I kind of agree with Kaelik here. Until asshole does something assholish at work, he shouldn't be fired just because he's an asshole. Like, if when I was managing a Halloween store, I had an employee I knew to be a white supremacist, with WS tattoos all over their arms, that wouldn't be a reason to fire them. But if they started berating jewish or black customers, that would. Just because someone is an asshole in their personal life, or does shitty things away from work, doesn't mean they should be fired. I'd hate to be fired just because I'm an asshole online, and I don't think there's really any level of asshole someone can be that justifies firing them when they haven't done anything at work that is assholish.
edit: on the other hand, if the hypothetical white supremacist committed a crime away from work that I happened to know about, I would definitely report that to police and provide any assistance I could. ...maybe short of facilitating him being arrested at my actual store, since that could conceivably put innocents in harms way.
It's Personal...
Moderator: Moderators
Last edited by Prak on Sat Mar 26, 2016 2:48 am, edited 1 time in total.
Cuz apparently I gotta break this down for you dense motherfuckers- I'm trans feminine nonbinary. My pronouns are they/them.
Winnah wrote:No, No. 'Prak' is actually a Thri Kreen impersonating a human and roleplaying himself as a D&D character. All hail our hidden insect overlords.
FrankTrollman wrote:In Soviet Russia, cosmic horror is the default state.
You should gain sanity for finding out that the problems of a region are because there are fucking monsters there.
Yeah, pretty much. I mean, I recognize how unlikely that situation actually is, and if I guy has fucking swastikas tattooed on his arms, then no amount of politesse is going to prevent customers from balking. But absent actual behavioural issues, I wouldn't fire the guy. If he could keep his racism to himself and not actively cause problems, I'd start with just asking he cover the tattoos at work.
Cuz apparently I gotta break this down for you dense motherfuckers- I'm trans feminine nonbinary. My pronouns are they/them.
Winnah wrote:No, No. 'Prak' is actually a Thri Kreen impersonating a human and roleplaying himself as a D&D character. All hail our hidden insect overlords.
FrankTrollman wrote:In Soviet Russia, cosmic horror is the default state.
You should gain sanity for finding out that the problems of a region are because there are fucking monsters there.
That's what bothers me here. I'm not really gleeful about the jackass probably losing his job. Ambivalent, I guess in the word.
The workplace is actually within their legal rights--well, here in a "right-to-work" state where you can legally be fired for anything at any time--to fire him. Some employers do demand a level of professional conduct away from the job, too. This guy, it turns out, was a car salesman, so he -would- be directly interacting with the public and if the contract, employee handbook, or whatever equivalent they had forbade this kind of ass-showing, then, yeah, they wouldn't even get a wrongful termination suit (which are still possible even in R-T-W shitsville. My own job, the company promises to not fire people except for disciplinary problems, so if I got fired because they didn't like my haircut they'd face a wrongful termination suit.)
I'm just not 100% this is worth his life upended up. I dunno. It seems to be dying down now
The workplace is actually within their legal rights--well, here in a "right-to-work" state where you can legally be fired for anything at any time--to fire him. Some employers do demand a level of professional conduct away from the job, too. This guy, it turns out, was a car salesman, so he -would- be directly interacting with the public and if the contract, employee handbook, or whatever equivalent they had forbade this kind of ass-showing, then, yeah, they wouldn't even get a wrongful termination suit (which are still possible even in R-T-W shitsville. My own job, the company promises to not fire people except for disciplinary problems, so if I got fired because they didn't like my haircut they'd face a wrongful termination suit.)
I'm just not 100% this is worth his life upended up. I dunno. It seems to be dying down now
Last edited by Maxus on Sat Mar 26, 2016 3:57 am, edited 2 times in total.
He jumps like a damned dragoon, and charges into battle fighting rather insane monsters with little more than his bare hands and rather nasty spell effects conjured up solely through knowledge and the local plantlife. He unerringly knows where his goal lies, he breathes underwater and is untroubled by space travel, seems to have no limits to his actual endurance and favors killing his enemies by driving both boots square into their skull. His agility is unmatched, and his strength legendary, able to fling about a turtle shell big enough to contain a man with enough force to barrel down a near endless path of unfortunates.
