Total Posts:25|Showing Posts:1-25
Jump to topic:

An interesting experiment on discrimination

TUF
Posts: 21,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2013 2:54:08 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
So at work a few weeks ago, I was in the break room or the "suite" as we call it here, with Dan, another employee, and Chris our supervisor.

Dan was telling us how he was feeling sick and hungry. He said he wanted to go to Dennys after work.

Chris replied "you know Mike the supervisor for swings? His partner owns the Dennys chain throughout the state. Maybe you should ask mike if you can get a discount."

Dan said " maybe. But the thought of Mike's partner just makes me feel more sick."

I was kind of taken aback by this incredibly discriminatory statement, but before I could say anything he said: "Haha, that was mean of me." And then quickly left the suite to patrol.

Chris was laughing about it too. But I wonder if he had made a comment about racism or sexism in the sane type of joke which is strictly against the rules for our job. Do you think you think that the supervisor would have acted appropriately and talked.to him about it? Keep in mind my supervisor is strongly against gay rights too.

where is the between being against something, and choosing to allow discrimination because of it? What is the difference between him saying this and saying the blacks or woman made him sick at the thought? Just wondering.
"I've got to go and grab a shirt" ~ Airmax1227
Fractals
Posts: 38
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2013 3:12:53 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/19/2013 2:54:08 AM, TUF wrote:
What is the difference between him saying this and saying the blacks or woman made him sick at the thought? Just wondering.

There isn't, we just use different labels to categorise who is being targeted i.e. racist, sexist, homophobic. It's also not discrimination - there is no action being taken here, just one douche talking to another. It makes him likely homophobic, yes, but discrimination is an act towards another, not a voicing of opinion.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2013 3:20:30 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
I don't understand. Where is the discrimination? Is it because he won't eat at Denny's?

His comment, while unprofessional and bigoted, is really no different than "wow, thinking of some 400-lb woman having sex made me lose my appetite".

The only real difference is that you disagree with his view, and are likely correct in your assumption it is because of the gay factor. What if the partner was actually a hidious looking person, and thinking of him actually made him sick? That would be more acceptable, but it's really in the same vein, isn't it?
My work here is, finally, done.
Irresistable
Posts: 224
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2013 3:35:00 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
This is the same with when the DDO community praises people like Imabench and MassiveDump whilst shunning people like Qopel and Badger.
TUF
Posts: 21,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2013 6:23:06 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
We'll I expected some of these answers.
So I will clarify, Dan doesn't even know Mike's partner. His reaction was at the.concept of someone having a partner. Being homophobic justifies reacting to seeing or being described to about specific homophobic actions. Not outright claiming that the concept of having a.partner is disgusting.

either way the thread was more about the supervisor not reacting to the situation appropriately. If there is no difference in this judgement between race and sexual discrimination, doesn't this say a little something about certain people being biased by their beliefs to look past certain things so Long as it suits them in their ignorance??
"I've got to go and grab a shirt" ~ Airmax1227
slo1
Posts: 4,312
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2013 10:09:06 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/19/2013 6:23:06 AM, TUF wrote:
We'll I expected some of these answers.
So I will clarify, Dan doesn't even know Mike's partner. His reaction was at the.concept of someone having a partner. Being homophobic justifies reacting to seeing or being described to about specific homophobic actions. Not outright claiming that the concept of having a.partner is disgusting.

either way the thread was more about the supervisor not reacting to the situation appropriately. If there is no difference in this judgement between race and sexual discrimination, doesn't this say a little something about certain people being biased by their beliefs to look past certain things so Long as it suits them in their ignorance??

Is it possible he looked past it because the individual admitted it as being mean spirited?

It sounds like there maybe some other discussions you have had with your manager that leads you to believe he has discriminatory views of homosexuals.

As far as approaching him, you need to judge the over all situation on how hard you hit. You can do it in a soft way to let him know you were a little miffed about the statement.

