprejədəs|
noun
1 *preconceived opinion that is not based on reason or actual experience
*


Macfury said:


> Each person should be free to make choices.* Just as other should be free to judged those choices.*


What does this mean? 

If I choose to eat cheese cheese whiz should you be free to judge *my character * based on that choice? Well I suppose you are but I would argue that your choice to judge me based on that is more telling of your character than my choice to eat cheese whiz.

I find it rather hard to believe that in the 21st century we are even having such a debate quite frankly.


----------



## bryanc (Jan 16, 2004)

I can certainly see both sides of this; if I meet someone who has a horrible tattoo on their face (or somewhere that is going to be noticeable in day-to-day interactions), I can't help but be affected by it. I can make an effort to compensate for how I think it may be altering my perceptions, but one can also take the position that it was their choice to get the tattoo, so why should I try not to let it affect how I judge them?

I think there's a spectrum here; someone who has a nose piercing or a belly button ring may well have come from a culture (or subculture) where that sort of ornamentation is normal, and even if you find it off-puttting, it's in everyone's best interest for you to try to suppress that response. Our judgements of what's 'normal' or even aesthetic are purely cultural biases, and our standards are not inherently 'better' than any others. If you let your cultural biases prejudice you against others, everyone looses potentially beneficial interactions.

On the other hand, if someone has a swastika tattooed on their forehead, your first impressions are probably right, and I wouldn't even give them the time of day.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

screature said:


> No prejudice is:
> 
> prejudice |ˈprejədəs|
> noun
> ...


A similar definition. However, I leave it up to the individual to determine whether their reasoning or actual experience justifies their judgment. Assuming one cannot possibly hold a negative view of someone over what one perceives as self-mutilation is certainly wishful thinking.




screature said:


> If I choose to eat cheese cheese whiz should you be free to judge *my character * based on that choice? Well I suppose you are but I would argue that your choice to judge me based on that is more telling of your character than my choice to eat cheese whiz.


Certainly, although narrowing it to just one's character is a bit extreme. I might see you as someone who does not take your health seriously, someone who has little aesthetic appreciation for food--or, as a mensch who appreciates food from all walks of life. However, I might not hire you to operate a fine food establishment, or counsel customers of a nutrition clinic.


----------



## GratuitousApplesauce (Jan 29, 2004)

Automatically judging the character of person based on external appearances is to me a sign of lazy, closed-minded and simplistic thinking. 

As bryanc said, the tendency to judge others may be sometimes reflexive, possibly even sometimes instinctive, but as human beings with working brains, we should have the intelligence to not always act instinctively and reflexively. We should be smart enough to not apply the presumptions about stereotypes we might have to an individual standing before us.

When people decide to deviate from an appearance that is considered in the "normal" range, they can have a whole host of reasons for doing so, some undoubtedly simply the rashness of youth.

In the late '70s I cut my hair quite short back when most young men my age sported longer hair. Friends I knew all were listening to the new music that was coming from England at the time and I guess we were responding to that. I remember walking down the street one night in Toronto with friends when a muscle car screeched around the corner, a beer can came flying towards us and we heard the epithet screamed by the carload of long-haired guys -- "Punkers!". We weren't even close to looking like real punks, but I thought it was so ironic that a decade earlier, it would have been a muscle car filled with short haired guys yelling "HIppies!" at a group of long-haired guys.

What we consider "normal" is just a societal construct that shifts over time and from place to place. It inherently means nothing. Tattooing is now very mainstream as are many nonstandard piercings. What someone who is 70 might see as "weird" when looking at a teenager, might be pretty much in the range of normal for the teenager's generation. While we may assume that those who push the envelope outside of normal appearance might be either crazy, on drugs, stupid or attention getting and while in some cases this may even be true, it's probably also true that just as many within the normal appearing population can also be crazy, on drugs, stupid or looking for attention in other ways.

These people that many will apply their judging to may be just as likely as anyone else to be decent, honest and intelligent people who have just have a unique outlook on things. You can't know that if you limit yourself to your pre-judgement of them.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

GratuitousApplesauce said:


> Automatically judging the character of person based on external appearances is to me a sign of lazy, closed-minded and simplistic thinking.


Yes, automatic judgment, but not considered judgement taking into place a number of considerations, including appearance and/or self-mutilation.


----------



## GratuitousApplesauce (Jan 29, 2004)

Macfury said:


> Yes, automatic judgment, but not considered judgement taking into place a number of considerations, including appearance and/or self-mutilation.


