Red Pill TheoryIsraeli academics discover the post-wall women in the HR department, and find that they discriminate in favor of attractive men and discrimiate against attractive women (self.TheRedPill)

submitted by el_nikon


University research tries to reconcile the inconsistency between how:

  1. Attractive women are more likely to be promoted because people tend to project positive traits onto them.
  2. Attractive women are less likely to be hired if they include a photo in their resume. Attractive men, however, were more likely to be hired.

Then, the researchers discover there is a difference between the post-wall fatties who hire over at Human Resources and the boss who promotes people.



Academia can be quite dominated with paradigms of patriarchal control, and so it can be difficult for them to see when women have societal agency. A group of Israeli academics were trying to reconcile the seeming inconsistency between the bias favoring attractive people, but they were concerned how this bias was unbalanced during the hiring process if a photo was attached to the resume. Attractive males were favored. Attractive females were discriminated against.

For men, the results were as expected. Hunks were more likely to be called for an interview if they included a photo. Ugly men were better off not including one. However, for women this was reversed. Attractive females were less likely to be offered an interview if they included a mugshot. When applying directly to a company (rather than through an agency) an attractive woman would need to send out 11 CVs on average before getting an interview; an equally qualified plain one just seven.

Of course, they were quick to look at all the ways women were objects and victims. They examined the “dumb-blonde hypothesis”—that people assume beautiful women to be stupid. Nope. Not that one.

Well, who is doing the hiring? Human Resources. Gosh, wouldn't you know it, they're nearly all post-wall jealous women. After a bunch of research, they were forced to conclude the following.

So the cause of the discrimination must lie elsewhere. Human resources departments tend to be staffed mostly by women. Indeed, in the Israeli study, 93% of those tasked with selecting whom to invite for an interview were female. The researchers' unavoidable—and unpalatable—conclusion is that old-fashioned jealousy led the women to discriminate against pretty candidates.

Lessons Learned

Society struggles with giving agency to women. Men? Lift, groom yourself, and be more attractive. Let that improve your chances of being hired over your tubby competitors. The ladies in HR will push your application in the right pile.

[–]pcadrian 342 points342 points [recovered]

Who knew the patriarchy was really old post-wall women?

[–]2rp_valiant 218 points219 points  (8 children)

most of the feminist complaint are actually targeted at women. Slut shaming? men love sluts, it's women that judge each other. Fat acceptance? Women judge each other much more harshly than men. The "wage gap"? Comes down to women's choices in career.

It's all just projected rage with a healthy dose of stupid.

[–]sundaybrunch11 49 points50 points  (2 children)

it's like "these are our problems, let's find someone else to blame/project it to".

shits like this make my blood boil. Well take a fucking number! You're not the only ones with problems. I got my own shit that I face each day, but don't blame it on others.

[–][deleted] 45 points46 points  (0 children)

these are our problems, let's find someone else to blame/project it to

Feminism itself is what happens when the worst and most-childish behaviors of individual women are exaggerated into a political movement.

[–]cheesepythons 29 points30 points  (0 children)

Men love sluts, but they don't want to marry them, same as fat acceptance....the issue is that these women don't want to have to conform to the general populace view of LTR morality and beauty, it is the biggest tantrum that can possibly be thrown.

[–]Ducman69 8 points9 points  (1 child)

Slut shaming? men love sluts, it's women that judge each other.

For slut shaming, I don't believe its about "judgement", but sexual currency. Women understand from an early age that they can use sex, or more often even just the promise of sex, as an empowering tool to get what they want.

However, sluts give up sex too readily, and so devalue the rest of the "union members" sexual currency on the marketplace and so are treated with hostility like scabs. Likewise, the seemingly anti-feminist stance of not allowing women to do with their body as they please and sell sex is promoted and prostitution outlawed, because the overriding concern about the inflationary effect of cheap sex on the market is a greater negative.

[–]2rp_valiant 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I realise this, but the way they present their confrontation ("you should stop slut-shaming us!") doesn't really target men. If they'd protest "men should marry sluts!" then they'd be addressing their actual concerns, but because that's obviously trying to control someone else's behaviour and not "defending women", they have to reword their complaint to the point where it's no longer even targeted at men.

