Anyone else feel discriminated against at work because they're fit?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s because if you are fit and healthy it means you must not be working hard enough. We are going to need you to stay chained to your desk later at work so you can’t have that body anymore. This is capitalism, we own your body and soul.

Even though the OP is likely fake, what you post here is an attitude we see on these forums all the time. If you spend more than an hour on yourself every day you aren’t working hard enough or not focused on your family and kids appropriately. It’s like clockwork those comments.

I have seen that attitude at play in other contexts, and I've posted about it. When I worked at a couple DC biglaw firms I saw that play out with people who spent time on their appearance, with the idea that people who spent time on looking put together weren't putting enough time in work, weren't serious, etc. It's one of the few places where I think the correlation went in that direction. Usually fit, well-put together people get the benefit of the doubt.

People who make time to look put together and look attractive generally do better at work. There are literally studies about this. No one is discriminating against good looking people. GTFOH

Not the poster you are responding to, but you obviously have no understanding of how big law firm culture works. They are 100% right. It’s better than it has been in the past, but there are still a bunch of boomers and gen Xers around.

I deal with it now but don’t care. And my partners are right-I don’t put in the hours they do or bring in the same amount of work. My compensation reflects that, and I DGAF. It’s a choice I’ve made.

When those dorks are lucky to make it to 75 and can’t move in retirement after years of flexing on people for working all the time they will finally figure it out. Meanwhile, I’m going be active and do cool shit while I can (sometimes during the week) and spend time with my family.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am 5'4", 120lbs, and relatively fit, but do not find "vascularity" attractive in the slightest. It's actually repulsive to me. I like slim and mildly toned, NOT overly muscular.

Don't think for one minute that you look physically appealing to everyone, OP.

Therefore, I don't think your physique is the reason people are excluding you.

It's something else.

Good for you. Some of us like to be strong though rather than weak.

You should try lifting heavier weights.

*I don't want to* I see you have difficulty with this concept that visibly muscular isn't attractive to me, and that therefore I don't want to look like that!
My spouse is naturally slim, and from heavy lifting in the garden, has serious arm and torso muscles. Honestly I'd be OK with less definition, but he loves gardening, so I don't say a word.

You are clearly obsessed with your fitness, but my point is that you need to look for other reasons your coworkers seem exclusionary.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s because if you are fit and healthy it means you must not be working hard enough. We are going to need you to stay chained to your desk later at work so you can’t have that body anymore. This is capitalism, we own your body and soul.

Even though the OP is likely fake, what you post here is an attitude we see on these forums all the time. If you spend more than an hour on yourself every day you aren’t working hard enough or not focused on your family and kids appropriately. It’s like clockwork those comments.

I have seen that attitude at play in other contexts, and I've posted about it. When I worked at a couple DC biglaw firms I saw that play out with people who spent time on their appearance, with the idea that people who spent time on looking put together weren't putting enough time in work, weren't serious, etc. It's one of the few places where I think the correlation went in that direction. Usually fit, well-put together people get the benefit of the doubt.

People who make time to look put together and look attractive generally do better at work. There are literally studies about this. No one is discriminating against good looking people. GTFOH

Not the poster you are responding to, but you obviously have no understanding of how big law firm culture works. They are 100% right. It’s better than it has been in the past, but there are still a bunch of boomers and gen Xers around.

I deal with it now but don’t care. And my partners are right-I don’t put in the hours they do or bring in the same amount of work. My compensation reflects that, and I DGAF. It’s a choice I’ve made.

When those dorks are lucky to make it to 75 and can’t move in retirement after years of flexing on people for working all the time they will finally figure it out. Meanwhile, I’m going be active and do cool shit while I can (sometimes during the week) and spend time with my family.

I spent 15 years at Kirkland. Does that count? You obviously haven't figured out how to get the hours or promotions within big law, but they are MOST certainly not penalizing you because you're fit or put together. You are just justifying your shitty work product with ridiculous excuses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can’t tell is OP is a man or woman.

I have never noticed men treating other men poorly bc they are in shape.

But women, absolutely. If you are an attractive and fit woman, chances are high at some point some older, overweight, frumpy woman (or women) have been rude or out right mean to you at work- for no obvious other reason

Yup.

+1000

How dare you be fit and attractive. Other women will want to put their jealous claws in you to try to bring you down.

Again with the "women are catty and jealous". It's not cute to mansplain or put down women, dude.

Whiskers is meowing. Isn't it time to change his litter box, cat lady?

