Let me preface this first with my personal bias. I tend to be liberal on many social issues. I sympathize with the struggles of minorities and do believe that the playing field is still slanted (although not nearly as much as it used to be) in favor of white hetero males in this country. I'm 43 and have worked in a steel foundry for 22yrs. Steel foundries aren't exactly the bastion of PC culture, so we accept a lot of non-PC behavior that wouldn't be allowed in most workplaces. Don't get me wrong- the same rules certainly apply to us, it's just that it's extremely rare for anyone to report.
So- over the years I've really noticed a rise in this idea that regardless of intent, if someone is offended, the "offender" is automatically in the wrong and must alter their speech/behavior to acomidate the offended party. To be fair, I encounter this most often reading on the Internet- but I have also encountered it more often in real life over the past few years.
It seems to me this is coming for the most part from the younger generation (millenials).
So- a few thoughts/questions that I'd like to get feedback on:
-Where does this idea come from?
-If the offending party is not attempting to be offensive, do they have a responsibility to change their behavior?
-Where is the line drawn? Obviously there's blatant offensive speech (nigger and the like), then ignorance/culture change (older folks referring to black folks as "colored"), but there's also purely innocent/socially acceptable by most (referring to black folks as "black).
-I this trend I'm seeing merely perception? Is it really just a vocal minority?
-What effect does it have on society overall, if any?
Your thoughts?
Should be a barrel of fucking laughs to listen to them all.
I am offended by the almost 100 million not working and I am paying for it, as are you
Intelligence is usually a pre-req for climbing up the working ladder.
Intelligence is usually a pre-req for climbing up the working ladder.
Counterpoint: Kardashian, Kim.
Well, I mean, I guess it could help...
I'm still offended
I also do not agree with you about the scale being tilted in in the favor of a white man.
There are certain instances of racial profiling but for the most part black people have more rights then i do as a white male.
They also have it alot easier as well,being able to play the race card where ever and when ever they like,and most do when something doesn't go there way.
I know because i've heard and seen it on many occasions!!
It's 2016 people,and it's time to put the past where it belongs,in the past.
Are you serious? You think it's easier being black? You think it's not unusual that lots of businesses and colleges the employment numbers are insanely skewed towards white people?
Also, you proved the EXACT opposite of the point you wanted to make.
"They can use the race card". So what about everyone else?
Listen, there are assholes all over the place. Al Sharpton, for example, is a fuck face. My friend was the guy framed by Tawana Brawley, the scum of the earth. People use shitty arguments of dickheads playing the race card when it has no place on that situation, as examples of black people using the race card all the time or using race to get the upper hand.
If you don't think there's such a thing as where privilege, holy shit.
There's something seriously wrong when an academic affairs office of 15 people at a college which is half racial minorities is 100% white. How is that possible? They were always the best?
Racism isn't this overt thing of calling someone a tar baby or nigger, though that certainly counts. The worst kind is people not being aware of the simple things like hiring someone that "just fits our culture more" when the other person was a better candidate. I've seen this happen. It's almost never been malicious or purposeful. It's a subconscious, well, this person looks like me and acts like me, so they're a better person to work with. It's not even always a race thing.
Shit. People need to be a little more introspective.
Link - ( New Window )
Quote:
In comment 12803159 Cam in MO said:
Quote:
In comment 12803149 Deej said:
Quote:
saying black coffee. Is this really an issue? Or a one off criticism?
It's just an example.
I did have someone (white) get offended when I said, "black paint", though. We were painting a fence at the barn with my son, lesson kids, and some barn parents. It pissed me off, but since they are customers I relented and apologized and changed my wording to, "Cosmo (my son), please stop goofing off and paint like everyone else."
Is it though? Is there a widespread movement to change the name of black coffee? Any movement? Or is it either an apocryphal example OR a one-off of one idiot being an idiot?
This is just my opinion, but a lot of the current anti-PC sentiment seems to be driven by white victimhood. It's a recent development. You can see it in chillinman1183's post. I dont want to get political, but it's in a segment of our politics right now. It's especially prominent among men. Sommers & Norton's study showed that whites now view reverse-racism (ie. racism against whites) as a bigger societal problem than traditional racism (vs. non-whites). IMO the current backlash against "PC" (or tolerance in speech -- dont think there is a good term for it) comes from the same place. Yes, everyone can agree that there there are stupid examples of people being offended. Someone being offended by "black paint" is an idiot. But I honestly dont think that such outlier examples are driving the current national conversation. Sommers - ( New Window )
I am offended cause my white privilege allows me to get up at 4 am and earlier everyday to make a living to pay for all the Free shit of the other offended types... everyone should STFU and take care of themselves
Go post with Filmy on your redneck site, eh?
Quote:
What's a "white Hispanic"?
srsly?
Clear as mud.
Link - ( New Window )
What should get you is that your employer is an idiot if they actually told you that, and that's the whole story.