Also, hilariously, the argument against sex work is that it "promotes trafficking" but the funny thing is that regulation (legalisation) would prevent this. It's the same roundabout logic that prevents weed legalisation. And it's no secret that there are ulterior motives at work to prevent that too.

[–]HearTheRaven 105 points106 points  (14 children)

Funny story.

A buddy of mine is from Saudi Arabia. You know all those "patriarchal" rules they have? Turns out, the main proponents are not religious nuts, but older women.

For older women, covering up from head to toe is a small price to pay if it means your husband never gets to ogle pretty young women.

Women not driving? Makes affairs harder. Women always have a male relative with them in public? Ditto

Picture every fundamentalist Muslim rule for women as an attempt by older women to restrict their husband's access to younger women, and suddenly they all start to make sense

[–]5 Endorsed ContributorStayinghereforreal 24 points25 points  (0 children)

Picture every fundamentalist Muslim rule for women as an attempt by older women to restrict their husband's access to younger women, and suddenly they all start to make sense

Now consider the West, divorce, and laws regarding custody and assets...yeah, same wine, different bottle.

[–]Zachar1a 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Wow, yes, that makes sense if the rules allow each man to have up to four wives. The first wife will want to restrict the husband's access to possible additional wives as much as possible. I never thought about it like that. Makes sense.

[–]StotheGG 28 points29 points  (8 children)

Oh please. I'm all against the myth of the all pervasive patriarchy, but you're nuts if you think that Saudi Arabia is created in and for the interest of women. Concerned about affairs? Why, they have polygamy. It takes nothing to divorce a woman. If you divorce, the man keeps the kids and almost all the money. Women, older or younger, have no real power to restrict the access of their husbands to other women.

[–]Tropper01 3 points3 points [recovered]

I remember Karen Straughn (sp?) talking about Saudi Arabia at some point, she went into some depth about money during divorce over there. Haven't checked it myself, but I'm pretty sure is ridiculously expensive for men to get divorced too.

[–]StotheGG 3 points4 points  (0 children)

It costs money to get MARRIED. Not divorced. India is one of the only societies were the girl pays the guy's family money. Everywhere else its always the reverse. That's why there are lots of Saudi girls in their 30s who are unmarried. That, and Saudi women who don't marry Saudi men are penalized in a myriad of ways by the Saudi state--treated as not being full citizens, not getting the educational programs. In Saudi Arabia a girl from a wealthy family does have resources to attract more from the man she divorces....but a girl from a poor family or a foreign girl...forget it. She is lucky to get the right to visit the children. These is more a function of how connected the family is than anything else. But hell, Saudi Arabia is just tribes and tribal politics amplified by billions in oil.

[–]Senior Endorsed ContributorVasiliyZaitzev 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm pretty sure is ridiculously expensive for men to get divorced too.

Not at all. They just have to say "I divorce you, I divorce you, I divorce you!". They can even do it by text message. Don't even have to click their heels together three times while wearing the Ruby Slippers. "I divorce you!" x3 and the bitch is GAWN!

[–]Planner_Hammish 8 points9 points  (1 child)

Sounds way better than what we have now in the west, where a man is ruined in divorce and has to fight to see their kids! Both are extreme swings of the pendulum.

[–]Joseph_the_Carpenter -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

If it's an issue of pragmatism I know which one I'd pick. No wonder the world's running to Islam.

[–]sir_wankalot_here 2 points3 points  (2 children)

Yah they do, women have the power of nagging.

[–]Phantom-furious 12 points13 points  (0 children)

So? Saudi men have the power of flogging.

[–]luciansolaris 2 points3 points  (0 children)


[Praise KEK!](14788)

[–]crackalot 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Grandparents, especially grandmothers, were throughout human evolution the guiding moral authority. In less-scourged regions of the world, elders still garner reverence for their experience and wisdom in such matters.