--The horror of Mario
Zak S, Zak Smith, Dndwithpornstars, Zak Sabbath. He is a terrible person and a hack at writing and art. His cultural contributions are less than Justin Bieber's, and he's a shitmuffin. Go go gadget Googlebomb!
--The horror of Mario
Zak S, Zak Smith, Dndwithpornstars, Zak Sabbath. He is a terrible person and a hack at writing and art. His cultural contributions are less than Justin Bieber's, and he's a shitmuffin. Go go gadget Googlebomb!
Call down the thunder, reap the whirlwind, Maxus.
Was the asshole in question consistently berating/affecting the child as well? Because if a Little League coach is talking shit to the kids as well as the parents, then that is affecting his job performance. If not, it's still unprofessional as fuck, but it's not deliberately harming his work, if that makes any sense?
Dude should probably get stomped out, but technically he's within his rights to say horrible shit to people (as long as it does not cross over into physical abusive action).
Was the asshole in question consistently berating/affecting the child as well? Because if a Little League coach is talking shit to the kids as well as the parents, then that is affecting his job performance. If not, it's still unprofessional as fuck, but it's not deliberately harming his work, if that makes any sense?
Dude should probably get stomped out, but technically he's within his rights to say horrible shit to people (as long as it does not cross over into physical abusive action).
FrankTrollman wrote: Halfling women, as I'm sure you are aware, combine all the "fun" parts of pedophilia without any of the disturbing, illegal, or immoral parts.
K wrote:That being said, the usefulness of airships for society is still transporting cargo because it's an option that doesn't require a powerful wizard to show up for work on time instead of blowing the day in his harem of extraplanar sex demons/angels.
Chamomile wrote: See, it's because K's belief in leaving generation of individual monsters to GMs makes him Chaotic, whereas Frank's belief in the easier usability of monsters pre-generated by game designers makes him Lawful, and clearly these philosophies are so irreconcilable as to be best represented as fundamentally opposed metaphysical forces.
Whipstitch wrote:You're on a mad quest, dude. I'd sooner bet on Zeus getting bored and letting Sisyphus put down the fucking rock.
Except that's complete bullshit on every level.SlyJohnny wrote:No, I completely get that and agree, but when you semi-publicly make racist declarations or make aggressive statements about the mentally disabled with a listed employment to a company, and then your statements get publicised and the company decides "you know what, maybe we won't go to bat in the press for some racist cashier we can easily replace, and in not doing so we'll create a better corporate culture (and also not lose business)" I think that's fair enough.
a) You don't get a better corporate culture, your corporate culture is by definition the same if they haven't done anything at work.
b) You don't lose sales because of a stupid internet lynch mob that shouldn't have existed in the first place. If Wal Mart boycotts based on the fact that they use goddam slave labor to keep their products cheap doesn't stick, why the fuck would "some guy who works at some walmart, probably not in your town, said something racist on the internet." be an actual issue?
1) I'm obviously not saying it's illegal, because stupid fucking right to work states exist. I'm saying what should be the case.Maxus wrote:Some employers do demand a level of professional conduct away from the job, too. This guy, it turns out, was a car salesman, so he -would- be directly interacting with the public and if the contract, employee handbook, or whatever equivalent they had forbade this kind of ass-showing, then, yeah, they wouldn't even get a wrongful termination suit.
2) This is my point though, like 99.999% of jobs should not require a level of professional conduct away from work. Being a Car Salesman who talks to people is totally a bullshit reason to fire someone who said something when they are not at work, because for fucks sake, your actual job is to lie and pretend as a car salesman, so you were going to fake a personality anyway, you might as well fake a non racist one.
The U.S. isn't a democracy and if you think it is, you are a rube.DSMatticus wrote:Kaelik gonna kaelik. Whatcha gonna do?
That's libertarians for you - anarchists who want police protection from their slaves.
