The Kunsthal Heist comes to a Very Bad End

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
Izawwlgood
WINNING
Posts: 18686
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:55 pm UTC
Location: There may be lovelier lovelies...

Re: The Kunsthal Heist comes to a Very Bad End

Postby Izawwlgood » Tue Jul 23, 2013 9:52 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:I find myself agreeing with hipsters; the status in appreciating artwork is from finding the art before everyone else tells you how good it is. "I saw this truly interesting piece about melted clocks by some guy named Dali, and just had to have it" is much better than "I spent enough money to feed a small country on a painting that other people insist is good".
... with gigantic melancholies and gigantic mirth, to tread the jeweled thrones of the Earth under his sandalled feet.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10325
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: The Kunsthal Heist comes to a Very Bad End

Postby addams » Wed Jul 24, 2013 1:02 am UTC

Izawwlgood wrote:
CorruptUser wrote:If you enjoy collecting silver age comic books, more power to you. If you enjoy flying Cessnas, sure, go ahead. If you really enjoy the taste of sturgeon splooge, eat up. But if you do those things only to show how much better you are than everyone else?
Again, the point is that caring what others think is not in and of itself a shallow or condemnable outlook. If you've ever worn formal wear, you've fallen into that particular 'trap'.

It is a reasonable subject of discussion.
Status symbols.
The Mysticism of Belonging to a Deeply Important Group.
Belonging bought and paid for.

Who has a Harley Davidson?
Those things are a hole in the road to pour money into.
The machine is an external sign of Belonging.

The suit is also a sign of Belonging.
To show off for persons within your chosen group is Human Nature.

People Jump off Cliffs.
People buy and sell other people.
Why? Because they can.
It is impressive to the In Crowd.

Some of the messed up Shit people will do to become a Big Somebody!
Buying Art is not a Sin. Not at all. You have a What?

I will follow a person to get a look at a piece of Art.
I have seen some good Art.

One piece of Art was so Strange and Wonderful.
It looked to be an odd assortment of broken chunks from a piece of Flow Blue.
The chunks were glued to the wall. I looked at it. I said, "I don't 'get' it."

I sometimes complain about Modern Art.

The artist said. "Hit the Lights."
The overhead light was dimmed.
A spotlight shown from the side onto the chunks of broken ceramic.

The shadow cast by the chunks of Ceramic formed a fully formed vase on the wall.
It was the shadow of what had been. It was Strange and Wonderful.
I liked it. It was beautiful. It showed intelligence in design.

Modern Art is hard to understand, sometimes. It is nice to have a guide.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
Adacore
Posts: 2755
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 12:35 pm UTC
Location: 한국 창원

Re: The Kunsthal Heist comes to a Very Bad End

Postby Adacore » Wed Jul 24, 2013 1:42 am UTC

CorruptUser wrote:I always wondered, if the forgers are that talented, why don't they have a career creating their own work?

Others have mentioned the 'way more money from forged work' angle, which is certainly the biggest reason, but there's another factor to it too - sometimes they want to test their skill by seeing if their work can pass as authentic and chase the rush of seeing their work fool the art world and trained authenticators of art.

The more money thing isn't entirely linked to the value of 'big names' either. It can also be linked to the age of the work - if someone paints a forgery of a painting by a no-name artist from 200 years ago, it will be inherently more valuable than the same painting by a no-name artist yesterday because age adds value to art and antiques.

brenok
Needs Directions
Posts: 507
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2011 5:35 pm UTC
Location: Brazil

Re: The Kunsthal Heist comes to a Very Bad End

Postby brenok » Wed Jul 24, 2013 4:52 am UTC

Izawwlgood wrote:
CorruptUser wrote:I find myself agreeing with hipsters; the status in appreciating artwork is from finding the art before everyone else tells you how good it is. "I saw this truly interesting piece about melted clocks by some guy named Dali, and just had to have it" is much better than "I spent enough money to feed a small country on a painting that other people insist is good".


I don't see the word "everyone" anywhere around there.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10325
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: The Kunsthal Heist comes to a Very Bad End

Postby addams » Wed Jul 24, 2013 6:15 am UTC

Adacore wrote:
CorruptUser wrote:I always wondered, if the forgers are that talented, why don't they have a career creating their own work?

Others have mentioned the 'way more money from forged work' angle, which is certainly the biggest reason, but there's another factor to it too - sometimes they want to test their skill by seeing if their work can pass as authentic and chase the rush of seeing their work fool the art world and trained authenticators of art.

The more money thing isn't entirely linked to the value of 'big names' either. It can also be linked to the age of the work - if someone paints a forgery of a painting by a no-name artist from 200 years ago, it will be inherently more valuable than the same painting by a no-name artist yesterday because age adds value to art and antiques.

Yes.
Any work of human hands that has withstood the test of time has great value.
We have many reasons for a nearly universal high regard for items and ideas from long ago.

Some of the silly stuff I have heard people say.
People of long ago were as smart as we are.
People from long ago were not all smarter than all people today.

I understand why a person may believe people were better in the past.
It is for the same reason people like to believe people will be better in the future.

The Future is Now.
How are we doing?
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
folkhero
Posts: 1775
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2008 3:34 am UTC

Re: The Kunsthal Heist comes to a Very Bad End

Postby folkhero » Wed Jul 24, 2013 8:48 am UTC

CorruptUser wrote:I've worn the monkey suit because its what employers and customers expect and want. Many of them didn't want to wear ties and a suit but they had to in order to show their bosses and customers they were willing to do what was necessary. When someone wears the suit, they are saying "I'm a functioning and contributing member of society!" When Snowflake refuses to wear a suit, Snowflake isn't saying "I'm an individual!", Snowflake is saying "I don't do what needs to be done!".

Of course there are plenty of people who contribute to society without wearing a suit. Lots of professions, especially these days, don't require a suit at all. Some professions do require a suit, as do some social functions. Similarly, some careers are aided by expensive status items like fine art, as are some social lives. Snowflake might think he's original for decorating his walls with county fair art, but he'd better not expect the state senator to come to any of his dinner parties.