[–]BJS_1 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A lady friend of mine, who lives in between there and Sudan, told me a lot of them are lesbians anyway. With the segregation of men and women there. So it may not matter anyway

[–]indeydius 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Who knew the patriarchy was really old post-wall women?

It's patriarchal standards of beauty that are making them do it. It's not their fault! Don't you get it! /s

[–]BradPill 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well, the fatties now actually get hired, which is part of the feminist agenda - positive discrimination, sort of (although for the exact opposite reason (eliminating the 'competition')).

[–]ComradeCynic 81 points82 points  (5 children)

It is absolutely right. I remember the CEO of a company I did some consulting with, tasking 2 women with finding booth babes for a telecom show (90% male attendees), a task he usually handled. They somehow managed to find and hire only dogs.

[–][deleted] 29 points30 points  (3 children)

If they were males, actively sabotaging the company for person insecurities and immaturities would get them fired. But as a woman, it won't here.

But they're soo oppressed, there's only 540,000 examples of stuff like this.

[–]redkick 53 points54 points  (5 children)

HR is a cancer on tech companies that needs to die. They're the worst to judge a job candidate (b/c they have no clue about the field) but always have the first say in the matter.

[–]TacoNinjaSkills 35 points36 points  (2 children)

Amen. HR is a parasite. Every responsibility HR has could be divvied up among existing departments. Hiring should be back in the hands of the actual managers.

[–]1runnerrun2 19 points20 points  (0 children)

They are divisions created so women can have jobs at big companies.

[–]1whatsazipper 2 points3 points  (0 children)

HR can be done right, but keeping them out of hiring except for trivial tasks is the way to go.

[–]rpscrote 3 points4 points  (0 children)

really HR is a compliance apparatus that exists only to appease the pile of busywork that is needed to satisfy the monumental wall of regulation and liability that is operating a US workforce. There's a lot of reasons people outsource and cost isnt the only one.

If you weren't legally required to jump through so many godamn hoops, HR would be a fraction of its size.

It's too expensive to hire lawyers to do the actual hoop jumping -- they just put together the hoop jumping plan and set the busy bees in HR to checking those boxes. HR is a massive CYA operation.

[–]beware_the_syllogism 27 points28 points  (1 child)

My major complaint against HR was them hiring people and not actually having to work with them. I was in a management position and frequently got people who had the correct buzzwords on their resumes or did well in interviews but didn't know what they were doing and usually didn't seem to care.

It got worse when I moved into the office which was populated with female managers who only seemed to work as a team when there was something that benefited them collectively (and allowed them to slack off on company time), such as paid time off to attend yoga classes each week, or something equally stupid. Every woman manager was a bit more road worn than the next from years of wine binges, "non smoking", or bitter over some BS in their personal lives. I would add that most of them were multiple divorcees. They seemed to only want to hire older, fatter, and uglier women. The general managers were men who kept increasing the frequency of meetings wondering why people were spending more time in the office but less work was being completed. The managers were scared of HR who could produce a sexual harassment issue out of nowhere, while the actual owners, a group of brothers in their 50s-70s, were hiring mostly early 30 year old "assistants."

It was a real shit show.

[–]spectrum_92 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Jesus Christ that sounds hilariously depressing

[–]Senior EndorsedMattyAnon 21 points22 points  (1 child)

The researchers' unavoidable—and unpalatable—conclusion

The conclusion is unpalatable because it blames women.

Blaming men isn't just palatable it's positively delicious.

[–][deleted] 57 points57 points

[permanently deleted]

[–]eccentricrealist 5 points6 points  (4 children)

Yeah, I'll probably be running a small biz with my uncle, and when it comes to hiring, we don't give a shit about the gender, it's more of a "Will you fucking work or not?" It takes next to nothing to be a waiter (not any "exclusive skills, per se), but if you send me a hot girl who doesn't know how to mop a floor, or be courteous, she's not getting hired, but that same standard applies to plain or ugly girls, plain, ugly, or attractive men.

[–]eddiae 5 points6 points  (3 children)

for a waiter you should really focus on hiring attractive people that can get the job done, no need to be pc here looks in those jobs help tremendously.