The way I understand it, the sequence is like this:Mask_De_H wrote:Call down the thunder, reap the whirlwind, Maxus.
Was the asshole in question consistently berating/affecting the child as well?
1) A, the mother of of the Down Syndrome child and an older, typical needs child, was at a Little League game. B, the mother of a couple of typical needs children, including one toddler/infant, is also there.
2) Down Syndrome girl, she's...four, I think now, she loves babies. And kids shorter than her. She sees the stroller. Before A can stop her, she runs over to B and her child to look at the baby.
3) B, she sees this child running for her full-blast and somehow comes to the conclusion that this special-needs child is about to attempt to injure her own child. She takes defensive action and either grabbed the Down Syndrome kid roughly or knocked her down, one. Reports unclear. Down Syndrome girl begins crying.
4) A catches up, and is a bit sharp about B handling her child in such a way.
5) B replies in a very snide fashion about the Down Syndrome child and accuses A of being unable to control her/irresponsible/drunk/etc.
6) One of A's berserk buttons is somehow commenting on her child as if she's defective.
7) Argument starts, it stops. For some reason, they continue it on text messages later.
8) B's husband becomes aware, and engages A, also on text messages.
9) A, by this point, is in full-on "TO THE DEATH" mode. She lights into the husband.
10) Then the text series happens as seen above.
11) A makes facebook posts, it gets shared ~300 times that I'm aware of, people take up the cause, B's husband will now have to go find a cave to hide out on. Except we're on good ol' sedimentary Gulf Coast and the nearest caves are hundreds of miles away.
Last edited by Maxus on Sat Mar 26, 2016 6:32 am, edited 1 time in total.
He jumps like a damned dragoon, and charges into battle fighting rather insane monsters with little more than his bare hands and rather nasty spell effects conjured up solely through knowledge and the local plantlife. He unerringly knows where his goal lies, he breathes underwater and is untroubled by space travel, seems to have no limits to his actual endurance and favors killing his enemies by driving both boots square into their skull. His agility is unmatched, and his strength legendary, able to fling about a turtle shell big enough to contain a man with enough force to barrel down a near endless path of unfortunates.
--The horror of Mario
Zak S, Zak Smith, Dndwithpornstars, Zak Sabbath. He is a terrible person and a hack at writing and art. His cultural contributions are less than Justin Bieber's, and he's a shitmuffin. Go go gadget Googlebomb!
--The horror of Mario
Zak S, Zak Smith, Dndwithpornstars, Zak Sabbath. He is a terrible person and a hack at writing and art. His cultural contributions are less than Justin Bieber's, and he's a shitmuffin. Go go gadget Googlebomb!
That... makes everything worse.
Koumei wrote:I'm just glad that Jill Stein stayed true to her homeopathic principles by trying to win with .2% of the vote. She just hasn't diluted it enough!
Koumei wrote:I am disappointed in Santorum: he should carry his dead election campaign to term!
Just a heads up... Your post is pregnant... When you miss that many periods it's just a given.
]I want him to tongue-punch my box.
The divine in me says the divine in you should go fuck itself.
-
DSMatticus
- King
- Posts: 5271
- Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2011 5:32 am
Because the former requires a coordinated sacrifice on the part of tens (or even hundreds) of millions of people and the latter requires clicking the share button on twitter. Wal Mart can be reliably trusted to address your grievances if and only if your grievances are cheap to address, so it is a bajillionty times easier to convince them to fire and replace a cashier than it is to convince them to not use slave labor, and that means one is a feasible goal for an uncoordinated mob and the other is basically never going to happen without a legislative effort.Kaelik wrote:If Wal Mart boycotts based on the fact that they use goddam slave labor to keep their products cheap doesn't stick, why the fuck would "some guy who works at some walmart, probably not in your town, said something racist on the internet." be an actual issue?