If you focus solely on how you felt and that you wished he would have said something to the guy, he will get the picture and hopefully not cause you trouble down the road. The key again is to state your intent so he does not read more into it. "My intent is to let you know how __________ that discussion made me feel, so you know a bit more about what is important to me." But be open to hear his side. Maybe he is just uncomfortable with confronting other? (generally a bad trait for a manager)

Fundamentally you are right though. If a person has a discriminatory view at a group of people it will come out in conscious and unconscious ways. Best you can do is call him on it and try to reduce the behaviors.
tulle
Posts: 4,445
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2013 10:24:06 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
He probably just didn't want to deal with it or fill out paperwork. When I worked at a bank, I sent a message to my branch manager to let him know a client had just threatened to "blow up" a nearby branch, and his response was "lol". I went around him and told another supervisor lol some people just laugh things off because they don't want to put in any extra work.

If a gay person had been present, there likely would have been a different response, in the same way had he made a racist or sexist remark in front of two white males, nothing would have been done either.
yang.
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2013 11:07:03 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/19/2013 2:54:08 AM, TUF wrote:
So at work a few weeks ago, I was in the break room or the "suite" as we call it here, with Dan, another employee, and Chris our supervisor.

Dan was telling us how he was feeling sick and hungry. He said he wanted to go to Dennys after work.

Chris replied "you know Mike the supervisor for swings? His partner owns the Dennys chain throughout the state. Maybe you should ask mike if you can get a discount."

Dan said " maybe. But the thought of Mike's partner just makes me feel more sick."

I was kind of taken aback by this incredibly discriminatory statement, but before I could say anything he said: "Haha, that was mean of me." And then quickly left the suite to patrol.

Chris was laughing about it too. But I wonder if he had made a comment about racism or sexism in the sane type of joke which is strictly against the rules for our job. Do you think you think that the supervisor would have acted appropriately and talked.to him about it? Keep in mind my supervisor is strongly against gay rights too.

where is the between being against something, and choosing to allow discrimination because of it? What is the difference between him saying this and saying the blacks or woman made him sick at the thought? Just wondering.

I know you are heavily implying it, but there is nothing overtly racist or discriminatory in anything you wrote above. We don't know Mike's partner's race, gender, etc...all we know is that just "the thought of Mike's partner just makes [Dan] feel more sick." Maybe Mike's partner likes to go to Tijuana to view donkey sex. That would also make me "feel more sick" if I had to go into a Denny's restaurant owned by him.

It's possible you're reading too much into this.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
Maikuru
Posts: 9,112
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2013 12:16:00 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/19/2013 10:24:06 AM, tulle wrote:
He probably just didn't want to deal with it or fill out paperwork. When I worked at a bank, I sent a message to my branch manager to let him know a client had just threatened to "blow up" a nearby branch, and his response was "lol". I went around him and told another supervisor lol some people just laugh things off because they don't want to put in any extra work.

If a gay person had been present, there likely would have been a different response, in the same way had he made a racist or sexist remark in front of two white males, nothing would have been done either.

That's exactly what I was thinking: he didn't want to deal with it. Like you said, if there was a crowd, his response would likely have been different. In a lounge with a couple guys...laugh it off and you don't have to report anything.

I'm not saying that is correct or moral, I'm just saying what he may have been doing.
"You assume I wouldn't want to burn this whole place to the ground."
- lamerde

https://i.imgflip.com...
Jack212
Posts: 572
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2013 4:33:47 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/19/2013 2:54:08 AM, TUF wrote:
[abbreviated]

Why would the supervisor do anything? Dude hasn't done anything illegal or against company policy. As long as he's not talking to a customer or insulting a present employee, he can say whatever he likes - including things that are racist, sexist, homophobic or otherwise offensive. If you don't like it then that's your problem, but don't expect the other guy to limit freedom of speech.
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2013 4:40:22 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/19/2013 3:35:00 AM, Irresistable wrote:
This is the same with when the DDO community praises people like Imabench and MassiveDump whilst shunning people like Qopel and Badger.

You are definitely a multiaccount of someone. Who are you?
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2013 4:55:06 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
All of those "ALL discrimination is automatically bad" types make me sick. There are fundamental differences between being prejudiced against races, religions, sexual orientations, etc... Do these differences justify the discrimination? Maybe, maybe not- that's irrelevant. But categorically stating that all prejudices against any type of group is bad is moronic.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
medic0506
Posts: 13,450
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2013 5:30:12 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/19/2013 2:54:08 AM, TUF wrote:
So at work a few weeks ago, I was in the break room or the "suite" as we call it here, with Dan, another employee, and Chris our supervisor.