I'm not sure what you would qualify as "considered" judgement. A "number of considerations" can hardly be possible based on appearance alone. Once you've interacted with the person you may have more to go on. "Self-multilation" is in the eye of the beholder. Not too long ago is was somewhat scandalous for a woman to pierce her ears. Nowadays "normal" includes breast implants and surgery to re-do one's face. Normal and what is considered "mutilation" is in flux.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

I'm not going to waste time trying to convince anyone that someone with piercings or tattoos is a credible human being too. I know old overweight white balding men in suits, as well as fully tattood pierced up people as well. Some in all are wonderful human beings, and on all sides there's the arseholes. I'm probably more likely to be somewhat judgemental based on cleanliness, or how they act to me or others around them. But if anyone wants to judge simply based on 'I don't like peircings or tattoos, well, I say, your loss. Sad, but not my problem. My life has been enriched from friendships with good people pierced/tattood, and not.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

Macfury said:


> A similar definition. However, I leave it up to the individual to determine whether their reasoning or actual experience justifies their judgment.* Assuming one cannot possibly hold a negative view of someone over what one perceives as self-mutilation is certainly wishful thinking.*


And I said as much:



> ...Of course not everyone feels this way as is demonstrated by some of the posts here and *those that choose to be outside the "norm" should understand that is going to be the case especially when they make the choice of "permanent" alterations to their body and that they may suffer consequences for those decisions.*


But as far as I am concerned it is a sad reality... just as is racism.



Macfury said:


> Certainly, although narrowing it to just one's character is a bit extreme. *I might see you as someone who does not take your health seriously, someone who has little aesthetic appreciation for food--or, as a mensch who appreciates food from all walks of life. *However, I might not hire you to operate a fine food establishment, or counsel customers of a nutrition clinic.


How is this not making assumptions about one's character?


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

bryanc said:


> I can certainly see both sides of this; if I meet someone who has a horrible tattoo on their face (or somewhere that is going to be noticeable in day-to-day interactions), I can't help but be affected by it. I can make an effort to compensate for how I think it may be altering my perceptions, but one can also take the position that it was their choice to get the tattoo, so why should I try not to let it affect how I judge them?
> 
> *I think there's a spectrum here; someone who has a nose piercing or a belly button ring may well have come from a culture (or subculture) where that sort of ornamentation is normal, and even if you find it off-puttting, it's in everyone's best interest for you to try to suppress that response. Our judgements of what's 'normal' or even aesthetic are purely cultural biases, and our standards are not inherently 'better' than any others. If you let your cultural biases prejudice you against others, everyone looses potentially beneficial interactions.
> 
> On the other hand, if someone has a swastika tattooed on their forehead, your first impressions are probably right, and I wouldn't even give them the time of day.*


Absolutely and I think the imagery a person chooses to adorn their body with and the reasons for them definitely comes into play. However without any overt political connotations to that imagery I see no reason to have preconceived notions as to the reasons for why the person choose to do so, as the reasons are diverse and one should not presume to know them.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

GratuitousApplesauce said:


> Automatically judging the character of person based on external appearances is to me a sign of lazy, closed-minded and simplistic thinking.
> 
> As bryanc said, the tendency to judge others may be sometimes reflexive, possibly even sometimes instinctive, but as human beings with working brains, we should have the intelligence to not always act instinctively and reflexively. We should be smart enough to not apply the presumptions about stereotypes we might have to an individual standing before us.
> 
> ...





GratuitousApplesauce said:


> I'm not sure what you would qualify as "considered" judgement. A "number of considerations" can hardly be possible based on appearance alone. Once you've interacted with the person you may have more to go on. "Self-multilation" is in the eye of the beholder. Not too long ago is was somewhat scandalous for a woman to pierce her ears. Nowadays "normal" includes breast implants and surgery to re-do one's face. Normal and what is considered "mutilation" is in flux.


Great posts GA and I agree on all fronts.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

screature said:


> How is this not making assumptions about one's character?


It is passing a _judgement_ on one's character. Given only so much time to review each human being we meet, we impart a sort rolling and ongoing judgement on each of them as long as we know them.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

Macfury said:


> It is passing a _judgement_ on one's character. *Given only so much time to review each human being we meet, we impart a sort rolling and ongoing judgement on each of them as long as we know them.*


I try to do this as little as possible until I actually get to know someone. I find it serves me well.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

I find the opposite has served me well. My first impressions have generally been sound. The few situations where I've forced myself to disregard strong initial impressions have resulted in some spectacular chaos over the long run.


----------



## G-Mo (Sep 26, 2007)

From my son's iPad storybook app:

"Never judge a book by it's cover; never judge a person by their face."