But yeah, social media mob justice is an uncomfortable topic. On the one hand, it's probably a good thing that corporations have to think twice before hiring a CEO who has openly funded discriminatory anti-LGBT legislation. Having your upper management be full of bigoted shitbags almost certainly will seep into the corporate culture as either institutional apathy or outright discrimination. On the other hand, just this week Microsoft had to take down their twitter-based chatbot because a bunch of shitbags decided it would be funny to teach it to say racist bullshit.
It is definitely not the safest of mechanisms by which to dispense justice, but unfortunately still somewhat of an important one.
Maybe her berserk button is being fucking assholes? I mean, I'm going to be charitable and assume she's aware her child is defective, but that doesn't mean people have to be assholes about it by calling the kid names or making shitty comments about how she's defective for no reason except to harass a Downsyndrome kid/her mother.Maxus wrote:6) One of A's berserk buttons is somehow commenting on her child as if she's defective.
Except that if tens or hundreds of millions of people aren't willing to make sacrifices, then if Walmart just doesn't fire the person, then they will still refuse to make sacrifices, and still shop at Walmart, almost like the thing I said, not firing the person, produces the same results as firing them, so just don't do that.DSMatticus wrote:Because the former requires a coordinated sacrifice on the part of tens (or even hundreds) of millions of people and the latter requires clicking the share button on twitter. Wal Mart can be reliably trusted to address your grievances if and only if your grievances are cheap to address, so it is a bajillionty times easier to convince them to fire and replace a cashier than it is to convince them to not use slave labor, and that means one is a feasible goal for an uncoordinated mob and the other is basically never going to happen without a legislative effort.Kaelik wrote:If Wal Mart boycotts based on the fact that they use goddam slave labor to keep their products cheap doesn't stick, why the fuck would "some guy who works at some walmart, probably not in your town, said something racist on the internet." be an actual issue?
The U.S. isn't a democracy and if you think it is, you are a rube.DSMatticus wrote:Kaelik gonna kaelik. Whatcha gonna do?
That's libertarians for you - anarchists who want police protection from their slaves.
-
DSMatticus
- King
- Posts: 5271
- Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2011 5:32 am
No, I mean because replacing a cashier is so cheap, the number of people willing to make sacrifices (even if they don't manage to stick to them for more than a month, because gosh darnit Wal Mart is just so cheap and convenient) before it becomes smarter to just replace the cashier is much much smaller than tens (or hundreds) of millions of people. It's an amount of total economic damage that is easily achievable through the power of viral facebook outrage, so Wal Mart will just cut you off and pay the small bill upfront.
But paying employees reasonable wages is fucking expensive (not paying employees a reasonable wage is basically their entire fucking business model), so the amount of economic damage you'd have to cause is not a thing you are ever going to accomplish without your own pet senators.
But paying employees reasonable wages is fucking expensive (not paying employees a reasonable wage is basically their entire fucking business model), so the amount of economic damage you'd have to cause is not a thing you are ever going to accomplish without your own pet senators.
-
Stahlseele
- King
- Posts: 5975
- Joined: Wed Apr 14, 2010 4:51 pm
- Location: Hamburg, Germany
What a nerd can't all find in his room if he tidies it up a bit . . 20Gigs of assorted RAM . .
Welcome, to IronHell.
Shrapnel wrote:TFwiki wrote:Soon is the name of the region in the time-domain (familiar to all marketing departments, and to the moderators and staff of Fun Publications) which sees release of all BotCon news, club exclusives, and other fan desirables. Soon is when then will become now.
Peculiar properties of spacetime ensure that the perception of the magnitude of Soon is fluid and dependent, not on an individual's time-reference, but on spatial and cultural location. A marketer generally perceives Soon as a finite, known, yet unspeakable time-interval; to a fan, the interval appears greater, and may in fact approach the infinite, becoming Never. Once the interval has passed, however, a certain time-lensing effect seems to occur, and the time-interval becomes vanishingly small. We therefore see the strange result that the same fragment of spacetime may be observed, in quick succession, as Soon, Never, and All Too Quickly.
-
phlapjackage
- Knight-Baron
- Posts: 671
- Joined: Thu May 24, 2012 8:29 am
Another reason we need basic incomeKaelik wrote:I don't think I can really advocate for people starving to death in gutters over having said dumb misogynistic shit online.