I do find your attitude cute though. Anyone who doesn't use the same symbols that you use to attain status is foolish and unpragmatic, hell they're barely a functioning member of society. Meanwhile, anyone who attains status with a symbol that you don't particularly like is a sucker. It's like when your driving: everyone going faster than you is a maniac and everyone going slowing than you is an octogenarian moron.
To all law enforcement entities, this is not an admission of guilt...

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10547
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: The Kunsthal Heist comes to a Very Bad End

Postby CorruptUser » Wed Jul 24, 2013 12:49 pm UTC

No, you don't have to do the stuff I had to do to 'make it', just don't insist on 'individuality' or 'uniqueness' in a job where you aren't supposed to. I don't want my attorney showing up to court dressed for Burning Man; I might not mind directly, but I'm reasonably sure the judge would. While I won't insist on a doctor wearing a suit under the lab coat, said doctor also shouldn't be wearing an a-shirt and sweatpants.

Oh, and face and hand tattoos are a detriment for any job other than 'tattoo artist'.

User avatar
The Great Hippo
Swans ARE SHARP
Posts: 7368
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 4:43 am UTC
Location: behind you

Re: The Kunsthal Heist comes to a Very Bad End

Postby The Great Hippo » Wed Jul 24, 2013 2:49 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:Oh, and face and hand tattoos are a detriment for any job other than 'tattoo artist'.
Are you sure? Can't you think of any jobs where tattoos aren't a detriment? What about jobs in phone service?

I think part of my issue with what you are saying is the implication that certain types of status-maintenance behavior (wearing certain clothes for a certain job) are superior to others (buying thousand dollar shoes so people will admire your taste). While I agree the latter is a little baffling (and I find it very wasteful!), I'm at a loss to describe how one is genuinely inferior to the other. While I find it wasteful, obviously it's not wasteful to the people doing it (otherwise they'd probably not do it!).

KrytenKoro
Posts: 1487
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2011 2:58 pm UTC

Re: The Kunsthal Heist comes to a Very Bad End

Postby KrytenKoro » Wed Jul 24, 2013 2:53 pm UTC

I don't see the word "everyone" anywhere around there.

Ctrl+F should help.

CorruptUser wrote:Oh, and face and hand tattoos are a detriment for any job other than 'tattoo artist'.

Apparently aerospace engineers are tattoo artists, now?
From the elegant yelling of this compelling dispute comes the ghastly suspicion my opposition's a fruit.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10547
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: The Kunsthal Heist comes to a Very Bad End

Postby CorruptUser » Wed Jul 24, 2013 3:50 pm UTC

The Great Hippo wrote:
CorruptUser wrote:Oh, and face and hand tattoos are a detriment for any job other than 'tattoo artist'.
Are you sure? Can't you think of any jobs where tattoos aren't a detriment? What about jobs in phone service?


You do realize that phone service jobs are usually among the shittiest of shit jobs, right? Telemarketers are universally hated, and tech support has to deal with the idiots all day.

I think part of my issue with what you are saying is the implication that certain types of status-maintenance behavior (wearing certain clothes for a certain job) are superior to others (buying thousand dollar shoes so people will admire your taste). While I agree the latter is a little baffling (and I find it very wasteful!), I'm at a loss to describe how one is genuinely inferior to the other. While I find it wasteful, obviously it's not wasteful to the people doing it (otherwise they'd probably not do it!).


While I'd wish we could live in the world that doesn't judge based on appearances, that's not the world we live in. Indeed, it may be impossible; part of being human is the ability to judge content based on presentation. Our time on this planet is limited, and we all have to determine how best to spend our time and with whom. If we can use obvious signals to quickly decide whether a person is worth talking to (do they look healthy, sane, competent, etc), we will.

Not all signals are accurate, as for example a gay black muslim trans woman disabled veteran may be better qualified than any other candidate, but all of those descriptives have been/are still used as signals.

Your clothes are another signal. But unlike gender or race or religion or disability or sexuality, are easy to change.

As for why status-maintaining expenditures are superior to wasteful spending, well, that's it; it's wasteful. If the only purpose of spending was to show off you could, it'd be greatest argument ever for a 95% tax bracket. Why? Well, lets say you need to use $100m to build the biggest house just to show off the biggest house in the state. If every rich person has to pay the same exorbitant tax rate, and you now have a mere $10m to build the biggest house, you are exactly where you were before as you still have the biggest house.

User avatar
The Great Hippo
Swans ARE SHARP
Posts: 7368
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 4:43 am UTC
Location: behind you

Re: The Kunsthal Heist comes to a Very Bad End

Postby The Great Hippo » Wed Jul 24, 2013 3:57 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:You do realize that phone service jobs are usually among the shittiest of shit jobs, right? Telemarketers are universally hated, and tech support has to deal with the idiots all day.
So when you said 'any jobs', you actually meant 'any job that I consider non-shitty'?
CorruptUser wrote:While I'd wish we could live in the world that doesn't judge based on appearances, that's not the world we live in. Indeed, it may be impossible; part of being human is the ability to judge content based on presentation. Our time on this planet is limited, and we all have to determine how best to spend our time and with whom. If we can use obvious signals to quickly decide whether a person is worth talking to (do they look healthy, sane, competent, etc), we will.

Not all signals are accurate, as for example a gay black muslim trans woman disabled veteran may be better qualified than any other candidate, but all of those descriptives have been/are still used as signals.

Your clothes are another signal. But unlike gender or race or religion or disability or sexuality, are easy to change.
Okay, but signals are incredibly complex, and there's really no universal set; tattoos signal one thing to you, another thing to someone else. And depending on context, the nature of those signals drastically change.
CorruptUser wrote:As for why status-maintaining expenditures are superior to wasteful spending, well, that's it; it's wasteful. If the only purpose of spending was to show off you could, it'd be greatest argument ever for a 95% tax bracket. Why? Well, lets say you need to use $100m to build the biggest house just to show off the biggest house in the state. If every rich person has to pay the same exorbitant tax rate, and you now have a mere $10m to build the biggest house, you are exactly where you were before as you still have the biggest house.
So your opposition to (EDIT: certain types of) art is merely that it's a wasteful financial expenditure? But why do you care about how people waste their money?

