Facebook Can Be Good For SA

[Jim S]

An occasional guilty pleasure of mine is to trawl fb for a few minutes to look at people I went to junior school and college with. Seeing that 90% of them are screw ups covered in crap tattoos working in retail makes me feel better about my own life. Some of them are looking seriously washed up.

[Bad_Buoys]

Phenomenal post. Beautiful bit of irony when just a week or so ago Jim posted that jobs don't define you, and now his nose is turned right up.

People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. A lot of people would make fun of you for being SA, for being awkward, for being a loner, and when you look down on people just because they happen to stack shelves or sit behind a till for a living gives anyone carte blanche to do the same to you. Do unto others as they do unto you, right?

[anxiouslondoner]

Facebook isn't reality. It's a very fake, curated, PR representation of people's lives with the ugly bits photoshopped out.

[Tembo]

Nothing wrong with tattoos or retail.

I think it's important not to go on Facebook too much. You can end up obsessing over how rubbish you think you're life is compared to how seemingly amazing other peoples lives are. Facebook feels more like a CV or LinkedIn profile where people just show off their best bits

[Jim S]

The community scorneth the wrong do-er Yep, I was having a bit of a rant last night. We're all struggling in truth, I am too. Phenomenon of our generation. Apologies.

[Generation Erm]

Its really hard getting a job in retail nowadays. You have to do these group talent day/team building tests to assess your teamwork skills and then a short interview. if you manage to get through that and are successful, you are then shortlisted for another interview! You shouldn't knock people who work in retail. Dealing with unpredictable customers is hard even without SA. If you were having a rant - fair enough.

[Copernicium]

Working in retail, or being a shop assistant as it used to be called, is fine, but having tattoos is a clear sign of being from the lower echelons. Personally I make no distinction between "crap tattoos" and any other kind. There is no other kind as a matter of fact.

Generation Erm:

You have to do these group talent day/team building tests to assess your teamwork skills and then a short interview. if you manage to get through that and are successful, you are then shortlisted for another interview!

Two interviews? For a job in a shop? And what is a group talent day supposed to be when it's at home? How much talent do you need to work in a shop? As long as you look reasonably presentable and don't dribble on the customers what more can they want? I mean, there's a guy in the local supermarket on the lottery till who hasn't got any hands but he gets by alright. I don't suppose he had to go through a talent day. What do they ask you to do on a talent day?

[black_mamba]

Heyyy what's wrong with being from the lower echelons?

[Progress]

Originally Posted by Copernicium

Working in retail, or being a shop assistant as it used to be called, is fine, but having tattoos is a clear sign of being from the lower echelons. Personally I make no distinction between "crap tattoos" and any other kind. There is no other kind as a matter of fact.

Not sure if serious.

Could it be that if you're so quick to make wild judgements about others, then your SA could stem from a fear of others making similar judgements about you. Just a thought.

By your definition, HelloSunshine and David Dimbleby are both from the 'lower echelons'!

[Copernicium]

Originally Posted by Kyle*

I wasn't offended by the OP's opinion, i do believe there are "crap" tattoos, as is there are crap things in life of everything. But this is subjective to personal taste - as in your situation, you clearly find body art not to be for you. But i'm personally shocked you could use body art / tattoos, an expression of ones self, as a measure of where somebody belongs or where there place is in society. or their value - whatever you're really suggesting. Theres no clear sign to go on by just choosing to have tattoos. Thats a prejudice.

No, it's just a fact. Tattoos are downmarket.

[Jim S]

Hm to interject, if tattoos are done right and on the right people, they can look stunning. I've seen girls with sleeves that look so good and suit so well you would have to put your penis in a wheelchair if you saw them But yeah trouble is not all artists are good and tattoos don't suit everyone.

Other half of the problem is it's become a bit banal because everyone has them. Now it's got to the point where trying to find someone without a single tattoo is near impossible - not that it matters all that much, it's just a rare thing and a bonus these days. I have a tattoo, but only from where I was stabbed in the leg with a Pilot pen

[Jim S]

Too late to take the moral high ground, the thread has moved on. There is no argument, scroll up. I already admitted I was ranting and apologised.

[Bad_Buoys]

Originally Posted by Copernicium

Working in retail, or being a shop assistant as it used to be called, is fine, but having tattoos is a clear sign of being from the lower echelons.

First of all, I really, really get the feeling that you were of half a mind to say "it's political correctness gone mad!" after the first part of this quote.

Second of all, can i just ask what aristocratic noble stock you're from? What royal hobnobbing you do when you're not posting on here? Or are you in fact a self-hating member of the 'lower echelons'.

[TTSP]

Originally Posted by black_mamba

Heyyy what's wrong with being from the lower echelons?

Aye, tell me about it! Tattoos are our primary means of communication t'up north! As well as grunting and banging..

[black_mamba]

Originally Posted by TTSP

Aye, tell me about it! Tattoos are our primary means of communication t'up north! As well as grunting and banging..

