#2 2009-01-28 17:39:25
They believe they have an image to maintain and she doesn’t fit the bill. All they need to do is show that they have dark skinned employees who don’t present themselves as ghetto trash.
Offline
#3 2009-01-28 17:41:35
fnord wrote:
They believe they have an image to maintain and she doesn’t fit the bill. All they need to do is show that they have dark skinned employees who don’t present themselves as ghetto trash.
Or they would have, if they'd just kept their mouths shut and said she didn't meet their standards.
Offline
#4 2009-01-28 18:42:01
The fact that these kinds of businesses actually exist in the 21st Century is dismaying and disgusting. The fact that some people actually want to be employed there makes me feel all stabby.
However, the chica has a smokin' body, and since that's the main criterion for getting hired at a Hooters knockoff restaurant, I don't see what their problem is. Do they think their clientele come in to hear the waitresses' perfect elucidation?
Offline
#5 2009-01-28 19:03:33
George Orr wrote:
The fact that these kinds of businesses actually exist in the 21st Century is dismaying and disgusting. The fact that some people actually want to be employed there makes me feel all stabby.
However, the chica has a smokin' body, and since that's the main criterion for getting hired at a Hooters knockoff restaurant, I don't see what their problem is. Do they think their clientele come in to hear the waitresses' perfect elucidation?
She looks skanky. As Fnord said, these places have a certain image that they want to uphold. You won't see any big-bootied black chicks at Hooters. They hire black chicks, but they've got to fit the white ideal.
If a chick wants a job where she is judged on her looks, she should be prepared for rejection.
Offline
#6 2009-01-28 20:01:50
You judgemental bitches. Talk all sorts o' shit on this freak. You high-minded galls spend your free time, who're you to judge?
Odds are, one of you have done a turn or two on a pole in an earlier life.
Last edited by orangeplus (2009-01-28 20:08:27)
Offline
#7 2009-01-28 20:24:56
orangeplus wrote:
You judgemental bitches. Talk all sorts o' shit on this freak. You high-minded galls spend your free time, who're you to judge?
C'mon...is she entitled to $130,000 a year for her discrimination? She's have to give a lot of blow jobs....
Offline
#8 2009-01-28 20:26:41
If you had the opportunity to take a large monetary chunk out of a sleezeball for being a hypocrit, you wouldn't do it?
Offline
#9 2009-01-28 20:31:53
headkicker_girl wrote:
orangeplus wrote:
You judgemental bitches. Talk all sorts o' shit on this freak. You high-minded galls spend your free time, who're you to judge?
C'mon...is she entitled to $130,000 a year for her discrimination? She's have to give a lot of blow jobs....
If they really were stupid enough to tell her that it had to do with her accent then she might get away with it.
Offline
#10 2009-01-28 20:33:02
orangeplus wrote:
If you had the opportunity to take a large monetary chunk out of a sleezeball for being a hypocrit, you wouldn't do it?
Her case has no merit. She won't get shit. Her attorney is just hoping for a settlement to get it to go away because of thee restaurant's past problems with sexual harrassment. A white person can look too ghetto. All they have to show is that they've turned down plenty of skany white girls for similar reasons (sleazy looks and poor diction), or show that they have other black and latin waitresses, and they have given a race-neutral reason for not hiring her. Real discrimination exists, but this ain't it.
Offline
#11 2009-01-28 20:34:25
orangeplus wrote:
If you had the opportunity to take a large monetary chunk out of a sleezeball for being a hypocrit, you wouldn't do it?
I gather you are talking about her lawyer being the one to get a large chunk of money out of a sleazeball. But then her lawyer is a sleazeball, so we are talking about income redistribution among sleazeballs.
Offline
#12 2009-01-28 21:16:28
fnord wrote:
so we are talking about income redistribution among sleazeballs.
Christ on a motherfucking crutch, can we be done with the "income redistribution" talk already? We've given wall st 3 tril already, what more do they deserve??
Offline
#13 2009-01-29 11:36:02
Look under her arms along her waist. Is that just low-res pixilation or a bad photochop? Methinks they gave her some digital lipo.
And I wouldn't hire a Nuevo Rican for anything. They don't speak English OR Spanish.
Offline
#14 2009-01-29 12:15:13
Personally, I never understood the lip liner thing.
Offline
#15 2009-01-29 18:50:27
icangetyouatoe wrote:
Personally, I never understood the lip liner thing.
That, and ripping out your eyebrows just to draw them back the fuck on, only dumber-looking. I say Sharpies should not be marketed in Hispanic/Latino markets.
Oh, and nice fake tits. What do they say underneath the nipples, "Inflate to 35 pounds"?
Offline
#16 2009-01-29 20:49:23
whiskytangofoxtrot wrote:
That, and ripping out your eyebrows just to draw them back the fuck on, only dumber-looking. I say Sharpies should not be marketed in Hispanic/Latino markets.
Oh, and nice fake tits. What do they say underneath the nipples, "Inflate to 35 pounds"?
I'm betting she was super breedable before the entire fake titty thing, probably had some awecome b-cups, firm and bouncy!!!!
ooopsss, anyone got any kleenix???
Offline
#17 2009-01-31 01:08:01
icangetyouatoe wrote:
Personally, I never understood the lip liner thing.
Offline
#18 2009-01-31 11:45:46
square wrote:
You are going to scale that down a bit, and "side-image" it - No?
Offline
