967
[REPOST] Woman says she started wearing ‘terrible wigs’ after work banned her pink hair
(www.thelondoneconomic.com)
this post was submitted on 04 Sep 2023
967 points (97.4% liked)
Malicious Compliance
19593 readers
1 users here now
People conforming to the letter, but not the spirit, of a request. For now, this includes text posts, images, videos and links. Please ensure that the “malicious compliance” aspect is apparent - if you’re making a text post, be sure to explain this part; if it’s an image/video/link, use the “Body” field to elaborate.
======
-
We ENCOURAGE posts about events that happened to you, or someone you know.
-
We ACCEPT (for now) reposts of good malicious compliance stories (from other platforms) which did not happen to you or someone you knew. Please use a [REPOST] tag in such situations.
-
We DO NOT ALLOW fiction, or posts that break site-wide rules.
======
Also check out the following communities:
!fakehistoryporn@lemmy.world !unethicallifeprotips@lemmy.world
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
"They think this is better?"
Yes, they actually do. They're probably conservative dickheads. They know that pink hair is code for "I am a tolerant and kind person; I might be gay but not necessarily; I support counterculture ideas."
They hate the counterculture ideas. They don't hate the color pink. Covering it up with a terrible wig makes it about something else.
Or anyway, so they think. What they've actually done is given her an opportunity to start conversations about the pink hair.
Keen insight. I wouldn't have known she exists otherwise.
Hah! It doesn't even take that. All you need is a middle-management who doesn't support the rights of their workforce, is inconvenienced should a customer gin up complaints about OP's hair-color (whatever it is), and is generally just lazy and indifferent, learning from upper mgmt that growth & profits are 99% the things that count, followed by limiting liability situations. The workers themselves are just an inconvenient expense in the equation.