Dan was telling us how he was feeling sick and hungry. He said he wanted to go to Dennys after work.

Chris replied "you know Mike the supervisor for swings? His partner owns the Dennys chain throughout the state. Maybe you should ask mike if you can get a discount."

Dan said " maybe. But the thought of Mike's partner just makes me feel more sick."

I was kind of taken aback by this incredibly discriminatory statement, but before I could say anything he said: "Haha, that was mean of me." And then quickly left the suite to patrol.

Chris was laughing about it too. But I wonder if he had made a comment about racism or sexism in the sane type of joke which is strictly against the rules for our job. Do you think you think that the supervisor would have acted appropriately and talked.to him about it? Keep in mind my supervisor is strongly against gay rights too.

where is the between being against something, and choosing to allow discrimination because of it? What is the difference between him saying this and saying the blacks or woman made him sick at the thought? Just wondering.

Is Chris the supervisor?? If so, what do you expect should be done?? Sometimes it's advantageous for a lower level manager to let people be themselves, especially when there is no harm being done by simply talking. It can give you a heads up for potential problem areas in the future. Say a week from now there is a complaint against Dan for harassing a gay guy, which Dan denies, and there were no other witnesses. When Chris goes to deal with the situation, he already knows that Dan has made comments in the past about not liking homosexuals. He's going to be skeptical of Dan's claim from the get go. That's my professional, workplace opinion.

My personal opinion is...So what?? Three grown men are talking in the break room and one says he doesn't like homosexuals...big deal. Is his a job skill that requires a positive view of homosexuality?? I seriously doubt it, so why make it a part of the job?? This is exactly why I would never hire someone that I know is openly gay, you're just asking for trouble. Stop the foolishness.
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2013 5:47:49 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/19/2013 5:30:12 PM, medic0506 wrote:
At 8/19/2013 2:54:08 AM, TUF wrote:
So at work a few weeks ago, I was in the break room or the "suite" as we call it here, with Dan, another employee, and Chris our supervisor.

Dan was telling us how he was feeling sick and hungry. He said he wanted to go to Dennys after work.

Chris replied "you know Mike the supervisor for swings? His partner owns the Dennys chain throughout the state. Maybe you should ask mike if you can get a discount."

Dan said " maybe. But the thought of Mike's partner just makes me feel more sick."

I was kind of taken aback by this incredibly discriminatory statement, but before I could say anything he said: "Haha, that was mean of me." And then quickly left the suite to patrol.

Chris was laughing about it too. But I wonder if he had made a comment about racism or sexism in the sane type of joke which is strictly against the rules for our job. Do you think you think that the supervisor would have acted appropriately and talked.to him about it? Keep in mind my supervisor is strongly against gay rights too.

where is the between being against something, and choosing to allow discrimination because of it? What is the difference between him saying this and saying the blacks or woman made him sick at the thought? Just wondering.

Is Chris the supervisor?? If so, what do you expect should be done?? Sometimes it's advantageous for a lower level manager to let people be themselves, especially when there is no harm being done by simply talking. It can give you a heads up for potential problem areas in the future. Say a week from now there is a complaint against Dan for harassing a gay guy, which Dan denies, and there were no other witnesses. When Chris goes to deal with the situation, he already knows that Dan has made comments in the past about not liking homosexuals. He's going to be skeptical of Dan's claim from the get go. That's my professional, workplace opinion.

My personal opinion is...So what?? Three grown men are talking in the break room and one says he doesn't like homosexuals...big deal. Is his a job skill that requires a positive view of homosexuality?? I seriously doubt it, so why make it a part of the job?? This is exactly why I would never hire someone that I know is openly gay, you're just asking for trouble. Stop the foolishness.

lol. Either I'm dense or just from a different part of the world than y'all. When you say "Mike's partner" you don't mean Mike's BUSINESS partner, don't you?

=)
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
medic0506
Posts: 13,450
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2013 6:31:44 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/19/2013 5:47:49 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 8/19/2013 5:30:12 PM, medic0506 wrote:
At 8/19/2013 2:54:08 AM, TUF wrote:
So at work a few weeks ago, I was in the break room or the "suite" as we call it here, with Dan, another employee, and Chris our supervisor.

Dan was telling us how he was feeling sick and hungry. He said he wanted to go to Dennys after work.