----------



## BigDL (Apr 16, 2003)

+1

However that sentiment only applies to non judgemental people.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

G-Mo said:


> From my son's iPad storybook app:
> 
> "Never judge a book by it's cover; never judge a person by their face."


Your son's storybook is correct--for books and faces.


----------



## bryanc (Jan 16, 2004)

Macfury said:


> My first impressions have generally been sound.


This, I think, is the crux of the matter. I agree with you that there are many circumstances in which we must take mental shortcuts in order to come to a decision within the time constraints, and it is in these circumstances that one's personal appearance makes the biggest difference. It's interesting how often we can get this right, and psychologists have spent a lot of time and effort trying to figure out the subconscious mechanisms underlying this aspect of human behaviour.

That being said, it's valuable to consider how these first impressions are routinely being 'gamed' (makeup, breast implants, the entire fashion industry, and loads of social rituals like handshakes, length of eye contact, etc. are all calculated to manipulate your first impression of someone).

I therefore consciously try to avoid forming first impressions, and judge people only after sufficient meaningful interaction that I have some substantive data on which to establish my judgement. This, of course, means that I must refrain from forming a judgement of most people in my life, as I don't get enough information, but that's fine with me.

I also turn this around; I don't make any effort to impress people with superficialities like clothing (I don't own a suit or tie) or professional hair cuts (I cut my own hair), because I really don't want to work with people who would judge me on those sorts of grounds.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

bryanc said:


> This, I think, is the crux of the matter. I agree with you that there are many circumstances in which we must take mental shortcuts in order to come to a decision within the time constraints, and it is in these circumstances that one's personal appearance makes the biggest difference.
> 
> That being said, it's valuable to consider how these first impressions are routinely being 'gamed' (makeup, breast implants, the entire fashion industry, and loads of social rituals like handshakes, length of eye contact, etc. are all calculated to manipulate your impression of someone on first impression).
> 
> ...


That seems a reasonable approach, and I support any approach that does not result in cruel treatment of people we have barely met. The point I'm making is that each of us develops an approach to social interaction that probably works well for us.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

Macfury said:


> I find the opposite has served me well. My first impressions have generally been sound. The few situations where I've forced myself to disregard strong initial impressions have resulted in some spectacular chaos over the long run.


And so we shall have to agree to disagree as this is clearly a fundamental difference in approach as to how we deal with others and the outcome of those approaches.

Peace out.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

bryanc said:


> This, I think, is the crux of the matter. I agree with you that there are many circumstances in which we must take mental shortcuts in order to come to a decision within the time constraints, and it is in these circumstances that one's personal appearance makes the biggest difference. It's interesting how often we can get this right, and psychologists have spent a lot of time and effort trying to figure out the subconscious mechanisms underlying this aspect of human behaviour.
> 
> That being said, it's valuable to consider how these first impressions are routinely being 'gamed' (makeup, breast implants, the entire fashion industry, and loads of social rituals like handshakes, length of eye contact, etc. are all calculated to manipulate your first impression of someone).
> 
> ...


Bang on. That is exactly how I try to conduct my relations with people. I agree 100%.


----------



## jamesB (Jan 28, 2007)

Well I've followed this thread since the beginning, and am amazed at how much over thinking goes on.
I've always used the "KISS" process, I initially treat everyone I meet with the same respect that I'd like to receive from them.
Only after this first meeting do I adjust my impressions if needed.
I'm constantly being amazed at the responses, almost always favorable, you get from being nice and non judgmental to others.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

jamesB said:


> Well I've followed this thread since the beginning, and am amazed at how much over thinking goes on.
> I've always used the "KISS" process, I initially treat everyone I meet with the same respect that I'd like to receive from them.
> Only after this first meeting do I adjust my impressions if needed.
> I'm constantly being amazed at the responses, almost always favorable, you get from being nice and non judgmental to others.


I'm nice AND often judgmental.


----------



## jamesB (Jan 28, 2007)

Macfury said:


> I'm nice AND often judgmental.


You think you are being nice, those who are the object of your judgments probably have a different opinion and will respond in kind.
BTW no need to answer, I know you are going to say "you could care less".


----------



## tilt (Mar 3, 2005)

jamesB said:


> *Snip* I know you are going to say "you could care less".


Arrrrggghhhhhh!!!!! The phrase is "you COULDN'T care less".


----------



## jamesB (Jan 28, 2007)

tilt said:


> Arrrrggghhhhhh!!!!! The phrase is "you COULDN'T care less".