🐈 💩

Why are incels on a mommy and daddy website?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m fit as well OP and this is the dumbest thread I’ve read today.

and there's significant competition.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s because if you are fit and healthy it means you must not be working hard enough. We are going to need you to stay chained to your desk later at work so you can’t have that body anymore. This is capitalism, we own your body and soul.

Even though the OP is likely fake, what you post here is an attitude we see on these forums all the time. If you spend more than an hour on yourself every day you aren’t working hard enough or not focused on your family and kids appropriately. It’s like clockwork those comments.

I have seen that attitude at play in other contexts, and I've posted about it. When I worked at a couple DC biglaw firms I saw that play out with people who spent time on their appearance, with the idea that people who spent time on looking put together weren't putting enough time in work, weren't serious, etc. It's one of the few places where I think the correlation went in that direction. Usually fit, well-put together people get the benefit of the doubt.

People who make time to look put together and look attractive generally do better at work. There are literally studies about this. No one is discriminating against good looking people. GTFOH

Not the poster you are responding to, but you obviously have no understanding of how big law firm culture works. They are 100% right. It’s better than it has been in the past, but there are still a bunch of boomers and gen Xers around.

I deal with it now but don’t care. And my partners are right-I don’t put in the hours they do or bring in the same amount of work. My compensation reflects that, and I DGAF. It’s a choice I’ve made.

When those dorks are lucky to make it to 75 and can’t move in retirement after years of flexing on people for working all the time they will finally figure it out. Meanwhile, I’m going be active and do cool shit while I can (sometimes during the week) and spend time with my family.

I spent 15 years at Kirkland. Does that count? You obviously haven't figured out how to get the hours or promotions within big law, but they are MOST certainly not penalizing you because you're fit or put together. You are just justifying your shitty work product with ridiculous excuses.

I guess the operative word here for you is spent.

There is a near unlimited demand for my time. I just chose how to spend it. And I never suggested I was discriminated against. Promotion has never been an issue for me. Perhaps it was when you washed out.

I did suggest some of the dorks have an issue with spending time on things other than being chained to your desk. Thankfully for me they aren’t in my group generally and aren’t on the comp committee. If you have never seen that in your time in the past at the venerable Kirkland (which I turned down), either you weren’t in that position, or weren’t paying attention.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s because if you are fit and healthy it means you must not be working hard enough. We are going to need you to stay chained to your desk later at work so you can’t have that body anymore. This is capitalism, we own your body and soul.

Even though the OP is likely fake, what you post here is an attitude we see on these forums all the time. If you spend more than an hour on yourself every day you aren’t working hard enough or not focused on your family and kids appropriately. It’s like clockwork those comments.

I have seen that attitude at play in other contexts, and I've posted about it. When I worked at a couple DC biglaw firms I saw that play out with people who spent time on their appearance, with the idea that people who spent time on looking put together weren't putting enough time in work, weren't serious, etc. It's one of the few places where I think the correlation went in that direction. Usually fit, well-put together people get the benefit of the doubt.

People who make time to look put together and look attractive generally do better at work. There are literally studies about this. No one is discriminating against good looking people. GTFOH

Not the poster you are responding to, but you obviously have no understanding of how big law firm culture works. They are 100% right. It’s better than it has been in the past, but there are still a bunch of boomers and gen Xers around.

I deal with it now but don’t care. And my partners are right-I don’t put in the hours they do or bring in the same amount of work. My compensation reflects that, and I DGAF. It’s a choice I’ve made.

When those dorks are lucky to make it to 75 and can’t move in retirement after years of flexing on people for working all the time they will finally figure it out. Meanwhile, I’m going be active and do cool shit while I can (sometimes during the week) and spend time with my family.

I spent 15 years at Kirkland. Does that count? You obviously haven't figured out how to get the hours or promotions within big law, but they are MOST certainly not penalizing you because you're fit or put together. You are just justifying your shitty work product with ridiculous excuses.

I guess the operative word here for you is spent.

There is a near unlimited demand for my time. I just chose how to spend it. And I never suggested I was discriminated against. Promotion has never been an issue for me. Perhaps it was when you washed out.

I did suggest some of the dorks have an issue with spending time on things other than being chained to your desk. Thankfully for me they aren’t in my group generally and aren’t on the comp committee. If you have never seen that in your time in the past at the venerable Kirkland (which I turned down), either you weren’t in that position, or weren’t paying attention.

I think I see why you're not doing well at work since comprehension is clearly a problem for you. This thread was started by a person claiming that her coworkers don't like her because she is fit and her body looks a certain way. If you aren't suggesting that you're being discriminated against, then what are you even blabbering about? I assure you, those boomers and Gen X-ers you claim have a problem with how good looking you are, would MUCH rather look at a pretty young thing than a frumpy one. Moreover, if you're a rockstar in their department, they don't give a rats ass how much you work out. You bill a certain amount and deliver results for them PLUS look good and they will love you. So either you are really dumn (no, you never turned Kirkland down, please or you never worked in big law.

