Working at Taboo Places

College Life
61

<p>I'm sorry, but WHAT? -_-</p>

<p>"First impressions aren't always correct, but I believe they often are (note the distinction between first impressions and prejudice)."</p>

<p>No i don't "note" you making a distinction between first impressions and prejudice. The fact that your first impressions, based off someones looks or their job, leads you to conclude that they are not worthy as girlfriends erases any possible line between prejudice and first impressions. The reason you can draw conclusions based on someone's appearance is because you already have an established criteria to interpret their appearance. Tell me, what do you think is prejudice?</p>

<p>"Gladwell's writing is intellectually shallow at times, but he at least introduces some cool ideas."</p>

<p>There are plenty of intellectually deep literature that introduces "cool" ideas. Maybe those would make better examples. </p>

<p>"The general idea outlined in "Blink" is that you can indeed make well-formed evaluations of things based on very little information (he calls doing so "thin-slicing") and sometimes more information is deleterious. For example, an art expert was able to detect that a statue was a fraud just by glancing at it, when other experts ran all sorts of tests and examinations and erroneously concluded it to be authentic."</p>

<p>Ok, Great. There are also more intellectually deep works in which first impressions are incorrect or insignificant: The Bible, Crime and Punishment, 1984, etc. Just because a fictional character in an intellectually shallow work can draw correct conclusions with deleterious information doesn't mean it applies to you and the rest of reality. And in most great works of literature you will not find the story revolving around first impressions. </p>

<p>My current girlfriend once asked me at what point in time did I decide that I could take her up as my girlfriend</p>

<p>Maybe a better question is: When (and why) the heck did she decide you could take her up as your girlfriend -_-</p>

<p>"Less time I checked, obesity is a physical and not mental manifestation, although the ramifications of it effect a person's mentality as well."</p>

<p>So then obesity is a physical and mental "manifestation." If the ramifications of a certain physical condition affect a persons's mentality, then the manifestation would be mental as well. Last time you checked your logic was wrong hm? Maybe :/ you should form a first impression before you do research. </p>

<p>"In addition, is something despicable simply because it's not desirable? Smoking cigarettes is not desirable to me, but I don't view it as despicable"</p>

<p>Ok change "despicable types" to "undesirable types." That still doesnt change the fact that make shallow judgments based off a person's appearance. Oh wait correction: your first impressions. Maybe try responding to the general criticism I'm making and not my specific wording. </p>

<p>"although from my casual empiricism, intelligence and attractivity have a moderately inverse correlation"</p>

<p>Well pretty women tend to want to marry successful intelligent men, which then breeds more intelligent and attractive children. There's an article written about a positive correlation between intelligence and attractivity somewhere. But then again there's your casual empiricism to consider. :[ Maybe for you it's just a negative correlation :/?</p>

<p>"I just implicitly assume that the girl isn't as comfortable as me with just using thin-slicing in evaluating a partner."</p>

<p>I'm sorry but how else would you assume that she isn't confortable with being judgmental if not implicitly. Announce it on your first date? -_- </p>

<p>"<a bunch="" of="" stuff="" on="" your="" awesomeness="">. I emphasized that the point (or purpose or telos) of the date wasn't to get to know her better. </a></p><a bunch="" of="" stuff="" on="" your="" awesomeness="">

<p>Yes I know what point means. No need to insert nonexplanatory synonyms. </p>

<p>"And just because something is a side-effect doesn't automatically make it un-worthwhile much less harmful--"</p>

<p>But the fact that you consider your getting to know her better as a byproduct or "side effect" of her getting to you better (which you consider to be the telos of a date) shows that you value getting to know her better less. Or you think that your first corrections are correct and sufficient whereas hers are not. Nothing channels awesomness like arrogance -_-.</p>

<p>"that's why you learn about positive as well as negative externalities in introductory economics"</p>

<p>Ok this is so not why you learn about externalities in economics. </p>

<p>This is where you come off as very trigger-happy and reading what you want to read instead of reading what's there.</p>

<p>If I read what I wanted to read, I wouldn't be so perturbed by your arrogant shallowness. This post is where you come off as very purple prosed and responding to what you want to respond to instead of the issues at hand.</p>

<p>Hm... here I mentioned strippers and escorts, and fatties and inmates. If only I explained what they have in common...oh wait I did. I said that just because many guys do take these categories up as girlfriends doesn't make it desirable for others. My commentary has nothing to do with superiority or moral right and wrong.</p>

<p>Perhaps not moral right and wrong, but you very likely do have a superiority complex towards strippers, escorts, fatties, and inmates. Why do you categorize them? Why do you use these categories in such a negative context? Why do you make sweeping generalizations? Why do you use the term fatties? Why do you not take them as serious girlfriend material? or Why are they so undesirable? Are they not human beings? Are not all of us equal in terms of human worth? Apparently not in your eyes that are so clouded by ignorance.</p>
</a>

62

<p>
[quote]
Perhaps not moral right and wrong, but you very likely do have a superiority complex towards strippers, escorts, fatties, and inmates. Why do you categorize them? Why do you use these categories in such a negative context? Why do you make sweeping generalizations? Why do you use the term fatties? Why do you not take them as serious girlfriend material? or Why are they so undesirable? Are they not human beings? Are not all of us equal in terms of human worth? Apparently not in your eyes that are so clouded by ignorance.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>waaahhh waaaahhh who cares who he finds attractive and what he will consider for girlfriend material. We could give you crap for people you aren't attracted to.</p>

63

<p>"Are not all of us equal in terms of human worth? Apparently not in your eyes that are so clouded by ignorance."
*
This has nothing to do with strippers or escorts or girlfriends or dates or attraction or anything, but I will
address it anyway. I happen to not believe that all human beings are equal, is that automatically ignorant? *Ceteris paribus, I'd rather save the life of one doctor, professor, or professional athlete than the life of 100 rapists. Wouldn't you feel somewhat slighted if you and a rapist were drowning and I flipped a coin to decide who to save because I subscribed to the theory that all humans were equal in "worth"?</p>

<p>"If I read what I wanted to read, I wouldn't be so perturbed by your arrogant shallowness. This post is where you come off as very purple prosed and responding to what you want to respond to instead of the issues at hand."</p>

<p>Arrogant shallowness? Is this because I believe looks are important and that I think a profession as a stripper or escort makes it unlikley for me to take up the girl as my girlfriend? And what issues am I avoiding exactly? I think I’m offering a pretty encompassing account. </p>

<p>“But you very likely do have a superiority complex towards strippers, escorts, fatties, and inmates. Why do you categorize them? Why do you use these categories in such a negative context?”
Girls that are not those categories I desire for a girlfriend, doesn’t mean I look down upon them. I like blue more than I like yellow for the color of my car. Do I have a superiority complex towards yellow? Do I look down upon yellow or yellow cars?</p>

<p>Why are you making such a big deal about the word “category”? A category is just a collection of things. For example, “strippers” is a collection or category of all the girls out there who strip. I couldn’t say profession, because “fatties” is not a profession. What do you mean by negative context? I just said many times in various forms that they’re undesirable for me as girlfriends. So if that’s what you see as negative context, I guess that’s why. </p>

<p>“Why do you make sweeping generalizations?”
I assume you’re referring to: “A lot of guys also have fatties and inmates as serious girlfriends too. Doesn't make it desirable for me and a large number of guys out there." Where’s the generalization? Did I say that all fat girls and incarcerated females are inherently undesirable? Would you say that the guys who prefer non-obsese, non-incarcerated girls are a small minority? I think it’s a safe assumption that a large number of guys prefer shapely, non-criminal girls. I didn’t even say “most,” or “almost all,” even though I do believe the latter is the case, but “a large number” would be a more widely accepted assumption. </p>

<p>“Well pretty women tend to want to marry successful intelligent men, which then breeds more intelligent and attractive children. There's an article written about a positive correlation between intelligence and attractivity somewhere. But then again there's your casual empiricism to consider. :[ Maybe for you it's just a negative correlation :/?”
Correlation doesn’t imply causation. Are the girls at Stanford more attractive or are the girls at USC more attractive? I posed this example because I imagine the student-body income levels are comparable. </p>

<p>I assume your last sentence is a joke, a play on the common meanings of “positive” and “negative” and their statistical counterparts.
*
“Tell me, what do you think is prejudice”*
Prejudice - preconceived notions with reasonless grounding.
First impressions – available information gathered on initial opportunities.
I wish I had more time to come up with a well-worded definition, but I really just juxtaposed prejudice with first impressions just so people wouldn’t be like “then you’re a racist too then?” on thin-slicing.
*
“Why do you use the term fatties?” *
Easier to type than “corpulent females” and is more informal. </p>

<p>“Just because a fictional character in an intellectually shallow work can draw correct conclusions with deleterious information doesn't mean it applies to you and the rest of reality.”
I don’t necessarily disagree, but “Blink” is non-fiction. I just said Gladwell’s writing was intellectually shallow at times because Gladwell keeps in mind his audience (the masses) in writing his books. </p>

<p>“Maybe a better question is: When (and why) the heck did she decide you could take her up as your girlfriend”
I’m not sure on when (we were official three weeks after first meeting), but she likes me for my sense of humor, intelligence, and sense of confidence, if that answers your question. </p>

<p>“Ok change "despicable types" to "undesirable types." That still doesnt change the fact that make shallow judgments based off a person's appearance. Oh wait correction: your first impressions. Maybe try responding to the general criticism I'm making and not my specific wording.”
Looks are a criterion when I am screening for a girlfriend, as they are for a lot of guys (and girls for vice versa). Therefore, I determine whether I will pursue (or accept) a girl as my girlfriend is based on a large part on looks among other things. This is different than evaluating people as good or bad based on what they look like. Or are you saying I’m a shallow person because I value attraction and look for a good-looking girlfriend? </p>

<p>And by the way, wording matters. </p>

<p>“Or you think that your first corrections are correct and sufficient whereas hers are not”
I said “I just implicitly assume that the girl isn't as comfortable as me with just using thin-slicing in evaluating a partner.” Nothing to do with correctness. Let’s say I like playing basketball more than you like playing basketball. Doesn’t automatically mean I’m better at basketball than you. </p>

<p>*“I'm sorry but how else would you assume that she isn't comfortable with being judgmental if not implicitly” *
I’ll take your “being judgmental” to mean “using thin-slicing.” I think your discomfort with using “think-slicing” to evaluate girlfriend candidacy would exemplify why I assume most girls aren’t comfortable with it. Even if they are comfortable with it, no harm no foul. There would just be less “purpose” per se to the date. Doesn’t make the date any less “worthy” or enjoyable. </p>

<p>Is your intent to have a discussion, or is it to try and insult me and accuse me of things because I present a reasonably well-formulated viewpoint that goes against your less tenable personal beliefs? Calling me arrogant, ignorant, or shallow does not accentuate your points.</p>

64

<p>Hard to wade through all of that, but I have to say that finding out that a woman is a stripper or an escort would, in my mind, justifiably create a bad first impression. It would take a lot to overcome it.</p>

65

<p>I am considering becoming a bartender to put myself through college. </p>

<p>To all the bartenders in this thread... How much do you average (in tips) a week? Any advice on getting the job? Do you enjoy it?</p>

66

<p>Looks like unshunreshun got OWNED. LOLOLOL</p>

<p>I'd also just like to say that fat people irritate me. Don't like being occasionally made fun of or looked down upon? Here's an idea: Exercise 30 minutes a day most days of the week and don't eat like a fat pig! YAY! Thats all it takes folks.</p>

<p>Personally I'd never make fun of a fat person to their face, I'm not mean like that, but its not like the issue isn't totally preventable, as opposed to say being in a wheelchair from a car crash.</p>