Unless I meant "he could care less" as in, he is not quite finished caring yet.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

jamesB said:


> You think you are being nice, those who are the object of your judgments probably have a different opinion and will respond in kind.
> BTW no need to answer, I know you are going to say "you could care less".


I really doubt your hypothesis that it is impossible to be nice to someone, even if you may hold a negative opinion of them. Likewise, I never try to read between the lines if they treat me well in return.


----------



## Andrew Pratt (Feb 16, 2007)

I think there's a huge difference between judging someone based on their cultural/ethic appearance and judging based on how they've _personally _chosen to dress or present themselves. For example when meeting with a trades person about a job you need doing in your home you shouldn't make assumptions about his skills based on the fact he's of "X" ethnicity but you could if they are disheveled, unclean or whatever. In that sense you are judging a person on choices they have made not those of a larger cultural group.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Andrew Pratt said:


> I think there's a huge difference between judging someone based on their cultural/ethic appearance and judging based on how they've _personally _chosen to dress or present themselves. For example when meeting with a trades person about a job you need doing in your home you shouldn't make assumptions about his skills based on the fact he's of "X" ethnicity but you could if they are disheveled, unclean or whatever. In that sense you are judging a person on choices they have made not those of a larger cultural group.


Absolutely agreed. I was a little surprised to see people throwing "race" into a thread about appearances.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

Andrew Pratt said:


> I think there's a huge difference between judging someone based on their cultural/ethic appearance and judging based on how they've _personally _chosen to dress or present themselves. For example when meeting with a trades person about a job you need doing in your home you shouldn't make assumptions about his skills based on the fact he's of "X" ethnicity but you could *if they are disheveled, unclean* or whatever. *In that sense you are judging a person on choices they have made not those of a larger cultural group.*


Not the same thing at all as the choice to mark your body. You can be perfectly well dressed and clean and still have tatoos and piercings, you are mixing apples and oranges. The twains do not meet.

Also you are judging them based on being an identifiable/visible minority and then lumping them all into the same group so it is very similar to racism which is just a specific form of prejudice.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

screature said:


> ...you are mixing apples and oranges. The twains do not meet.






+
YouTube Video









ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

I learned my lesson long ago that knowing what you are talking about trumps dress/appearance every time.
Guy came into a corporate meeting in overalls.....all others including me in suits.
He knew his stuff and exuded confidence......took a lesson from it.

Haven't worn a tie since.

IBM finally figured it out too and dropped the stupid 50s dress code some seem to like to think "makes the person"......horsepucky.

I see a kid all done up to the 9s trying to impress and I wonder how much time he wastes in the bathroom playing narcissus. 

There are blind auditions for symphony orchestra's now to avoid judgement calls based on appearance ( or gender ) as opposed to ability.

Some of the best con artists in the world dress really well.


----------



## Andrew Pratt (Feb 16, 2007)

> Not the same thing at all as the choice to mark your body. You can be perfectly well dressed and clean and still have tatoos and piercings, you are mixing apples and oranges. The twains do not meet.


I don't disagree. I was commenting on previous posts that included racial/cultural stereotypes and not simple individual choices. 

As with most things in life it isn't black and white but shades of gray. If you have a "tasteful" tatoo/piercing you aren't going to be judged in the same way as someone with a more extreme example. Generally speaking those that go to an extreme do so to make a point and as a result societal views will reflect that.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

saw this today:


----------



## tilt (Mar 3, 2005)

jamesB said:


> Unless I meant "he could care less" as in, he is not quite finished caring yet.


Heheheh, possible, but not probable in this case, I believe. 

Cheers


----------



## vancouverdave (Dec 14, 2008)

Our tile guy had a shaved head and a full length tattoo on his arm. 

This is not unusual in trades, but my daughter was curious so we asked. 

It turns out he likes hair, but can't wash he grout out of it by the time he gets home. 

The tattoo is the full name of his daughter who he didn't think was going to survive a bout of cancer at the time. 

Just an anecdote, for what it's worth.


----------



## partsguy (Jul 24, 2012)

While it's not good to judge on appearances, especially over things over which people have no control (gender, ethnicity, height, natural hair colour, etc.), it is interesting for me to make conjectures over _why_ some people do what they do to themselves (tattoos, piercings, weird hair styles/colour). Are they just attention-seeking, or are they trying to make some other sort of a statement?

As has been stated elsewhere, if you have enough self confidence, it doesn't matter much what you wear, or what you look like, because self confidence overrides just about everything else.

