PDA

View Full Version : You really can't do this....


Phatman
02-08-2016, 12:15 PM
I was thumbing through the ads this morning and just ran across this line:

"Need FEMALE penciler for violent indie superhero book. Male artists, do not apply for this job."

FYI (according to the EEOC):

"Federal law makes it illegal to discriminate against a job applicant or an employee because of the person's race, color, religion, sex (including pregnancy), national origin, age (40 or older), disability or genetic information. It is also illegal to discriminate against a person because the person complained about discrimination, filed a charge of discrimination, or participated in an employment discrimination investigation or lawsuit.

The laws apply to all types of work situations, including hiring, firing, promotions, harassment, training, wages, and benefits."

As a public service message, I thought I'd point out that the job advertised by "hoffmangler" in the "help wanted/paid jobs" section violates those laws explicitly. Perhaps, this person would like to rephrase their ad? Just my 2 cents.

Duane Korslund
02-08-2016, 12:24 PM
I feel repressed

https://media.giphy.com/media/CbezwsaSQNilG/giphy.gif

Buckyrig
02-08-2016, 07:02 PM
EEOC only applies to businesses with at least 15 employees.

:nyah:

Scribbly
02-09-2016, 01:23 AM
Good to know. I was ready to change my sex and get that job.

khperkins
02-09-2016, 08:53 AM
I was thumbing through the ads this morning and just ran across this line:

"Need FEMALE penciler for violent indie superhero book. Male artists, do not apply for this job."

FYI (according to the EEOC):

"Federal law makes it illegal to discriminate against a job applicant or an employee because of the person's race, color, religion, sex (including pregnancy), national origin, age (40 or older), disability or genetic information. It is also illegal to discriminate against a person because the person complained about discrimination, filed a charge of discrimination, or participated in an employment discrimination investigation or lawsuit.

The laws apply to all types of work situations, including hiring, firing, promotions, harassment, training, wages, and benefits."

As a public service message, I thought I'd point out that the job advertised by "hoffmangler" in the "help wanted/paid jobs" section violates those laws explicitly. Perhaps, this person would like to rephrase their ad? Just my 2 cents.
Actually it doesn't since this is contract work, and as some one pointed out only applies to certain levels of businesses..
PS Stop being a piss baby.

dannycruz
02-09-2016, 10:00 AM
Female pencillers only? No problem!
https://debravega.files.wordpress.com/2014/03/tootsie.gif

Duane Korslund
02-09-2016, 10:09 AM
Female pencillers only? No problem!
https://debravega.files.wordpress.com/2014/03/tootsie.gif

hahahahaha well played!! Tootsie ftw!

Bishop
02-09-2016, 12:39 PM
Good to know. I was ready to change my sex and get that job.

I wish I'd read through all the posts before having that operation.

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/150716070949-02-caitlyn-jenner-espys-super-169.jpg

Phatman
02-09-2016, 01:12 PM
EEOC only applies to businesses with at least 15 employees.

:nyah:

Actually it says that "most" EEOC regulations apply to businesses with at least employees---not all. In this instance, it's probably the case, but it certainly is a discriminatory and sexist ad. That's my point.


.

Phatman
02-09-2016, 01:15 PM
Actually it doesn't since this is contract work, and as some one pointed out only applies to certain levels of businesses..
PS Stop being a piss baby.

Don't most babies piss? Isn't this name redundant?

khperkins
02-09-2016, 01:56 PM
Pissbaby
n. Not unlike a crybaby, but where a crybaby cries out of sadness, fear, or pain, a pissbaby pisses on things out of anger. A pissbaby is:

1. A person who becomes irrationally angry at being denied something they feel entitled to, even when they aren't.

2. A person who receives something they want, and immediately becomes irrationally angry at its perceived flaws while ignoring that it still has the qualities that made them want it in the first place.
"If she was really an ugly skank, you wouldn't have asked for her number. You're being a pissbaby."

"You just said the cast for the movie adaptation of your favorite book is perfect, but you've been complaining all night because it had a Nickelback song in the soundtrack. You're being a pissbaby."
From: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=pissbaby

Buckyrig
02-09-2016, 04:00 PM
Actually it says that "most" EEOC regulations apply to businesses with at least employees---not all. In this instance, it's probably the case, but it certainly is a discriminatory and sexist ad. That's my point.


.