Chris replied "you know Mike the supervisor for swings? His partner owns the Dennys chain throughout the state. Maybe you should ask mike if you can get a discount."

Dan said " maybe. But the thought of Mike's partner just makes me feel more sick."

I was kind of taken aback by this incredibly discriminatory statement, but before I could say anything he said: "Haha, that was mean of me." And then quickly left the suite to patrol.

Chris was laughing about it too. But I wonder if he had made a comment about racism or sexism in the sane type of joke which is strictly against the rules for our job. Do you think you think that the supervisor would have acted appropriately and talked.to him about it? Keep in mind my supervisor is strongly against gay rights too.

where is the between being against something, and choosing to allow discrimination because of it? What is the difference between him saying this and saying the blacks or woman made him sick at the thought? Just wondering.

Is Chris the supervisor?? If so, what do you expect should be done?? Sometimes it's advantageous for a lower level manager to let people be themselves, especially when there is no harm being done by simply talking. It can give you a heads up for potential problem areas in the future. Say a week from now there is a complaint against Dan for harassing a gay guy, which Dan denies, and there were no other witnesses. When Chris goes to deal with the situation, he already knows that Dan has made comments in the past about not liking homosexuals. He's going to be skeptical of Dan's claim from the get go. That's my professional, workplace opinion.

My personal opinion is...So what?? Three grown men are talking in the break room and one says he doesn't like homosexuals...big deal. Is his a job skill that requires a positive view of homosexuality?? I seriously doubt it, so why make it a part of the job?? This is exactly why I would never hire someone that I know is openly gay, you're just asking for trouble. Stop the foolishness.

lol. Either I'm dense or just from a different part of the world than y'all. When you say "Mike's partner" you don't mean Mike's BUSINESS partner, don't you?

=)

Umm...I don't know. Given that TUF was talking about discrimination I assumed he was meaning his significant other.
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2013 6:32:47 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/19/2013 6:31:44 PM, medic0506 wrote:
At 8/19/2013 5:47:49 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 8/19/2013 5:30:12 PM, medic0506 wrote:
At 8/19/2013 2:54:08 AM, TUF wrote:
So at work a few weeks ago, I was in the break room or the "suite" as we call it here, with Dan, another employee, and Chris our supervisor.

Dan was telling us how he was feeling sick and hungry. He said he wanted to go to Dennys after work.

Chris replied "you know Mike the supervisor for swings? His partner owns the Dennys chain throughout the state. Maybe you should ask mike if you can get a discount."

Dan said " maybe. But the thought of Mike's partner just makes me feel more sick."

I was kind of taken aback by this incredibly discriminatory statement, but before I could say anything he said: "Haha, that was mean of me." And then quickly left the suite to patrol.

Chris was laughing about it too. But I wonder if he had made a comment about racism or sexism in the sane type of joke which is strictly against the rules for our job. Do you think you think that the supervisor would have acted appropriately and talked.to him about it? Keep in mind my supervisor is strongly against gay rights too.

where is the between being against something, and choosing to allow discrimination because of it? What is the difference between him saying this and saying the blacks or woman made him sick at the thought? Just wondering.

Is Chris the supervisor?? If so, what do you expect should be done?? Sometimes it's advantageous for a lower level manager to let people be themselves, especially when there is no harm being done by simply talking. It can give you a heads up for potential problem areas in the future. Say a week from now there is a complaint against Dan for harassing a gay guy, which Dan denies, and there were no other witnesses. When Chris goes to deal with the situation, he already knows that Dan has made comments in the past about not liking homosexuals. He's going to be skeptical of Dan's claim from the get go. That's my professional, workplace opinion.

My personal opinion is...So what?? Three grown men are talking in the break room and one says he doesn't like homosexuals...big deal. Is his a job skill that requires a positive view of homosexuality?? I seriously doubt it, so why make it a part of the job?? This is exactly why I would never hire someone that I know is openly gay, you're just asking for trouble. Stop the foolishness.

lol. Either I'm dense or just from a different part of the world than y'all. When you say "Mike's partner" you don't mean Mike's BUSINESS partner, don't you?

=)

Umm...I don't know. Given that TUF was talking about discrimination I assumed he was meaning his significant other.

Yeah, that was aimed at TUF, lol. I just realized it when reading your comment, though.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
Mrs.lynch
Posts: 54
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/20/2013 4:25:42 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Thanks for the laugh!