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10547
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: The Kunsthal Heist comes to a Very Bad End

Postby CorruptUser » Wed Jul 24, 2013 4:24 pm UTC

1) People are more likely to hire you if you don't have tattoos everywhere, even in call centers. The main exception being tattoo parlors, and I'm sure there are a few other rare exceptions. It's not something that generally enhances your career opportunities.

2) Yes signals depend on location and context. In the Philippines, tattoos are a sign of social rank and manhood. Years ago they were a sign of wealth (I mentioned that Churchill and Victoria were tattooed). But in Western society today, they rarely signs of social status. You can't even donate blood if you had a tattoo recently, society assumes that much about you. It might be different tomorrow, it might be the same. Fashions change.

3) Art for art's sake is not exactly a waste, especially when someone is commissioning art; virtually every piece in an art history book was commissioned. Roof of Sistine Chapel? Versailles? Portraits? Etc. My problem is when the art already exists, and people are hording it in their own collections instead of displaying it in a museum. What creation is taking place as a result of people buying centuries old artwork?

OTOH, when people pay, for illustrative purposes, $1m for a bagel, you could say that $1m could've fed a starving city for a year. But, the person who sold that bagel now has $1m that could feed that starving city for a year. It's my goto response to anyone asking me to, say, donate $10 to Haiti instead of buying a movie; it costs practically nothing to sell one additional movie, so go harass Spielberg to donate that $10.

User avatar
folkhero
Posts: 1775
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2008 3:34 am UTC

Re: The Kunsthal Heist comes to a Very Bad End

Postby folkhero » Wed Jul 24, 2013 6:42 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:1) People are more likely to hire you if you don't have tattoos everywhere, even in call centers. The main exception being tattoo parlors, and I'm sure there are a few other rare exceptions. It's not something that generally enhances your career opportunities.
To some people that might be an advantage. They might want to use tattoos as a quick filter because they would never want to work for someone that would discriminate against someone for a reason as silly as having tattoos. Actually tattoos are an effective way to make a Ulysses pact to prevent one's self from entering certain professions that one might find distasteful for whatever reason.


CorruptUser wrote:3) Art for art's sake is not exactly a waste, especially when someone is commissioning art; virtually every piece in an art history book was commissioned. Roof of Sistine Chapel? Versailles? Portraits? Etc. My problem is when the art already exists, and people are hording it in their own collections instead of displaying it in a museum. What creation is taking place as a result of people buying centuries old artwork?
Expensive old art allows people to buy expensive status symbols with very little real 'waste.' If you build a $100 million house that doesn't give you much more satisfaction (above the status of the thing) than a $5 million house, that's wasteful because of all the resources and labor put into the house that could be used to build schools or whatever. In the high end art market, it's just money moving around from rich person to rich person with very little actual waste. Gallery space and curator salaries are about it. Fine art is also more liquid and depreciates less than a lot of other expensive high-status symbols. No one is going to pay full price for second hand Armani, anyone who can afford your $100 million dollar house thinks it gaudy and in a bad location, it doesn't matter how good an opera is or how good your seats are, your tickets are worth 0 after the show is over. Unlike a fine wine or ungodly priced, whiskey you can enjoy a good art without destroying the thing (unless you're really bad at enjoying art).

At the end of the day I don't see why it's so much more wasteful of several thousand people to pay huge amounts of money for art when than it is for several million people buying $500+ suits when they can get a perfectly ugly one for $75.
To all law enforcement entities, this is not an admission of guilt...

User avatar
The Great Hippo
Swans ARE SHARP
Posts: 7368
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 4:43 am UTC
Location: behind you

Re: The Kunsthal Heist comes to a Very Bad End

Postby The Great Hippo » Wed Jul 24, 2013 6:57 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:1) People are more likely to hire you if you don't have tattoos everywhere, even in call centers. The main exception being tattoo parlors, and I'm sure there are a few other rare exceptions. It's not something that generally enhances your career opportunities.
In general, yes, I think having visible tattoos decrease your prospects regarding your hire-ability. But I know plenty of people with visible tattoos who have rewarding careers! I also have worked for employers who have tattoos themselves, and do not consider tattoos a big deal (and might actually be more likely to hire someone with a sweet tat!).

But I don't think this contradicts what you're saying; I just thought it was a little silly for you to emphasize that having a visible tattoo means you'll never get hired outside of a tattoo parlor. Plenty of people have visible tattoos and get hired outside of tattoo parlors.
CorruptUser wrote:2) Yes signals depend on location and context. In the Philippines, tattoos are a sign of social rank and manhood. Years ago they were a sign of wealth (I mentioned that Churchill and Victoria were tattooed). But in Western society today, they rarely signs of social status. You can't even donate blood if you had a tattoo recently, society assumes that much about you. It might be different tomorrow, it might be the same. Fashions change.
I would get even more specific -- if you have a tattoo in a certain type of club, that might get you more respect in certain circles throughout Western society! Don't just examine this from the broadest social level! Because no one actually operates on the broadest social level!
CorruptUser wrote:3) Art for art's sake is not exactly a waste, especially when someone is commissioning art; virtually every piece in an art history book was commissioned. Roof of Sistine Chapel? Versailles? Portraits? Etc. My problem is when the art already exists, and people are hording it in their own collections instead of displaying it in a museum. What creation is taking place as a result of people buying centuries old artwork?
Two people are trading X and Y (where X is a certain amount of money, and Y is a painting); this trade happens because someone values X more than Y, and another person values Y more than X.

How is this ever a 'bad thing'? You seem to just be griping because you don't like the particular values we've plugged into X and Y.