Quote:
when I am told by my employer that I can't say to a co worker you look nice today or tell someone they have a nice haircut or that an outfit is pretty because that can be deemed as harassment. When did non sexual comments of a complementary nature become threatening and offensive? I can't say anything nice at work to someone in fear of losing my job? IMHO things like that have gone over the top
What should get you is that your employer is an idiot if they actually told you that, and that's the whole story.
Haven't you ever been in sexual harassment training?
Quote:
In comment 12803548 Larry in Pencilvania said:
Quote:
when I am told by my employer that I can't say to a co worker you look nice today or tell someone they have a nice haircut or that an outfit is pretty because that can be deemed as harassment. When did non sexual comments of a complementary nature become threatening and offensive? I can't say anything nice at work to someone in fear of losing my job? IMHO things like that have gone over the top
What should get you is that your employer is an idiot if they actually told you that, and that's the whole story.
Haven't you ever been in sexual harassment training?
Yes. I also have a B.S. in labor relations and as an attorney have represented several Fortune 500 & 1000 companies in employment matters.
There isnt a plaintiff's lawyer in the country who is taking a sex harassment case based on the comment "I like your haircut".
And there in lies the problem. Whether true or perceived, business, large and small will err on the side of caution.
Your hair looks good 1 month, Nice dress you have another, that new perfume?, smells nice the 3rd. Person gets fired the the next for what ever and it's a possible hostile work environment suit.
It's what is drilled into you.
Now I have been retired 5 yrs now and I don't think it's gotten any better. And I retired from the FD for Christ sake.
I can't imagine what is like in the real world.
I'm just talking about fellow workers, never mind the general public.
I've seen a guy fired on his first shift because he said something off handed to a secretary.
Deservedly so.
agree with you
but stop picking on Muslims
that offends me
Quote:
In comment 12803396 Deej said:
Quote:
In comment 12803159 Cam in MO said:
Quote:
In comment 12803149 Deej said:
Quote:
saying black coffee. Is this really an issue? Or a one off criticism?
It's just an example.
I did have someone (white) get offended when I said, "black paint", though. We were painting a fence at the barn with my son, lesson kids, and some barn parents. It pissed me off, but since they are customers I relented and apologized and changed my wording to, "Cosmo (my son), please stop goofing off and paint like everyone else."
Is it though? Is there a widespread movement to change the name of black coffee? Any movement? Or is it either an apocryphal example OR a one-off of one idiot being an idiot?
This is just my opinion, but a lot of the current anti-PC sentiment seems to be driven by white victimhood. It's a recent development. You can see it in chillinman1183's post. I dont want to get political, but it's in a segment of our politics right now. It's especially prominent among men. Sommers & Norton's study showed that whites now view reverse-racism (ie. racism against whites) as a bigger societal problem than traditional racism (vs. non-whites). IMO the current backlash against "PC" (or tolerance in speech -- dont think there is a good term for it) comes from the same place. Yes, everyone can agree that there there are stupid examples of people being offended. Someone being offended by "black paint" is an idiot. But I honestly dont think that such outlier examples are driving the current national conversation. Sommers - ( New Window )
I am offended cause my white privilege allows me to get up at 4 am and earlier everyday to make a living to pay for all the Free shit of the other offended types... everyone should STFU and take care of themselves
I grew up Roman Catholic and your hating everyone and not wanting to help the less fortunate, is anti-Christ so you are the devil. Which party do you associate with which should therefore be considered demonic? Just want to keep clear. Oh, and nobody wants to work hard and pay taxes so "some" can stay home and collect checks because they don't want to work. Thankfully, unlike your beliefs, they are few and far between.
Go post with Filmy on your redneck site, eh?
Randy never changes, yet He just offended me
I don't think it is, but we were told that it was and that type of comment should not be made.
Quote:
In comment 12803554 Deej said:
Quote:
In comment 12803548 Larry in Pencilvania said:
Quote:
when I am told by my employer that I can't say to a co worker you look nice today or tell someone they have a nice haircut or that an outfit is pretty because that can be deemed as harassment. When did non sexual comments of a complementary nature become threatening and offensive? I can't say anything nice at work to someone in fear of losing my job? IMHO things like that have gone over the top
What should get you is that your employer is an idiot if they actually told you that, and that's the whole story.
Haven't you ever been in sexual harassment training?
Yes. I also have a B.S. in labor relations and as an attorney have represented several Fortune 500 & 1000 companies in employment matters.
There isnt a plaintiff's lawyer in the country who is taking a sex harassment case based on the comment "I like your haircut".
It's not a case for harassment, but in those silly classes you are told not to make those types of comments. Specifically because you don't know who will think it's harassment.
I once dated a Brazilian reporter who is very very "white."
If you didn't know what Guillermo del Toro looked like, and found a random photo of him in a magazine, you'd never say "Oh, that guy's Mexican." Sofia Vergara, from Colombia, similar - you wouldn't know she's Latina until she talks.