Shitbirds like this (sorry, been rewatching The Wire) wouldn't NEED the jobs they should be losing for acting so horribly.
Last edited by phlapjackage on Sun Mar 27, 2016 12:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Koumei: and if I wanted that, I'd take some mescaline and run into the park after watching a documentary about wasps.
PhoneLobster: DM : Mr Monkey doesn't like it. Eldritch : Mr Monkey can do what he is god damn told.
MGuy: The point is to normalize 'my' point of view. How the fuck do you think civil rights occurred? You think things got this way because people sat down and fucking waited for public opinion to change?
PhoneLobster: DM : Mr Monkey doesn't like it. Eldritch : Mr Monkey can do what he is god damn told.
MGuy: The point is to normalize 'my' point of view. How the fuck do you think civil rights occurred? You think things got this way because people sat down and fucking waited for public opinion to change?
It might be a tougher sell if we call it Shitbird Income.phlapjackage wrote:Another reason we need basic incomeKaelik wrote:I don't think I can really advocate for people starving to death in gutters over having said dumb misogynistic shit online.
Shitbirds like this (sorry, been rewatching The Wire) wouldn't NEED the jobs they should be losing for acting so horribly.
When you couch the issue like that's the entirety of what's at stake, sure. But the logical consequence of not firing this guy, or before that, of not telling your employees "we don't tolerate dumb misogynistic shit at all at this company" instead of "ehhhh, we don't care about your personal opinions on women unless you actually sexually assault a woman on company property" is that people will feel free to be cheerfully misogynistic, and management will expect female employees to just deal with it rather than "make a fuss". And then what is actually, practically permissible goes beyond the thereotical line of just not firing anyone over the odd questionable comment.Kaelik wrote:I don't think I can really advocate for people starving to death in gutters over having said dumb misogynistic shit online.
The US military is a prime example on this. They profess to not like sexual assault, but they have an engrained culture of "fuck PC bullshit" and they'd rather their minority of female soldiers just had thick skins. And what happens is that the people who are actively contemptuous of women push it as far as they can, sexual assault is rife, and anyone that reports is usually discouraged from doing so by their superiors. It varies from unit to unit, of course; where the superiors actually care about that stuff and take a stand and make it clear that harassing women won't be tolerated, the culture is healthier.
When you say you don't agree with the guy but don't feel like he deserves to lose his job, what you're actually saying is that you expect all the employees who are members of whatever group he hates to just expect and endure a certain level of background hostility and microaggressions from their coworkers in the interests of keeping the peace, and maybe you'll intervene when somebody inevitably "crosses the line" and actually attacks them or whatever. You're expecting the people who are the biggest targets to just be okay with being bullied, because it's easier for everyone else that way.
I'm white, I'm assuming you are too, this shit is all just abstract to us, but to the people who are the actual targets of this stuff, it's just part of the ambient bullshit they have to deal with each day, a kind of tax on being black or a woman.
Plus, being positive is really not that hard. It doesn't require much in the way of financial outlay or effort. You make it clear from the top down that discrimination isn't going to fly, you put it in the employment manuals and you train people to that effect, and then the people at the bottom just adopt whatever the ambient attitude is. Maybe the people that really would have enjoyed a safe and supportive environment from which they could abuse blacks or gays will grumble about "PC gone mad", but they'll basically do what everyone else is doing and what's expected of them.
Maybe it sucks for the one guy that got fired, but life is a bit less shitty for everyone else he would have interacted with. Including the people who aren't targets and are uncomfortable with his opinions, but would have laughed nervously when he makes rape jokes, because they're pretty sure their supervisor wouldn't find it unusual or unacceptable and wouldn't do anything about it if they told him.
Last edited by SlyJohnny on Sun Mar 27, 2016 8:28 pm, edited 3 times in total.