Heisenberg
Posts: 3789
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 8:48 pm UTC
Location: Uncertain

Re: The Kunsthal Heist comes to a Very Bad End

Postby Heisenberg » Wed Jul 24, 2013 7:02 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:But in Western society today, they rarely signs of social status. You can't even donate blood if you had a tattoo recently, society assumes that much about you. It might be different tomorrow, it might be the same. Fashions change.

I know, right? They don't let you donate blood if you've had a recent ear piercing either, which means that no-one with pierced ears has ever gotten a job. Having lived in England in the 80s is also so frowned upon that it dooms you to eternal unemployment.
...
I think you picked the worst possible analogy to illustrate your point, is what I'm saying.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: The Kunsthal Heist comes to a Very Bad End

Postby Tyndmyr » Wed Jul 24, 2013 7:18 pm UTC

folkhero wrote:
CorruptUser wrote:1) People are more likely to hire you if you don't have tattoos everywhere, even in call centers. The main exception being tattoo parlors, and I'm sure there are a few other rare exceptions. It's not something that generally enhances your career opportunities.
To some people that might be an advantage. They might want to use tattoos as a quick filter because they would never want to work for someone that would discriminate against someone for a reason as silly as having tattoos. Actually tattoos are an effective way to make a Ulysses pact to prevent one's self from entering certain professions that one might find distasteful for whatever reason.


That's a poor filter. I need not care about tattoos myself to observe that much of society does. If the position involves, say, dealing with customers, then between two equal applicants, selecting the non-tattooed one is rational, even if I do not care about tattoos at all.

More to the point, I am amused that people often describe their reasons for getting tattoos in such language as "it's a way to express myself", yet do not seem to believe that any conclusions should be drawn from their tattoos at all. Someone preaching a sermon or swearing on the street corner is also expressing himself, and nobody seems to have any problems with me drawing conclusions from those expressions.

Full Disclosure: I have done significant hiring for a few businesses. Appearance matters a lot. Status demonstrating behavior is often entirely rational.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26818
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: The Kunsthal Heist comes to a Very Bad End

Postby gmalivuk » Wed Jul 24, 2013 7:40 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:Oh, and face and hand tattoos are a detriment for any job other than 'tattoo artist'.
All the happy tattooed people I know working in non-tattoo-artist jobs would beg to differ.

None of them do phone service, either, not that that's actually relevant to your claim.

If you didn't actually mean "any job", perhaps you shouldn't have said "any job".

Heisenberg wrote:
CorruptUser wrote:But in Western society today, they rarely signs of social status. You can't even donate blood if you had a tattoo recently, society assumes that much about you. It might be different tomorrow, it might be the same. Fashions change.

I know, right? They don't let you donate blood if you've had a recent ear piercing either, which means that no-one with pierced ears has ever gotten a job. Having lived in England in the 80s is also so frowned upon that it dooms you to eternal unemployment.
...
I think you picked the worst possible analogy to illustrate your point, is what I'm saying.
Yeah. What society assumes about you if you have a piercing or tattoo is unrelated to your ability to give blood. That decision is not because they think the sorts of people who get body art are dirty. It's because things can be transmitted on needles and they decide better to be safe than sorry.

Also, yeah, it's a shitty analogy in any case, since traveling out of the country or being a gay man also affect your blood donation status, and yet aren't a detriment to most jobs. (Legally can't be, in fact, in many states.)
Last edited by gmalivuk on Wed Jul 24, 2013 9:12 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10325
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: The Kunsthal Heist comes to a Very Bad End

Postby addams » Wed Jul 24, 2013 8:13 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:
CorruptUser wrote:Oh, and face and hand tattoos are a detriment for any job other than 'tattoo artist'.
All the happy tattooed people I know working in non-tattoo-artist jobs would beg to differ.

None of them do phone service, either, not that that's actually relevant to your claim.

If you didn't actually mean "any job", perhaps you shouldn't have said "any job".

Heisenberg wrote:
CorruptUser wrote:But in Western society today, they rarely signs of social status. You can't even donate blood if you had a tattoo recently, society assumes that much about you. It might be different tomorrow, it might be the same. Fashions change.

I know, right? They don't let you donate blood if you've had a recent ear piercing either, which means that no-one with pierced ears has ever gotten a job. Having lived in England in the 80s is also so frowned upon that it dooms you to eternal unemployment.
...
I think you picked the worst possible analogy to illustrate your point, is what I'm saying.
What society assumes about you if you have a piercing is unrelated to your ability to give blood. That decision is not because they think the sorts of people who get piercings are dirty. It's because things can be transmitted on needles and they decide better to be safe than sorry.

Also, yeah, it's a shitty analogy in any case, since traveling out of the country or being a gay man also affect your blood donation status, and yet aren't a detriment to most jobs. (Legally can't be, in fact, in many states.)

From Stolen Art to Tattoos.
That is a reasonable walk.

Tattoos; The art that can not be stolen?
It can be. eeewww. There is not a right and proper way to do that.

I find some peircings and Tattoos off putting.
It is something that can be overcome, Yet. jeeze.

I was face to face with a thirty something year old white guy.
He had a U shaped Large piece of metal in his nose.

He had a great many other peices of metal Sticking out of his face here and there.
The one in his nose had me riveted. I did not need to talk to him.

Someone else was talking to him.
I was only watching.

That Nose One had to Hurt. Correct?
He forgets he looks like that.
I forget what I look like.
Don't you?

When I know a person the inside becomes more important than the outside.
I still see it. When it is funny looking we have to talk about it to be friends.

Like Black or Indian or White or Tall or Short or Deaf or Blind or Limping or Blonde ooops. Blonde is on the inside.
People; Each and every one is a Work of Art.

Even a medium I love will not always produce a work of art I like.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10547
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: The Kunsthal Heist comes to a Very Bad End

Postby CorruptUser » Wed Jul 24, 2013 8:15 pm UTC

Are we using the same 'detriment'? I don't mean 'impossible', only 'harder, however slightly'. The detriment could be dealing with coworkers, dealing with clients, or on the hiring side even if it's unrelated to the work itself. Race is a 'detriment' if you have racist clients, and there are a lot of people who care about things like that.