Poster could have a legitimate reason for the preference. Although I can see it more with wanting a writer of a particular gender or background. Perspective and life experience inform writing. Not sure how it would inform illustration, but maybe I just don't see it.

Marta
02-09-2016, 04:28 PM
I was wondering about what was behind that particular job posting, but there could be any number of reasons behind it. The person seeking the artist might have been trying to meet eligibility requirements for submitting work, such as for a publication requiring at least one creator to be female, or might be trying to balance out a skewed history, like the previous 10 projects all having a male artist. As long as it meets the posting guidelines, it's really not our business to ask for more information than who will be considered and how to apply.

SamRoads
02-09-2016, 04:59 PM
When most of the top jobs in comics are filled by women and it's the men who are often treated as second class creators... then please feel free to complain about jobs which are women only.

Until then, enjoy the benefits of a society which deliberately or otherwise gives better voice to male creators... and don't worry about jobs which are women only. :)

Phatman
02-23-2016, 11:46 AM
When most of the top jobs in comics are filled by women and it's the men who are often treated as second class creators... then please feel free to complain about jobs which are women only.

Until then, enjoy the benefits of a society which deliberately or otherwise gives better voice to male creators... and don't worry about jobs which are women only. :)

It's a discriminatory ad. That was my only point. You and ever other poster on this thread have yet to deny or prove that isn't the case. So, by that measure, it can be assumed that you endorse discrimination based on sex.

PS: I'll complain about whatever I want. It's the internet.

Phatman
02-23-2016, 11:47 AM
I was wondering about what was behind that particular job posting, but there could be any number of reasons behind it. The person seeking the artist might have been trying to meet eligibility requirements for submitting work, such as for a publication requiring at least one creator to be female, or might be trying to balance out a skewed history, like the previous 10 projects all having a male artist. As long as it meets the posting guidelines, it's really not our business to ask for more information than who will be considered and how to apply.

In the past, several of these sorts of ads have been by creeps. I'm not saying that was the case here.

Rob Norton
02-23-2016, 03:50 PM
It's a discriminatory ad. That was my only point. You and ever other poster on this thread have yet to deny or prove that isn't the case. So, by that measure, it can be assumed that you endorse discrimination based on sex.

PS: I'll complain about whatever I want. It's the internet.

nevermind

Steven Forbes
02-23-2016, 03:57 PM
I'm more than half tempted to close this.

Any reason why I shouldn't?

Buckyrig
02-23-2016, 04:20 PM
YOU prove its discriminatory. but you cant.

It's the definition of discrimination.

The question is if and when discrimination is not a bad thing.


Also, did everyone completely forget Phatman's personality? It's a laid-back, "you know, come to think of it" kind of complaint. Don't read too much zeal into it.

Stewart Vernon
02-23-2016, 06:16 PM
Taking it seriously for a moment... the ad in and of itself isn't discriminatory. Not enough information.

What if the ad was for a model and said "female models only, men need not apply." Would that be discriminatory? What if you found out the job was for a fashion show of a new line of dresses? Is it still discriminatory to only want women?

We don't know why the advertisement is for a female penciller. The EEOC doesn't come into play for small stuff like this, so even if it is outright discriminatory, there's not much you can do about it.

The advertisement itself wasn't otherwise offensive, so there's not a whole lot to discuss about it really. IF you're truly concerned about it, have you contacted the person who placed the ad to ask why they placed it? That seems like a prudent thing to do before condemning the process out of hand.

Buckyrig
02-23-2016, 06:58 PM
You're arguing legal definition. Which, yes, doesn't apply to the job offer (though it would if the listing were made by Dark Horse or another established publisher), and doesn't apply to modeling or acting work (even if the employer would otherwise be bound by EEOC . . . these are allowed exceptions. Although there was that guy who sued Hooters for gender discrimination.)

But saying X group is excluded due solely to the characteristics of X group . . . that's what discrimination means.

SamRoads
02-23-2016, 07:56 PM
If we lived in a society where women didn't get trolled for daring to open their mouths, then I'd join in the complaint about discriminatory posts against men.

Until that day...

Stewart Vernon
02-24-2016, 01:03 AM
I still contend that if no one has contacted the person who placed the ad and asked them why they only are looking for a woman to fill the role, that you can't declare it discrimination based on that information alone.

There could be any number of valid non-discriminatory reasons... for example... it could be for a comic based on the real life story of a woman who has asked that the illustrations in the graphic novel version of her story be drawn by a woman... much in the same way that you would normally cast an actress to portray that woman in a movie adaptation.

edit: I know based on the description, this particular comic isn't likely to be based on a real-life story... that was just an example I used to illustrate (see what I did there?) the point.