[–]gebrial 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Actually customers order more food if their waiter is overweight so hiring them would be the way to go

[–]eccentricrealist 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oh, I know that helps them get better tips, but if they can't do the job and aren't willing to learn then they're no good, even if they're practically models.

[–]McLarenX 0 points1 point  (1 child)

That's interesting. You'd think with the numbers a female engineer would be an obvious federal protected class. Their pride will get in the way of obeying federal staffing laws, which is basically the purpose of the HR department.

Reminds me of the time my HR department refused to hire a very qualified Indian because we already had too many on staff. Asiatic minorities get a raw deal in the professional world just because their peers are successful.

[–]LauraXVII 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The HR girls obviously think needing to keep up female numbers isn't so important that you'd hire any female, and just stick to lower-SMV-than-HR females.

Which would make sense considering some of the "women" that I work with!!

[–]TermsOfColors 16 points17 points  (4 children)

Sometimes I wonder why there's no cure for cancer, or the common cold. Then I see these "studies" and realize why.

Resources and effort go into studying phenomenon that anyone with at least a year or two in the corporate world knows.

It's not just in HR. I have seen "feminist" 30, 40, 50-somethings come out with teeth and claws bared against the PYT fresh out of school.

[–][deleted] 11 points12 points  (0 children)

You need to back up these common sense claims with data or anyone can call foul when you incorporate this into your business practices.

Also, these people don't get much money to study this stuff. They're usually struggling to find a decent research assistant to trudge through all the shitty data and handle the logistics for the studies. Trust me, research funding mostly goes to healthcare.

[–][deleted] 8 points9 points  (2 children)

Feminism IS a cancer and it really is holding humanity back. We could be addressing REAL problems that would advance humanity. Curing diseases, space travel, ect. But noooo womynnns need to be in STEM!! They need more encourraaagementtttt!!

Ironic the least productive members who contribute the least are calling the shots and dictating where society goes. That's not a recipe for failure or anything, not at all...

[–]sumdumbullshit 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Taking off the AWALT cap for a moment...

Unless you are hiring them for client/customer facing duties, hiring attractive females can be as much a distraction as a blessing. You're there to make money, not enjoy the wallpaper. Last thing you need is your staff spending too much time stopping by the pretty girl's desk, trying to impress her, etc...

Not saying jealousy isn't a significant component, but it's a problem that could be fixed by upper management if they cared. Plus, odds are a plain or ugly woman actually had to work harder to get where she is since no ones rolls out the carpet for them hoping for a fuck.

[–]rockstarr 21 points22 points  (0 children)

heh, I'm cracking up over here dude.

Great evidence of female jealousy and dynamics, great writing, great post.

[–]GoldPisseR 18 points19 points  (9 children)

Even those pot bellied mid 40s managers do the same.

Hire young pretty girls to make kind of a harem

[–]Senior Endorsed ContributorVasiliyZaitzev 71 points72 points  (8 children)

As a guy on the hiring committee, NFW will I hire based on a woman's looks. FuckNO! HellNO! Why?

Because if I hire based on looks and the chick has no talent, then I'm stuck probably doing her work for her to make sure it's done right. Even when you get a woman who is competent (hey, it can happen), she's more likely to take sick days, more likely to come in late, more likely to leave early, etc.

At another place I worked we had two kids (20s) doing the same gig. the guy showed up early, stayed late, did everything you asked him. the chick rolled in at 9:05, slurping her latte (and really, she needed to go 'low fat' on those, but didn't), or could be as late as 9:30 if "there was a line at Starbucks" like that is some sort of magical excuse for not being on time. She was also out the door at 5pm (at the latest), regardless of whether or not her work was done. And who would raise a stink if she didn't get EXACTLY the days off she wanted, regardless of seniority? I bet you can name that tune in one note.

Now, eventually, she figured out that her colleague was paid a bit more (they had the same base, but at bonus time, we would reward the people who work harder) and that was "No Fair!" Now, of course, HR wouldn't let me anywhere NEAR that meeting b/c I would have told her the truth: the other guy works much harder and his work product is better, and, really, we should fire her for being late all the time. So they bumped her about 50% of the negligible difference, and within a year, she'd left to marry her betabux, so it all worked out (for us; addition by subtraction.)