It's not 'wrong' for people to spend their money any way they like. It's their money, so long as they earned it and aren't harming anyone, I have no right to tell them how to spend it. And yes, this includes artwork. The issue I have is when people buy artwork not because they like the art, but because they are trying to show off they can afford it. Another issue comes up; does Warren Buffet have the right to purchase the Mona Lisa? If so, is he also allowed to, reference to the OT, burn the Mona Lisa? It's his property after all, and if he wants the world's most expensive fireplace, what right do I have to say no?
Last edited by CorruptUser on Wed Jul 24, 2013 8:29 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26818
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: The Kunsthal Heist comes to a Very Bad End

Postby gmalivuk » Wed Jul 24, 2013 8:23 pm UTC

When you acknowledge that things like race and sexual orientation are "detriments" in the same sense as tattoos, any sort of normative or aesthetic argument you once may have been clumsily attempting to make falls apart. But in any case, not all jobs have coworkers at all. Many that do don't tend to have coworkers who mind tattoos. Not all jobs have clients at all. Many that do don't tend to have clients who mind tattoos.

The two most tattooed people I know personally are librarians at Harvard Law School. Being heavily tattooed hasn't hurt their job prospects there at all.

There are, it turns out, jobs where the primary qualification employers care about is whether you are good at the job they hired you for. And not all the jobs they hire you for necessarily involve any particular level of interaction with people who may not like your tattoos or hair style or whatever else might be relevant in a traditional office job. (There are, in other words, jobs other than traditional office jobs.)
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10547
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: The Kunsthal Heist comes to a Very Bad End

Postby CorruptUser » Wed Jul 24, 2013 8:38 pm UTC

Does it do any one of the following;

Reduce your ability to satisfy customers?
Reduce your ability to attract customers?
Reduce your ability to work with coworkers?
Reduce your ability to complete tasks?
Reduce your ability to get along with the boss?
Reduce your ability to get hired?

If so, it's a 'detriment', even if it 'shouldn't' be.

If you are a Catholic worker, while your coworkers are Scientologists who hate Catholics, being Catholic is a detriment at the job. Even if you would otherwise be the best employee ever. That's why we have Affirmative Action, to in theory say, no, you hire people based on their capabilities, not their gender or race or orientation or religion.



And yes I realize using 'detriment' implies a christocaucasialcisandroheteronormative view, but referring to anything as a 'bonus' still feels like some kind of normative. I brought up 'tattoos' because they are a 'bonus' in maybe one job, and anything from effectively irrelevant to crippling in just about any other job.
Last edited by CorruptUser on Wed Jul 24, 2013 8:49 pm UTC, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
sam_i_am
Posts: 624
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 3:38 pm UTC
Location: Urbana, Illinois, USA

Re: The Kunsthal Heist comes to a Very Bad End

Postby sam_i_am » Wed Jul 24, 2013 8:41 pm UTC

Izawwlgood wrote:You're still assuming that EVERYONE who pays for art is doing so without 'getting it' themselves, and only cares what others think about it. And you're still ignoring TGHs point about why even if this was their motive, who cares?


Something tells me that if you truly don't care what other people think of the art, than you can buy a piece that you like more than any particular famous piece for a fraction of the cost and effort.

There's a whole lot of art out there. A whole lot of excellent and reasonably priced art.

But with a $2000 painting you can't tell people that you have the one and only Famous-Painting-X

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: The Kunsthal Heist comes to a Very Bad End

Postby Tyndmyr » Wed Jul 24, 2013 8:45 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:Are we using the same 'detriment'? I don't mean 'impossible', only 'harder, however slightly'. The detriment could be dealing with coworkers, dealing with clients, or on the hiring side even if it's unrelated to the work itself. Race is a 'detriment' if you have racist clients, and there are a lot of people who care about things like that.


Sure, race is a detriment if there are racist clients. All manner of things can be positives or negatives. Race, however, is not trivially changeable. If it was, I suspect it'd be much less of an issue. Tattoos and much other status-displaying behavior(tattoos will depend on your culture to some degree, but I observe a very low incidence of facial tattoos among politicians, ceos, and other people occupying traditional high status jobs in the west) are driven by choice. Assigning status based on skin color, over which the person has very little choice, is suboptimal compared to using more choice-based metrics, because the former system is going to be pretty poor at satisfying desires.

Also, let us not fall into the trap of trying to equate status with morality. One can very morally and rationally choose not to pursue status. However, rationally, one should not disregard that the concept of status is pretty important to human culture. We should likewise not assume a lack of rationality or morality for someone who opts to pursue status.

TLDR: Just because some historical indicators of status are stupid does not mean we should regard the entire concept the same way. Someone expecting you to dress up for an interview is not like someone being racist.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26818
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: The Kunsthal Heist comes to a Very Bad End

Postby gmalivuk » Wed Jul 24, 2013 8:52 pm UTC

Reduce your ability to satisfy customers?
Reduce your ability to attract customers?
Not if you don't work with customers, or your customers are fine with tattoos.
Reduce your ability to work with coworkers?
Not if you don't work closely with other people, or if they don't mind your tattoos.
Reduce your ability to complete tasks?
Not for any tasks I can imagine a job involving, apart from interacting with other people which is already addressed above and below.
Reduce your ability to get along with the boss?
Reduce your ability to get hired?
Not if the boss doesn't mind tattoos.

Yes, of course tattoos are detrimental in some jobs. But that could be said about literally any particular characteristic that isn't a human universal. The claim people have taken issue with was your assertion that tattoo artist is the only job where tattoos aren't detrimental. No one is arguing that every job is one where tattoos aren't detrimental. We're just pointing out to you that there are at least some jobs other than tattoo artistry that qualify.