It isn't discrimination if there's a reason... and it doesn't sound like anyone has asked what that reason might be.

Scribbly
02-24-2016, 03:31 AM
Womanthology?

Bishop
02-24-2016, 08:46 AM
It isn't discrimination if there's a reason...

Seriously?

Scribbly
02-24-2016, 10:33 AM
Style?
Convention's table factor?

Buckyrig
02-24-2016, 11:01 AM
If we lived in a society where women didn't get trolled for daring to open their mouths, then I'd join in the complaint about discriminatory posts against men.

Until that day...

Affirmative action doesn't even work that way. And in fact, in the US, attempting to fill demographic quotas is illegal as a practice, and unenforceable as law.

There could be any number of valid non-discriminatory reasons... for example... it could be for a comic based on the real life story of a woman who has asked that the illustrations in the graphic novel version of her story be drawn by a woman... much in the same way that you would normally cast an actress to portray that woman in a movie adaptation.

The parallel would be cinematographer, not actress. And gender is irrelevant in that job. (If you look back at my first post, I left open the possibility, but I'm more inclined to allow for it with a writer . . . even so, it would still be discriminatory. And really, the onus is on the poster to provide any such justification in the ad. Absent that, the ad, as written, looks bad. Just not in any legally relevant way.)

Buckyrig
02-24-2016, 11:10 AM
Womanthology?

Was a collaboration, if I'm not mistaken. You'd have to ask Renae though.

Style?

Doesn't require a statement of ______ need not apply. Make the choice based on the individual style.

Convention's table factor?

Which wouldn't meet the standard of Bona-fide Occupational Qualification.



Although, I am now wondering if Phatman got that from the help wanted section or collaborations.

Scribbly
02-24-2016, 11:47 AM
Help wanted. And the recruiter is a guy. http://www.digitalwebbing.com/forums/showthread.php?t=176309
No womanthology then.
Personally, I don't see big deal on the request. Is not that is a million dollars at stake.

juan.a.stewart
02-24-2016, 12:58 PM
I love this thread and not only because it involves women :happy: ... wait, wait, those images... aww man, screw it... very informative info tho'.

Stewart Vernon
02-24-2016, 03:47 PM
Curiously, this thread seems to be mostly (completely) men talking about whether or not this particular job offer is discriminatory...

Meanwhile, maybe it is maybe it isn't. No one has bothered to contact the person and ask why the ad specifically states "men need not apply"? I still don't see where anyone has attempted to do that.

I do see that the original poster of that ad has already posted in there that the offer has been closed... so I'm not sure what the hubbub is about at this point.

I'm very much against discrimination. But I'm also against labeling things as discrimination without investigation. I see no evidence of any investigation to justify the conclusion that this ad was discriminatory. Perhaps if anyone had contacted the person, a reasonable and acceptable explanation exists and would have been given and all this could have been avoided... OR conversely, maybe you'd have the proof you want that it is discriminatory.

Another simple explanation... maybe this is a person seeking to diversify their staff of artists and get more female perspective for future projects. Nothing wrong with that.

Scribbly
02-24-2016, 10:25 PM
Discrimination or preference?

Buckyrig
02-24-2016, 10:47 PM
Another simple explanation... maybe this is a person seeking to diversify their staff of artists and get more female perspective for future projects. Nothing wrong with that.

Then hire a diverse staff. Gender-exclusive ads are unnecessary.

The ad is still discriminatory. Underrepresentation and oppression are a relevant part of a larger discussion, but the word has a meaning. There aren't caveats. Caveats simply go to whether or not a particular discrimination is reasonable.

And "_______ need not apply" is always a worrisome phrase.


I still don't see where anyone has attempted to do that.

Because we have better things to do . . . like rearrange our sock drawers. :nyah:

No one actually cares. It's just an academic exercise. But it progressivism is always better when tempered with liberalism.

Stewart Vernon
02-25-2016, 02:22 AM
Because we have better things to do . . . like rearrange our sock drawers. :nyah:

No one actually cares. It's just an academic exercise. But it progressivism is always better when tempered with liberalism.