The comment was okay because there is nothing wrong with being disgusted at something that is OBVIOUSLY disgusting, and wrong.
And it is immoral also. so yeah... He didn't really discriminate anything. Also the supervisor doesn't have to do anything. Commenting on being disturbed by something disturbing, is personal taste, not discrimination. If you scoff at womans rights, or race, that just shows you are disturbed by those things, the same I am disturbed by the thought of mcdonalds.
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/20/2013 9:07:52 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/20/2013 4:25:42 AM, Mrs.lynch wrote:
Thanks for the laugh!

The comment was okay because there is nothing wrong with being disgusted at something that is OBVIOUSLY disgusting, and wrong.
And it is immoral also. so yeah... He didn't really discriminate anything.

<facepalm>

Also the supervisor doesn't have to do anything. Commenting on being disturbed by something disturbing, is personal taste, not discrimination. If you scoff at womans rights, or race, that just shows you are disturbed by those things, the same I am disturbed by the thought of mcdonalds.

Is advocating woman's rights "OBVIOUSLY disgusting, and wrong?"
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/20/2013 9:19:00 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/19/2013 6:23:06 AM, TUF wrote:
We'll I expected some of these answers.
So I will clarify, Dan doesn't even know Mike's partner. His reaction was at the.concept of someone having a partner. Being homophobic justifies reacting to seeing or being described to about specific homophobic actions. Not outright claiming that the concept of having a.partner is disgusting.

My point is this:
What is the difference in the following scenarios that make a hypothetical lose their appetite thinking about it:
1. Two dudes having sex
2. A pedophile doing his thing
3. A 80 year old woman and a 20 year old man
4. An interracial couple
5. A really nasty person (like unhygienic and fat)
6. A really ugly person
7. A relative (like your parents or your daughter)

Why are some of these feelings that are evoked when these images are thought of allowed to be spoken, but others are taboo?

either way the thread was more about the supervisor not reacting to the situation appropriately. If there is no difference in this judgement between race and sexual discrimination, doesn't this say a little something about certain people being biased by their beliefs to look past certain things so Long as it suits them in their ignorance??

You did say that he "apologized", so what was the supervisor (or his) going to do? Are you going to fire someone for simply stating a bigoted opinion on break? If he had offended someone, all that would have been done (I assume) is have him apologize, which he did.

What would you like for the supervisor to have done? (besides not saying stupid sh!t)
My work here is, finally, done.
TUF
Posts: 21,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/21/2013 11:30:43 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/20/2013 9:19:00 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 8/19/2013 6:23:06 AM, TUF wrote:
We'll I expected some of these answers.
So I will clarify, Dan doesn't even know Mike's partner. His reaction was at the.concept of someone having a partner. Being homophobic justifies reacting to seeing or being described to about specific homophobic actions. Not outright claiming that the concept of having a.partner is disgusting.

My point is this:
appetite thinking about it:
1. Two dudes having sex

This isn't a logical thought process upon considering someone's love interest. Someone Jumping to this conclusion is the problem.

2. A pedophile doing his thing

Does your train of morality support forced rape on those who don't know any better, rather than simply two individuals loving each other? I think you know the answer.

7. A relative (like your parents or your daughter)
3. A 80 year old woman and a 20 year old man

I feel like some people are less disgusted by this than the prospect of gays, simply because of the genitalia involved. Let me ask you; Why would someone support the right of marriage between an 80 year old woman and a 20 year old man, but not the rights of marriage between two equivalent aged individuals? Where is this imaginary moral line drawn? (I know this is off topic, but it is applicable to my point, based on your answer).

4. An interracial couple

There is just as much reason to be disgusted by this, as gay rights; IE none, except contrived ignorance.

5. A really nasty person (like unhygienic and fat)
6. A really ugly person

He doesn't even the man in question. He knows nothing about him other than that he owns a denny's chain, and has a partner.

None of these have Nothing to do with acting repulsed simply at the concept of finding out someone is gay.

Why are some of these feelings that are evoked when these images are thought of allowed to be spoken, but others are taboo?

People make them up, in my opinion as a result of bias against there political or religious beliefs.

either way the thread was more about the supervisor not reacting to the situation appropriately. If there is no difference in this judgement between race and sexual discrimination, doesn't this say a little something about certain people being biased by their beliefs to look past certain things so Long as it suits them in their ignorance??