Unfortunately far too many people substitute 'style' for 'substance', and erroneously think that what they look like will overcome all other obstacles. Looking good might get you the interview, but if you don't have any qualifications beyond "not looking like an idiot", you'll probably not make it much further.

I like the internet, because (aside from being able to judge someone's relative intelligence based upon their correct grammar usage), it masks any prejudicial abilities, except for what we choose to reveal.


----------



## Sonal (Oct 2, 2003)

Due to my ethnicity, I've had a lot of people (mistakenly) assume that I wear a nose ring for religious reasons... this happens a lot less now than it did 20 years ago when I first got it. But it meant I could wear it without comment in a lot of situations where people of a different ethnicity would be adversely judged for it. I always found that funny. 

My mother's reaction to my nose ring was that she was angry that I would do something so conventional. (She never liked wearing one... took it out as soon as she could.) My aunt likes it, but she wears hers. My grandmother likes it, but she also wears hers. My cousins in India think it's bizarre... only old people like their mothers and grandmothers get nose piercings... mark of an old fuddy-duddy. (More things I find funny.)

As for tattoos, clothing, other piercings, to me it depends on context. Seeing someone pierced and inked everywhere at, say, an art opening is very different from, say, a meeting with a corporate lawyer. How people present themselves, to me, is a reflection of their response to social understanding. Someone dressed very inappropriately is either doing so deliberately, or doesn't know better. Both of these give me clues to their character. This doesn't make the other person necessarily shady, or stupid, but it's information.

In any case, I've been walking around with substantial "henna tattoos" up my arms and legs for close to two weeks now. While it's a lot more subtle than a real tattoo, what's interesting is how few people seem to react. I suspect this is all a lot less of a big deal than it once was.


----------



## vancouverdave (Dec 14, 2008)

Is it reasonable to think that ones appearance is ones 'brand'?

It represents what people can expect from you socially or professionally. 

Sure, it can be 'gamed' or you could simply be represented by bad 'branding', but there may be something to be gained by both parties by an honest and professional representation of yourself.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

vancouverdave said:


> Is it reasonable to think that ones appearance is ones 'brand'?


Yes, good point.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Sonal said:


> In any case, I've been walking around with substantial "henna tattoos" up my arms and legs for close to two weeks now. While it's a lot more subtle than a real tattoo, what's interesting is how few people seem to react. I suspect this is all a lot less of a big deal than it once was.


Just don't try to serve me breakfast, and we're good.


----------



## Sonal (Oct 2, 2003)

Macfury said:


> Just don't try to serve me breakfast, and we're good.


They'll wear off in another week or so.

But I'm still not serving you breakfast.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

a rugged individualist being served breakfast?

Now I've heard everything.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

> Is it reasonable to think that ones appearance is ones 'brand'?
> 
> It represents what people can expect from you socially or professionally.
> 
> Sure, it can be 'gamed' or you could simply be represented by bad 'branding', but there may be something to be gained by both parties by an honest and professional representation of yourself.


snicker...not surprised by this....the con men and the politicians know the game only too well...well dressed horsepucky doesn't change the nature of the crap they serve up. 

then there are those that have the substance and could care less about the " appearance"


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Then there are those who dress and groom terribly and have no substance at all.


----------



## bryanc (Jan 16, 2004)

Macfury said:


> Then there are those who dress and groom terribly and have no substance at all.


Yes, and they ought to be judged on their lack of substance, not on their dress. In my experience, there is no correlation between dress (or tattoos, or piercings) and substance, and even if there was, correlation != causation.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Exactly..


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

bryanc said:


> Yes, and they ought to be judged on their lack of substance, not on their dress. In my experience, there is no correlation between dress (or tattoos, or piercings) and substance, and even if there was, correlation != causation.


agreed.


----------



## Sonal (Oct 2, 2003)

bryanc said:


> Yes, and they ought to be judged on their lack of substance, not on their dress. In my experience, there is no correlation between dress (or tattoos, or piercings) and substance, and even if there was, correlation != causation.


Agreed.

However, that someone ought not to be judged on their dress does not mean that they ought not to be aware that they will likely be judged on this. 

Why a person chooses to flout social conventions around clothing says something about them--not necessary anything negative, but it's a clue about personality.


----------



## partsguy (Jul 24, 2012)

When you are hiring an employee, if you're looking for someone who needs to be creative and think outside 'society's norms', a little flamboyance in personal style wouldn't be considered a detracting trait.

However, if you've got a regimented 'system' and people need to work within that system for the system to work most efficiently, you might be tempted to hire someone who displays a bit more conventionality and a bit less aptitude to 'buck the system'.