I mean, in this thread about art, I really shouldn't have to point out that artists paid for their artwork can probably, for the most part, make pretty much the same living whether or not they have tattoos, since it's not their personal appearance that people are paying for. And in addition to tattoo artists, I imagine there are quite a lot of other people's careers that would actually be less successful if they looked more "professional". Danny Trejo, for example.
Last edited by gmalivuk on Wed Jul 24, 2013 8:55 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10547
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: The Kunsthal Heist comes to a Very Bad End

Postby CorruptUser » Wed Jul 24, 2013 8:55 pm UTC

Fine, it's effectively irrelevant in a number of jobs, a bonus in maybe one, and a detriment in a number of others.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26818
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: The Kunsthal Heist comes to a Very Bad End

Postby gmalivuk » Wed Jul 24, 2013 8:58 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:Fine, it's effectively irrelevant in a number of jobs, a bonus in maybe one, and a detriment in a number of others.
See my edit: it's actually probably a bonus in quite a few art-related jobs besides tattooing, depending on the kind of clientele said jobs cater to.

So it's like literally every non-universal trait: irrelevant in a number of jobs, a bonus in a number of jobs, and a detriment in a number of jobs.

That sure was a point well worth making!
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: The Kunsthal Heist comes to a Very Bad End

Postby Tyndmyr » Wed Jul 24, 2013 9:02 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:Yes, of course tattoos are detrimental in some jobs. But that could be said about literally any particular characteristic that isn't a human universal. The claim people have taken issue with was your assertion that tattoo artist is the only job where tattoos aren't detrimental. No one is arguing that every job is one where tattoos aren't detrimental. We're just pointing out to you that there are at least some jobs other than tattoo artistry that qualify.


His exact statement was hyperbole. However, it is fairly easy to establish that in broad terms, getting visible tattoos is, on average, an obstacle to traditional metrics of acheivement, like financial security or acheiving positions of power.

For instance, only 8% of government workers have tattoos at all(Salary.com) and tattoos and body piercings are strongly correlated with lower income(Laumann and Derrik). Tattoos are also strongly correlated with jail time and have an inverse correlation to educational acheivement(same source as last).

It's little wonder that they are a signal of low status.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26818
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: The Kunsthal Heist comes to a Very Bad End

Postby gmalivuk » Wed Jul 24, 2013 9:08 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:For instance, only 8% of government workers have tattoos at all(Salary.com) and tattoos and body piercings are strongly correlated with lower income(Laumann and Derrik). Tattoos are also strongly correlated with jail time and have an inverse correlation to educational acheivement(same source as last).

It's little wonder that they are a signal of low status.
Much like having dark skin.

Also, you've established correlation, not causation. The alleged obstacle to traditional success may be (in fact almost certainly is) some other thing that also happens to correlate with getting tattoos, such as being involved in a criminal gang or not giving a shit about traditional measures of success.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10547
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: The Kunsthal Heist comes to a Very Bad End

Postby CorruptUser » Wed Jul 24, 2013 9:47 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:
CorruptUser wrote:Fine, it's effectively irrelevant in a number of jobs, a bonus in maybe one, and a detriment in a number of others.
See my edit: it's actually probably a bonus in quite a few art-related jobs besides tattooing, depending on the kind of clientele said jobs cater to.

So it's like literally every non-universal trait: irrelevant in a number of jobs, a bonus in a number of jobs, and a detriment in a number of jobs.

That sure was a point well worth making!



We've argued about this so long I forgot why I even brought up tattoos. Rereading my first post about tattoos, I think I was arguing that often we have to do things we don't necessarily want to do (or not do what we want to), even if it shouldn't matter, because you do what you have to to succeed.

User avatar
folkhero
Posts: 1775
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2008 3:34 am UTC

Re: The Kunsthal Heist comes to a Very Bad End

Postby folkhero » Wed Jul 24, 2013 9:51 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:It's not 'wrong' for people to spend their money any way they like. It's their money, so long as they earned it and aren't harming anyone, I have no right to tell them how to spend it. And yes, this includes artwork. The issue I have is when people buy artwork not because they like the art, but because they are trying to show off they can afford it.

How often do you think that really happens though? Suppose some rich person decides to buy some expensive things to display status. They decide on art, since it's durable and holds value pretty well and can be resold if fortunes change. This person hardly seems like a sucker to me, but what do I know? I don't even wear a suit to work.

So what do you suppose happens next? They go to the nearest posh art gallery and say, "one art please," without even looking at it? That kind of thing might happen occasionally but I would suspect that the vast majority of the time, the budding art collector will spend at least some time exploring the fine art and antique art worlds to find something they actually like. Isn't that most of the fun of being rich: going out and finding something you like and then buying it even if (or specifically because) it's expensive?
To all law enforcement entities, this is not an admission of guilt...

User avatar
Adacore
Posts: 2755
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 12:35 pm UTC
Location: 한국 창원

Re: The Kunsthal Heist comes to a Very Bad End

Postby Adacore » Wed Jul 24, 2013 11:27 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:
Tyndmyr wrote:For instance, only 8% of government workers have tattoos at all(Salary.com) and tattoos and body piercings are strongly correlated with lower income(Laumann and Derrik). Tattoos are also strongly correlated with jail time and have an inverse correlation to educational acheivement(same source as last).

It's little wonder that they are a signal of low status.
Much like having dark skin.

Also, you've established correlation, not causation. The alleged obstacle to traditional success may be (in fact almost certainly is) some other thing that also happens to correlate with getting tattoos, such as being involved in a criminal gang or not giving a shit about traditional measures of success.

Is anyone arguing that tattoos should be used to discriminate against people? From what I've seen, the argument is simply that they are used for such discrimination, much like dark skin, or being female. The difference being, you can't choose your race or gender, but you can choose to not get a tattoo. Thus, knowing that you will be discriminated against for having one, getting a tattoo could be seen as unwise for anyone who thinks they might ever be interested in any job where they could be discriminated against for having one (which, while there are many jobs where this discrimination won't happen, will still be a lot of jobs). Obviously, as an individual, you have to weigh the marginal benefit of getting a tattoo (which could be for a huge number of reasons, and is highly individual) against the marginal cost of the discrimination you will likely face for having one.