Perhaps... but it looks like more time was spent complaining in this discussion than the time it would have taken to ask the poster of that particular job offer. :)

William Blankenship
02-25-2016, 07:37 AM
http://24.media.tumblr.com/696e6c5546a8c5bc98f59aa636fc49f1/tumblr_n5viooa2QL1tq4of6o1_500.gif

MBirkhofer
02-25-2016, 09:39 AM
"Womanthology" is discriminatory.
So is the ad.

However, EEOC does not apply to every field by law. (specifically food, housing, etc) And only applies to Employers with 15 or more employees. Private clubs need 25 or more.
Its a volunteer basis for others. And of course, only to US Citizens.
And of course this is a big one.

People who are not employed by the employer, such as independent contractors, are not covered by the anti-discrimination laws.

http://www.eeoc.gov/employers/coverage.cfm

"Womanthology" doesn't have any legal obligation to not be discriminatory.

Steven Forbes
02-25-2016, 10:18 AM
Still?

Won't this thing die a quiet death?

Steven Forbes
02-25-2016, 10:19 AM
My fault. This is the internet. Someone has to be right and someone has to be wrong--and compared to Nazis.

Pray, continue.

(Let's just not make that last comparison.)

Scribbly
02-25-2016, 10:33 AM
Its Donald Trump involved?

AJWritesComics
03-09-2016, 07:24 PM
I don't see a problem with this. Comics are art, and sometimes you need a unique perspective on art if you want to make something.

Like, I'm a Hispanic guy, and if someone was making a story about a group of Southern belles or about Kenyan folklore and said "Southern Women only/African-American writers only," I don't see the problem. It's not like they're telling me I can't write comics because I'm Hispanic or a guy, so what's the big deal? It's clear they want a specific cultural perspective that I, as a Cuban guy from California don't have, so I fail to see the issue.

That said, "pissbaby?" Seriously? I will never, ever understand the appeal of insults like that.

Rob Norton
03-10-2016, 03:08 PM
I don't see a problem with this. Comics are art, and sometimes you need a unique perspective on art if you want to make something.

Like, I'm a Hispanic guy, and if someone was making a story about a group of Southern belles or about Kenyan folklore and said "Southern Women only/African-American writers only," I don't see the problem. It's not like they're telling me I can't write comics because I'm Hispanic or a guy, so what's the big deal? It's clear they want a specific cultural perspective that I, as a Cuban guy from California don't have, so I fail to see the issue.

That said, "pissbaby?" Seriously? I will never, ever understand the appeal of insults like that.

i think that is a very good point

Duane Korslund
03-10-2016, 03:16 PM
Its interesting though...some of the greatest writers the world has ever known have been able to channel other genders and races without having to hear complaints about not having a unique cultural perspective. Hell, its the writers job to span the breadth of human experience....so that means that the woman that this guy hires to do this comic better not write any male parts? Or parts of other races? Religions? Sexual Orientations? Where does it stop?

Bishop
03-10-2016, 03:25 PM
http://www.garbett.org/image/2011/1/10/threadwouldntdie.jpeg(445x)(crop)(1D9ABF561F2C6EC1 8315D1871A30A056).jpg

AJWritesComics
03-10-2016, 03:58 PM
Its interesting though...some of the greatest writers the world has ever known have been able to channel other genders and races without having to hear complaints about not having a unique cultural perspective. Hell, its the writers job to span the breadth of human experience....so that means that the woman that this guy hires to do this comic better not write any male parts? Or parts of other races? Religions? Sexual Orientations? Where does it stop?

If it's THEIR project they can do what they want, hire who they want...literally NOBODY is saying you or I can't go and do the exact same thing with my own personal project. My project, my rules.

Using the above example, I could VERY easily write a story about Kenyan folklore or southern belles on my own. NOBODY is kicking down my door and telling me I can't. However, if the qualifications for a specific project are: "We need someone from Africa/ a gay person/ a Mormon/ an Electrical Engineer to get the right angle on this story," I fail to see how this counts as some sort of horrible discriminatory practice.

Like, if there was a collab for Christian comics by Christians and some agnostic or atheist guy tried to write for it and was denied access, I see NOTHING wrong with that. Would YOU call that prejudice and discrimination? It's their project, let them do what they want. If you think they're d*cks for discriminating against [insert excluded group], why would you want to work for them anyway?

And with that, I'm leaving. Après moi, le déluge.

Steven Forbes
03-10-2016, 05:10 PM
So you revive a dead thread because...why?

Know what? I don't care. It was stupid to begin with.

There, now it's fixed.