[–]whyalwaysm3 10 points11 points  (7 children)

Please tell me "there was a line at Starbucks" was actually not a real excuse lmao?

Also if you're in NYC/NJ you should hire me!

[–]Darkone06 4 points5 points  (6 children)

I worked in a place that had a donut taco right across the street.

I heard that excuse every day. There was a line at the donut taco.

Of course on a particular cold morning, I pulled in there was a line making me 10 minutes late.

My Co workers were right behind me in line. Guess who got a talking about being late?

[–]eccentricrealist 5 points6 points  (5 children)

D-donut taco?

I get NAFTA but that's taking it a bit too far, damn.

[–]Darkone06 3 points4 points  (4 children)

Is a real thing.

It's a donut cut in half and stuff with breakfast taco meat.


It's like tejano brunch to go.

[–]eccentricrealist 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Damn, don't bring that to Mexico. We're fat enough as is.

[–]dapowa 5 points6 points  (1 child)

what in the actual fuck are people doing to themselves

[–]Darkone06 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's really good man.

You have to try it perfect mix between a spicy taco and a sugary donut.

[–]redpillavatar 8 points9 points  (0 children)

In the workplace, older post-wall women simply adore some attention from good looking younger men. I try to use this to my advantage because many of the older women are so incredibly well-connected in the workplace, and are just good people to know.

Secretaries and Executive Assistants wield so much soft power it is crazy!

[–]TheSliceman 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I see this in the workplace daily.

If I am working adjacent to women, life is easier; if I am working tangent to women, life is harder.

That is to say that if I am selling our product to a woman or have to be vetted by a woman, I am golden. If my sales partner or boss is a woman, Im fucked.

[–]Endorsed Contributorbalalasaurus 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Every so often, studies like this come up. While I find the information contained therein useful, I can't shake the fact that this kind of information will never make it into mainstream discourse. By and large that makes this kind of information irrelevant if only for the fact that you should know that being attractive has uses beyond sexual gratification.

[–]getRedPill 4 points5 points  (0 children)

It's not only beautiful yound girls that are silly being discriminated by HR. In IT/Software Development, a field well-known for being one of the most meritocratic and male-dominated that exists, HR are famous for the silly things they do when hiring. HR is a big cancer everywhere. CEO's, managers and founders of companies must pay close attention to HR's departments as their companies are losing good talents (which translates into lost money). It has come to the point where they themselves are doing the hiring process for IT/software guys or the head of the department (IT/software in this case).

[–]Senior Endorsed ContributorVasiliyZaitzev 6 points7 points  (1 child)

There's a bit of a flipside to this also, although it doesn't show up in the study. One of the guys I work with is really handsome. I refer to him as "the underwear model" just to hose him a bit.

Anyway, he's early 30s, and when he was interviewed by our former head of HR, she was really down on him. Why? B/C she was formerly hot, but at 48, he wasn't going to bang her, even with a stolen dick. We hired him anyway, and he's a great colleague. So it doesn't always go that the post-wallers favor hot guys.

[–]Teatach 3 points3 points [recovered]

I've read about this before, but never seen any research on it. But also, if it's a male HR/boss he's most likely ALSO going to reject pretty women just to prove that he's not a sexist who hires people based upon their beauty.

[–]TheSliceman 1 point2 points  (1 child)

ALSO going to reject pretty women just to prove that he's not a sexist who hires people based upon their beauty.

Well not hiring the babe is a win-win for him. He is the general and knows his army will be distracted and divided with ass in the barracks. Also a good PR move for him to check his privilege and not objectify women by hiring on looks.

[–]RedPimpin 0 points1 point  (0 children)

or you can hire a good looking chick for a small position (like picking up the phone) and then look at which of your workers get distracted easily

you can then replace those that get distracted from work with other people that actually work, thus building a stronger workforce

[–]fakenate1 2 points3 points  (1 child)


be attractive

Don't be unattractive.

