There is always a difference between knowing something and seeing it manifested into reality right in front of your eyes. While running an errand, Eye4Style and I noticed the sign at left on the front of the new Hollister store (currently under construction). It's a well known fact that the Abercrombie family (of which Hollister is a part of) aims to hire only the most beautiful. In NYC, most Abercrombie are actors or models in between jobs. I'm sure beautiful people persuade customers more easily and models need jobs too, however there is something so inherently wrong about blatantly advertising a need for "good-looking" people.
One could argue that "good-looking" isn't offensive or discriminatory because "good-looking" is subjective, but that is entirely the point. What is "good-looking" to me may not be "good-looking" to you, and in fact there are many things I find "good-looking" that aren't the traditional idea.
So which is it Hollister? Are you telling me that I must be a size 2 and every man's wet dream to work in your store or is "good-looking" simply a subjective attribute decided by the manager I'd interview with that day? Not to mention there must be a law outlining these types of discriminatory hiring conditions as illegal.
What do you think readers - does Hollister's public quest for vanity shock you?
.