----------



## tilt (Mar 3, 2005)

Sonal said:


> Due to my ethnicity, I've had a lot of people (mistakenly) assume that I wear a nose ring for religious reasons... this happens a lot less now than it did 20 years ago when I first got it. But it meant I could wear it without comment in a lot of situations where people of a different ethnicity would be adversely judged for it. I always found that funny.
> 
> *SNIP*
> 
> As for tattoos, clothing, other piercings, to me it depends on context. Seeing someone pierced and inked everywhere at, say, an art opening is very different from, say, a meeting with a corporate lawyer. How people present themselves, to me, is a reflection of their response to social understanding. Someone dressed very inappropriately is either doing so deliberately, or doesn't know better. Both of these give me clues to their character. This doesn't make the other person necessarily shady, or stupid, but it's information.


As usual, an intelligent post from Sonal.

Your first paragraph reminded me of something - I had a ponytail for over a year very recently, and no one seemed to mind. Considering I am a consultant and am traditionally expected to dress and groom myself well, this (to me) was an aberration and I wondered how long I could get away with it. And then one day after I cut it off, someone asked me why i did so, and I mentioned that it was difficult to maintain. That's when they said "Oh, since you are Indian, I thought it was a religion thing that you had to have long hair".

Cheers


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

why how respectable.....

not....

White supremacist’s wild ponzi scheme - Salon.com


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Is that your idea of a nice suit, MacDoc? He should be arrested just for combining those colours.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

red white and blue?

hah, hello!


----------



## vancouverdave (Dec 14, 2008)

tilt said:


> I had a ponytail for over a year


I had long hair for many years and dressed in a style that makes sense to most bikers (jeans, leather jacket, boots).

In those days, my clients loved it: "That's our computer guy".

These days, customers are looking more for reliability rather than creativity. Eccentric-computer-guy (Woz) is a tired cliche who has been replaced by I-understand-your-business-needs-guy (Jobs).

/dave


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

Well certainly not all customers, or I'd be outta business


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

As usual MF you fell for the suit appearance not the "accomplishment" ...thank you for proving my point. 

•••

my idea of a "suit" runs to neoprene


••

Online activities have disarmed the entire stupid " dress to impress scenario" - billions of dollars are transacted every day by people who have never had and never will have a face to face.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

MacDoc said:


> As usual MF you fell for the suit appearance not the "accomplishment" ...thank you for proving my point.


I was not impressed by the suit, then read the link to show that his accomplishments were also not impressive. How does this prove your point?


----------



## Sonal (Oct 2, 2003)

MacDoc said:


> Online activities have disarmed the entire stupid " dress to impress scenario" - billions of dollars are transacted every day by people who have never had and never will have a face to face.


Yes, but they've introduced a new issue about presenting yourself online in a way that shows that you are trustworthy.

That's also about appearances, although not clothing.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

Sonal said:


> Yes, but they've introduced a new issue about presenting yourself online in a way that shows that you are trustworthy.
> 
> That's also about *appearances*, although not clothing.


Well to be picky it isn't about appearances as that is visual, it is however about perception, i.e. how one perceives you in their mind's eye without being able to see you.


----------



## Sonal (Oct 2, 2003)

screature said:


> Well to be picky it isn't about appearances as that is visual, it is however about perception, i.e. how one perceives you in their mind's eye without being able to see you.


Websites are visual.


----------



## jamesB (Jan 28, 2007)

tilt said:


> And then one day after I cut it off, someone asked me why i did so, and I mentioned that it was difficult to maintain.


Difficult, how?
Every morning, brush your hair and gather it all together, fix it up with a rubber band, and that's it for the day.
Doesn't get much easier then this.
From a 20+yr pony tailer.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

Sonal said:


> Websites are visual.


So that talks about your ability to hire a good designer and web developer it still has nothing to do with ones appearance.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

well I suppose I -could- hire someone to photoshop my unkempt hair and lack of expensive suits on the website picture.


----------



## Sonal (Oct 2, 2003)

screature said:


> So that talks about your ability to hire a good designer and web developer it still has nothing to do with ones appearance.


Not your personal appearance, no. But it is the appearance of your online presence.

That you hire people to keep it looking professional (or whatever) is not unlike hiring a personal stylist for the same reason.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

I would rather my competitors go casual and sport stringy, unkempt hair.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

They might think the very opposite if it works extremely well for them.

I've taken great pleasure at knocking out the dorks with ties in a pitch. Especially when it's a biggie. :lmao:


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

Sonal said:


> *Not your personal appearance, no.* But it is the appearance of your online presence.
> 
> That you hire people to keep it looking professional (or whatever) is not unlike hiring a personal stylist for the same reason.