Incidentally, I can think, offhand, of one case where a tattoo was probably beneficial for a 'high status' job. My local member of parliament a few years ago won her seat in an election by a very small margin and had the number '47' (her margin of victory) and a rose (the symbol of the Labour Party) tattooed on her ankle. I think that probably won her more respect in her current and future jobs than it lost her.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: The Kunsthal Heist comes to a Very Bad End

Postby Tyndmyr » Thu Jul 25, 2013 1:19 am UTC

gmalivuk wrote:
Tyndmyr wrote:For instance, only 8% of government workers have tattoos at all(Salary.com) and tattoos and body piercings are strongly correlated with lower income(Laumann and Derrik). Tattoos are also strongly correlated with jail time and have an inverse correlation to educational acheivement(same source as last).

It's little wonder that they are a signal of low status.
Much like having dark skin.

Also, you've established correlation, not causation. The alleged obstacle to traditional success may be (in fact almost certainly is) some other thing that also happens to correlate with getting tattoos, such as being involved in a criminal gang or not giving a shit about traditional measures of success.


So? Nobody is arguing that skin color should be a status indicator. I see you've entirely ignored that tattoos are sort of different than racism, because you can't really choose race.

The majority of Americans(see previous sources) also believe that having visible tattoos is bad for your career. The first source had some responses, like "do I support my child getting a tattoo" broken out further. People were generally more supportive of their children's actions than the general public. However, 100% of board members disapproved of tattoos for their children. People in power see these things as negatives. They are also much less likely to have them.

And the "correlation is not causation" does not really apply to social status. If the majority of people think something is a social negative, it IS a social negative, because status is perception. It may not be right according to your moral status, but meh. That's life. Yeah, the association with prison gangs is a thing. And yeah, being in prison is a cause for poor success. Still, associating yourself with those people is generally not a plus. It doesn't actually matter if you've never been in such a gang, if the interviewer makes such a connection, even unconsciously, it's ugly.

Tattoos are not alone in this. Height matters. Attractiveness matters. Clothes matter. The fact that you apparently feel they SHOULD not matter is irrelevant to reality. Costs should not be hidden in vague platitudes like "sometimes they help, sometimes they don't". Own up to them...the reason you get the tattoo is not for your career. You get it for other reasons, and the effects on your career should be balanced against those. It doesn't mean "nobody should get a tattoo".

Bringing this back to art, yes, considering status effects with regards to art is reasonable. Art and fashion are all about status, and status matters. Dubai is currently investing heavily in art for economic reasons. They want to be a classier tourist destination, and "art museum" is a pretty normal way to do that.

User avatar
sam_i_am
Posts: 624
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 3:38 pm UTC
Location: Urbana, Illinois, USA

Re: The Kunsthal Heist comes to a Very Bad End

Postby sam_i_am » Thu Jul 25, 2013 2:24 am UTC

folkhero wrote:
CorruptUser wrote:I've worn the monkey suit because its what employers and customers expect and want. Many of them didn't want to wear ties and a suit but they had to in order to show their bosses and customers they were willing to do what was necessary. When someone wears the suit, they are saying "I'm a functioning and contributing member of society!" When Snowflake refuses to wear a suit, Snowflake isn't saying "I'm an individual!", Snowflake is saying "I don't do what needs to be done!".

Of course there are plenty of people who contribute to society without wearing a suit. Lots of professions, especially these days, don't require a suit at all. Some professions do require a suit, as do some social functions. Similarly, some careers are aided by expensive status items like fine art, as are some social lives. Snowflake might think he's original for decorating his walls with county fair art, but he'd better not expect the state senator to come to any of his dinner parties.

I do find your attitude cute though. Anyone who doesn't use the same symbols that you use to attain status is foolish and unpragmatic, hell they're barely a functioning member of society. Meanwhile, anyone who attains status with a symbol that you don't particularly like is a sucker. It's like when your driving: everyone going faster than you is a maniac and everyone going slowing than you is an octogenarian moron.



I've think I've Identified the specific point where this thread ceased to be about paintings and fine art.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26818
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: The Kunsthal Heist comes to a Very Bad End

Postby gmalivuk » Thu Jul 25, 2013 3:35 am UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:
gmalivuk wrote:
Tyndmyr wrote:For instance, only 8% of government workers have tattoos at all(Salary.com) and tattoos and body piercings are strongly correlated with lower income(Laumann and Derrik). Tattoos are also strongly correlated with jail time and have an inverse correlation to educational acheivement(same source as last).

It's little wonder that they are a signal of low status.
Much like having dark skin.

Also, you've established correlation, not causation. The alleged obstacle to traditional success may be (in fact almost certainly is) some other thing that also happens to correlate with getting tattoos, such as being involved in a criminal gang or not giving a shit about traditional measures of success.
You get it for other reasons, and the effects on your career should be balanced against those. It doesn't mean "nobody should get a tattoo".
I know you think your whole post up through this bit was actually a response to mine, but I don't remember saying anything about what should or shouldn't matter.

The correlation causation bit was to point out that (unlike is often the case with race) it need not be discrimination against tattooed people that actually prevents traditional success. In many cases, the main thing preventing traditional success is probably not giving a shit about traditional success. It's only bad for your career if your hoped-for career is one of the ones where a tattoo is detrimental. If it's not, then there's no negative "effects on your career" to balance against your benefits from a tattoo in the first place.

In the current discussion, what I take issue with more than the fact that some people discriminate against those with tattoos is the fact that some of you seem unaware that nontraditional careers even exist or are desired by some people.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10547
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: The Kunsthal Heist comes to a Very Bad End

Postby CorruptUser » Thu Jul 25, 2013 4:31 am UTC

I know they exist, but how common are they? We have millions of policemen, firemen, EMTs, doctors, lawyers, teachers, accountants, salesmen, truck drivers, farmers, fitness instructors, garbagemen, machinists, mechanics, nurses, IT, scientists, strippers, bus drivers, taxi drivers, cooks, janitors, politicians, secretaries, whores, postal workers, clerks, soldiers, sailors, flight crew, journalists, etc. Just the 10 most common jobs make up 27 million workers.