Hahah ok then translate these grunts and prove your lower echelon-ness: uuurgghhhhhh bbbbbggg rrrrrggggggaaaaahhh!

[Jim S]

The tats from the Pazyryk burials were boss. This much is true. http://siberiantimes.com/culture/oth...r-old-tattoos/ Beats the shit out of the stupid nautical stars all the kids were getting when I was at college.

Facebook isn't bad for chat. I've got people that I chat to exclusively through fb because I don't want them nattering to me via WhatsApp or text messages, etc. My mates say they meet people through Facebook hobby groups (photography type groups), but I've never met anyone through it, only via forums and Flickr.

[Azi]

Originally Posted by Generation Erm

Its really hard getting a job in retail nowadays. You have to do these group talent day/team building tests to assess your teamwork skills and then a short interview. if you manage to get through that and are successful, you are then shortlisted for another interview! You shouldn't knock people who work in retail. Dealing with unpredictable customers is hard even without SA. If you were having a rant - fair enough.

That wasn't my experience, thank criminy! I only had a fairly standard interview, but I suppose it varies with different stores/companies.

I definitely agree it's SA inducing and stressful though.

OP, I don't know if comparing yourself to others is helpful for SA, whether it's a favourable comparison or not, though it is understandable.

[Copernicium]

Originally Posted by black_mamba

Heyyy what's wrong with being from the lower echelons?

According to the outrage displayed in this thread, quite a bit. Snobbery, that's what I call it.

[Bad_Buoys]

Originally Posted by Copernicium

According to the outrage displayed in this thread, quite a bit. Snobbery, that's what I call it.

Surely you're on a windup? You're the one who brings the term 'lower echelons' into this and you're saying everyone else is the snob?

Bloody hell, sound the irony alarm.

[Copernicium]

Originally Posted by Bad_Buoys

Surely you're on a windup? You're the one who brings the term 'lower echelons' into this and you're saying everyone else is the snob?

Bloody hell, sound the irony alarm.

So being perceived as from the lower echelons would offend you. Yes?

Why?

Is it because of your own perception of what the 'lower echelons' represents? If it is, then it is your own snobbery that is outraging you. You might need to have a closer look at that irony alarm.

[Bad_Buoys]

On the contrary mate, sorry to disappoint you but not everyone divides people by 'quality'. The very concept of a 'lower echelon' of people just makes you sound like you have a highly inflated view of yourself.

If you mean less intelligent, say less intelligent. If you mean poorer, says poorer. You'd still sound arrogant but at least we'd know what you mean.

There is no such thing as a lesser person. They can be less X or less Y, but never of a lower 'quality'.

[Copernicium]

Originally Posted by Bad_Buoys

On the contrary mate, sorry to disappoint you but not everyone divides people by 'quality'.

Clearly you do: the thought of being lumped in with 'the lower echelons' was outrageous to you.

The very concept of a 'lower echelon' of people just makes you sound like you have a highly inflated view of yourself.

So what does 'lower echelon' mean to you exactly?

If you mean less intelligent, say less intelligent. If you mean poorer, says poorer. You'd still sound arrogant but at least we'd know what you mean.

I was deliberately unspecific to allow you to insert your own views and opinions onto the phrase.

There is no such thing as a lesser person. They can be less X or less Y, but never of a lower 'quality'.

If you really believed that you wouldn't have taken the bait.

[Bad_Buoys]

You're backtracking now. You were called out and criticised and now you're pretending it was all some masterful ruse and you've revealed divisive human nature or whatever.

Once again, what bothered me was the very concept of someone dividing people into upper and lower echelons. It could be about tattoos or hair colour or anything, it'd still be bollocks. It was a weasely phrase that made you sound pompous, and I felt it needed challenging.

To me, 'Lower echelons' means whoevers using the phrase has a twisted worldview, no more no less.

I wasn't anymore offended that you might call me lower than I would be complimented if you were to call me higher.

[Copernicium]

Originally Posted by Bad_Buoys

You're backtracking now. You were called out and criticised and now you're pretending it was all some masterful ruse and you've revealed divisive human nature or whatever.

Well, not quite, but we are revealing your prejudices.

Once again, what bothered me was the very concept of someone dividing people into upper and lower echelons.

Why does that bother you?

It could be about tattoos or hair colour or anything, it'd still be bollocks.

So categorising someone with red hair as more likely to be of scottish background would be bollocks? Yes? No? Oh, it's just the idea of higher or lower that bothers you is it? Although you have failed to say what higher or lower means to you, but I think we're getting a good idea.

It was a weasely phrase that made you sound pompous, and I felt it needed challenging.

Why did you feel that?

To me, 'Lower echelons' means whoevers using the phrase has a twisted worldview, no more no less.

No, try again. Try thinking about why you don't want to be associated with what 'lower echelons' specifically means to you.

I wasn't anymore offended that you might call me lower than I would be complimented if you were to call me higher.

Then nothing about the statement should have bothered you at all. And yet...