Lookism Writing Task
Introduction Paragraph: (HOOK) Beautiful Julie-Ann and her average looking sister, Mary-Ann, both decided to fill out an application for a job at Forever 21. Julie-Ann was an average C+ student, who has no working experience but knows how to take a killer selfie, while her sister graduated with 4.2 GPA all four years of highschool and had plenty of work experience, but only Julie-Ann was hired while her sister was not. Was this fair? Should people be hired or not hired based on their looks rather than their qualifications? (THESIS, POSITION, AND WHY) In a job where looks do not matter, lookism does not have a place in the workplace but in a job where looks do matter, then lookism definitely has a part; everything simply …show more content…
Victims have reasons to be mad but (some) businesses have the right to say no them.
Body Paragraph #1: (TOPIC SENTENCE) In a job where looks matter, image is everything and businesses know that; especially in businesses that sell clothes, makeup, shoes, and so on. Anyone who is good-looking has a chance of working for a big upscale business as “businesses are openly seeking workers who are sexy, sleek, or simply good-looking” to sell their products (Greenhouse, paragraph 6). It is not a surprise that “we are a culture consumed by image” (Bennett, paragraph 2) rather than by education …show more content…
(EXAMPLE) “Michele Cornell[, a waitress], had worked at [36th Street Food and Drink—a restaurant—] for 23 years,” that is nearly 24 years of her life that she had given to that restaurant, “but when it reopened after renovations, it refused to rehire her because, the commission said, she no longer fit the young, trendy look it had adopted” (Greenhouse, paragraph 20). (EVIDENCE) According to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, ADEA (the Age Discrimination in Employment Act) “forbids age discrimination against people who are age 40 or older” (eeoc.gov). Michele Cornell was 47 years old which means the employer violated ADEA; this business firing Michele Cornell is unjustified as they were not able to provide a legit business reason apart from quote,”she no longer fit the young, trendy look [we] adopted” (Greenhouse, paragraph 20). (EXPLANATION) In Michele Cornell’s case, she has a right to sue the business for discriminating against age. This specific business had no legit business reason to deny Michele even though their reason is that “she no longer fit the young, trendy look” (Greenhouse, paragraph 20). This is a case of unfair and unjustified denial but, it was not lookism—not fully anyway. The commission denied Michele because she was not young or trendy, the key word being young which
Introduction Paragraph: (HOOK) Beautiful Julie-Ann and her average looking sister, Mary-Ann, both decided to fill out an application for a job at Forever 21. Julie-Ann was an average C+ student, who has no working experience but knows how to take a killer selfie, while her sister graduated with 4.2 GPA all four years of highschool and had plenty of work experience, but only Julie-Ann was hired while her sister was not. Was this fair? Should people be hired or not hired based on their looks rather than their qualifications? (THESIS, POSITION, AND WHY) In a job where looks do not matter, lookism does not have a place in the workplace but in a job where looks do matter, then lookism definitely has a part; everything simply …show more content…
Victims have reasons to be mad but (some) businesses have the right to say no them.
Body Paragraph #1: (TOPIC SENTENCE) In a job where looks matter, image is everything and businesses know that; especially in businesses that sell clothes, makeup, shoes, and so on. Anyone who is good-looking has a chance of working for a big upscale business as “businesses are openly seeking workers who are sexy, sleek, or simply good-looking” to sell their products (Greenhouse, paragraph 6). It is not a surprise that “we are a culture consumed by image” (Bennett, paragraph 2) rather than by education …show more content…
(EXAMPLE) “Michele Cornell[, a waitress], had worked at [36th Street Food and Drink—a restaurant—] for 23 years,” that is nearly 24 years of her life that she had given to that restaurant, “but when it reopened after renovations, it refused to rehire her because, the commission said, she no longer fit the young, trendy look it had adopted” (Greenhouse, paragraph 20). (EVIDENCE) According to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, ADEA (the Age Discrimination in Employment Act) “forbids age discrimination against people who are age 40 or older” (eeoc.gov). Michele Cornell was 47 years old which means the employer violated ADEA; this business firing Michele Cornell is unjustified as they were not able to provide a legit business reason apart from quote,”she no longer fit the young, trendy look [we] adopted” (Greenhouse, paragraph 20). (EXPLANATION) In Michele Cornell’s case, she has a right to sue the business for discriminating against age. This specific business had no legit business reason to deny Michele even though their reason is that “she no longer fit the young, trendy look” (Greenhouse, paragraph 20). This is a case of unfair and unjustified denial but, it was not lookism—not fully anyway. The commission denied Michele because she was not young or trendy, the key word being young which