You did say that he "apologized", so what was the supervisor (or his) going to do? Are you going to fire someone for simply stating a bigoted opinion on break? If he had offended someone, all that would have been done (I assume) is have him apologize, which he did.

It wasn't an apology, is was a dismissal that grants him the right to be an ignorant douche. If were to say "I fvcking hate black people" and walk off saying "Haha, I'm sorry, that was mean." Does that make my comment less hurtful, discriminatory, or ignorant? It wasn't a sincere apology, because I was laughing about the fact that I had just spewed hate on an entire gender of people.

What would you like for the supervisor to have done? (besides not saying stupid sh!t)

Maybe talking to him, and letting him know that the comment was inappropriate. I don't care enough for him to get fired over it, because I know there are millions of people just like him out in the world. I mainly just wonder if he would have reacted differently towards racism, or sexism. Do you think discrimination against gays is taken a little less lightly given the political disputes? I am trying to make a point that discrimination is discrimination, regardless of your own beliefs.
"I've got to go and grab a shirt" ~ Airmax1227
TUF
Posts: 21,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/21/2013 11:43:36 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/19/2013 5:30:12 PM, medic0506 wrote:
Is Chris the supervisor??

Yes

If so, what do you expect should be done??

I don't expect anything to be done, I just openly wonder and am asking you all if you think he would have done anything if the comment was made about race, or gender. The point I am establishing is, do we treat discrimination against gays lightly as a bias of our own political or religious beliefs?

Sometimes it's advantageous for a lower level manager to let people be themselves, especially when there is no harm being done by simply talking. It can give you a heads up for potential problem areas in the future. Say a week from now there is a complaint against Dan for harassing a gay guy, which Dan denies, and there were no other witnesses. When Chris goes to deal with the situation, he already knows that Dan has made comments in the past about not liking homosexuals. He's going to be skeptical of Dan's claim from the get go. That's my professional, workplace opinion.

Maybe it is this way. I am skeptical, mainly due to the fact that he is openly like-minded, though not as douchey with it.

My personal opinion is...So what?? Three grown men are talking in the break room and one says he doesn't like homosexuals...big deal. Is his a job skill that requires a positive view of homosexuality?? I seriously doubt it, so why make it a part of the job?? This is exactly why I would never hire someone that I know is openly gay, you're just asking for trouble. Stop the foolishness.

There's this odd belief that people get that they can make illogical deductions for no real reasons, but being with a group of friends makes their opinions somehow more prevalent. When a bunch of guys are drinking together and hanging out, they will say things that I don't think they fully know about, or care about,and with the support of the mob mentality, suddenly the comments are okay. It looks like that re-action was what Dan was looking for, and was probably surprised at when he got appalled looks from people. Anyways, was this really the place to make the comment? Is it okay to say things that can potentially offend people without knowing who they are or what they believe in? I mean, I don't really know the guy, for all he knew I could have been gay myself. Anyways the point is; Accepting the fact that people are ignorant, biased, and discriminatory as okay, because they are with a group of friends is harmful thinking. This is the type of bandwagon effect that have caused racism, sexism, and ignorance for years. Society accepting this situation as okay, only emphasizes people's own ego's to stand by these beliefs without really knowing why, or caring to know why such comments are hurtful.
"I've got to go and grab a shirt" ~ Airmax1227
TUF
Posts: 21,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/21/2013 11:48:40 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/20/2013 4:25:42 AM, Mrs.lynch wrote:
Thanks for the laugh!

The comment was okay because there is nothing wrong with being disgusted at something that is OBVIOUSLY disgusting, and wrong.

This statement is shows that you may be slightly ignorant. Why is it disgusting? Is it possible for you to understand that your own beliefs may have caused to to jump on the train of believing such things are disgusting, when in actuality, you really probably wouldn't care if you had seen two grown men holding hands. It makes me question, where in people's lives, does all the political, religious bullcrap, starting taking over rationality, such that is makes people discriminists...?

And it is immoral also. so yeah...

Please tell me more.

He didn't really discriminate anything. Also the supervisor doesn't have to do anything.

Yes he does. That's probably one of his main responsibilities, and is actually in most employee handbooks. Also equal opportunity workplace laws make such things mandated. Please support your statement or drop it.