STOP BEING SUCH AN IDIOTIC FUCKING LIARSlyJohnny wrote:When you couch the issue like that's the entirety of what's at stake, sure. But the logical consequence of not firing this guy, or before that, of not telling your employees "we don't tolerate dumb misogynistic shit at all at this company" instead of "ehhhh, we don't care about your personal opinions on women unless you actually sexually assault a woman on company property" is that people will feel free to be cheerfully misogynistic, and management will expect female employees to just deal with it rather than "make a fuss". And then what is actually, practically permissible goes beyond the thereotical line of just not firing anyone over the odd questionable comment.Kaelik wrote:I don't think I can really advocate for people starving to death in gutters over having said dumb misogynistic shit online.
Interesting, man that sure is interesting. I sure hope you don't think it's wrong to lie like a fucking asshole about what other people say because it's literally all you have done.SlyJohnny wrote:I'm a murderer. I'm a murderer. I'm a murderer. I'm a murderer. I'm a murderer. I'm a murderer. I'm a murderer. I'm a murderer. I'm a murderer. I'm a murderer. I'm a murderer. I'm a murderer. I'm a murderer. I'm a murderer. I'm a murderer. I'm a murderer.
Last edited by Kaelik on Sun Mar 27, 2016 9:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.
The U.S. isn't a democracy and if you think it is, you are a rube.DSMatticus wrote:Kaelik gonna kaelik. Whatcha gonna do?
That's libertarians for you - anarchists who want police protection from their slaves.
I'm not accusing you of saying anything? I'm saying that not firing people like this and therefore not taking a firmly defined and public stance against this sort of thing, inevitably leads to an organisation where the attitudes that permit this are permissible, accepted, and profligate throughout the organisation.
Like if it genuinely seemed like I was deliberately misconstruing what you said just so I could rant at you, I'm sorry and I didn't mean to come off that way. On the other hand, if you're just frothing at the mouth because you're a moron who can't understand cause and effect and therefore can't follow my argument, then I'm afraid I don't have anything for you.
Like if it genuinely seemed like I was deliberately misconstruing what you said just so I could rant at you, I'm sorry and I didn't mean to come off that way. On the other hand, if you're just frothing at the mouth because you're a moron who can't understand cause and effect and therefore can't follow my argument, then I'm afraid I don't have anything for you.
Last edited by SlyJohnny on Sun Mar 27, 2016 10:33 pm, edited 2 times in total.
The key point is that he didn't do this at work, while talking to his coworkers, or in his official capacity, so your entire argument is completely inapplicable to this entire situation.
Last edited by name_here on Sun Mar 27, 2016 10:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.
DSMatticus wrote:It's not just that everything you say is stupid, but that they are Gordian knots of stupid that leave me completely bewildered as to where to even begin. After hearing you speak Alexander the Great would stab you and triumphantly declare the puzzle solved.
SlyJohnny wrote:I'm not accusing you of saying anything?
Yeah, you are and you are pretty much straw-manning as well.SlyJohnny wrote:When you say you don't agree with the guy but don't feel like he deserves to lose his job, what you're actually saying is that you expect all the employees who are members of whatever group he hates to just expect and endure a certain level of background hostility and microaggressions from their coworkers in the interests of keeping the peace, and maybe you'll intervene when somebody inevitably "crosses the line" and actually attacks them or whatever. You're expecting the people who are the biggest targets to just be okay with being bullied, because it's easier for everyone else that way.
Last edited by Leress on Mon Mar 28, 2016 12:31 am, edited 1 time in total.
Koumei wrote:I'm just glad that Jill Stein stayed true to her homeopathic principles by trying to win with .2% of the vote. She just hasn't diluted it enough!
Koumei wrote:I am disappointed in Santorum: he should carry his dead election campaign to term!
Just a heads up... Your post is pregnant... When you miss that many periods it's just a given.
]I want him to tongue-punch my box.
The divine in me says the divine in you should go fuck itself.
[The Great Fence Builder Speaks]Kaelik wrote:You shouldn't murder people.SlyJohnny wrote:I murdered 66 people today.
Quit that shit. I get what you're saying, but use a different example.
