🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <319B5198.41C6@x.org>, T. Hsu <ting@x.org> wrote:
>Gary Brainin (garygm@goonsquad.spies.com) wrote:
>> [...] so you might well say that it's counterproductive for the
>> interviewers to take my clothing as an indicator of my suitability.
>> Nevertheless, I'm damn sure I'm going to wear a suit and tie
>
>I haven't interviewed in a suit & tie since right out of college.
>Jacket, slacks, and silk shirt, yes, but not a suit style jacket
>nor a tie. However, I'm on the favorable side of the supply-demand
>curve, so I don't know if this has ever hurt me.

More to the point, sometimes I have had a *negative* impression when
people have come to interview with me in a suit and tie.  It says
that they don't have the strong confidence in their abilities that
not getting dressed up requires.   Of course, I don't factor this very
heavily either way, but there are certainly job categories, and probably
dates, for which getting dressed up is a mistake.

This actualy does apply to things like makeup.  For example, a woman who
looks good (to me) without makeup wins hands down over a woman who looks
great with makeup, and of course both win over badly applied or overdone
makeup.   (There must be guys who like women in badly done makeup, we see
so much of it.)

If you can make it look good without enhancement save the enhancement for
special occasions.  (Never is also fine.)

There is no doubt a similar rule for guys.  Women certainly like a well
dressed and groomed guy, but it's also well known that long hair and the
ruffian and beach bum looks are popular.  Perhaps somebody on the female
side can explain the rules for guys...

However, just like in the job interview, this is hardly the most important
characteristic; it's probably the least.
-- 
Brad Templeton, publisher, ClariNet Communications Corp.	 info@clari.net
The net's #1 E-Newspaper (1,400,000 paid sbscrbrs.)  http://www.clari.net/brad/