That's all I am saying. The rest is about branding your company... Apple has always been far more highly sophisticated than Steve Job's appearance ever was for example. Like I said, I was being picky.


----------



## Sonal (Oct 2, 2003)

screature said:


> That's all I am saying. The rest is about branding your company... Apple has always been far more highly sophisticated than Steve Job's appearance ever was for example. Like I said, I was being picky.


It's something that's been top of mind for me late. I've been slowly re-branding my online persona (under my personal name) so it's been a lot of personal web-grooming lately. 

But the original comment was to MacDoc's point about online business removing the need to concern oneself with appearances. It doesn't remove it so much as it changes the medium.


----------



## KC4 (Feb 2, 2009)

Macfury said:


> I would rather my competitors go casual and sport stringy, unkempt hair.


Yep. I would appreciate it if my competitors didn't brush their teeth and had a very "relaxed" attitude towards spelling and grammar. 

As one who has read 1000s of resumes and interviewed 100s of people, I can say emphatically, yes, presentation is extremely important.

I know, I know, how shallow.....but just because you don't like the game and choose not to play, don't be surprised when and if you are passed over. With all else equal, it may be the deciding factor.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

KC4 said:


> Yep. I would appreciate it if my competitors didn't brush their teeth and had a very "relaxed" attitude towards spelling and grammar.
> 
> As one who has read 1000s of resumes and interviewed 100s of people, I can say emphatically, yes, presentation is extremely important.
> 
> I know, I know, how shallow.....but just because you don't like the game and choose not to play, don't be surprised when and if you are passed over. With all else equal, it may be the deciding factor.


well, there's a huge difference between different types of appearances, and simply bad personal hygiene and poor communication skills.

There are many examples of this everywhere. In my industry, Joshua Davis is merely one of many that comes to mind.

In music, I've spent a great deal on personal appearance, and clothes, much of which I use in my web work now, a sense of style is far more important than how many trips you made to your barber/tip top tailors.


----------



## tilt (Mar 3, 2005)

jamesB said:


> Difficult, how?
> Every morning, brush your hair and gather it all together, fix it up with a rubber band, and that's it for the day.
> Doesn't get much easier then this.
> From a 20+yr pony tailer.


I need to wash my hair everyday, otherwise it becomes oily and itchy and I get dandruff! So, wet long hair does not dry out quickly and the ponytail looks like a rat tail 

Cheers


----------



## Sonal (Oct 2, 2003)

Back in my nerdy coding days, we had a lot of brilliant people with really, really poor personal hygiene. I remember chatting with the boss of one over drinks, and his comment was that he could always tell when so-and-so showered, because suddenly he would smell like soap. (They didn't dress particularly well either, but this was a lesser issue.)

These were the kind of guys (they were all guys) who would argue that the world should be a meritocracy where people were judged by skill and not by appearance. Was always slightly suspicious of this line of thinking from this group, since it seemed another way of saying, "I wish my life were easier without my having to do anything about it." Or put another way, "I wish the world would recognize my brilliance and not be put off by my aversion to showering."


----------



## bryanc (Jan 16, 2004)

KC4 said:


> just because you don't like the game and choose not to play, don't be surprised when and if you are passed over.


It's worth being aware that this game is not played the same everywhere; what strikes us as outré, may be very conservative in other cultures (or in subcultures of our own). Furthermore, as I've mentioned, things like appearance can be far less important in arenas where individuals are less fungible. If you're the only person who can do what you do, it doesn't much matter what you look like.


----------



## KC4 (Feb 2, 2009)

How many otherwise brilliant and capable people are passed over in favor of a possibly less capable but better presented individual, I wonder. 

Most people would quickly dismiss further consideration of an offensive person - why wouldn't that include grooming/hygiene? The brilliance would not have the chance to shine through, or would not matter.


----------



## bryanc (Jan 16, 2004)

KC4 said:


> Most people would quickly dismiss further consideration of an offensive person - why wouldn't that include grooming/hygiene?


I'm not sure how we got from tattoos and clothing to hygiene. I wouldn't argue that one should not judge on the basis of personal hygiene, but I would argue that judging on the basis of the way someone dresses is intellectually lazy at best, discriminatory at worst, and, probably most importantly, misleading much of the time.