[–]Danedina 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The real lesson is to get involved in the hiring process well before the interview stage. The HR pigs will look at you cross-eyed for invading their turf, but it's one time when it's worth it to ruffle a few feathers. If you think looking through 200 CVs isn't worth your time then you've never worked with an office cancer.

[–]redestofthereds 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I had a general manager who was actually pretty attractive for being in her late 30's. The consensus of all the male employees was that she was very bangable as she had a big ass and us being mostly "Mexican", we like big asses.

She still had a shitty disposition, probably because she never had kids and was married to a beta. It was said that she was nicer to the male employees and catty to the ladies.

I didn't really believe it until this twenty year old server who I say is a 7 remarked about the manager's hand lotion smelling like mint as she was putting some on. The manager got visibly annoyed and said it did not.

The girl insisted that it did. She smelled her hand and was like "OMG, where did you get this from. The smell of mint is really strong." The general manager got more irritated and maintained that it didn't. "No, Valerie" she said with a sigh, "it does not smell like mint." The manger saw that I was standing right by them and called to me. She raised her hand as if she was swearing an oath and told me "Reddest, smell my hand. Does it smell like mint?" Like a good little beta,I leaned in and gave her hand a good whiff. I don't remember what my answer was as I was so weirded out.

I think I said yes but they continued to bicker until the meeting that she called had started.

No matter what how good her circumstances might be, older women will resent the younger ones, especially if the younger ones are ditzy.

[–]CQC3 1 point2 points  (2 children)

Just look at the way it was written, it's like they're upset that they had to report something that was objectively true just because it left a bad taste in their mouths.

"The researchers' unavoidable—and unpalatable—conclusion" They're making excuses and justifications as to why they'd report something that was true. "Don't throw me in jail, it was an unavoidable and unpalatable conclusion, but we just couldn't spin it another way, I'm innocent, I swear!"

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

We found-- a very palatable and tasty conclusion-- that men were responsible! And we can blame more problems on them! Anything but us not being equal:D

[–]1runnerrun2 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It probably left a justifiable bad taste in their mouth because their correct conclusion will never see the light of day in the mainstream because it's not blaming men.

[–]sourdieselfuel 0 points1 point  (2 children)

BRB, going to make outlandish demands to post-wall HR head.

[–]martypete 3 points3 points [recovered]

brb, going to take headshot for resume with my cutoff tee.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Haha yeah.

I should just attach an HD dick pic to my resume.

[–]indeydius 0 points1 point  (2 children)

We need more lesbians in HR for non-discriminatory hiring. This is a job for Milo Yiannopoulos.

[–]fakenate1 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Wouldn't lesbos just hire hot women? My aunt was gay, she lusted after young women.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

yes bitter feminist lesbians will be fair to everyone, good thinking.

[–]Involution88 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The invisible women who rule the world revealed.

[–]1REDPILLRECKONING 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I swear man, bureaucrats that fucking hate their lives are ruining this country. I can deal with women, its the bureaucrats that are impossible to be around.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

I have been saying this for years. Post wall women typically hate young and attractive women and view them as rivals in every regard. To these post wall women the men they work with may be the only men in their lives who will have anything to do with them. While some would think that they would be bitter towards them, the reverse is true, they are typically happy any dude will have anything to do with them.

There was a firm I worked with a few years ago that had an old guy at the top. He was an ex-military type and was cool as fuck. I knew a few of the employees there and one chick I was hanging out with a little bit (no fucking or anything). As soon as he left an older woman took over his position. None of the guy employees had any complaints, she was professional, she was competent, she was actually really friendly too.

But the chick I knew didn't like her and she felt that she was out to get her. And I heard through the grape vine that the other young female employees were not too thrilled. The young guys had no complaints and neither did the older women.

Old women in power do not want young hot chicks around.

[–]EnragedParrot 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is nothing new - every woman I've worked with say women managers suck.

Note: I didn't say that - the WOMEN I've worked with said it.

Women hate to work for women. Wonder why? :p

[–]Pontefarina 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well,it's good news I suppose