Commenting on being disturbed by something disturbing, is personal taste, not discrimination. If you scoff at womans rights, or race, that just shows you are disturbed by those things, the same I am disturbed by the thought of mcdonalds.

Disturbed without good reasoning to be disturbed, is offensive, and shows that you are an ignorant bigot. Tell me you wouldn't be offended if someone you didn't even know told you they were disgusted with you.
"I've got to go and grab a shirt" ~ Airmax1227
medic0506
Posts: 13,450
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/22/2013 10:45:55 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/21/2013 11:43:36 AM, TUF wrote:
At 8/19/2013 5:30:12 PM, medic0506 wrote:
Is Chris the supervisor??

Yes

If so, what do you expect should be done??

I don't expect anything to be done, I just openly wonder and am asking you all if you think he would have done anything if the comment was made about race, or gender. The point I am establishing is, do we treat discrimination against gays lightly as a bias of our own political or religious beliefs?

Sometimes it's advantageous for a lower level manager to let people be themselves, especially when there is no harm being done by simply talking. It can give you a heads up for potential problem areas in the future. Say a week from now there is a complaint against Dan for harassing a gay guy, which Dan denies, and there were no other witnesses. When Chris goes to deal with the situation, he already knows that Dan has made comments in the past about not liking homosexuals. He's going to be skeptical of Dan's claim from the get go. That's my professional, workplace opinion.

Maybe it is this way. I am skeptical, mainly due to the fact that he is openly like-minded, though not as douchey with it.

My personal opinion is...So what?? Three grown men are talking in the break room and one says he doesn't like homosexuals...big deal. Is his a job skill that requires a positive view of homosexuality?? I seriously doubt it, so why make it a part of the job?? This is exactly why I would never hire someone that I know is openly gay, you're just asking for trouble. Stop the foolishness.

There's this odd belief that people get that they can make illogical deductions for no real reasons, but being with a group of friends makes their opinions somehow more prevalent. When a bunch of guys are drinking together and hanging out, they will say things that I don't think they fully know about, or care about,and with the support of the mob mentality, suddenly the comments are okay. It looks like that re-action was what Dan was looking for, and was probably surprised at when he got appalled looks from people. Anyways, was this really the place to make the comment? Is it okay to say things that can potentially offend people without knowing who they are or what they believe in? I mean, I don't really know the guy, for all he knew I could have been gay myself. Anyways the point is; Accepting the fact that people are ignorant, biased, and discriminatory as okay, because they are with a group of friends is harmful thinking. This is the type of bandwagon effect that have caused racism, sexism, and ignorance for years. Society accepting this situation as okay, only emphasizes people's own ego's to stand by these beliefs without really knowing why, or caring to know why such comments are hurtful.

If the comments were directed at a legitimate minority or protected class, then he should have told him privately to keep his comments to himself while at work. Comparing a behavior to race or gender is irrational. While I don't support physical bullying, I do think there are some things that should be discriminated against, homosexuality is one of them. If they're going to behave in a way that makes them different, and want to make it public, then they need to be able to handle the fact that people might not like it.
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/22/2013 10:51:38 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/20/2013 9:19:00 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 8/19/2013 6:23:06 AM, TUF wrote:

My point is this:
What is the difference in the following scenarios that make a hypothetical lose their appetite thinking about it:
1. Two dudes having sex [SEX]
2. A pedophile doing his thing [SEX]
3. A 80 year old woman and a 20 year old man [PAVLOVIAN RESPONSE TO SEX]
4. An interracial couple [PAVLOV]
5. A really nasty person (like unhygienic and fat) [PAVLOV]
6. A really ugly person [OK, STARTING TO WEAR OFF]
7. A relative (like your parents or your daughter) [WTF DOES THIS HAVE TO DO WITH SEX]
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/22/2013 10:54:49 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/21/2013 11:43:36 AM, TUF wrote:
At 8/19/2013 5:30:12 PM, medic0506 wrote:
Is Chris the supervisor??

Yes

I just want to ask you flat out - do you know Mike's partner, and do you know that both Mike and his partner are gay? Could it be that "Mike's partner" meant "Dan's business partner" and that Dan was getting sick at thinking something else about Mike's partner, something you didn't know about?
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?