----------



## KC4 (Feb 2, 2009)

bryanc said:


> I'm not sure how we got from tattoos and clothing to hygiene. I wouldn't argue that one should not judge on the basis of personal hygiene, but I would argue that judging on the basis of the way someone dresses is intellectually lazy at best, discriminatory at worst, and, probably most importantly, misleading much of the time.


Not much of a leap - Clothing, tattoos, piercings, grooming and hygiene are (barring financial or other distress) all personal choices.... Unless one is still groomed, dressed and bathed by a parent. Then, well, that's another issue entirely.


----------



## KC4 (Feb 2, 2009)

bryanc said:


> If you're the only person who can do what you do, it doesn't much matter what you look like.


Oh, never mistake forced tolerance for acceptance. It still matters (IMHO).


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

bryanc said:


> I'm not sure how we got from tattoos and clothing to hygiene. I wouldn't argue that one should not judge on the basis of personal hygiene, but I would argue that judging on the basis of the way someone dresses is intellectually lazy at best, discriminatory at worst, and, probably most importantly, misleading much of the time.


I'm not sure either how this got from tattoos etc. to poor personal hygiene. I don't think any choices be it tattoos, piercings, expensive suits, interesting haorcuts or barbarshop cleancuts, really have anything to do with cleanliness.

And I do agree strongly with:



> but I would argue that judging on the basis of the way someone dresses is intellectually lazy at best, discriminatory at worst, and, probably most importantly, misleading much of the time.


Very well written.

As I have said before, I think it's a waste of time trying to convince anyone that judging someone based on things like tattoos or other things is not only as you said intellectually lazy, but _their problem_ not mine.

I guess that's the beauty of freedom. Think what you want.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)




----------



## bryanc (Jan 16, 2004)

KC4 said:


> Not much of a leap - Clothing, tattoos, piercings, grooming and hygiene are (barring financial or other distress) all personal choices.


I think the reason I put hygiene in a different category is that, unlike fashion choices (or non-choices), hygiene has functional sanitary consequences.

If someone doesn't wear a tie, that isn't going to make themselves or the people around them sick.


----------



## jimbotelecom (May 29, 2009)

Tattoo culture making its mark on millennials - Canada - CBC News


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

bryanc said:


> I think the reason I put hygiene in a different category is that, unlike fashion choices (or non-choices), hygiene has functional sanitary consequences.
> 
> If someone doesn't wear a tie, that isn't going to make themselves or the people around them sick.


However those among us that have worked for a living might argue that wearing a tie does indicate that individual is a phony. (Based entirely on the observation that almost all politicians and TV preachers wear ties.)


----------



## bryanc (Jan 16, 2004)

eMacMan said:


> However those among us that have worked for a living might argue that wearing a tie does indicate that individual is a phony. (Based entirely on the observation that almost all politicians and TV preachers wear ties.)


It's so rare that I meet someone wearing a tie that actually turns out to be worth listening to, I now have to work hard not to pre-judge. I suspect my instinctive reaction to someone wearing a suit and tie is rather like SINCs reaction to someone covered in tattoos and piercings.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

bryanc said:


> *It's so rare that I meet someone wearing a tie* that actually turns out to be worth listening to, I now have to work hard not to pre-judge. I suspect my instinctive reaction to someone wearing a suit and tie is rather like SINCs reaction to someone covered in tattoos and piercings.


You need to get out a little more often.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

bryanc said:


> It's so rare that I meet someone wearing a tie...


Are you going to San Francisco? 

If you are going to San Francisco, be sure to wear some flowers in your hair...





+
YouTube Video









ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

bryanc said:


> It's so rare that I meet someone wearing a tie that actually turns out to be worth listening to, I now have to work hard not to pre-judge. I suspect my instinctive reaction to someone wearing a suit and tie is rather like SINCs reaction to someone covered in tattoos and piercings.


I do agree. There have been exceptions but they become rarer with each year that passes. 

For example I have had some recent exchanges with various tie wearing local council members. They look pretty but substance ends with the looks. Also talked to concrete contractors, back-hoe operators and newspaper editors on the same topic. To say the council members come off as shabby low-lifes when compared to those paying their salaries, is truly understating my overall impression.


----------



## bryanc (Jan 16, 2004)

screature said:


> You need to get out a little more often.


This year I've been at two conferences in Europe and one in Montreal, giving guest lectures in the US and BC, and have been working in labs across north america, and in all of these contexts, a suit-and-tie would've stood out like a sore thumb. In science, you're judged by your data and your ability to communicate and generate new data, not your looks, so very few of us pay much attention to clothes. In fields where objective criteria for performance are hard to find (arts, business, etc.) I suspect people spend far more effort on their appearances.


----------