[Anonymous]

Yes OP I think this is totally possible. People at work are often dismissive of my ideas or give me snarky looks. I notice. I also catch them staring. I've thought about why and for a while I thought it was because I am very mean and genuinely bad at my job, but I think the only plausible reason is that my face perfectly fits the golden ratio. My nose is basically the nose job every Hollywood actress wants and my hair is the perfect "old money" blonde that everyone else takes 2 hours to style and can't quite get right but I can. Once a colleague introduced me for a presentation and called me beautiful and it was so embarrassing for both of us. Actually wait I forgot...this has happened six times with five different people but three of them used the word "ravishing" and one said "hot AF" just like that with the initials, lol Gen Z.

But seriously this is a great troll post!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am 5'4", 120lbs, and relatively fit, but do not find "vascularity" attractive in the slightest. It's actually repulsive to me. I like slim and mildly toned, NOT overly muscular.

Don't think for one minute that you look physically appealing to everyone, OP.

Therefore, I don't think your physique is the reason people are excluding you.

It's something else.

Good for you. Some of us like to be strong though rather than weak.

You should try lifting heavier weights.

*I don't want to* I see you have difficulty with this concept that visibly muscular isn't attractive to me, and that therefore I don't want to look like that!
My spouse is naturally slim, and from heavy lifting in the garden, has serious arm and torso muscles. Honestly I'd be OK with less definition, but he loves gardening, so I don't say a word.

You are clearly obsessed with your fitness, but my point is that you need to look for other reasons your coworkers seem exclusionary.

We get it, you like undefined arms as smooth as your brains.

To each their own. Relishing in being weak is kinda lame though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s because if you are fit and healthy it means you must not be working hard enough. We are going to need you to stay chained to your desk later at work so you can’t have that body anymore. This is capitalism, we own your body and soul.

Even though the OP is likely fake, what you post here is an attitude we see on these forums all the time. If you spend more than an hour on yourself every day you aren’t working hard enough or not focused on your family and kids appropriately. It’s like clockwork those comments.

I have seen that attitude at play in other contexts, and I've posted about it. When I worked at a couple DC biglaw firms I saw that play out with people who spent time on their appearance, with the idea that people who spent time on looking put together weren't putting enough time in work, weren't serious, etc. It's one of the few places where I think the correlation went in that direction. Usually fit, well-put together people get the benefit of the doubt.

People who make time to look put together and look attractive generally do better at work. There are literally studies about this. No one is discriminating against good looking people. GTFOH

Not the poster you are responding to, but you obviously have no understanding of how big law firm culture works. They are 100% right. It’s better than it has been in the past, but there are still a bunch of boomers and gen Xers around.

I deal with it now but don’t care. And my partners are right-I don’t put in the hours they do or bring in the same amount of work. My compensation reflects that, and I DGAF. It’s a choice I’ve made.

When those dorks are lucky to make it to 75 and can’t move in retirement after years of flexing on people for working all the time they will finally figure it out. Meanwhile, I’m going be active and do cool shit while I can (sometimes during the week) and spend time with my family.

I spent 15 years at Kirkland. Does that count? You obviously haven't figured out how to get the hours or promotions within big law, but they are MOST certainly not penalizing you because you're fit or put together. You are just justifying your shitty work product with ridiculous excuses.

I guess the operative word here for you is spent.

There is a near unlimited demand for my time. I just chose how to spend it. And I never suggested I was discriminated against. Promotion has never been an issue for me. Perhaps it was when you washed out.

I did suggest some of the dorks have an issue with spending time on things other than being chained to your desk. Thankfully for me they aren’t in my group generally and aren’t on the comp committee. If you have never seen that in your time in the past at the venerable Kirkland (which I turned down), either you weren’t in that position, or weren’t paying attention.

I think I see why you're not doing well at work since comprehension is clearly a problem for you. This thread was started by a person claiming that her coworkers don't like her because she is fit and her body looks a certain way. If you aren't suggesting that you're being discriminated against, then what are you even blabbering about? I assure you, those boomers and Gen X-ers you claim have a problem with how good looking you are, would MUCH rather look at a pretty young thing than a frumpy one. Moreover, if you're a rockstar in their department, they don't give a rats ass how much you work out. You bill a certain amount and deliver results for them PLUS look good and they will love you. So either you are really dumn (no, you never turned Kirkland down, please or you never worked in big law.