Just how many people "successful" musicians, actors, writers, directors, and other artists do we have? EDIT: according to the website, about 1.34% of workforce is in entertainment, including athletes. Not sure who they count; are the accountants and managers and supply chain execs included?

User avatar
Adacore
Posts: 2755
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 12:35 pm UTC
Location: 한국 창원

Re: The Kunsthal Heist comes to a Very Bad End

Postby Adacore » Thu Jul 25, 2013 6:34 am UTC

CorruptUser wrote:...policemen, firemen, EMTs...truck drivers, farmers, fitness instructors, garbagemen, machinists, mechanics...bus drivers, taxi drivers, cooks, janitors...soldiers, sailors, etc. Just the 10 most common jobs make up 27 million workers.

I'm not sure if it's relevant to the discussion at hand or not, which seems partly focussed on non-traditional careers, but these are all jobs I don't see having a visible tattoo as being likely to negatively impact your employment chances in a significant way. I suppose if the tattoo were offensive and in a prominent area you could maybe strike policemen, EMTs, fitness instructors, bus drivers and maybe cooks off that list, as they have some interaction with the public involved in their jobs.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10325
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: The Kunsthal Heist comes to a Very Bad End

Postby addams » Thu Jul 25, 2013 6:52 am UTC

Adacore wrote:
CorruptUser wrote:...policemen, firemen, EMTs...truck drivers, farmers, fitness instructors, garbagemen, machinists, mechanics...bus drivers, taxi drivers, cooks, janitors...soldiers, sailors, etc. Just the 10 most common jobs make up 27 million workers.

I'm not sure if it's relevant to the discussion at hand or not, which seems partly focussed on non-traditional careers, but these are all jobs I don't see having a visible tattoo as being likely to negatively impact your employment chances in a significant way. I suppose if the tattoo were offensive and in a prominent area you could maybe strike policemen, EMTs, fitness instructors, bus drivers and maybe cooks off that list, as they have some interaction with the public involved in their jobs.

This discussion has stumbled off topic.
Wearable art. Tattoos are art a person can not escape.

Not one job is out of reach because of a Tattoo.
A Tattoo is very much like a birth mark.

This is a birthmark of one's own choosing.
Choose well, if it going onto your forehead.

Yes. It is possible to have a Tattoo that No One wants to look at.
If you are good at your job, then a way to cover the tattoo can be found.

Not all tattoos are icky. One woman has lovely peacock feathers tattooed on her head.
It looks pretty. She wears it well. Not one job is out of her reach because of her tattoo.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: The Kunsthal Heist comes to a Very Bad End

Postby Tyndmyr » Thu Jul 25, 2013 4:50 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:I know you think your whole post up through this bit was actually a response to mine, but I don't remember saying anything about what should or shouldn't matter.


Your logic appears highly driven by what you want, not by fact. Hence the drive for obscurity. Going into "it's sometimes good, sometimes bad" fuzziness to deliberately obscure the issue is hiding from truth, not attempting to find it. Non rational desires are typically emotional.

And come now, why bother with the racism comparison unless you were aiming for a "should"?

The correlation causation bit was to point out that (unlike is often the case with race) it need not be discrimination against tattooed people that actually prevents traditional success. In many cases, the main thing preventing traditional success is probably not giving a shit about traditional success. It's only bad for your career if your hoped-for career is one of the ones where a tattoo is detrimental. If it's not, then there's no negative "effects on your career" to balance against your benefits from a tattoo in the first place.

In the current discussion, what I take issue with more than the fact that some people discriminate against those with tattoos is the fact that some of you seem unaware that nontraditional careers even exist or are desired by some people.


How many jobs have a dress code requiring tattoos? How many jobs have one restricting them?

The fact that in an edge case it may not affect an individual is meaningless when describing the overall effect.

User avatar
Zamfir
I built a novelty castle, the irony was lost on some.
Posts: 7602
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 2:43 pm UTC
Location: Nederland

Re: The Kunsthal Heist comes to a Very Bad End

Postby Zamfir » Sun Jul 28, 2013 12:22 am UTC

Tyndmyr, what's your point? That there are lots of bosses who frown on tattoos? Sure. It's not as if tattooed people are unaware of that. For quite some of them it's a point of pride, a highly visible sign that they won't grovel to thoose people in return for a few notches on the career ladder.

From your and CorruptUser's posts, it seems almost as if you consider grovelling a positive character trait, as if it should be encouraged that people do whatever they can to get favour from those with power. As if it is a bad thing about tattoos that many bosses don't like them, instead of a bad thing about those bosses.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10547
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: The Kunsthal Heist comes to a Very Bad End

Postby CorruptUser » Sun Jul 28, 2013 12:32 am UTC

Zamfir wrote:... CorruptUser's posts, it seems almost as if you consider grovelling a positive character trait, as if it should be encouraged that people do whatever they can to get favour from those with power. As if it is a bad thing about tattoos that many bosses don't like them, instead of a bad thing about those bosses.


"Positive"? No.

"More likely to get ahead"? Yes.

If you have fuck-you money, feel free to do what you want. If you absolutely need every advantage you can get, be prepared to sacrifice what you want for what you need.

Yes, the world should not judge books by their cover, people should be nicer, we shouldn't use arbitrary metrics as a measure of human worth, everyone should sit around in campfires singing kumbaya while we get in touch with the Earth-spirits. But that isn't how the world works. You do what you have to, not because it's "right" but because you have to do what you have to do. You want to make the world a better place? Be the better person. But don't expect everyone else to be better people.

Spoiler:
I was tempted put a bunch of snowflakes in that previous paragraph.


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests