A woman went viral for being turned down for a next interview for a role, she asks the recruiter what she did wrong, the recruiter tells her they were “concerned about her lack of effort in her appearance.”
She explains she wore a freshly ironed blazer with a collared top. Her nails were painted a professional beige. She got a blowout for her hair, so a professional style. She had on subdued gold earrings.
The only thing she wasn’t wearing was makeup; she states she really doesn’t wear makeup, and only had chapstick on, as her skin is sensitive. Her lawyer mother has already explained she has no legal case against the company for any type of gender-based discrimination.
Just in case anyone wants to ask why feminists still refer to the “pink tax” or rail against more and more elaborate makeup trends being pushed on girls and women.
Women being punished socially for not wearing makeup is still a feminist issue.
Little girls being taught by TikTok at 10 and 12 that they have to have a “beat face” or a “snatched body” to be adequately feminine will go on to become recruiters and HR employees and managers in a decade.
We already know that women who don’t wear makeup are discriminated against in interviews. The next generation of interviewers were raised by Sephora and Ulta; it’s going to get worse, not better, unless there’s a concentrated campaign on breaking the connection between makeup+professionalism.
 they let some sun in art about ask |
|
|
|
|
|
| Next |