[/TGFBS]
Last edited by fbmf on Mon Mar 28, 2016 1:21 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
Omegonthesane
- Prince
- Posts: 3692
- Joined: Sat Sep 26, 2009 3:55 pm
This sort of claim gets trotted out a fair amount when unpicking actual misogyny and actual racism. The phenomenon has not gone unnoticed. At best, I can see people getting used to using that construction when what they mean is "when you say X, a lot of affected people hear Y".Leress wrote:SlyJohnny wrote:I'm not accusing you of saying anything?
Yeah, you are and you are pretty much straw-manning as well.SlyJohnny wrote:When you say you don't agree with the guy but don't feel like he deserves to lose his job, what you're actually saying is that you expect all the employees who are members of whatever group he hates to just expect and endure a certain level of background hostility and microaggressions from their coworkers in the interests of keeping the peace, and maybe you'll intervene when somebody inevitably "crosses the line" and actually attacks them or whatever. You're expecting the people who are the biggest targets to just be okay with being bullied, because it's easier for everyone else that way.
Kaelik wrote:Because powerful men get away with terrible shit, and even the public domain ones get ignored, and then, when the floodgates open, it turns out there was a goddam flood behind it.
Zak S, Zak Smith, Dndwithpornstars, Zak Sabbath, Justin Bieber, shitmuffin
This thing is in this instance with what has been said in this thread Sly was pretty much straw-manning because Sly's objection, as Name_here pointed out, is not applicable to what Kaliek said.Omegonthesane wrote:
This sort of claim gets trotted out a fair amount when unpicking actual misogyny and actual racism. The phenomenon has not gone unnoticed. At best, I can see people getting used to using that construction when what they mean is "when you say X, a lot of affected people hear Y".
Koumei wrote:I'm just glad that Jill Stein stayed true to her homeopathic principles by trying to win with .2% of the vote. She just hasn't diluted it enough!
Koumei wrote:I am disappointed in Santorum: he should carry his dead election campaign to term!
Just a heads up... Your post is pregnant... When you miss that many periods it's just a given.
]I want him to tongue-punch my box.
The divine in me says the divine in you should go fuck itself.
I've got to disagree. The Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory applies. How people act online does not in any way reflect the manner in which they'll act in real life. The internet is a separate universe that plays by it's own rules and logic, much of which is often insane.SlyJohnny wrote:When you couch the issue like that's the entirety of what's at stake, sure. But the logical consequence of not firing this guy, or before that, of not telling your employees "we don't tolerate dumb misogynistic shit at all at this company" instead of "ehhhh, we don't care about your personal opinions on women unless you actually sexually assault a woman on company property" is that people will feel free to be cheerfully misogynistic, and management will expect female employees to just deal with it rather than "make a fuss". And then what is actually, practically permissible goes beyond the thereotical line of just not firing anyone over the odd questionable comment.Kaelik wrote:I don't think I can really advocate for people starving to death in gutters over having said dumb misogynistic shit online.
Anyway, the point is to create an iron curtain between work and home. What you do on your own time is your own business and your employer must be deaf and blind to it, or pretend to be.SlyJohnny wrote:I'm not accusing you of saying anything? I'm saying that not firing people like this and therefore not taking a firmly defined and public stance against this sort of thing, inevitably leads to an organisation where the attitudes that permit this are permissible, accepted, and profligate throughout the organisation.
Like if it genuinely seemed like I was deliberately misconstruing what you said just so I could rant at you, I'm sorry and I didn't mean to come off that way. On the other hand, if you're just frothing at the mouth because you're a moron who can't understand cause and effect and therefore can't follow my argument, then I'm afraid I don't have anything for you.
Because it swings both ways. Firing someone for having gay sex in their own kitchen is unacceptable. Firing someone for having gay sex in the office, on the other hand, is perfectly alright.
And having a management culture where is is acceptable to snoop into employees private lives is substantially worse than any employee culture could possibly be, and that includes the Morlock culture.
Last edited by hyzmarca on Mon Mar 28, 2016 8:47 pm, edited 2 times in total.