This is a forum. I was responding to a tangential part of the discussion. That’s how forums work. I am not going to bother responding to the rest of your nonsense, other than to say breakfast at the Willard was pretty good. You should probably get back to work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am 5'4", 120lbs, and relatively fit, but do not find "vascularity" attractive in the slightest. It's actually repulsive to me. I like slim and mildly toned, NOT overly muscular.

Don't think for one minute that you look physically appealing to everyone, OP.

Therefore, I don't think your physique is the reason people are excluding you.

It's something else.

Good for you. Some of us like to be strong though rather than weak.

You should try lifting heavier weights.

*I don't want to* I see you have difficulty with this concept that visibly muscular isn't attractive to me, and that therefore I don't want to look like that!
My spouse is naturally slim, and from heavy lifting in the garden, has serious arm and torso muscles. Honestly I'd be OK with less definition, but he loves gardening, so I don't say a word.

You are clearly obsessed with your fitness, but my point is that you need to look for other reasons your coworkers seem exclusionary.

We get it, you like undefined arms as smooth as your brains.

To each their own. Relishing in being weak is kinda lame though.

Or you could stop judging other womens bodies and how they prefer them

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s because if you are fit and healthy it means you must not be working hard enough. We are going to need you to stay chained to your desk later at work so you can’t have that body anymore. This is capitalism, we own your body and soul.

Even though the OP is likely fake, what you post here is an attitude we see on these forums all the time. If you spend more than an hour on yourself every day you aren’t working hard enough or not focused on your family and kids appropriately. It’s like clockwork those comments.

I have seen that attitude at play in other contexts, and I've posted about it. When I worked at a couple DC biglaw firms I saw that play out with people who spent time on their appearance, with the idea that people who spent time on looking put together weren't putting enough time in work, weren't serious, etc. It's one of the few places where I think the correlation went in that direction. Usually fit, well-put together people get the benefit of the doubt.

People who make time to look put together and look attractive generally do better at work. There are literally studies about this. No one is discriminating against good looking people. GTFOH

Not the poster you are responding to, but you obviously have no understanding of how big law firm culture works. They are 100% right. It’s better than it has been in the past, but there are still a bunch of boomers and gen Xers around.

I deal with it now but don’t care. And my partners are right-I don’t put in the hours they do or bring in the same amount of work. My compensation reflects that, and I DGAF. It’s a choice I’ve made.

When those dorks are lucky to make it to 75 and can’t move in retirement after years of flexing on people for working all the time they will finally figure it out. Meanwhile, I’m going be active and do cool shit while I can (sometimes during the week) and spend time with my family.

I spent 15 years at Kirkland. Does that count? You obviously haven't figured out how to get the hours or promotions within big law, but they are MOST certainly not penalizing you because you're fit or put together. You are just justifying your shitty work product with ridiculous excuses.

I guess the operative word here for you is spent.

There is a near unlimited demand for my time. I just chose how to spend it. And I never suggested I was discriminated against. Promotion has never been an issue for me. Perhaps it was when you washed out.

I did suggest some of the dorks have an issue with spending time on things other than being chained to your desk. Thankfully for me they aren’t in my group generally and aren’t on the comp committee. If you have never seen that in your time in the past at the venerable Kirkland (which I turned down), either you weren’t in that position, or weren’t paying attention.

I think I see why you're not doing well at work since comprehension is clearly a problem for you. This thread was started by a person claiming that her coworkers don't like her because she is fit and her body looks a certain way. If you aren't suggesting that you're being discriminated against, then what are you even blabbering about? I assure you, those boomers and Gen X-ers you claim have a problem with how good looking you are, would MUCH rather look at a pretty young thing than a frumpy one. Moreover, if you're a rockstar in their department, they don't give a rats ass how much you work out. You bill a certain amount and deliver results for them PLUS look good and they will love you. So either you are really dumn (no, you never turned Kirkland down, please or you never worked in big law.

This is a forum. I was responding to a tangential part of the discussion. That’s how forums work. I am not going to bother responding to the rest of your nonsense, other than to say breakfast at the Willard was pretty good. You should probably get back to work.

Perhaps your husband paid for it since you clearly don't work at all and never have. Bye now.

[Anonymous]

In my experience yes. My team is full of fat women who are my age or okder. They keep giving me the cold shoulder and make me feel like the other.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is this a weird kind of porn?

I dunno, her description of her shredded vascular arms makes me thinks of pulled/shredded pork. Maybe it's food porn.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In my experience yes. My team is full of fat women who are my age or okder. They keep giving me the cold shoulder and make me feel like the other.

Stop sock puppeting