Eva Longoria, Alfonso Cuaron maybe you would. Alejandro Gonzales Inarritu, probably.
But there are lots of people from Hispanic countries and cultures who are as "white" as it gets, by complexion and hair color.
You can give training to help ward off employment claims. You can even cast a wider net in the hopes of staving off weak harassment claims. But if you train someone to avoid saying "nice haircut" you might as well not train them at all, because you're effectively depriving them the tools of normal human interaction.
I've been around a while and have never seen a case where a sexual harassment case was successful and I've observed some very salty environments.
in anatomy it has to do with similar skull structure.
I've been around a while and have never seen a case where a sexual harassment case was successful and I've observed some very salty environments.
that is why I never mention somebodies hair unless it's ugly.
people love playing the victim for some reason, the more offended they are, the easier it is to do.
I've been around a while and have never seen a case where a sexual harassment case was successful and I've observed some very salty environments.
Look, I think it's ridiculous, but I managed a department of people and you would not believe the idiotic complains that people come forward with. There was one woman who was convinced that a male employee was stalking her and looking at her 'weird'. Well that male employee was openly gay. She was psychotic. But what does HR do? Make him get sexual harassment training. To avoid the crazy woman from suing. Sure, she doesn't have a case. But the whole point of this type of CYA stuff is to eliminate even the possibility of litigation.
Quote:
saying black coffee. Is this really an issue? Or a one off criticism?
It's just an example.
I did have someone (white) get offended when I said, "black paint", though. We were painting a fence at the barn with my son, lesson kids, and some barn parents. It pissed me off, but since they are customers I relented and apologized and changed my wording to, "Cosmo (my son), please stop goofing off and paint like everyone else."
See, that's bullshit. You should be able to call your son whatever you want.
Hell, I remember my dad calling me a "dumb chink" like it was nothing.
Quote:
Assume you're not saying nice haircut while drooling and staring at her breasts daily.
I've been around a while and have never seen a case where a sexual harassment case was successful and I've observed some very salty environments.
Look, I think it's ridiculous, but I managed a department of people and you would not believe the idiotic complains that people come forward with. There was one woman who was convinced that a male employee was stalking her and looking at her 'weird'. Well that male employee was openly gay. She was psychotic. But what does HR do? Make him get sexual harassment training. To avoid the crazy woman from suing. Sure, she doesn't have a case. But the whole point of this type of CYA stuff is to eliminate even the possibility of litigation.
Your HR department is incompetent and wasted time and resources on bullshit. When I used to work in a corporate environment, I found HR to be useless altogether.
Quote:
In comment 12803684 AP in Halfmoon said:
Quote:
Assume you're not saying nice haircut while drooling and staring at her breasts daily.
I've been around a while and have never seen a case where a sexual harassment case was successful and I've observed some very salty environments.
Look, I think it's ridiculous, but I managed a department of people and you would not believe the idiotic complains that people come forward with. There was one woman who was convinced that a male employee was stalking her and looking at her 'weird'. Well that male employee was openly gay. She was psychotic. But what does HR do? Make him get sexual harassment training. To avoid the crazy woman from suing. Sure, she doesn't have a case. But the whole point of this type of CYA stuff is to eliminate even the possibility of litigation.
Your HR department is incompetent and wasted time and resources on bullshit. When I used to work in a corporate environment, I found HR to be useless altogether.
And yet if incompetence and wasting time and resources on bullshit staves off a lawsuit, is that the fault of the HR department?
The issue isn't whether or not it gets any traction. The issue is simply spending the time and money answering a frivolous lawsuit.
But yes, for the most part it is fucking dumb, and actually very silly of HR.
The way to stave off idiotic stuff like this is to do what our HR does- call their bluff. More often than not silly shit like this is about something else anyway. I've been in meetings on more than one occasion after an investigation of some silly harassment claim where our HR manager explains why it is silly and then says, "we aren't going to do anything. You're free to take it to EEOC (or wherever) and see what they have to say.
Never seen it go anywhere after that.
When was the last time you were on a college campus?
You can avoid the intellectual exercise of crafting a cogent argument against someone's beliefs by merely claiming offense. It's the lazy way out, but has been increasingly used as time moves on. It's sort of PC on steroids.
Well, to be fair- it's usually no cost to get an attourney. They take the cases they think will win and then get a %of the winnings.
Good luck finding one that will take a silly claim further than discoverey without getting a big retainer up front, tho.
There definitely are those that base their careers on big companies settling early, tho.
Quote:
experienced anyone getting offended by a truly benign comment in the real world. It doesn't exist in my world outside of stories on the internet.
When was the last time you were on a college campus?
You're seriously equating college campuses with the real world?
Quote:
experienced anyone getting offended by a truly benign comment in the real world. It doesn't exist in my world outside of stories on the internet.
When was the last time you were on a college campus?
Friday, February 5th, 2016.
Link - ( New Window )